Post #51,900
9/16/02 12:14:55 PM
|
Iraq to have nukes by Christmas
[link|http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-417076,00.html|Here's hoping Dubya plays the Grinch]
Excerpt:
IRAQ could produce nuclear weapons within months using pirated German equipment and uranium smuggled from Brazil, according to a dissident Iraqi nuclear scientist.
The revelations painting an alarming picture of President Saddam Hussein\ufffds nuclear capabilities came as the White House made its strongest link yet between Saddam and al-Qaeda, and demanded a United Nations resolution as soon as this week.
Dr Khidir Hamza, who was science adviser to the Atomic Energy Establishment and later helped to start and direct Iraq\ufffds nuclear bomb programme before he defected in 1994, claims in an interview with The Times today that Saddam could be in a position to make three nuclear weapons within the next few months, if he has not already done so.
The usual gang of idiots is bound to say:
Aw, what do nuclear scientists know? Look, over here! Oil!
[link|http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/marlowe/index.html|http://www.angelfir...e/index.html]
Everything's a mystery until you figure out how it works.
We are here to go!
The nihilists and the liars have buried truth alive in a shallow grave.
|
Post #51,903
9/16/02 12:26:36 PM
|
Where is he going to use it who/why
if it aint us why should we give a rats ass. If it is lets put him down. It would be nice to know what if anything he has on his mind. Perhaps a little call by our president telling him to look at the shore of our great Salt lake in Utah and explain that is what bhagdad and all other Iraqi cities may look like.
thanx,
bill
will work for cash and other incentives [link|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html|skill set]
qui mori didicit servire dedidicit
|
Post #52,429
9/20/02 12:38:25 AM
|
Re: Where is he going to use it who/why
One good-sized nuke would take out our only real ally in the Mideast.
Isreal is, if you look at a map, a really tiny country. With the right winds, a halfway dirty bomb could obliterate it. Two or three could turn it into a glass plain. If he has a delivery system. A suicide bomber wouldn't be suitable. A SCUD is unreliable. Experienced agents? Mmmm.... might be possible, even with the Mossad trying to search them out.
Saudi? Har. A nominal ally. Kuwait? Possible, but if he has two of 'em he could take them out also.
It's an argument about him not having any (yet) or biological agents (yet). I tend to agree with people who think that bio agents wouldn't be as effective as the scaremongers would have us thing; good sanitation and cleanliness helps. Lots. And chem attacks (which he's shown he has some expertise in) would be open warfare. I don't think Saddam is as crazy as that.
I think.
The lawyers would mostly rather be what they are than get out of the way even if the cost was Hammerfall. - Jerry Pournelle
|
Post #51,909
9/16/02 1:35:33 PM
|
Place your bets.
On the one side, there's someone who says that Iraq will have nuclear weapons in a few months.
I'm going to say that Iraq will not.
I'll also say that we will not invade Iraq for at least 3 months.
So, 90 days from today, if I'm wrong, we'll see Iraq detonate a test device (nuclear).
Marlowe is pretty free with other people's lives, let's see how much he believes in his own statements.
Place your bets. Even odds. Anyone want to bet against me (I'm saying we will NOT see a nuclear device tested by Iraq nor will we see Iraq using nukes if invaded).
(Ahhhhh, I can already see Marlowe's reaction. Just because they didn't test them or use them doesn't mean they didn't have them. Maybe they DID have them, but didn't want to test them or use them and then dismantled them after the invasion and maybe they ......)
|
Post #51,914
9/16/02 1:44:56 PM
|
Amazing theory...
...I've got enough to make 3. Let me waste a third of it to make sure the other 2 thirds is good. Yep...smart...smart dictator.</sarcasm>
And then..when they don't use those weapons in battle you will be vindicated. Even though the stated purpose is to make sure he doesn't build them at all.
I'll take your side on that bet.
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #51,939
9/16/02 4:59:54 PM
|
An un-tested weapon?
...I've got enough to make 3. Let me waste a third of it to make sure the other 2 thirds is good. Yep...smart...smart dictator.</sarcasm> No. The test is NOT only to ensure that your material will fission. It is also a test to see if the mechanism works. Of course, it's up to Saddam. He can either "waste" .33% of his fissionable material and KNOW that the bombs work -or- He can "save" all of the material and HOPE that the bombs work. The same as deploying new systems in a production environment. You can HOPE that all the bugs are worked out -or- You can TEST the system prior to deployment. Now, seeing as how this is an invasion of Iraq, Saddam would have to be an idiot to NOT test his weapons. But you don't see that. Now, how many bombs DOES Saddam have? An illustration of this is when we bombed Japan.
|
Post #51,948
9/16/02 5:28:29 PM
|
Close...
but I think you'll find the political manuvering even more to your advantage.
