April 12, 2010

Imagine the worst. "al Qaeda are .. trying to secure a nuclear weapon -- a weapon of mass destruction that they have no compunction at using"

Serious question - what would be the impact on humanity, and the future of world events, should terrorists set off a nuke in New York City? Or Mumbai? Or Paris? Or Moscow? And threatened that they had 5 more to go.

First, imagine that it happened.

What would be the impact? On the world economy. On how countries like India, Russia, China, the UK and the US dealt with foreign and domestic terrorists. On how people who lived in big cities felt and behaved. On political discourse in the US.

If one went off in Mumbai, would that be much different than one that went off in New York? Why? If one went off that killed 1 million, would that be much different than one that killed 10 million? Why? If one went off, who would be put to blame?

No jokes.

Because it's not a joke. With loose nukes and loose nuke material, combined with corrupt and incompetent government, military and science officials, the unimaginable could and should be imagined. And when Obama proposes increased efforts and funding to lock down nukes, and when the new START treaty with Russia comes to the Senate, those who oppose for political advantage or profit should be exposed.

It just takes one.

“We know that organizations like al Qaeda are in the process of trying to secure a nuclear weapon -- a weapon of mass destruction that they have no compunction at using... If there was ever a detonation in New York City, or London, or Johannesburg, the ramifications economically, politically, and from a security perspective would be devastating.”

- President Obama, April 2010


NukeGuy said...

Old school nukes aren't the problem because they are too big and difficult to hide to use as terrorist weapons. The real problem will come when terrorists get their hands on the fourth generation weapons that are being developed by nearly all industrialized countries. Besides the usual suspects, labs in Germany, Taiwan, Japan, Brazil, etc. are working to build these mini-nukes that use less than a gram of fission/fusion materials. Once this genie is out of the bottle, we will have to look at the world anew, much like the transformation that occurred when the first nukes were introduced in the 1940s.

So what's the big deal? Consider this: A 4th-gen weapon, virtually undetectable, and small enough to fit in a briefcase, can inflict tremendous damage or kill thousands of people without triggering an automatic strategic retaliation from the victim country. This will upset our present views of how the world should work politically, and on a personal level has far-reaching implications for travel, privacy, and personal freedoms.

consultant said...

The Repubs are already gaming to defeat the new START treaty. Despite the fact that everyone else says it's a good deal.

Let's see how this goes. If there are legitimate objections, fine. If it's all about red meat for your base, the blogs will have to expose them for what they are.

Anonymous said...


And we sit and let them

This weak kneed prick in office won't do a damn thing about it!


keith said...

I read a great book "The Fifth Horseman" 20 years ago, about terrorists who snuck a nuke into NYC, then blackmailed us to pull support for Israel. It stuck with me. What would the US do if is was blackmailed with a nuke?

Another one was "Special Bulletin" - a tv show 25 or so years ago again with nuclear blackmail. This one was domestic, a group of scientists who wanted the government to give up its nukes or else they'd set off a nuke. Which they then did.

After 9/11 all I heard was "nobody saw it coming". so on this one, I hope governments indeed understand the wildest scenarios, and do everything possible to lock down nukes and nuke materials. Obama calling this conference is way overdue - something bush, bush or clinton should have done years and years ago.

Anonymous said...

kill thousands of people without triggering an automatic strategic retaliation from the victim country.

Bzzzt WRONG. If the victim country (say US for instance) could prove (and not Dick Cheney prove either) another nation-state nuked you, you make that country a bacteria free zone. Exterminate everthing.

Anonymous said...

the nukular-scare card is only to be used when drumming up popular support for otherwise illegal wars against sovereign nations, NOT TO PROVIDE Support for a liberal president who is trying to do something about the problem! What the heck is the matter with you!?!?!
And another thing, about the terrorists. Why do we get so shook up when the politicians rattle our cages with that one when we have hundreds of thousands of terrorists hiding in plain sight right here in the good 'ol US of A? They are running guns, selling drugs, smuggling humans and sex slave trafficking, and no one has a word to say about it? They are in East L.A., scratch that, MOST of Los Angeles and go from coast to coast in every major city. We know them as gangbangers. We have third world conditions right here in our own country complete with corruption, terrorist cells (gangs), crime, poverty, sex slaves, drugs, illegal guns, you name it. Instead we are supposed to wrap ourselves in the flag and go on the war path overseas because a couple of guys are shooting at rocks with their ak 47's. That's the enemy? Really? If only they were eliminated Amuricka would be so much better off, huh? What about the thugs who run entire neighborhoods and have the police running scared? Nothing. Nope, we gotta go overseas and fight the terrorists who conveniently get thrown in the same bag as 'insurgents' over there, but of course anyone fighting a guerrilla war against occupation in this or any western country would be considered a 'freedom fighter' and/or a 'patriot'.
Well at least I can say if you really want to fight the terrorists in a smart way, Obama is doing it by (hopfully) denying what the these terrorists are after, BEFORE things get bad!!! Not just waiting for it to happen so we can gleefully goto war as our congress, hand in hand, both parites, sing the national anthem while our troops are out there slaughtering and getting slaughtered...

