Can A Nuke Really Fit Into A Suitcase?

Time | October 29, 2001 | Bill Saporito

[InfraRed]

You may want to see the following thread by Uncle Bill:
OSAMA BIN LADEN SAID TO HAVE NUKES - Terrorists With Suitcases

[mercy]

It would make sense to you if you knew what they were up to. Read Yossef Bodansky's book. He makes it clear that they are very much in the business of 'measured' attacks. They think they are sending particular messages to particular people. They calibrate the attack to the expected response. They know if they use nukes ... we will use nukes ... and our nukes are bigger. Much bigger. These guys do not, contrary to popular opinion have a death wish. Far from it. If we continue with our limited response rather than an all out assault (which I'm hoping against hope for once we take over Ashcanistan) they will up the ante.

[mercy]

You know this has been sort of a running joke but I'm beginning to think very serriously about it. We know that by far the bulk of the money supporting the Islamists is coming form Saudi Arabia. We should declare war specificly against Saudi Arabia and announce that Mecca will be bombed if Saudi Arabia does not cease and desist it's war of aggression. Give em 30 days, suggest that they abandon Mecca and wait. The minute that the Islamists go mass bio attack, or nuclear we make Mecca a glass sea.

Then we announce that the next attack will be Medina ... and so on.

[Poohbah]

What we know:

Suitcase nukes require a LOT of maintenance on a very frequent basis in order to work.

Therefore, if Osama HAD a suitcase nuke in 1998, as Yousef Bodansky was claiming, then he has a somewhat radioactive pile of junk today.

If Osama has a suitcase bomb NOW, we will know about it in the very near future, because he doesn't have a lot of time to use it.

[wny]

Even if it can fit in a suitcase, the airline will lose it.

[537 Votes]

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

The guy who built the World Trade Center claimed that they could withstand the impact of a jetliner. He failed to consider that the burning jet fuel would lead to the collapse of the building.

Yet Mohammed Atta did.

That means that a Middle Eastern terrorist knew more about the structural integrity of the World Trade Center than the architectural firm that constructed it.

Plus, he could fly a 767 -- with precision.

The price was too high the first time: let's not underestimate their intelligence again.

[Robert A Cook PE]

".... "The ultimate dirty bomb is a nuclear power reactor," says NCI's Leventhal. That someone will run a jet into a cooling tower isn't the only risk. Periodically the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has staged mock attacks against facilities, and the faux intruders won half the time--meaning they were in a position to cause severe damage. It's a target-rich environment: not only is the core vulnerable, but one NRC study also concluded that if terrorists blew up the cooling pool that holds the spent fuel, the radiation could kill 6% of the people living within 10 miles of the plant...."

AH HAH - Knew I'd find this group's agenda in there.

Pure BS - There is no way this can happen ("Kill all within ..." by blowing up the storage pool ... )

Among other minor "problems" is the simple thing that these pools can't be "blown up" they are open top pools (within the buildings - so little would get dispursed if an explosion happens - and an explostion in an open pool creates a big spalsh - A problem, to be sure, but NOT a 10 mile radius of "death"....not 6%, not 1%, not any. At most, you'd get a few hundred feet of "wet" dirt and asphalt and concrete blocks - IF the building itself were blown completely up! And if the explosion destroyed the building, then the

The pool, being low and submerged already - simply doesn't go anywhere, and IF leaks happens - the (mildly radiactive) cooling water either seeps slowly into the ground, or the water doesn't leak at all. If leaking, it's a simple matter of refilling the pool - with fire trucks if need be. With on-site water from any of several emergency and backup sources. Refills and water provcessing goes on routinely.

This is a POLITICAL AGENDA from a group of enviro - activists who don't know what they're talking about..... other than trying to shutdown all power plants with fear tactics.

[Freedom of Speech Wins]

That is what I thought as well, and would like to think.

But suppose they wish to wait until after we strike back to get more Muslim support worldwide, as outlined by Stanislav Lunev I believe in a newsmax article?

[Vinnie]

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

That is confusing. No only that, but there has to be some shielding between the components to prevent a premature critical mass. And there must be shielding around the whole thing to stop radioactivity from leaking.

IF a small nuke was detonated, then we would have to retaliate with same. But what target?

[Lazamataz]

Will Cipro help?

Elian Gonzales says "¡ Sí !"

[Robert A Cook PE]

Not so. Your numbers are immaterial because there are too many variables. So ANY weight value you care to mention, I could "design" a bomb that would work..down to a limit.

Or I could "prove" that such a bomb couldn't work equally easily.

Critical mass is funcion of density, geometry, implosion speed (or linear speed for a Tallboy style bomb - recall that it weighed (total bomb) something over 12,000 lbs and was the size of a good-sized van), packing material, reflector material, and purity/quality/density/enrichment of the fissile material. Etc. Etc.

[Poohbah]

Even if it can fit in a suitcase, the airline will lose it.

Quote of the Day, good sir! :o)

[Robert A Cook PE]

Yes, but even a "best if used before..." date could work when you realize that such a date also means ... "Might be Ok if used after ...."

Reliability isn't a big concern with these guys. Just HAVING the weapon is a big enough factor.

Then again ... I think, if anybody actually HAD such a weapon, they'd boast about ... or would have used it already.

A nuke is ONLY effective (unless exploded) when your opponent knows you have it. Here, a hidden threat is no threat at all.

[Poohbah]

Let's get it straight: he could program in a GPS fix into the 767's autopilot, and the AUTOPILOT could do the deed.

At least, that's my guess...

[Don Myers]

BTTT

[RussianBear716]

Putin is still a communist at heart and KGB to boot, why would God want to bless him?

[MaeWest]

This is a POLITICAL AGENDA from a group of enviro - activists who don't know what they're talking about..... other than trying to shutdown all power plants with fear tactics.

This bears repeating and thank you for adding some clear legitimate science to this discussion.

[The Raven]

>>So ANY weight value you care to mention

Something someone could carry without tipping off the public ---maybe 40 lbs

[The Raven]

>>IF a small nuke was detonated, then we would have to retaliate with same. But what target?

The generic Middle East excluding Israel