Martin Ling wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 12:57:29AM -0700, Eugene Leitl wrote:
> > Adrian Tymes writes:
> > > But then, where would you get the device? I suspect most of the people
> > > on this list do not have the connections and wealth to buy one of
> > > Russia's warheads.
> > Just get me ~1.5 worth of critical mass of plutonium (or, better,
> > U235, machining Pu is really nasty), a budget, and a few henchmen.
> I guess I was kinda expecting Eugene to be the builder :-)
> Okay, count me in as a henchman (hope you've read the Evil Overlord's
> Handbook...). A budget could be accumulated from others here, or we
> might decide to operate some other dodgy scheme to make the cash first.
> Perhaps we could come up with one that also happened to leave us with
> some Pu or U...?
Eh, well, assuming you could get the plutonium or uranium, maybe there
would be better sites for a blast than smuggled into the US. Sure,
that might make a good test case, but if you can use the sofar buoys to
deliver them, then might the mouth of the Persian Gulf make a good
target for anyone tired of the less progressive Middle East nations
getting so much attention just because they have oil? (Not to mention
that detonating one there would cause much head scratching among those
who "know" that a nuke smuggled onto American soil "must" be the work
of Middle East terrorists.)
In fact...can anyone think of a single target which would cause more
damage to a specific group of people? (The Panama and Suez Canals, for
example, would probably cause more damage, but significant parts would
be doled out to most countries; a lack of oil would mainly drive
efforts to increase oil production at various other sites, and reroute
M.E. oil to non-Persian Gulf ports.)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:13:51 MDT