Anonymous said...

In your thread introduction, you kept using the word "if". That's an error. The correct term is "when".

A nuke will eventually be set off in a populated area, likely in the next 10 years, almost certainly in the next 20.

No joke.

Whether it is Pakistan against India, or Al Qaeda against New York, or Syria against Israel, or U.S. against Iran, I don't have a clue.

But it will happen. It will certainly make the equity markets exciting!

And of course, however it happens, the U.S. will almost certainly do exactly the wrong thing in reaction, like invading the wrong country again. (Actually, we will probably underreact under a Democrat president and overreact under a Republican president.)

Anonymous said...

The powers that be would not care either way and would just use it to obtain more power and control over our daily lives.

Anonymous said...

Sharks with Lasers.

Anonymous said...

Keith, terrorists are not interested in anything as nuanced as blackmail, with its outcomes so unverifiable.

How do you prove you pulled support from Iran? Going to invite terrorists into Israel to verify no U.S. troops and weapons?

No, "terrorist" is a weak, misnomer term, they are simply international mass murderers, bent on killing for glory in the afterlife. They will simply set off the bomb, and then release a press statement gloating about it.

Dammerung said...

Again - the same characters behind the economic crash and the charade of the Federal Reserve are behind the terrorism fears.

10 million people have NO HOME and NO JOB and you're worried about a nuclear attack? Guess what buddy, it already happened. We're already in post-apocalyptia, radiation not needed. Just generations of corrupt politicians and bankers scheming to start wars and then fund and arm both sides behind our backs.

Seriously, sometimes you have the looks of a gov't shill about you. As if we need to worry about Al-Queda! We have a huge civil disaster on our hands already; we don't need to check in our closets at night for the atomic boogeyman.

Anonymous said...

Even there were 1000 eyewitness and 100 confessions, it would still be blamed on Isreal.

Pay Lay Ale said...

"The Repubs are already gaming to defeat the new START treaty. Despite the fact that everyone else says it's a good deal."

Ever hear of "never trust the Russians?"

We need to be doing what the Russians are doing, which is to retire old nuclear weapons and develop a new gen. of tactical nuclear weapons. A new gen. that consumes more of the radioactive materials with less fallout.

At the same time, Obama, just like Bush, is doing NOTHING substantive to stop Iran or North Korea from developing nukes.

Obama also folded like a cheap tent on the missile defense.

keith said...

dammerung - yeah, things are so bad, they can't possibly get worse.. no need to worry about terrorists getting a nuke and taking out DC.

Yeah, right.

You think things are bad? Picture losing NYC, DC and LA in one day.


Dammerung said...

keith said...

Eh heh. If we lost DC and NYC in a day, I'd have to very carefully reflect in order to not be overjoyed. Two Satanic cities which have put the entire world to the sword and enslaved Americans (w/the Fed) to do it.

Seems to me like these fears are the chickens of a guilty conscience coming home to roost. Why are YOU too good to lose a few million citizens after killing so many civilians in the Middle East? Why shouldn't America taste nuclear fire after totally unnecessarily dropping nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

The best way to protect America is to cut the tax rate to 2% flat, dissolve 99% of the Federal government, allow every non-felonious American citizen to own any kind of weapon their heart desires, and get the Hell out of the rest of the world and stop killing thier citizens and destroying their property.

You have a dirty conscience fueling your fear. Why aren't you worried about Tasmanian terrorists? Because America is not relentless bombing and murdering and destroying property in Tasmania and doesn't require a constant propaganda campaign excusing themselves for it.

Dammerung said...


