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

Skip to comments.

Nuclear Threat From Mexico
BorderFire Report ^ | April 06, 2008 | Michael Webster

Posted on 04/07/2008 9:39:58 AM PDT by SwinneySwitch

Detonating a nuclear weapon in or over Juarez, Mexico is the same thing as detonating one in El Paso, Texas: The difference is it may be a little easier to effect in Juarez. From the heart of downtown El Paso to downtown Juarez is just a very short distance. Or a bomb on the international bridge dividing the two countries empties into Avenida Juárez in downtown Juarez, on the south and El Paso downtown to the north could do the job and would be easy for any terrorist to pull off. Nowhere else on the planet are two major cities of two different nations so closely tied together and vulnerable — or so easy to visit from either side day or night.

One nuclear weapon placed in Juarez Mexico could kill up-wards of two million people almost half of them Americans living in both El Paso and Juarez.

Just a historical reminder: The atomic bomb named "Little Boy" was dropped on Hiroshima by the Enola Gay, a Boeing B-29 bomber, at 8:15 in the morning of August 6, 1945 - 62 years ago.

Of growing concern to some U.S. officials is the way the terrorists south of the border are taking advantage of the lack of sophistication on the Mexicans part for their inability and unwillingness to protect their own borders from terrorist infiltration and are using the low Mexican immigration standards and the U.S. open border to slip into Mexico or the U.S. with a nuclear weapon or dirty bomb.

Former CIA Director R. James Woolsey told NewsMax in an exclusive interview that terrorists could strike the American homeland — possibly with a weapon of mass destruction.

A terrorist strike with a nuclear, dirty bomb or with biological weapons was "a real possibility." Woolsey's comments echo those of FBI Director Robert Mueller, who told NewsMax that al-Qaeda's paramount goal is clear: to detonate a nuclear device that would kill hundreds of thousands of Americans.

Tens of millions of radical Muslims, mostly of Arabic descent, live in Latin America.

International law-enforcement authorities combating terrorism have growing concerns about a major influx into Mexico of Arabic-speaking visitors carrying Cuban, Russian, Greece, Holland and other European passports.

Many of the passport holders could not even speak the language of their so-called mother land, according to a secret report given to the Mexican legislators.

Intelligence sources have been warning us that they have noticed a tendency among Islamic terrorists to operate in Mexico. Mexico with a territory slightly bigger than Alaska and with geographic extremes that have proven perfect for hiding bombs, weapons, illegal aliens, and drugs is currently what’s going on south of our border.

According to the "INM" (Mex. Immigr.) Just last week six adult male Iraqis were arrested in Tapachula, state of Chiapas, while attempting to reach the Distrito Federal of Mexico and to proceed to the United States from that point. In their preliminary declaration, the six said they entered through Central America, reached Guatemala and that there they purchased the false passports from Greece and Holland which they initially presented to Mexican officials when arrested. They also claimed they crossed the Suchiate River (bordering Mexico and Guatemala) on a raft.

The names on the phony passports were Hristov Eroslavov Dobromir, Mirian Sitkinas, Carlos Harden, Stevan Bergian, Vasileios Venetis and Vasilev Martinov Georgi.

Another two Iraqis with false Bulgarian passports were detected and detained at the airport in Monterrey, Nuevo Leon. Now, Mexican officials are reportedly investigating "a network that could be made up of Mexicans operating in Greece who is selling false Bulgarian passports for ten thousand dollars to European and Middle Eastern citizens." Last year 28 Illegalsfrom Iraq were detected at the airport in Monterrey alone (El Porvenir said there were 23, seventeen of them in a single event) The latest two, "Wisam Gorgies", 34 yr. old male, and "Rana Nazar Peyoz", 26 yr. old female, flew from Madrid and said they obtained the false passports in Greece; their aim was to reach the United States.

The Mexican government is very concerned with the up-tick of known Mexican communist party members who are being converted to Islam this arises from recent immigrants who import new radical jihadi philosophies into their ranks. These people are also active in Islamic missionary work converting the poor and destitute with promises of a better life under Islam.

