Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So you think there is no possible way that an enemy of the United States, whether its Russia or some terrorist organization, planted any nuclear weapons in any cities or other targets?
Think how many drugs and people make it across the border every year. You don't think there may have been some weapons or material to make weapons smuggled in?
You apparently know absolutely nothing about nuclear weapons. First off, while I don't give the government credit for much, they can track and locate radioactivity extremely effectively. Do a quick search of all of the people in the past decade who have been pulled over on highways, stopped on the subways, etc. after they've been to the doctors for even the mildest radiation treatment. If getting a shot in your thyroid can set off a scanner from a couple of hundred yards away, what do you think a bomb would do? Your second suggestion is even more laughable. What good is raw material, if they can get it. Despite the hysterics of the some neo-cons, you cannot build a nuclear weapon from plans on the internet. There is a reason why very few countries on the planet have ever successfully built a bomb, and it is not for lack of trying. The precision needed to built a functional weapon is beyond the means of most nations, let alone a rogue terrorist group. No terrorist group is setting up their own weapons lab to build a bomb.
You apparently know absolutely nothing about nuclear weapons. First off, while I don't give the government credit for much, they can track and locate radioactivity extremely effectively. Do a quick search of all of the people in the past decade who have been pulled over on highways, stopped on the subways, etc. after they've been to the doctors for even the mildest radiation treatment. If getting a shot in your thyroid can set off a scanner from a couple of hundred yards away, what do you think a bomb would do? Your second suggestion is even more laughable. What good is raw material, if they can get it. Despite the hysterics of the some neo-cons, you cannot build a nuclear weapon from plans on the internet. There is a reason why very few countries on the planet have ever successfully built a bomb, and it is not for lack of trying. The precision needed to built a functional weapon is beyond the means of most nations, let alone a rogue terrorist group. No terrorist group is setting up their own weapons lab to build a bomb.
In Scientific American, 2008, pgs 98-104, the unreliability of nuclear detectors is discussed. Thomas Cochran and Matthew McKinzie helped ABC News smuggle depleted Uranium through such detectors.
Regarding, your comment about how difficult it is to make a nuclear weapon, from what I understand, magnetic seperation has been around for decades. Supposedly, and 8th grader could accomplish it.
Even then, what makes you think it isn't the Russians who have planted weapons? Certainly, they have the resources and the know how to do so.
In Scientific American, 2008, pgs 98-104, the unreliability of nuclear detectors is discussed. Thomas Cochran and Matthew McKinzie helped ABC News smuggle depleted Uranium through such detectors.
Regarding, your comment about how difficult it is to make a nuclear weapon, from what I understand, magnetic seperation has been around for decades. Supposedly, and 8th grader could accomplish it.
Even then, what makes you think it isn't the Russians who have planted weapons? Certainly, they have the resources and the know how to do so.
Again, I'm dealing in reality, you're apparently living in a some sort of Tom Clancy world. The Russians planting weapons here for what reason? So we can wipe them off of the planet in a retaliatory strike? Are we planning on detonating any hidden nukes in Russia? That would make about as much sense. You reasoning is almost like Dick Cheney and GW before the invasion of Iraq. If you are only 99.9% certain that there are no weapons of mass destruction then you must assume that there might be. That is not how you're suppose to think and it shows a serious lack of reasoning and comprehension skills.
BTW, As last week showed, I'd be more worried about an asteroid wiping out US city than any of the worlds boggie men. Yet our budget for DHS and the Pentagon is what? And our NASA budget is what?
A year or two ago, I saw a movie with Samuel L. Jackson, called UNTHINKABLE. He played the role of a specialist that was called in for extreme situations to extract information. In the movie, the suspect hid nuclear weapons in various cities that were set to go off on a timer. Anyway, they brought in Sam to torture the man until he gave up the information.
Anyway, it got me thinking, is there any situation you would justify torture?
Torture should not be legal. However, there are times when torture is necessary. There have been extreme cases where our government broke the law to save citizens, and when found out later, it was deemed necessary in history and dropped. There are likely many thousands of cases of torture that will never see the light of day.
Again, I'm dealing in reality, you're apparently living in a some sort of Tom Clancy world. The Russians planting weapons here for what reason? So we can wipe them off of the planet in a retaliatory strike? Are we planning on detonating any hidden nukes in Russia? That would make about as much sense. You reasoning is almost like Dick Cheney and GW before the invasion of Iraq. If you are only 99.9% certain that there are no weapons of mass destruction then you must assume that there might be. That is not how you're suppose to think and it shows a serious lack of reasoning and comprehension skills.
BTW, As last week showed, I'd be more worried about an asteroid wiping out US city than any of the worlds boggie men. Yet our budget for DHS and the Pentagon is what? And our NASA budget is what?
We've got a lot of Tom Clancy characters on this thread....
Nope. A good trained interrogator can get answers without physical torture.
But not always the correct answers and not always in time. There are a lot of non-coercive interrogation techniques that have been developed but one thing that's usually a common feature in them is that they are lengthy.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