Everyone responsible for 9/11 is in jail or dead. Why is the war continuing? America took it upon itself to try to reshape the politics of Middle Eastern society using bombing and violence. This fits what Patreus defined as terror - an attempt to make political changes using violence. America is the biggest terrorist regime to ever exist. If Americans knew this, they wouldn't tolerate it.

Anonymous said...

nyc, dc, and la at once?

it would be wwIII. heck, i would even go down and enlist at that point (though I think my usefulness as a foot soldier is over now).

hopefully, we would say (again) either you are with us or you are against us and we would mean it and wipe the religion of pieces off the face of the earth.

amigauser said...

Imagine President Bush saying " ____ country or organization has weapons of mass destruction, would YOU believe him Keith?

THEIR is NOT any difference between BUSH and OBAMA, both are lying and preparing the way to attack a foreign country (IRAN anyone)


got america out of IRAQ
NOT closed Guantanamo
NOT repealed the PATRIOT act

STOP being a useful idiot Keith, and look what Obama does, not what he says

Anonymous said...

"America is the biggest terrorist regime to ever exist."


"If Americans knew this, they wouldn't tolerate it."

I'm sorry but you have far to much respect for Americans. Most know this already in their gut, and they're just fine with it in a guilty sort of way. As long as the McFries keep coming its all good.

Anonymous said...

USA -After USA got into World War I & II they have been considered the watch dogs of the World . It's really a expensive deal for the USA ,but we are trying to protect our interest in
other Countries ,like all our Corporations that are overseas and the rich oil we like to buy .

Population growth is pushing the World to the max . It was better when it was a smaller World .

Charles said...

Never have been one to live in fear myself...

I personally doubt anyone's willing to pull the Nuclear trigger. Even the Muslim extremists (in their higher ranks at least) know this would be world wide suicide. Osama doesn't want to present Allah with a scorched earth now does he????

The only people crazy enough to first strike (through terrorism or otherwise) aren't close to the means to actually do so.

Abinmrfdad-what's his name, Jong Il and the Paki/Indians all have far more to lose than gain from a nuke strike.

If it happens the world as we know it ends and chaos rains. Power NEVER benefits from TRUE chaos as it is utterly unpredictable.

keith said...

You know what I fear? It's not the terrorists.

It's incompetent, corrupt, unintelligent, or self-profit-driven politicians, who are then of course terrible at governing when the people are stupid enough to put them there.

Yes, I'm speaking of Bush. And yes, I'm speaking of the almost comically laughable concept of Sarah Palin.

That's who I fear. Because the damage they can do, in just a short amount of time, can be immense.

I'm glad we have a steady hand on the switch today. Hopefully the American people don't f*ck it up again anytime soon.

Anonymous said...

"You know what I fear?"

Carnies. Circus folk. Nomads, you know. Smell like cabbage. Small hands.

Angry Leprechaun said...

This is pure fucking comedy! Why would I believe Obama playing the WMD card anymore than if Palin played it or if Bush tried to again?


I am supposed to believe it this time round because Obama is using it. Special interest assholes are laughing their asses of right now. They are saying, "We fooled the fucking public again, yet this time we actually got Keith to buy it!"

Anonymous said...

"Because the damage they can do, in just a short amount of time, can be immense."


you mean, like BO?

Anonymous said...

I had to make a delivery to DC last week. Other than the monuments and the Smithsonian which I would hate to lose, a nuke in that rat hole would only be for the better.

Terrorists would get bonus points for

a. a clean bomb

b. making sure both house and senate were in full session.

Charles said...

Angry Lep your clarity on the issue is shared by me.

There is sooooo little difference between the parties and Keith and others should no better.

While I disagree with the Bush admins war policy to say that Bush in and of himself made that decision is laughable. Just like the puppet masters are telling Obama to keep things hot in Afghanistan they did the same with GWB. Perpetual war is going nowhere anytime soon.

In this case I think the Republicans all the way back to Nixon have the right strategy. Make them think your a madman with your finger on the button and deal from a position of strength.

But in reality nobody's gonna make the move everyone has to much to lose. Reminds me how my issues w GW were more about the spending and the ancillary support of the housing bubble.

In preventing the correction, bailing out wall street and the health care fiaSCO I now have more beef with Obama than I ever did with Bush.

Of course in the end they are both POS politicians and anyone who believes otherwise is truly a fool.

Banana Republicrat said...

Keith I think what BHO is saying is that if al-Qaeda gets five bombs there will be no threats. The only thing they want from us is for all of us to die. Nucs would expedite that --no negotiation required.

