Nuclear jihad..imminent?

[kwillia]

Okay, here's my dorkstein question:

How exactly does a nuclear strike work? Do they fly planes over and drop a bomb, then fly like hell to get away? Do they launch from Europe or wherever and it flies over here itself? Do they smuggle it in and detonate it in Times Square?

I think all three scenerios are possible...:shrug:

 

[Steve]

As a Christian, it does not matter when or how my earthly body meets its end. It is only a temporary container for my soul which can only be destroyed by God. Since I believe in God come as man as Jesus as my Savior and Lord, the day my earthly body dies is graduation day; a joyous event.

Sorry, but this sounds a little like the mentality of suicide bombers. I thought life was supposed to be a cherished gift, not a transient waystation on the return trip to the Almighty.

 

[vraiblonde]

Vince Flynn's last book, Memorial Day, is about Islamic terrorists who build or smuggle in a nuclear device (I forget which) and boat it up the Chesapeake to detonate in DC on (you guessed it) Memorial Day. It was an excellent read but it seemed almost a comedy of errors and pure dumb luck that they went undiscovered long enough to get that far.

 

[camily]

Sorry, but this sounds a little like the mentality of suicide bombers. I thought life was supposed to be a cherished gift, not a transient waystation on the return trip to the Almighty.

It is a gift, but I would put it this way... You know how when you go on vacation, it is so nice to come home again? Well, when you die, it is like coming home again. Except with a HUGE party waiting to welcome you back, with all your friends and family, and oh yeah, God! You might have really enjoyed the vacation, but you "belong" at home. I know this is a very simplistic way to look at it, but it worked for my kids.

 

[Steve]

It is a gift, but I would put it this way... You know how when you go on vacation, it is so nice to come home again? Well, when you die, it is like coming home again. Except with a HUGE party waiting to welcome you back, with all your friends and family, and oh yeah, God! You might have really enjoyed the vacation, but you "belong" at home. I know this is a very simplistic way to look at it, but it worked for my kids.

Will home also be occupied by 70 virgins?

 

[aps45819]

Will home also be occupied by 70 virgins?

70 Virginians

 

[dustin]

Vince Flynn's last book, Memorial Day, is about Islamic terrorists who build or smuggle in a nuclear device (I forget which) and boat it up the Chesapeake to detonate in DC on (you guessed it) Memorial Day. It was an excellent read but it seemed almost a comedy of errors and pure dumb luck that they went undiscovered long enough to get that far.

http://rantburg.com/index.php?HC=1&D=7/23/2004#38813


...this happened back in AUG04...i mustve missed the media coverage

 

[Bruzilla]

Okay, here's my dorkstein question:

How exactly does a nuclear strike work? Do they fly planes over and drop a bomb, then fly like hell to get away? Do they launch from Europe or wherever and it flies over here itself? Do they smuggle it in and detonate it in Times Square?

I suppose I could look this up but it's easier and faster just to have one of you all tell me.

The problem with most of these scenarios is that they're based more on Hollywood than on reality. Ever since that stupid scare movie The Manhattan Project back in the mid-90s people have thought that building a working nuke is child's play when it isn't. The concept of nuclear detonation is simple, but the execution is extremely complicated. So the odds that someone can build their own "garage" bomb are nil. Also, working warheads require their own unique conditions to detonate... not just a key ala True Lies. Triggers are designed to prevent accidental detonation, and they require a great deal of effort to defeat, if they can be defeated at all. One hosed trigger and all you've got is a dirty bomb at best.

People also confuse a large-order detonation, and all the resulting damage, that a large warhead can cause with the small warheads in artillery shells that could be converted into a supposed back-pack bomb. But these are very low-yield warheads and you would need a lot of them to do real damage. And unless you're the strongest human on record, you ain't going to be hiking about with a high-yield warhead on your back.

As for an aircraft delivery, you would definately need a very high-yield warhead, and they aren't very light - which is why the PROK's claims of having a missile-launched bomb that can hit the US is BS when their unloaded missile can barely make it to the mid Pacific.

 

[2ndAmendment]

Sorry, but this sounds a little like the mentality of suicide bombers. I thought life was supposed to be a cherished gift, not a transient waystation on the return trip to the Almighty.

