Al-Qaida Leader Says They Have Briefcase Nukes

There were reports some years ago (never confirmed AFAIK) of Soviet suitcase
nukes having disappeared from their inventory.

What "inventory"? I've seen several reports where both ex-Soviet nuclear
scientists and ex-Soviet military officials repeatedly claim there were never
any suitcase nukes in the first place. This turn coat Ledbed (is that his
name?) seems to have been rewarded hansomely for scaring the crap out of
western nations.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

From: (BUFDRVR)


There were reports some years ago (never confirmed AFAIK) of Soviet suitcase
nukes having disappeared from their inventory.

What "inventory"? I've seen several reports where both ex-Soviet nuclear
scientists and ex-Soviet military officials repeatedly claim there were never
any suitcase nukes in the first place. This turn coat Ledbed (is that his
name?) seems to have been rewarded hansomely for scaring the crap out of
western nations.
BUFDRVR

We had/have "suitcase" nuke demolition charges.....it seems only fair to assume
that the Soviets had/have them too.

If they have lost control of them, denying they ever existed would be a good
way to attempt to save face and to try to avoid any liability for negligent
management of their armaments should the new owners use one in a terror attack.

Let's hope Al-Qaeda is blowing smoke.
Dave

"Dav1936531" wrote in message
...
From: (BUFDRVR)


There were reports some years ago (never confirmed AFAIK) of Soviet
suitcase
nukes having disappeared from their inventory.

What "inventory"? I've seen several reports where both ex-Soviet nuclear
scientists and ex-Soviet military officials repeatedly claim there were
never
any suitcase nukes in the first place. This turn coat Ledbed (is that his
name?) seems to have been rewarded hansomely for scaring the crap out of
western nations.
BUFDRVR

We had/have "suitcase" nuke demolition charges.....it seems only fair to
assume
that the Soviets had/have them too.

If they have lost control of them, denying they ever existed would be a
good
way to attempt to save face and to try to avoid any liability for
negligent
management of their armaments should the new owners use one in a terror
attack.

Let's hope Al-Qaeda is blowing smoke.
Dave

IIRC, they were termed Atomic Demolition Munitions. They were designed to
do things such as take out tunnels, and to demolish ports as they were
abandoned. The ADM's were not thermonuclear, which would be small comfort
to those close. The lightest one I ever read about was under 500 lbs, and I
think it may have been very close to 100. I seem to remember they could
also be submerged for up to 6 months on a timer. Those were ours. Theirs,
I never saw detailed at all. It's public information.

Don H.

"Don Harstad" wrote in message
...

"Dav1936531" wrote in message
...
From: (BUFDRVR)


There were reports some years ago (never confirmed AFAIK) of Soviet
suitcase
nukes having disappeared from their inventory.

What "inventory"? I've seen several reports where both ex-Soviet
nuclear
scientists and ex-Soviet military officials repeatedly claim there were
never
any suitcase nukes in the first place. This turn coat Ledbed (is that
his
name?) seems to have been rewarded hansomely for scaring the crap out of
western nations.
BUFDRVR

We had/have "suitcase" nuke demolition charges.....it seems only fair to
assume
that the Soviets had/have them too.

If they have lost control of them, denying they ever existed would be a
good
way to attempt to save face and to try to avoid any liability for
negligent
management of their armaments should the new owners use one in a terror
attack.

Let's hope Al-Qaeda is blowing smoke.
Dave

IIRC, they were termed Atomic Demolition Munitions. They were designed to
do things such as take out tunnels, and to demolish ports as they were
abandoned. The ADM's were not thermonuclear, which would be small comfort
to those close. The lightest one I ever read about was under 500 lbs, and
I
think it may have been very close to 100. I seem to remember they could
also be submerged for up to 6 months on a timer. Those were ours.
Theirs,
I never saw detailed at all. It's public information.

Ours were grouped into two categories--medium, which could be up into the
many hundreds of pounds (and over a thoudand pounds in their early form,
IIRC), and small, which weighed in at around 110 pounds or so IIRC (the W-54
warhead itself weighed less (around 60 pounds), but it was pretty much
worthless without the accoutrements that made up the rest of the SADM
package). A lot of the info available on these weapons is still somewhat
speculative, with different sources providing different weights, yields,
etc.; unless somebody went through the (five week IIRC) ADM course at FT
Belvoir back in the eighties or earlier, then you can't really know for sure
what the yields were (or exactly how the PAL worked, etc.)--those of us who
just attended the two-day ADM familiarization phase (which required a SECRET
clearance that was verified at the entrance to the ADM training facility--no
foreign officers in our OBC course were allowed to participate) were only
provided with theoretical yields to use in doing the calculations for
emplacement. Not sure that the Soviets ever really had need for ADM's, being
as they were not really planning on fighting a major defensive effort that
would have required them (they could have quite easily nuked any target in
our own rear area with the myriad rocket, missile, tube arty, and freefall
nuclear weapons they had in their inventory, and included the use of in
their OPLAN's based upon post Cold War revelations).

Brooks


Don H.

"Dav1936531" wrote in message
...
From: (BUFDRVR)


There were reports some years ago (never confirmed AFAIK) of Soviet
suitcase
nukes having disappeared from their inventory.

What "inventory"? I've seen several reports where both ex-Soviet nuclear
scientists and ex-Soviet military officials repeatedly claim there were
never
any suitcase nukes in the first place. This turn coat Ledbed (is that his
name?) seems to have been rewarded hansomely for scaring the crap out of
western nations.
BUFDRVR

We had/have "suitcase" nuke demolition charges.....it seems only fair to
assume
that the Soviets had/have them too.

Big suitcase. SADM, with its W-54 warhead, was not something you could drop
into your American Tourister and waltz into some hotel with it. Did the
Soviets have small ADM's? We don't really know--Lebed's claims have been
pretty much discredited, though, so if that is what you (or the originator
of this "news" story) are basing this on, it is not much.


If they have lost control of them, denying they ever existed would be a
good
way to attempt to save face and to try to avoid any liability for
negligent
management of their armaments should the new owners use one in a terror
attack.

If AQ had them for some time, they'd have used them by now. And would not
have been wasting their time trying to foment "dirty bomb" plots. AFAIK, the
smallest Soviet device would have been a 152mm warhead for artillery
use--but that would undoubtedly have been a gun-type or linear implosion
device, so it would be kind of long, not to mention heavy (more than 100
pounds IIRC based upon US 155mm warheads)--and of a rather small yield.
Color me (very) dubious on this whole "suitcase nukes are lying around
everywhere" hysteria that periodically arises (this ain't the first time).

Brooks


Let's hope Al-Qaeda is blowing smoke.
Dave

In article ,
says...
If AQ had them for some time, they'd have used them by now. And would not
have been wasting their time trying to foment "dirty bomb" plots. AFAIK, the
smallest Soviet device would have been a 152mm warhead for artillery
use--but that would undoubtedly have been a gun-type or linear implosion
device, so it would be kind of long, not to mention heavy (more than 100
pounds IIRC based upon US 155mm warheads)--and of a rather small yield.
Color me (very) dubious on this whole "suitcase nukes are lying around
everywhere" hysteria that periodically arises (this ain't the first time).


Definitely as the un maintained shelf life of a bomb is only a few years
and the longer that they sit on the bomb the more likely it is to be
found.

--
The freer the society, the more expensive the elections.

Observations of Bernard - No 55

In article , says...

If AQ had them for some time, they'd have used them by now. And would not
have been wasting their time trying to foment "dirty bomb" plots.

Not especially.

Even al qaeda has a sense of public relations.

Blowing up innocent civilians in Western countries is acceptable to most
of the people al qaeda are targeting as their "audience'; i.e.,
jihadists against the West.

However, a good argument could be made that use of a nuke against a
Western country would loose al qaeda the support of many currently
moderate Middle Eastern/Southwest Asia countries, and potentially hurt
their image with the typical man on (their) street.

It would also definitely change the opinion of many of the moderate
countries world-wide that are unhappy with the US and its recent
actions; it could swing world-wide opinion back similiar to that of just
after 9/11 when the US enjoyed nearly world-wide support.

In short, it could hurt their 'cause' far more than help it.

No SPAM wrote:

In article , says...

If AQ had them for some time, they'd have used them by now. And would not
have been wasting their time trying to foment "dirty bomb" plots.

Not especially.

Even al qaeda has a sense of public relations.

Blowing up innocent civilians in Western countries is acceptable to most
of the people al qaeda are targeting as their "audience'; i.e.,
jihadists against the West.

However, a good argument could be made that use of a nuke against a
Western country would loose al qaeda the support of many currently
moderate Middle Eastern/Southwest Asia countries, and potentially hurt
their image with the typical man on (their) street.

It would also definitely change the opinion of many of the moderate
countries world-wide that are unhappy with the US and its recent
actions; it could swing world-wide opinion back similiar to that of just
after 9/11 when the US enjoyed nearly world-wide support.

In short, it could hurt their 'cause' far more than help it.

Good insight! Just like 9/11. Vot?

Grantland

If AQ had them for some time, they'd have used them by now. And would not
have been wasting their time trying to foment "dirty bomb" plots. AFAIK,
the
smallest Soviet device would have been a 152mm warhead for artillery
use--but that would undoubtedly have been a gun-type or linear implosion
device, so it would be kind of long, not to mention heavy (more than 100
pounds IIRC based upon US 155mm warheads)--and of a rather small yield.
Color me (very) dubious on this whole "suitcase nukes are lying around
everywhere" hysteria that periodically arises (this ain't the first time).

An ideal target would be a Presidential Political convention. Decapitation
and the destruction of a substantial part of NYC would be a possible result
of exploding a SADM at the republican convention. But you have to consider
the democratic convention in Boston as a target since Bush is such an
effective recruiter for AQ


Brooks


Let's hope Al-Qaeda is blowing smoke.
Dave

In article ,
(Dav1936531) writes:
From: (BUFDRVR)


There were reports some years ago (never confirmed AFAIK) of Soviet suitcase
nukes having disappeared from their inventory.

What "inventory"? I've seen several reports where both ex-Soviet nuclear
scientists and ex-Soviet military officials repeatedly claim there were never
any suitcase nukes in the first place. This turn coat Ledbed (is that his
name?) seems to have been rewarded hansomely for scaring the crap out of
western nations.
BUFDRVR

We had/have "suitcase" nuke demolition charges.....it seems only fair to assume
that the Soviets had/have them too.

Hardly "Suitcase Nukes". More like "Steamer Trunk Nukes" or
"Footlocker Nukes". Our smallest nuke, the Small Atomic Demolition
Munition, wasn't really amenable to being carried about like luggage.
If they have lost control of them, denying they ever existed would be a good
way to attempt to save face and to try to avoid any liability for negligent
management of their armaments should the new owners use one in a terror attack.

Which wouldn't work worth a damn if they were ever used. Over the
last 6 decades, we've become very, very, good at puling radioactive
particles out of the air, and figuring out their provenance. We can
identify the parts of teh bombs that that dust was, originally. We
can identify the origin of the pit by assaying the various levels of
impurities and such that were part of teh original metal. I wouldn't
be a damned bit surprised if we could tell what production batch the
bomb pit was from.

Let's hope Al-Qaeda is blowing smoke.

Even the Russians don't do bombast quite like the Arabs.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster