Something to think about is Middle Eastern countries give weapons to terrorists, and there are many missing Russian nuclear pits (pits are the radioactive cores of nukes). Also, Iran is working at making HEU (highly enriched uranium).
2007-10-15
15:46:01
·
23 answers
·
asked by
a bush family member
7
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
Terrorists don't have access to long range missiles.
U.S. government report (GAO):
"Nuclear materials can be smuggled across a countrys border through a variety of means: they can be hidden in a car; train; or ship; carried in personal luggage through an airport; or walked across an unprotected border."
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d02989t.pdf
2007-10-15
15:53:33 ·
update #1
Nuclear bombs are not large. They can fit in a car's trunk.
2007-10-15
15:54:36 ·
update #2
"If" starts questions. Here is one:
"If terrorists hijack planes and fly them into skyscrapers, which country do you attack? "
2007-10-15
15:59:51 ·
update #3
To time_wounds_all_heelz: Nuclear weapons are not as strong as most people think. You will survive as long as you are not in the same area as the weapon. Not everyone in Japan died in World War 2.
2007-10-15
16:03:31 ·
update #4
Whichever has the most natural resourses (spelled o-i-l-), and
can have the blame placed on them quickly.
:-o
2007-10-15 16:39:28
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
Wow, that's a good question. I honestly cannot answer it because I don't know. That's a real stumper. Dropping a nuke isn't as easy as it sounds; see, unlike the terrorists, we have a conscience. Obviously we have to take action, but a nuclear strike?
Do we attack the terrorists' country of origin, wherever the nuke came from, both? Neither? What of the civilian casualties? Unless we get lucky and the terrorists who supplied the nuke are operating from a remote area, thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of innocents may perish. (If we end up taking out a large city I mean.) What about a possible retaliation from the country that we nuked? Or even a possibly catastrophic action from another nuclear power (Russia?)?
Damn, you're getting a star for this one lol.
EDIT: Nuclear weapons have become much more powerful since 1945. The atom bombs we dropped had the power of about 20 kilotons. Our strongest nukes in our active arsenal are about 1.2 megatons (Or 1200 kilotons)
2007-10-15 23:04:28
·
answer #2
·
answered by Liberals love America! 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Only one country comes to mind when talking about Islamo Fascist Terrorism.
PAKISTAN
Listen to any news story about any Islamic Jihad Attack and chain starts in Pakistan.
Yemen
New York I and II (1993 / 2001)
London Bombings
Spain Bombings
Listen to any story on Terrorism on any News Media, Liberal or Conservative, this country is the root cause of worldwide terrorism.
After Afghanistan, we should have disarmed Pakistan's Nuclear Weapons and Rebuild Pakistan rather than Iraq.
Hussein though he was no saint he was not a threat to US like Pakistan continues to be.
Read this:
Richard Haass the head of the Council on Foreign Relations was asked, "What nation keeps you up at night?" He answered that Pakistan is the one nation that has him the most worried.
Complete Story: http://www.raptureready.com/nm/154.html
2007-10-16 11:27:35
·
answer #3
·
answered by Thomas B 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
nukes have already been smuggled in,good thing it was are own people checking how secure our borders are. nuclear signature will trace it back to the country of origin. you don't think that it is untraceable do you.
added. dirty bombs should be our biggest concern. I find it strange that someone here would favor attacking the US,after all we would be partly to blame for allowing our borders to be unsecured.
2007-10-15 23:06:39
·
answer #4
·
answered by here to help 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I say we'd have to hit Iran. Wouldn't matter much, we'd all be gone
Beatchanter...you mean like the true enemies that Clinton went after.
EDIT: I realize that. What I'm talking about is we attack one country...let's say Iran, therefore Russia attacks us. Then Britian attacks Russia so North Korea attacks Britian, Britian attacks Syria who then attacks Israel. Isreal retaliates so Syria....on and on.
EDIT: Okay Joe, I'll bite...how is your hero Ron Paul going to save us. LOL
2007-10-15 22:54:38
·
answer #5
·
answered by time_wounds_all_heelz 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
It's kinda hard to smuggle a nuke into the US. you would need a really big thing that would keep it stable. it would need to be a pretty big, well staffed boat or something that would have a hard time staying under the radar.
edit- They aren't too large, but if you didn't want to blow yourself up in the process of smuggling it you would want to carry it in some sort of nuclear facility which would be large.
2007-10-15 22:51:55
·
answer #6
·
answered by just some chick 6
·
0⤊
2⤋
the US has lost its share of nukes...I would start to worry if the US or any nuclear power starts changing the number of devices in their arsenal...but at the moment, Iran is the scapegoat for everything and they would be the country we attack...regardless if they're responsible for it or not...do you know what is 68 miles north-north-west of Las Vegas??? Our government/ Your government 50 years ago distributed nuclear fallout over Utah, the Dekotas, Wyoming etc...let us hope they have changed their ways.
2007-10-15 22:51:32
·
answer #7
·
answered by T-monster 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
That's a good question and my answer would be a strike against Iran. And the area in Pakistan where OBL is. If necessary against Russia too. After all this is WWlll.
2007-10-15 22:54:13
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
Banks to eliminate world Debt. Start fresh!
2007-10-15 22:50:36
·
answer #9
·
answered by Jaime M 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
Wait until they take responsibility. Nuke the countries that shelter them.
2007-10-15 23:01:28
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