It is good to stay and it is better to go. Paul even said the same thing.

Philippians 1:21-23

<sup id="en-NASB-29383">21</sup>For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain. <sup id="en-NASB-29384">22</sup>But if I am to live on in the flesh, this will mean fruitful labor for me; and I do not know which to choose.

<sup id="en-NASB-29385">23</sup>But I am hard-pressed from both directions, having the desire to depart and be with Christ, for that is very much better;

 

[2ndAmendment]

Will home also be occupied by 70 virgins?

No.

Matthew 22:29-32

<sup id="en-NASB-23902">29</sup>But Jesus answered and said to them, "You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God.

<sup id="en-NASB-23903">30</sup>"For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.

<sup id="en-NASB-23904">31</sup>"But regarding the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God:

<sup id="en-NASB-23905">32</sup>'I AM THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, AND THE GOD OF ISAAC, AND THE GOD OF JACOB'? He is not the God of the dead but of the living."

 

[Steve]

It is good to stay and it is better to go. Paul even said the same thing.

Seriously, isn't there a passage in the Bible to be found to support or denounce just about every point of view there is?

 

[2ndAmendment]

The problem with most of these scenarios is that they're based more on Hollywood than on reality. Ever since that stupid scare movie The Manhattan Project back in the mid-90s people have thought that building a working nuke is child's play when it isn't. The concept of nuclear detonation is simple, but the execution is extremely complicated. So the odds that someone can build their own "garage" bomb are nil. Also, working warheads require their own unique conditions to detonate... not just a key ala True Lies. Triggers are designed to prevent accidental detonation, and they require a great deal of effort to defeat, if they can be defeated at all. One hosed trigger and all you've got is a dirty bomb at best.

People also confuse a large-order detonation, and all the resulting damage, that a large warhead can cause with the small warheads in artillery shells that could be converted into a supposed back-pack bomb. But these are very low-yield warheads and you would need a lot of them to do real damage. And unless you're the strongest human on record, you ain't going to be hiking about with a high-yield warhead on your back.

As for an aircraft delivery, you would definately need a very high-yield warhead, and they aren't very light - which is why the PROK's claims of having a missile-launched bomb that can hit the US is BS when their unloaded missile can barely make it to the mid Pacific.

All true. The one scenario that can deliver high yield detonation to our shores is a container shipment. Only about 2% (may be 3% now) of containerized shipments are inspected. A nuke hidden in a shipment of heavy equipment or other heavy stuff so that significant shielding can be use and not seem out of place could get by. It could be trucked anywhere. I don't know if it is true, but there were stories going around that there were many nukes missing from the former Soviet Union. You don't have to build one if you can buy one.

I thought the PROK's missile was loaded with inert material to simulate the warhead load.

 

[2ndAmendment]

Seriously, isn't there a passage in the Bible to be found to support or denounce just about every point of view there is?

I don't think so.

 

[Steve]

I don't think so.

I didn't think you would think so...



And you lost me on post #32. How does this say that we won't get 70 virgins?

 

[2ndAmendment]

I didn't think you would think so...

Then why did you bother to provoke the statement?

 

[Steve]

Then why did you bother to provoke the statement?

I'll have to play again another day, to get my point across. We'll pick a topic and search the Bible for things that both support and refute a position. Like how you used post #32 to refute my 70 virgins. I didn't see how those passages relate.

 

[2ndAmendment]

I'll have to play again another day, to get my point across. We'll pick a topic and search the Bible for things that both support and refute a position. Like how you used post #32 to refute my 70 virgins. I didn't see how those passages relate.

No wives -> no sex. Don't need virgins.

 

[Steve]

No wives -> no sex. Don't need virgins.

But if you're an angel, maybe you don't need to be married. Is that covered in the Bible? Or are all angels sexless balls of energy?

 

[Larry Gude]

!!!

Maybe they meant Dubya...

Yep!

 

[2ndAmendment]

But if you're an angel, maybe you don't need to be married. Is that covered in the Bible? Or are all angels sexless balls of energy?

Humans do not become angels. Angels are not human but they can appear that way. Angels did have sex with human females. It is in the Old Testament.

Do you ever read the Bible? It doesn't appear so. Not trying to pick a fight. Just asking.