Originally posted by: tec699
Originally posted by: rickn
Originally posted by: tec699
I just did about 1,000 situps and 500 push ups. If the draft is reenacted, then I'll be there. And I expect you guys to be there to!!!! RIGHT???
hell no. to old anyway, heh
What are you talkin about! We could use a little bit of action if you ask me. I say bring on the draft!!! I've been playin Tac Ops all week and I'm ready to go!!
Okay, from that link:Originally posted by: Fencer128
Originally posted by: godmare
Originally posted by: KickItTwice
I think that all the suitcase nukes are all already inside the US. It's just too easy too smuggle stuff inside the US. Why would the terrorists NOT have the suitcase nukes inside the US.
Suitcase nuke? Do you have any idea how much a nuke weighs?
These things exist (and the missing quantity in the ex-soviet inventory is also well documented).
here is a nice link
Andy
...1-kiloton 'suitcase-sized' nuclear bombs
Okay, from that, there is clearly speculation about even the existence of such a weapon.Yaklokov's testimony was curtly dismissed by State Department spokesperson James Rubin (3 October): "there is no evidence other than hearsay to support such claims; therefore, we give such claims little credibility... We have no information or evidence suggesting that nuclear weapons were ever developed for or put under the control of the KGB."
This assumes they do exist, but even at that are heavy and awkward."I think we are aware that the Russian nuclear arsenal contained atomic demolition munitions which some people define or characterize as suitcase bombs. They are not really suitcase bombs since it requires two people to carry them, and they are not flat, so that they don't fit in suitcases."
Originally posted by: Insane3D
Hmmm...making sure I have plenty of porn?
You can never have enough porn..especially in wartime. Oh, and some of the nifty particle board Evadman was raving about.
Yep..porn and particle board..what else could a citizen need in war time?
Originally posted by: godmare
Originally posted by: Insane3D
Hmmm...making sure I have plenty of porn?
You can never have enough porn..especially in wartime. Oh, and some of the nifty particle board Evadman was raving about.
Yep..porn and particle board..what else could a citizen need in war time?
A rag?
which people? The Iraqis crushed under Saddam's jackboot?Originally posted by: damiano
Originally posted by: Fausto1
Why prepare for a war you have no direct involvement in?
you will
if bush starts the war..
these people will come to destroy stuff inside the US
Yeah there has to be some stuff there and once baghdad is plowed free of Saddamn we'll be able to see them because 1/4 million "inspectors" should be able to find what's going on.Originally posted by: Fencer128
I appreciate your points (I have put up another link for you too). IMHO there is too much circumstantial evidence to dismiss their existence. I have also seen television documentaries interviewing the man in charge of the nuclear auditing - and he convinced me.
Too big a risk not to take seriously - small risk of an explosion occuring maybe but huge potential if it does.
Cheers,
Andy
which people? The Iraqis crushed under Saddam's jackboot?
Originally posted by: Insane3D
Originally posted by: godmare
Originally posted by: Insane3D
Hmmm...making sure I have plenty of porn?
You can never have enough porn..especially in wartime. Oh, and some of the nifty particle board Evadman was raving about.
Yep..porn and particle board..what else could a citizen need in war time?
A rag?
Doh! Good point...
/revises list
Ok...porn, particle board, and a rag...and porn...oops..got that on the list twice!
That second link cites some US instances of simiilar weao\pons, though it's still more of the 'maybe / maybe not' idea. I will concede that there may be a risk of small nuclear weapons as you suggest, I'm not an expert in the area , but really it seems moot- a small nuclear weapon like that seemingly would have less of an effect than an ICBM or hydrogen bomb, and someone could just as easily walk into a target area with conventional explosives, also to a detrimental effect.Originally posted by: Fencer128
I appreciate your points (I have put up another link for you too). IMHO there is too much circumstantial evidence to dismiss their existence. I have also seen television documentaries interviewing the man in charge of the nuclear auditing - and he convinced me.
Too big a risk not to take seriously - small risk of an explosion occuring maybe but huge potential if it does.
Cheers,
Andy
a rag or sock is so teenager. Grownups use cum-kleen moist wipes
Originally posted by: rickn
a rag or sock is so teenager. Grownups use cum-kleen moist wipes
Originally posted by: KickItTwice
If it takes 2 or 3 people to handle a "suitcase" nuclear weapon, that really makes no difference. Such a weapon could easily be placed into an ordinary van and driven into a heavily populated area. Granted, 1 kilo ton is small for a nuclear bomb, it would be a devastating terrorist weapon.
As for the suitcase bombs mysterious disappearance, where would they go? It makes sense that the stolen suitcase bombs would be sold for millions to whoever had the money. Where else would they be. Who would be so interested and willing and able to pay the money?