These terrorists are organized in active cells around the country of Mexico according to a Mexican General who wants to remain nameless. I have seen documents describing part of the drug-smuggling cartels cooperation with terrorists using their existing routes though Mexico to the states. Islamic terrorists are paying millions to the Mexicans to transport their drugs from Afghanistan, as well as weapons and people. These elaborate well defined drug routes run through a web of border crossings pointing also to the complex cooperation between various "smuggling cartels and the terrorists." These belong to jihadi organizations such as al-Qaeda, joining forces with local drug lords, developing and greasing their smuggling skids with money all the way to Mexico aiming ultimately to hit the U.S.

With the nature of lawlessness, graft, poverty and disorder in Mexico, enables operatives of such terrorist groups as al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and Hamas to operate with impunity. These organizations have turned Mexico into a logistical attack base.

The growing danger is that the militant Islam terrorists have penetrated Mexico. Some of them have ties to smugglers operating in American states bordering Mexico, especially those with connections in Arizona, New Mexico, Texas and California.

Experienced anti-terror experts report the Mexican border is the Achilles heel of the Department of Homeland Security.

Islam is on the move in Mexico and throughout Latin America, making dramatic gains in converting the native population, increasing immigration, establishing businesses and charities and attracting attention from U.S. government officials who have asked their neighbors to the south to keep an eye on foreign Muslim groups.

Al-Qaeda and other allied organizations are expanding operations throughout Mexico, establishing both legitimate and criminal enterprises to help fund future attack operations.

According to U.S. Ambassador to Venezuela Charles Shapiro, almost every extremist terror group is now represented in Latin America.

Pentagon officials have confirmed human smuggling rings in Latin America are attempting to sneak al-Qaeda operatives into the U.S.

Anti-terrorism experts say extremist cells tied to Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and al-Qaeda network are operating in Argentina, Ecuador, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Paraguay and Uruguay.

FBI Director Robert Mueller told a congressional panel that illegal aliens from countries with ties to al-Qaeda have crossed into the U.S. from Mexico using false identities. Mueller said some of the aliens are people with Middle Eastern names who have adopted Hispanic last names before coming into the U.S.

"We are concerned, Homeland Security is concerned about special interest aliens entering the United States," Mueller said. The U.S. Bush administration officials have previously said al-Qaeda could try to infiltrate the United States through the Mexican border.

Al-Qaeda has become deeply involved in cocaine and heroine trafficking, arms and uranium smuggling, counterfeiting CDs and DVDs and money-laundering activities.

Cash laden Non-Mexicans often are more difficult to intercept because they typically pay high-end smugglers a large sum of money to efficiently assist them in setting up in Mexico or help them across the border, rather than traverse it on their own.

According to the WorldNetDaily many of America’s enemies have chosen Mexico as a target to locate and undermine security in the Americas and weaken America politically and strategically. America’s various adversaries have chosen Mexico as their infiltration route. And American politicians are opening the doors wide to our enemies with NAFTA and The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) programs.

Robert Grenier, who was head of the CIA's counter-terrorism center, told a press conference in Mexico that the Muslim terrorist organizations see the illegal immigration and drug trafficking networks in the Latin American nations as the most effective way to move people and equipment into the US. Grenier said that the Bush Administration fears both Hamas and Hizballah may already have sleeper cells operating in Mexico. Hamas and Hizballah have both threatened in the past to extend their war against Israel to include the United States.

Source: U.S. Government, Mexican Government, Laguna Journal, WorldNetDaily NewsMax. Photo's U.S. Government

© Michael Webster - All Rights Reserved

America's leading authority on Venture Capital/Equity Funding. A trustee on some of the nations largest trade Union funds. A noted Author, Lecturer, Educator, Emergency Manager, Counter-Terrorist, War on Drugs and War on Terrorist Specialist, Business Consultant, Newspaper Publisher. Radio News caster. Labor Law generalist, Teamster Union Business Agent, General Organizer, Union Rank and File Member Grievances Representative, NLRB Union Representative, Union Contract Negotiator, Workers Compensation Appeals Board Hearing Representative. Investigative Reporter for print, electronic and on-line News Agencies.

We Invite You To Visit Michael Webster's Website:

Michael Webster's Other Writings .

