Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Area Freeper
"A nuclear device going off in any large city around the globe is going to kill millions of people," she said.

This is just exaggerated BS. Unless the terrorist got a hold of a megaton-sized city-buster (I highly doubt they could build a thermnuclear fission weapon), the numbers would be far less than this. It would be awful, but not millions.

2 posted on 09/22/2004 10:10:21 AM PDT by Shryke (Never retreat. Never explain. Get it done and let them howl.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Shryke

Still, it is my firm belief that if John Forbes Kerry is elected president, a nuclear device will be detonated in a Western City (most likely NY) within the next decade.

Regardless of who is elected, that scenario is almost guaranteed for a Russian City (Volgograd?).


3 posted on 09/22/2004 10:16:32 AM PDT by Area Freeper (From John Kerry, they get a "yes/no/maybe" bowl of mush that can only encourage our enemies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Shryke
The bomb itself won't. The panic afterwards, the fights for food, water and shelter, the rioting might. . . NEVER forget second and third-order effects
5 posted on 09/22/2004 10:20:09 AM PDT by Salgak (don't mind me: the orbital mind control lasers are making me write this. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Shryke
She said the "raw material for nuclear terrorism is housed in hundreds of facilities in dozens of countries and inadequately secured."

Your statement (that you quoted) wasn't the only example of exaggeration. To make a bomb easily, you need enriched uranium, and that is not available all over the place. To make a plutonium bomb, you need a much more complicated device.

Maybe she's trying to sell a book.

45 posted on 09/22/2004 11:47:02 AM PDT by Lazamataz ("Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown" -- harpseal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Shryke
"This is just exaggerated BS. Unless the terrorist got a hold of a megaton-sized city-buster (I highly doubt they could build a thermnuclear fission weapon), the numbers would be far less than this. It would be awful, but not millions."

Having studied nuclear warfare while in the military, I'd easily agree with the millions estimate for the type device described.

70 posted on 09/22/2004 12:50:37 PM PDT by backtothestreets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Shryke

You're only counting blast and fire damage.

Radiation would bag a LOT of people before they could get out of the danger space. This wouldn't be a airburst by a modern clean weapon; you'd generate a s**tload of radioactive crap and spread it downwind.


113 posted on 09/22/2004 3:27:39 PM PDT by Poohbah (If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up too much room.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Shryke

True. Private individuals severely overestimate the threat from nuclear weapons. The first is the constant overexxageration of the fallout caused by nuclear weapons. The second is a misunderstanding of the different types of nuclear weapons. A megaton-scale boosted weapon is far different from a Hiroshima-scale weapon built in the third world.


182 posted on 09/26/2004 2:02:32 AM PDT by Remember_Salamis (Freedom is Not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson