View Single Post
  #1  
Old May 11th 05, 11:54 PM
Dave S
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

They cant? Gee.. I guess this guy listed below was lying. So, why cant
they exist? Only need a few pounds of fissionable material and some
shielding. Dont need a LOT of shielding, since the guy delivering it is
on a suicide mission and not really worried about radiation sickness.
But Im not a nuclear physicist.. I just play one on TV :P.

Dave

http://armageddononline.tripod.com/nuclear.htm

Why are suitcase bombs such a great risk?
Russia created around 250 suitcase bombs - nuclear weapons the size of
suitcases. According to a Soviet defector called Aleksander Lebed it has
lost track of more than 100 - each of which could kill more than 100,000
people. Many of these bombs were distributed and hidden in hostile
countries. Possibly the worst effect of a terrorist nuclear device would
be that it could trigger a nuclear war. If America thought Russia had
used nuclear weapons against it, it would not hesitate to retaliate; so
one small nuclear device could kill billions.
x-ray wrote:

"Sport Pilot" wrote:

Not when its possible for a C150 to carry a small A bomb in a suitcase.




Apparently you do not understand nuclear weapons.

1) You can NOT put "A bomb" in a suitcase.
2) Considering the weight of such "suitcase" it would take 4 people to carry
it.
3) You need explosives to compress the plutonium to approx 3 times normal
density, not to mention the weight of the shielding you need, unless you
want to be a martyr.
4) By skipping 3) the device would be enough radioactive to harm the one who
is carrying it - they would be dead before they got to target!
5) Oh, by the way, by skipping 3) radiation sensors around various areas
would go ape ****.

In short, "A bomb" suitcase is nothing but paranoia (but that's already
mentioned in thread, so i won't go into it again).