- Obtaining legal documents a burden to Coloradans
- Will Columbus Day protesters become the very monster they deplore?
- Ready to fight right-to-work
- GUEST COLUMN: Rockies tickets, anyone?
- Energy development imperils habitat
- A Civic Center for Denver
- Preventing a nuclear terrorist attack on the U.S.
- Closures identified: critical next steps for DPS
- Hillary health plan could result in crackdown on illegal immigration
- More energy needed from North America
Preventing a nuclear terrorist attack on the U.S.
By
After nearly six years without a second attack on U.S. soil, some skeptics suggest that 9/11 was a 100-year flood. The view that terrorists are preparing even more deadly assaults seems as far-fetched to them as the possibility of terrorists crashing passenger jets into the World Trade Center did before that fateful Tuesday morning. To assess the threat of nuclear terrorism, it is necessary to answer five
Al-Qaida remains a formidable enemy with clear nuclear ambitions. Former CIA Director George Tenet wrote in his memoirs that al-Qaida’s leadership has remained “singularly focused on acquiring WMD” and willing to “pay whatever it would cost to get their hands on fissile material.”
Mr. Allison, Talking about nuclear weapons in the hands of terrorists is a great way to get people's attention and create fear. However, you left out some very important information concerning what it takes to create a nuclear yield. Terrorists never had and never will have the capability to "create" a nuclear weapon. But they may gain the capability of creating a "dirty bomb" (one that contains radioactive material that could be dispersed in a conventional explosion). Here's a quick explanation that avoids exposing any classified material: To create a fission chain reaction, you have to have a core of highly refined, volatile, radioctive material, surrounded by a core of conventional explosives. But here's the hard part. To get that big mushroom cloud explosion, you have to set off all the conventional explosives around the core at precisely the same instant (which requires an extremely precise timing/detonation mechanism). If the conventional explosives are set off properly, then the core of plutonium or uranium becomes compressed so tightly that atoms begin colliding into one another, splitting each other in the process. Also, don't forget that there are safeguards built into existing nuclear weapons to prevent accidental nuclear yields and to prevent terrorists and other potential tamperers from creating horrific results. It is important to fully inform people when you talk about a subject as sensitive as nuclear terror. It isn't fair to the public for a scientist to imply that setting off a nuclear weapon is as simple as lighting a fuse or pushing a button. THE BEST WAY TO PREVENT A NUCLEAR ATTACK ON AMERICAN SOIL IS TO GET RID OF THE TWIN FRUIT LOOPS IN THE WHITE HOUSE, YOU KNOW THE TWO, CHENEY THE SHOTGUN AND HIS SIDEKICK BUSH THE IDIOT. For starters: secure the borders, know who is here and why they are here, boot the illegals and finish the fence--we have 600 miles to go. Being in denial about terrorism and the war hurts, it doesn't help. That's why the liberal moonbats--Reid & Pelosi--have 11% approval, about what the DNC gives to the terrorists. It wasn't Terrorists that flew planes into the world trade center. A contingency plan makes too much sense for most politicians. The rest of us feel too powerless after being ignored or lied to outright. Those who are making ready and trying to plan will end up on the end of pointed fingers if an attack happens amid shouts of, "Why didn't you warn us? Why didn't you_____(fill in the blank here). Real question should be, "Why didn't you shake us out of our apathy and make us listen?" Good Luck.
They could acquire an existing bomb from one of the nuclear weapons states or construct an elementary nuclear device from highly enriched uranium made by a state. Theft of a warhead or material would not be easy, but attempted thefts in Russia and elsewhere are not uncommon. Once a terrorist group acquires about 100 pounds of HEU, terrorists could conceivably construct a bomb such as the one dropped on Hiroshima.
3. Where could terrorists acquire a nuclear bomb?
If a nuclear attack occurs, Russia will be the most likely source of the weapon or material. A close second would be North Korea.
Pyongyang has boasted that it not only possesses nuclear weapons but might export them, saying, “It’s up to you whether we. .
4. When could terrorists launch the first nuclear attack? If terrorists bought or stole a nuclear weapon in good working condition, they could explode it today. If the weapon had a lock, detonation would be delayed for several days. If terrorists acquired 100 pounds of HEU, they could have a working elementary nuclear bomb in less than a year.
5. How could terrorists deliver a nuclear weapon to its target?
The illicit economy for narcotics and illegal immigrants has built up a vastinfrastructure that terrorists could exploit.
Based on current trends, a nuclear terrorist attack on the United States is more likely than not in the decade ahead.
As horrific as that vision is, the most important but largely unrecognized truth is that this ultimate catastrophe is preventable.
I have proposed a strategy for a no-loose-nukes agenda under a “Doctrine of Three Nos”:
2.
3. No expansion of the nuclear club beyond its current 8.5 members, the half being North Korea.
Faced with the possibility of an American Hiroshima, many Americans areparalyzed by a combination of denial and fatalism. Either it hasn’t happened, so maybe it’s not going to happen; or, if it is going to happen, there’s nothing we can do to stop it.
Both propositions are wrong. Citizens must press their elected officials to adopt a clear agenda for action and then hold them accountable for following through.
We all know who was responsible for that, the very same person whose family member profited so much off of the 2 week before insurance policy he took out just in case.
Watch the video and read the scientific reports.