E-Mail: mvwsr@aol.comThis e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it


TOPICS: Mexico; News/Current Events; US: Texas; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: elpaso; illegalaliens; immigration; mexico; nuclear; terrorism; wot
"The growing danger is that the militant Islam terrorists have penetrated Mexico. Some of them have ties to smugglers operating in American states bordering Mexico, especially those with connections in Arizona, New Mexico, Texas and California."
1 posted on 04/07/2008 9:39:59 AM PDT by SwinneySwitch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SwinneySwitch
Or a bomb on the international bridge dividing the two countries empties into Avenida Juárez in downtown Juarez, on the south and El Paso downtown to the north could do the job and would be easy for any terrorist to pull off.

This sentence alone may have killed more English teachers than a nuclear bomb would.

2 posted on 04/07/2008 9:42:40 AM PDT by xjcsa (Has anyone seen my cornballer?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SwinneySwitch

So, if we take over Mexico, will all the illegals move south?


3 posted on 04/07/2008 9:46:51 AM PDT by maclay (America First - The rest of the world comes second)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SwinneySwitch

I still say annexation just might be the best way to fix the mexico problem.


4 posted on 04/07/2008 9:47:55 AM PDT by GulfBreeze (McCain is our nominee. Yeah... I guess.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SwinneySwitch

“special interest aliens” — now that’s a chilling phrase


5 posted on 04/07/2008 9:49:52 AM PDT by Steve Schulin (Cheap electricity gives your average Joe a life better than kings used to enjoy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SwinneySwitch

This would be frightening if we hadn’t been living under threat of total thermonuclear annihilation since the fifties.


6 posted on 04/07/2008 9:51:04 AM PDT by RightWhale (Clam down! avoid ataque de nervosa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SwinneySwitch

The only solution is to annex Mexico so that we can then enforce terrorism protections at the new borders. It also wouldn’t hurt to make the populace start paying income tax too.


7 posted on 04/07/2008 9:51:12 AM PDT by BuffaloJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SwinneySwitch
Mexico isn't an issue and this is minor.
As written in other articles, it would be far easier to get just 5 miles off our shore by water, to detonate a nuke that would do far worse damage to everything.

They could nuke 5 miles out of Long Beach Harbor before being inspected and would take out everything for a tens of miles with the explosion and radiation, but being in the water, they would also cause mayor trouble up and down the coast with a giant waves. Radioactives one as well...

It would do far less damage to do that in Mexico like that than in water off our shore.

Articles I've read sure seem to have a good point IMO.

8 posted on 04/07/2008 9:53:12 AM PDT by A CA Guy ( God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SwinneySwitch
Mexico isn't an issue and this is minor.
As written in other articles, it would be far easier to get just 5 miles off our shore by water, to detonate a nuke that would do far worse damage to everything.

They could nuke 5 miles out of Long Beach Harbor before being inspected and would take out everything for a tens of miles with the explosion and radiation, but being in the water, they would also cause mayor trouble up and down the coast with a giant waves. Radioactives one as well...

It would do far less damage to do that in Mexico like that than in water off our shore.

Articles I've read sure seem to have a good point IMO.

9 posted on 04/07/2008 9:53:13 AM PDT by A CA Guy ( God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy

The REAL Problem for AQ is that if doesn’t happen inside of a Major American Media center, LIKE NEW YORK, it just won’t get the kind of coverage 9/11 did...

The trade centers effected THEM, the Liberal Media elites, directly.

If the same thing had happened in Denver, it would still be worldwide news, but it wouldn’t have had the same effect.


10 posted on 04/07/2008 9:56:51 AM PDT by tcrlaf (VOTE DEMOCRAT-You'll look great in a Burka!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: GulfBreeze

Annexation isn’t an answer, the answer is getting all nuclear arsenals under control around the world.

I think the best way terrorist like Iran can get nukes would simply be to buy one.
They have all the money they need, you have elements in Russia probably who would give them one figuring it would be exploded on our soil so for Russia it would be a boost.

Russia could damage America and get paid for it.
They are still ambitious on a world stage and are fast and loose with their security when they want to be with weapons for sale.


11 posted on 04/07/2008 9:58:28 AM PDT by A CA Guy ( God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy

Good luck trying to secure nuke’s the world over. If you can figure out how to do that I’ll kiss your a... Aunt Sally.


