Article

2006-03-24 Terror Networks

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Dan Darling 2006-03-24 02:45|| || Front Page|| [4 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 I remember big discussions about terrorist nukes some time back, here at Rantburg. As I recall, the consensus was that there is serious equipment needed to construct a real nuclear bomb from scratch (or even just to assemble one from components), and even more serious training and tools for the technicians doing the frequently required maintenance until the thing is used, without which the bomb would become a really pretty paperweight. And, that a more realistic concern would be about the deployment of a dirty nuke/conventional bomb in the center of a major city. But, that the concern was more about the fears of the residents, as the radioactivity shed by such a thing would break down to a reasonable level pretty quickly.

Do I remember correctly?

Posted by trailing wife 2006-03-24 16:55|| 2006-03-24 16:55|| Front Page Top

#2 a WMD terrorist is far more likely to knock off the night watchman, lower the chain-link fence somewhere in Switzerland or Italy and drive off with sufficient materials for a nuclear device. Actually making a nuclear bomb after that is the easy part; the recipe is on the Internet.

What rubbish.

Recipe on the internet?
Making an A bomb is not like mixing a cake.
The actual Physics and Engineering required is non trivial and is not available on the net.

Any fool who lowers a chain link fence and tries to load a spent reactor rod from a cooling pool into his truck will die in minutes from radiation poisoning.

Posted by john 2006-03-24 17:03|| 2006-03-24 17:03|| Front Page Top

#3 We must remember that countries have failed to get the bomb.
Some tried for decades and gave up.

Governments can buy things that terrorits cannot.
They have vast amounts of money, intelligence operatives that can steal things, ships and plnaes to transport things, they can hire expertise, thye have access to the top scientists at their universities.

Yet countries like Iraq did not find bomb making to be trivial.

Exploding a single atomic bomb could have deterred action during the first gulf war.

How come Iraqi secret service did not pull down a chain link fence, steal the material for a bomb and have their scientists (or maybe street urchins in Baghdad) use the internet recipe to build a few bombs?

Posted by john 2006-03-24 17:08|| 2006-03-24 17:08|| Front Page Top

#4 Which is why a single nuclear terrorist attack on American soil should get the terror sponsors glassed over in less than 24 hours.

Posted by Zenster 2006-03-24 17:17|| 2006-03-24 17:17|| Front Page Top

#5 Actually, tw, besides the high-precision shaping of critical mass sub-segments (so that they implode/compress into a very uniform solid) and the almost instantaneous triggering of all the explosive charges that compress them (two incredibly difficult achievements), there is also the "one point safe" level of fusing and triggering a nuclear device.

This requires (as with American nuclear weapons) that there is only a one-in-a-million chance of accidental detonation. Few rough-shod developmental laboratories are able to devise such safe and reliable actuation systems. Lack of that sort of control makes a crude nuclear weapon an equal threat to both attacker and target alike.

Given the propensity that terrorists have for "work related" accidents, some of their first attempts at fabricating nuclear weapons will probably do them more harm than us. All of this points back to how critical it is to contain and secure existing weapons stocks in Russia and elsewhere.

Posted by Zenster 2006-03-24 17:28|| 2006-03-24 17:28|| Front Page Top

#6 Yet countries like Iraq did not find bomb making to be trivial.

Few rough-shod developmental laboratories are able to devise such safe and reliable actuation systems.

Interesting. I was just reading recently (I can't remember where - here, maybe?) that some scientific types were convinced that Pak and the NKors couldn't have done what they did without significant Chinese help. Here's an article along those same lines.

Posted by xbalanke 2006-03-24 22:14|| 2006-03-24 22:14|| Front Page Top

23:57 Zhang Fei
23:52 Zhang Fei
23:49 Grealing Grineper7055
23:17 Frank G
23:16 Frank G
23:14 wxjames
23:13 Frank G
23:10 JosephMendiola
22:57 RWV
22:55 Ptah
22:55 Captain America
22:53 JAB
22:52 Eric Jablow
22:51 JosephMendiola
22:50 Captain America
22:41 JosephMendiola
22:18 Inspector Clueso
22:14 JosephMendiola
22:14 Barbara Skolaut
22:14 xbalanke
22:13 DMFD
22:07 JosephMendiola
22:00 Ptah
21:49 Inspector Clueso