Posted on 05/02/2006 6:56:33 AM PDT by Wiz
My information still leads me to believe we should be more concerned with suitcase nukes. But if you are really concerned, maybe you can get yourself one of these handy dandy Micro Dirty Bomb Key Fobs to carry around with you ; )
I do apologize, but just I can't help being a smartass sometimes, living with my hubby will do that to a person, LOL!
Strongly suggest you make a Barnes/Noble run and read:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1581825293/qid=1146603320/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/104-0934037-1546326?s=books&v=glance&n=283155
If he had had the dirty bomb on 9/11/2001, he would have used it...now, he's hiding in caves with more and more of his aides and leutenants getting the "72 virgin" service every day! In Iraq, Zarquawi is getting more and more desperate because the same scenario is happpening and he's more in the open than Bin Laden. Personally, I think we ought to just MOAB the entire border region between Pakistan and Afghanistan because there are more enemies there than everywhere else put together!
OBL remains dead. The Alqaida dirty bomb, if ever used, would bring the rapid end of islamic terrorism since the entire civilized world would come down on them like a ton of bricks.
Yes, and this has to be repeated frequently (at least once per day on FR) to westerners who don't understand the Islamic concept of eternal patience.
Why do you say that? Did the U.S. and Britain use every weapon in their inventory when invading Iraq?
Besides, a dirty bomb would result in few if any more immediate casualties than any conventional bomb of the same size.
The main effect would be to make the area off-limits for a period of time.
I thought that 'whacky' guy that's always by his side is a doctor. Isn't that what they keep telling us.
MY bombs are good! - Dr. Emmemetovich Brownov
The US and Britain aren't having their command and control structure steadily chopped to bits, and thus aren't under the same use-it-or-lose-it pressure.
That point seems applicable now, but not in mid 2001, when Al-Qaeda was not under any great onslaught. Besides, I suspect that there is enough "free trade" among terrorist groups and supporting states that any destroyed special weapons would be quickly replaced.
And he can't sing worth a crap either, LOL!
I've read the book...it's VERY VERY good...I have a graduate degree and should know...I've read a lot of books
It basically details how America, from presidents Carter thru W., have been acting in the world without the slightest clue about our Islamic enemy...hell it was only till after 9/11 that I even bothered to learn anything about them
I see downthread that somebody remembered the source of that quote.
I don't have a degree, but I have held the hands of military Ph.D.-types (read: handling all their "perceived crises", LOL!) in the human factors/bioeffects research arena for 20 years, so I would trust the military before I trusted any flunky from the FBI, who IMHO, were the ones that didn't have a clue. We were attacked way before 9/11...OKC and the 1993 WTC bombings are just two of those examples. If you like to read, you may want to check out Jayna Davis and Laurie Mylroie's work on this. This war is not about our foreign policy or occupation of foreign lands, it is a holy war where Muslims want to conquer the world and force them to convert to their religion. Anyone that doesn't see that is blind...I loathe the "Blame America" crowd.
he probably does have a dirty bomb, but wont settle for it hence your assertion of hesitation. Releasing a dirty bomb would tip his hand to the west and draw way too much attention, his goal is a nuclear bomb, not a miniscule dirty bomb.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.