I'd fear not the five, but the global hysteria afterwards --there are lots of goofballs with itchy red button fingers out there. I'd say Pakistan, India, China, and DPRK would scare me the most just because they have such contentious relationships with each other to begin with.

I'm pretty sure that the economy would be the least of our worries. In fact, if there could be a silver lining in any of it, it would be that all of us would be able to articulate just exactly how little the performance of the DJIA matters to us.

PatrickHenry said...

Wow. I used to read HousingPanic during the fake RE boom years and it was great! I think that blog introduced me to Peter Schiff. HousingPanic CORRECTLY criticized Bush & Co. over the war & the economy back then. I haven't read any postings by Keith in the last 2 years when he became an cheerleader for Barry Soetoro. Barry is pursuing the same policies as GW, but I guess you're OK with that. Middle-class people are pissed off that G.W. & B.O. gave our tax money to the failed banks, but they are "tea-baggers". Right. I guess killing people around the globe and having the federal government merge with Goldman Sachs is only good if Barry, Nancy and Harry are doing it.

Anonymous said...

Keefer End timer would blame gays,

Liberals would blame 'white males'
nazis would blame Jews,
Zionists would blame Anti Semites
Al Gore would blame global warming

then everyone would go back to getting zombified on TV
no joke

Anonymous said...

actually seems this scenario is being planned, maybe Iran is the target mini nuke goes off in USa magically Iranian passport and and I love Ahmiadinejad picture recovered the blam excuse to bomb hell out of iran

they did a radiation study of NYC after 9-11 and found radiation super hot spot in a very interesting place

Pay Lay Ale said...

"It's incompetent, corrupt, unintelligent, or self-profit-driven politicians, who are then of course terrible at governing when the people are stupid enough to put them there.

Yes, I'm speaking of Bush. And yes, I'm speaking of the almost comically laughable concept of Sarah Palin."

It sounds A LOT like Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Frank, Dodd, Schumer, McCain, and Liebermann as well.

"I'm glad we have a steady hand on the switch today."

You mean the community organizer (agent provacateur) with a radical communist past and terrorist ties?

Anonymous said...

the country that has threatened to use nukes the most is Israel

against Egypt and Syria in 1973 and against the world (USA , CHina, even Antartica I think becuase the ice is white and you know how anti semitic white is )

Anonymous said...

blah, blah, blah, ... Sarah Palin ..., blah blah blah

Anonymous said...

Dammerung said...

"Everyone responsible for 9/11 is in jail or dead."


Ken Lay is dead, and Marvin Bush is under house arrest.

Prisoner No. 6 said...

It'll be interesting to see the usual gang of TeaTards, Wingnuts and Dittoheads screeching here about the IMMINENT DESTRUCTION OF OUR WAY OF LIFE!!! by trying to control the spread of nukes. Leaders lead by example; and wasting billions of dollars maintaining weapons that serve no purpose (not even deterral, since the fanatics that would use nukes have their own version of The Rapture that they subscribe to) is not something we should continue to subsidize.

Before you get all wound up repeating the talking points from St. Palin and Fox, here's a question: How can Obama be both a Hitler-appeasing lily-livered coward AND a Hitler-like fascist determined to control our lives?

Dammerung said...

Obama authorizes extrajudicial assassination of American citizens

I feel safer already!

Anonymous said...

Am I the only thinking a small nuclear detonation, preferably near 33 liberty or 85 broad, might do NYC a world of good?

Just sayin...

Dammerung said...

Prisoner No. 6 said...

Fortunately that argument has been resolved. He's a Hitler-like fascist bent on controlling our lives.

Anonymous said...

Too bad that CIA front company Brewster Jennings isn't still on the case.

Whatever happened to that anti-nuke effort by our premier intelligence agency anyway? {snicker}

keith said...

...Picture losing NYC, DC and LA in one day..."

You say that like it would be a bad thing.

Even LA would be no tragedy, but think of all the good losing the other two would do this nation.

Since 16/19 hijackers were Saudi, are we not at war with Saudi Arabia?

keith said...

Those of you stating that you'd be in favor of millions of innocents dying in the US's major cities are sick.

If you truly feel that way, seek help. You're psychopaths.

Anonymous said...

keith said...seek help. You're psychopaths."

In sharp contrast to the people who do "God's work" as Blankfein taunted us recently?

Who are the real sociopaths, Keith?