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

Skip to comments.

Can A Nuke Really Fit Into A Suitcase?
Time | October 29, 2001 | Bill Saporito

Posted on 10/22/2001 6:20:06 AM PDT by Stand Watch Listen

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 next last

1 posted on 10/22/2001 6:20:06 AM PDT by Stand Watch Listen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen
These guys don't impress me as the rocket science type. I'm guessing low probability of nuclear attack.
2 posted on 10/22/2001 6:38:02 AM PDT by mrgolden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen
They could be carried in a case 8 in. by 16 in. by 24 in.

This is one of those things we should not lose sleep over. A truck or shipboard container, possibly.

Critical Mass is a non-negotiable figure, as are the well-known public details of implosion device assembly.

Just try to carry such a "briefcase".

Nope, I am going to worry about more immediate things.

Besides, our "No First Use" doctrine would be totally out the window if someone were to do this, and it would give us a blank check to do whatever we wanted. *WE* are not the ones who should be losing sleep over this.

We have one warhead for each WTC victim. Fact.

To use one, or even fifty against us would be the same thing as taking a knife to a gunfight.

3 posted on 10/22/2001 6:40:42 AM PDT by Gorzaloon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen
We have tactical nuclear warhead that fit inside the size envelope of an artillery shell. I suppose there are suitcases that would fit around such a shell.
4 posted on 10/22/2001 6:49:00 AM PDT by Fixit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen
I think the critical mass of a nuke is somewhere around 80-90 lbs. Then add in the weight of the bomb itself. So how could the suitcase weigh 60 lbs?

Also..... Later in the above article they say they need 110kg (220 lbs) of material - confusing the reader by mixing english/metric units.

5 posted on 10/22/2001 6:53:08 AM PDT by The Raven
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mrgolden
"These guys don't impress me as the rocket science type. I'm guessing low probability of nuclear attack."

You would guess wrong.

It is not a matter of IF, it is a matter of WHEN.

I would be very, very surprised if Bin Laden or some other group did not already have a weapon or the materials to make it.

I would not be surprised if one or more cells in place in the U.S. had one.

It does not need to be in a "suitcase". It could be rolled into town in a Ryder van. It could float into a port onboard a freighter.

And, BTW, I am a rocket scientist!

--Boris

6 posted on 10/22/2001 6:56:16 AM PDT by boris
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen
Smallpox and nuclear-suitcase reports are the worst types of fear-mongering by America's big-media.

In both cases, there has not been any credible information released that shows an attack of this type imminent or even possible by the terrorist organizations that wish to harm us.

Spreading fear on false threats is not the only horrible tactic of big-media. They are also down-playing real threats toward the United States and trying to undercut all preparations for such a threat. The most striking exampleof this is a National Missile Defense System against the growing threat of missile attack from China or North Korea. China and North Korea have been sending strong signals in recent years of their intention to challenge America's military. A couple of the most striking examples was North Korea's missile test in the Pacific and China's threat to nuke Los Angeles in any conflict over Taiwan. These threats are real and are backed-up an incresingly threating military and hard-line attitude toward the United States.

Big-Media's response has been that the system is too expensive, won't work, and would upset other countries.

It would certainly be more expensive to lose Los Angeles or even the entire West Coast. Regardless of the effectiveness of the NMD system, it would be at least as effective as not building any system at all. As for upsetting other countries, I have no doubt that making America stronger would upset our enemies.......who cares!!!?

In conclusion, I rate America's Big-Media coverage of the national security threats against America as a D-. It's really a shame their reporting is so out-of-step with reality.

7 posted on 10/22/2001 6:58:22 AM PDT by Tai_Chung
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen
Oh no not this again.
8 posted on 10/22/2001 7:00:29 AM PDT by boomop1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #9 Removed by Moderator

To: mrgolden
"They may not be the Rocket science type". Yeah but does that increase or decrease our chances of being nuked, I'm afraid of the answer.
10 posted on 10/22/2001 7:05:28 AM PDT by HELLRAISER II
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen
If my wife can fit all her clothes into one suitcase, I'd have to say "Yes."

DISCLAIMER: cheap joke based on a stereotype which DOES NOT apply to my wife -- who is a more judicious packer than I!

Dan

11 posted on 10/22/2001 7:06:01 AM PDT by BibChr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #12 Removed by Moderator

Comment #13 Removed by Moderator

Comment #14 Removed by Moderator

Comment #15 Removed by Moderator

To: Stand Watch Listen; Gorzaloon
Although it is unlikely that terrorists could build a good device on their own, and that we would of course retaliate in kind,

1- They have the money. You can buy anything if you have the money. You don't have to have skill.

2- They may not care about massive retaliation. They may even hope to provoke it. They don't think like we do.

Well I am not going to lose much sleep over it but I did get myself a CD survey meter and some potassium iodate. Just in case.

16 posted on 10/22/2001 7:16:18 AM PDT by Sender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #17 Removed by Moderator

To: ThreadKiller
Bump
18 posted on 10/22/2001 7:21:34 AM PDT by LiberteeBell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: The Raven
One critical mass of plutonium is only about 10.5 kilos I believe. So they wouldn't need much more than that. But even if they only have a handful of highly radioactive dust taped to a stick of dynamite it's going to cause a mess much bigger than the anthrax scare.
19 posted on 10/22/2001 7:22:00 AM PDT by Sender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ThreadKiller
The nuclear weapons include suitcase bombs acquired through Chechniyan rebels and received technical help from Iraq. ‘The Russians believe that he has a handful [of nuclear weapons], the Saudi intelligence services are very conservative, perhaps they are friendly to the United States, believe that he has in the neighborhood of 20,’

I fail to understand, then, why these rebels did not use them against the FSU. It would have been easy.

Also, what is the shelf-life of low-shielded compact devices?

Thermal degradation of the implosion charge (These things are *warm* to handle), as well as y and N degradation imposes a "Best if used before...." date on them.

20 posted on 10/22/2001 7:30:09 AM PDT by Gorzaloon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 next last

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