Let's see, Saddam claims to have 3 nukes. (No one really knows anything.)
Saddam test fires one of them - (and unless the US and others are VERY smart and claim it's an earthquake) - proves to the world that he has them.
|
Post #51,950
9/16/02 5:38:55 PM
|
Yup. That's "deterrent".
If people know he has them, they are far less likely to attack (unless we're talking about India and Pakistan).
"Cold War".
Personally, I cannot see any reason for NOT testing a nuke.
|
Post #51,981
9/16/02 10:41:06 PM
|
Good reasons.
He tests a nuke, he's showed the world that he's got them and thus justifies some sort of military action. Holding them in reserve, he can claim he doesn't have them.
Wherever he may have gotten them, if in fact he actually has any (either from former USSR stocks, or home-built), it would be dangerous. Me, given Saudi instability, and Saudi funded terrorism, I'm not real sure I'd be much in favor of spending our lives and money protecting them.
The lawyers would mostly rather be what they are than get out of the way even if the cost was Hammerfall. - Jerry Pournelle
|
Post #51,987
9/16/02 11:21:56 PM
|
Even better.
He tests a nuke, he's showed the world that he's got them and thus justifies some sort of military action. Holding them in reserve, he can claim he doesn't have them. A nuke is NOT a firecracker. A nuke takes a LOT of sophisticated engineering. He COULD hold them in reserve. But, as I said above, he'd be HOPING that they would work. The first time. Under combat conditions. Without testing. Again, he COULD do that. In which case, how is Iraq a threat to us? Me, given Saudi instability, and Saudi funded terrorism, I'm not real sure I'd be much in favor of spending our lives and money protecting them. We aren't. It's the oil. The Saudi's just happen to be sitting on it (and pretend to be, somewhat, US-friendly).
|
Post #51,913
9/16/02 1:39:59 PM
|
Nah...he'd never...
...launch missiles at Israel...
Oops...he already did that.
And they weren't even in the fight.
Good thing they didn't have nukes on board.
No matter what happens to Saddam...his [link|http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/1/15/75846.shtml|sons] should [link|http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,4660287%255E1702,00.html|go] with him. They're such [link|http://www.middleeastwire.com/iraq/stories/20011208_meno.shtml|nice boys].
Oh...wait...never mind.
I know what its all about.
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #51,931
9/16/02 4:09:41 PM
|
Would be very credible
This would be very credible except for one small problem. This guy defected in 1994. That was 4 years before Iraq threw the inspectors out of the country in the first place.
So what does he know about Iraq's current production? I don't see how he could have any current information, unless he is just passing on what the US government tells him.
Jay
|
Post #52,165
9/18/02 10:12:42 AM
|
Re: Aha - someone else who noticed that little fact
Mr M lacking any ability to analyse what is before him, won't pay any attention to such minor details as the total lack of credibility of his sources. What the f*** has credibiltiy go to do with his (and his fearless leader's) desire to kill people and invade Iraq.
That turkey has been inleague with Richard Butler and others in lying about Iraq to bolster the Republican right's need to sieze Iraq.
If I seem a bit testy it is because I just watched Bush on TV looking into the camera and lying barefacedly to the world about Iraq.
I am glad to see that there are those among us who can see through the deceptive mist.
DSM
|
Post #52,175
9/18/02 11:24:59 AM
|
Well if I got materials and tools I could have one by xmas
will work for cash and other incentives [link|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html|skill set]
qui mori didicit servire dedidicit
|
Post #52,209
9/18/02 3:19:28 PM
|
Doubt it, Box
It took George Kistiakowsy (and friends) a hell of a lot of tests and blown-up pipes.. to get anywhere near a sufficiently uniform implosion - which is the *only* mechanism workable with Pu, for various reasons. And even if you had the several 'velocities' of plastic - you wouldn't have a clue as to arranging their geometry. Not even you.
So unless you had U-235, could use the crummy gun-barrel approach: you'd fail, even by All Saints Day (or whenever that thingie is, about the Prince of Peace and all.) But the world is awash with kilotons of Pu - why you could build the new US Memorial Temple to Dreams of Empire out of solid Pu (if you kept it sufficiently thin so as not to encounter a few other little problems).
Better stick to stickin those pins in those dolls.
Ashton Designer Munitions Gmbh Tu-Th-Sa-Su
Catering on M-W-F
|
Post #52,213
9/18/02 3:31:06 PM
|
But I still have the plans
before they yanked them off the web and the libraries. 2 balls, certain weight imploded with a shaped charge at a designated velocity.
thanx,
boxley
mad scientist for hire and part time sysadmin
will work for cash and other incentives [link|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html|skill set]
qui mori didicit servire dedidicit
|