12 posted on 04/07/2008 10:00:48 AM PDT by GulfBreeze (McCain is our nominee. Yeah... I guess.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf
The REAL Problem for AQ is that if doesn’t happen inside of a Major American Media center, LIKE NEW YORK, it just won’t get the kind of coverage 9/11 did...

Huh? My dear friend, you think if they wipe out Los Angeles and a bunch of the western seashore they would get no coverage for it?

With all due respect, I think you are wrong about that.

13 posted on 04/07/2008 10:01:36 AM PDT by A CA Guy ( God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: GulfBreeze

Right, securing nukes world over is impossible at this time, which is why I made the point that AQ with Iran could simply buy one someplace and just use it.

Granted, we don’t want an Iran in position to make them, but they are rich and could easily buy one or some.


14 posted on 04/07/2008 10:03:23 AM PDT by A CA Guy ( God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale; tx_eggman
This would be frightening if we hadn’t been living under threat of total thermonuclear annihilation since the fifties.

The problem with that is that the threat was mutual, and both parties (soviets and US), wanted to live through it. Methinks these animals WANT to die, so the mutual part of it has no bearing anymore.
15 posted on 04/07/2008 10:05:52 AM PDT by SpinnerWebb (Islam ... If you can't join them, beat them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SwinneySwitch
With the nature of lawlessness, graft, poverty and disorder in Mexico, enables operatives of such terrorist groups as al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and Hamas to operate with impunity. These organizations have turned Mexico into a logistical attack base.

The growing danger is that the militant Islam terrorists have penetrated Mexico. Some of them have ties to smugglers operating in American states bordering Mexico, especially those with connections in Arizona, New Mexico, Texas and California.

Experienced anti-terror experts report the Mexican border is the Achilles heel of the Department of Homeland Security.

Send home the friggin' illegals - make the Mexican govt choose the path - and they'll clean up their own mess. Right now, border "chaos" and disorder work for Mexican elites - up the ante. See who drops out.

16 posted on 04/07/2008 10:09:29 AM PDT by GOPJ (Wall Street game: Privatize profits and socialize losses.Freeper Mad_Tom_Rackham)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SpinnerWebb
It was never "mutual" for the warrior - they always die - on both sides - it's the war effect.

The "mutual" part was the elites and the leaders. Russians built bomb shelters for themselves.

Muslims hide under the unknown. They feel safe knowing it's going to be hard to pin the attack on any one country - and that's the problem.

For MAD to work, the rulers need to know they go with the great unwashed of their respective countries.

17 posted on 04/07/2008 10:13:13 AM PDT by GOPJ (Wall Street game: Privatize profits and socialize losses.Freeper Mad_Tom_Rackham)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: SpinnerWebb

That’s not an issue but a historical fallacy. Many assumed that total thermonuclear annihilation was going to happen any day. The mutual thing came later, much later.


18 posted on 04/07/2008 10:19:01 AM PDT by RightWhale (Clam down! avoid ataque de nervosa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy
They could nuke 5 miles out of Long Beach Harbor before being inspected and would take out everything for a tens of miles with the explosion and radiation, but being in the water, they would also cause mayor trouble up and down the coast with a giant waves. Radioactives one as well...

They are detonating an atomic nuke, not dropping an asteroid. Please do some more research before putting your freak-out on.

19 posted on 04/07/2008 10:24:05 AM PDT by Centurion2000 (Party ahead of principles; eventually you'll be selling out anything to anyone for the right price.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SwinneySwitch
Old news
/vanity
20 posted on 04/07/2008 10:34:40 AM PDT by naturalized ("The time has come," He said. "The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xjcsa
This sentence alone may have killed more English teachers than a nuclear bomb would.

LOL!

There are many sentences in the article like this. I wonder if the author is embarrassed? I wonder if he even knows?

21 posted on 04/07/2008 10:39:05 AM PDT by upchuck (Who wins doesn't matter. They're all liberals. Spend your time and money to take back Congress.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: xjcsa

“This sentence alone may have killed more English teachers than a nuclear bomb would.”

Public school English teachers can handle it.


22 posted on 04/07/2008 11:03:39 AM PDT by SwinneySwitch (US Constitution Article 4 Section 4..shall protect each of them against Invasion...domestic Violence)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SwinneySwitch

Sounds like the poster arguement for linking the U.S. up to Mexico for defense purposes.

No sale.


23 posted on 04/07/2008 11:04:10 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (McCain is rock solid on SCOTUS judicial appointments. He voted for Ginsberg, Kennedy and Souter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SwinneySwitch
As incredibly porous as the borders are, hadji would be stupid to detonate a nuke in mexico.

Hire a team of mexican federales to transport it across the border for a few grand and you're golden.

24 posted on 04/07/2008 11:12:18 AM PDT by Dr.Zoidberg (Mohammedanism - Bringing you only the best of the 6th century for fourteen hundred years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy
...you have elements in Russia probably who would give them one figuring it would be exploded on our soil so for Russia it would be a boost.

Hold it right there. You can't lump the Russians into this.

The Russians are not stupid, and giving nukes to towelheads would be. Even the Russian Mob is smarter than that. Allegedly, They ripped off Osama by selling them bogus uranium, because they knew that he was trouble.

Like the US, they have been working to stop this sort of thing. They hand over a nuke to AQ, and it goes to their Azeri buddies, and winds up inside a lorry in Moscow with a lit fuse. Even Putin could see that coming.

25 posted on 04/07/2008 12:03:23 PM PDT by Mr. Quarterpanel (I am not an actor, but I play one on TV)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy
El Paso has one of the biggest military bases in Texas, Fort Bliss. The gang lords in Juarez are becoming ruthless to the point that they have ALMOST taken over the city of over 4 million folk. There govt and the police force can't do jack with them. The gangs even control the prison system there. How long before the OSAMA’s of this world will offer some deranged money hunger killer a 100 million bucks to set one off? It's just a matter of time. I'm telling you all folks, it's bad down there...scary!
26 posted on 04/07/2008 1:02:49 PM PDT by RoseofTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SwinneySwitch

All of you guys and gals read this book...the author wrote about this type of event taking place three years ago,

http://www.amazon.com/Terrorists-Crossing-Rich-Carroll/dp/1413779115


27 posted on 04/07/2008 1:05:54 PM PDT by Paige ("Facts are stubborn things." President Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SwinneySwitch
One nuclear weapon placed in Juarez Mexico could kill up-wards of two million people almost half of them Americans living in both El Paso and Juarez. ,p>Along with a few Mexican druglords.

Which would bring the rest of 'em over to 'our side'. And they don't play around.

28 posted on 04/07/2008 1:10:42 PM PDT by uglybiker (I do not suffer from mental illness. I quite enjoy it, actually.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

Nah - here’s the problem. If they hit NY with a nuke - there isn’t anyone to cover the news...


29 posted on 04/07/2008 3:02:22 PM PDT by GOPJ (Wall Street game: Privatize profits and socialize losses.Freeper Mad_Tom_Rackham)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Centurion2000
There have been articles on this, and they wouldn't have to be DROPPING nukes, the weakness we have is we don't inspect ships coming in until they are close enough to do major damage.
You drop a nuke a few miles off shore and you do lots more damage than if you blew it in Los Angeles proper.

Damage would still be to the cities, now also more so the ocean and up and down the coast for some distance.

We'd rather NOT have one at all of course, but terrorist can get the oil money to buy one if they have the will to do so.

30 posted on 04/09/2008 8:42:29 AM PDT by A CA Guy ( God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Quarterpanel

The Russians have been selling various weapons on the market already, so why wouldn’t they sell one to terrorist if they believed it would NOT blow up on them and would damage us? Especially if it is for millions and it is an ex KGB person selling one for their retirement?

We go down a peg, they figure to go up and in a way the terrorist would be helping a cause that could be seen as mutually beneficial.

As far as allowing Iran to make stuff, the way Iranian stuff has showed up in Israel, I think Iran will find itself blown up over this issue.


31 posted on 04/09/2008 8:48:01 AM PDT by A CA Guy ( God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: RoseofTexas
Yes, some thug with a nuke who lives far away from where it would strike would potentially sell one for millions to finance a luxurious lifestyle for sure.

Around the world, many places aren't as secure with the nukes, so no one is safe.

32 posted on 04/09/2008 8:51:08 AM PDT by A CA Guy ( God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy
There have been articles on this, and they wouldn't have to be DROPPING nukes, the weakness we have is we don't inspect ships coming in until they are close enough to do major damage. You drop a nuke a few miles off shore and you do lots more damage than if you blew it in Los Angeles proper.

An atomic nuke off the coast of CA is going to make a giant cloud of radioactive steam and fallout saltwater rain that is going to cover a good bit of LA.

The wave action is going to be negligible for the rest of the coast.

Something to consider, sand rats with a nuke are not going to have the top of the line thermonuclear warheads with yields in the hudreds of kiltons or megaton ranges. They will be closer to hiroshima bombs, and those just do not have the power that you are talking about.

33 posted on 04/09/2008 9:21:16 AM PDT by Centurion2000 (Party ahead of principles; eventually you'll be selling out anything to anyone for the right price.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Centurion2000

Do you think that goes for a nuke they would buy from places like Russia?


34 posted on 04/09/2008 9:23:12 AM PDT by A CA Guy ( God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Centurion2000
a giant cloud of radioactive steam and fallout saltwater rain

Nah. This is silly. Radioactive water?

35 posted on 04/09/2008 9:23:58 AM PDT by RightWhale (Repeal the Law of the Excluded Middle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy
The Russians have been selling various weapons on the market already, so why wouldn’t they sell one to terrorist if they believed it would NOT blow up on them and would damage us?

Because we can footprint their nukes based on tace elements found in the fallout. The Soviets and the Russians know that if we trace one back to them we'd nuke THEM.

36 posted on 04/09/2008 9:25:07 AM PDT by Centurion2000 (Party ahead of principles; eventually you'll be selling out anything to anyone for the right price.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Centurion2000
I think Russia would come back with...

No, they got that bomb elsewhere, we have all our secured and the trace elements were copied to frame us for this.

We are really good guys, so do you Americans want some free tanning lotion to fight against the nuclear fallout?

37 posted on 04/09/2008 9:28:00 AM PDT by A CA Guy ( God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
a giant cloud of radioactive steam and fallout saltwater rain

Nah. This is silly. Radioactive water?

Correction: Water impregnated with radioactive fallout particles. Iodine-131 and Strontium-90 laced water is a BAD BAD thing.

Remember that a large part of the ship is nuke detonates inside of will be drawn up through the nuclear blast as fine particles.

38 posted on 04/09/2008 9:31:22 AM PDT by Centurion2000 (Party ahead of principles; eventually you'll be selling out anything to anyone for the right price.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy
No, they got that bomb elsewhere, we have all our secured and the trace elements were copied to frame us for this.

You can't copy the trace elements. They are like fingerprints for nuclear reactors.

39 posted on 04/09/2008 9:32:06 AM PDT by Centurion2000 (Party ahead of principles; eventually you'll be selling out anything to anyone for the right price.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Centurion2000

Probably not. There will be steam, and not much of that. Otherwise the water blast produces a column of water that rains back almost immediately. The ship, mostly iron, will not become Strontium 90 or Iodine 131. The ship will mostly be broken, fragmented, but not vaporized.


40 posted on 04/09/2008 9:35:46 AM PDT by RightWhale (Repeal the Law of the Excluded Middle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

Depending on the size of the device, a significant amount of metal can be vaporized and spread with the cloud. In the Nevada tests of the 50’s they started suspending the larger devices (such as Hood) from balloons instead of towers.


41 posted on 04/09/2008 9:39:43 AM PDT by Tijeras_Slim (Play that Funky Music Typical White Boy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Tijeras_Slim

Watch out for ships with devices suspended from balloons.


42 posted on 04/09/2008 9:42:59 AM PDT by RightWhale (Repeal the Law of the Excluded Middle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

That's gonna leave a mark.

43 posted on 04/09/2008 9:47:00 AM PDT by Tijeras_Slim (Play that Funky Music Typical White Boy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Tijeras_Slim

Fifty feet elevation is the right elevation for maximum destructivity unless you are going after submarines, in which case fifty feet below the surface would be a good choice.


44 posted on 04/09/2008 9:49:25 AM PDT by RightWhale (Repeal the Law of the Excluded Middle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

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.

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