Jimbo 0
Recommended Posts
The United States thinks we are better because we are better. We make our own rules because we are a sovereign state. That's what sovereign states do.
Yep. Our wonderful blue planet is fully of sovereign states. Living with their own rules. Not the ones of the US. Can you imagine this? I feel sure, there is only one nation in the world asking for US ideals and rules: The US itself.
dudeist skydiver # 3105
billvon 2,998
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>the USSR and the US were 2 countries with a specific list of targets to hit
>in case any of them starts a war. today's war is doesnt have a "return address".
That's definitely a problem. But that's a problem with terrorist groups, not with Iran. Anyone with a map knows where Tehran is.
>i dont think Iran will use nukes directly, but i think its more than possible
> that nukes or radioactive leftovers will reach the wrong hands operating in
>the name of allah (or at least their twisted views of it...)
In October 2004, Halliburton lost a large shipment of americinium, a highly radioactive isotope. It was later found sitting unprotected on a loading dock in Boston. The IIS estimates that 40kg of weapons-grade plutonium has been lost within the former USSR. We've lost several fuel rods from commercial nuclear reactors in the past 20 years. Over the years the US has lost 11 working nuclear weapons in accidents. Which isn't suprising since we built about 70,000 of them - that's a loss rate of only .016%, which is pretty good. Since only about 11,000 are even close to usable, that's a lot of spare nuclear material sitting around.
In other words, we've LOST more nuclear weapons than Iran and North Korea have built even by optimistic estimates of their capabilities.
To put it another way - what's going to be easier? For Osama bin Laden to get a working nuclear weapon, modify it to work by remote control, find a shipping company willing to endure the wrath of the US military (and send a crew to their deaths) ship a container to NY harbor, and detonate it by remote control - or send one guy across the border to find some discarded nuclear waste in the US and put it in a drum with some ANFO? The risk isn't that Iran will sell nuclear weapons to Bin Laden - the big risk is that someone will use our own nuclear waste (or weapons!) against us.
>in case any of them starts a war. today's war is doesnt have a "return address".
That's definitely a problem. But that's a problem with terrorist groups, not with Iran. Anyone with a map knows where Tehran is.
>i dont think Iran will use nukes directly, but i think its more than possible
> that nukes or radioactive leftovers will reach the wrong hands operating in
>the name of allah (or at least their twisted views of it...)
In October 2004, Halliburton lost a large shipment of americinium, a highly radioactive isotope. It was later found sitting unprotected on a loading dock in Boston. The IIS estimates that 40kg of weapons-grade plutonium has been lost within the former USSR. We've lost several fuel rods from commercial nuclear reactors in the past 20 years. Over the years the US has lost 11 working nuclear weapons in accidents. Which isn't suprising since we built about 70,000 of them - that's a loss rate of only .016%, which is pretty good. Since only about 11,000 are even close to usable, that's a lot of spare nuclear material sitting around.
In other words, we've LOST more nuclear weapons than Iran and North Korea have built even by optimistic estimates of their capabilities.
To put it another way - what's going to be easier? For Osama bin Laden to get a working nuclear weapon, modify it to work by remote control, find a shipping company willing to endure the wrath of the US military (and send a crew to their deaths) ship a container to NY harbor, and detonate it by remote control - or send one guy across the border to find some discarded nuclear waste in the US and put it in a drum with some ANFO? The risk isn't that Iran will sell nuclear weapons to Bin Laden - the big risk is that someone will use our own nuclear waste (or weapons!) against us.
What about the 152mm chemical arty rounds
that the Iraqis had (and one injured an EOD
tech, so no whining about "no Iraqi wmds)?
The Sovs made 152mm nuke rounds too.
they're easily vehicle portable...if you can
get it here.
that the Iraqis had (and one injured an EOD
tech, so no whining about "no Iraqi wmds)?
The Sovs made 152mm nuke rounds too.
they're easily vehicle portable...if you can
get it here.
falxori 0
QuoteIf you have one nuke, and you use it, you can create terror and mayhem once. If you bluff with it you can do it a dozen times - and it's a thousand times easier to do. Just make a videotape.
if one nuke explodes, how do you know they had only one? wouldnt a video tape be more effective after they've proved they can do it? after all, no one took their video tapes too seriously before 9/11.
Quote>A state like Israel will not sell/give them away if they had them.
I think they would give them away in a New York minute if they thought they could benefit from the exchange. If, say, Turkey approached them and said "we want to sign a mutual defense pact with you; sell us some nukes and we'll confront the threat together" I bet they would seriously consider the offer.
you have no idea how wrong you are about that. turkey is an ally of israel, but so was Iran before the revolution.
Israel is believed to have had nukes since the 60's, until now it didnt even admit it let alone share it.
and at this point, the US holds nukes in turkey. if turkey really wants them they can easily take them by force.
O
"Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."
Thank God.
-
Jim
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites