American Hiroshima

[sag111 (imported)]

Today as I was surfing the net I found an artical on American Hiroshima and what it might mean.There were two men befor 911 who said osama ben laden was going to attack America back then.One died in the attack and one is 71 years old today and lived with those muslims and knew some attack was near and did there best to warn America.This man says another attack is very near and it he says sute case nuke bombs will be used.He says five American cities are the target.New York.Washingtion DC.Chicago.Miami.Huston.Las Vagas and Los Angeles.I do hope this is just some news put out to sell books but I wouldent put any thing past ben laden.Its probly a story that will never happen but as the report goes who would we go after if they do carry out such a plan as there is no country to call on this.When I see things of intrest I will post them so take a look at American Hiroshima and see what you make of it.

[fhunter]

Suitcase nuclear bomb?

Either I skipped school physics or I remember wrong, but I remember that it is not possible to build a nuclear bomb in the size of a suitcase.

And it will be "hot" - so - easily detected.

So it leaves only "dirty" bomb as an option - conventional explosives + some radioactive material.

[sag111 (imported)]

The artical I read said if it were encased in lead it couldent be detected I dont know but for sure we havent herd the last of ben laden

[tugon (imported)]

I would think that a very heavy suitcase that the security screening points could not see into would trigger concern. Or if transported by car seeing two or more men having to carry it. Oh well I am off to Chicago today and will trust all goes well. The only bombs should be my jokes.

[MacTheWolf (imported)]

It's a shame that it was our government who made Osama bin-Laden famous by funding his terrorist activities against the Russians in Afghanistan. Then when he wanted help, we turned against him.

What goes around comes around.

[Riverwind (imported)]

I think its time to take those trips I have been planning. My trip to DC, NY, and LA all for different reasons. I better go now while there still there.

River

[chilliwilli (imported)]

Well that does it then...I'm gonna to visit bi-kinki island just for the mammories....

mmmmmmm.........................pusssssssssyyyyyyy y

chilli-

[Dave (imported)]

The article

I read said if it were encased in lead it could

n't be detected I don't know but for sure we haven't heard the last of Bin Laden

And how heavy do you think a briefcase made of lead would be?

I knew researchers at Mellon Institute of Science who did nuclear work. A "pallet" of lead less than 18 inches on a side and six inches high weighed in at one ton. One "pallet" slid off a truck during a move and seriously destroyed a fender of the car it scraped on the way down. It dug itself six inches into the asphalt street.

So who is going to carry this suitcase?

[speedvogel (imported)]

This thing has appeared on various websites which have a viewpoint quite a bit different than mine since 2002. It is a hoax according to Snopes.com.

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/nukes.asp

Speed

[ramses (imported)]

I don't think Bin Laden is a player anymore and is pretty much irrelevent but I could be wrong...

"In Nuclear weapon design, there is a tradeoff in small weapons designs between weight and compact size. Extremely small (as small as 5 inches (13 cm) diameter and 24.4 inches (62 cm) long) Linear Implosion type weapons, which might conceivably fit in a large briefcase or typical suitcase, have been tested, but the lightest of those are nearly 100 pounds and had a maximum yield of only a fraction of a kiloton (190 tons).[2] The largest yield of a relatively compact linear implosion device was under 2 kilotons for the cancelled / never deployed (but apparently tested) US W82-1 artillery shell design, with yield under 2 kilotons for a 95 pounds (43 kg) artillery shell 6.1 inches (15 cm) in diameter and 34 inches (86 cm) long.

The lightest nuclear warhead ever acknowledged to have been manufactured by the U.S. is the W54, which was used in both the Davy Crockett 120 mm recoilless rifle–launched warhead, and the backpack-carried version called the Mk-54 SADM (Special Atomic Demolition Munition). The bare warhead package was an 11 in by 16 in (28 cm by 41 cm) cylinder that weighed 51 lbs (23 kg). It was, however, small enough to fit in a footlocker-sized container.

Declassified Russian sources[which?] indicate that the smallest Soviet miniaturized nuclear weapon was also small in dimensions, and its size was compared to a "small refrigerator."[citation needed] Following the breakup of the Soviet Union, these were the type of devices[original research?] that Soviet General Alexander Lebed claimed had been issued to the GRU and then subsequently lost. Lebed, who worked with Soviet President Boris Yeltsin, presented to the U.S. Congress the idea that suitcase bombs had been created by the Soviets and that 132 KGB-produced devices could not be accounted for.[3][not in citation given][page needed]

Suitcase nuclear weapons

There has been no official information released on the existence of true suitcase or briefcase-sized nuclear weapons in either the U.S. or Russian arsenals. However, the Washington, D.C.–based intelligence-firm, Center For Defense Information (CDI), states that the US government produced a class of nuclear devices in the late 1970s which were small enough to fit into an actual suitcase or briefcase.[citation needed] Likewise, CDI claims that a detailed training replica—with dummy explosives and no fissionable material—was routinely concealed inside a briefcase and hand-carried on domestic airline flights in the early 1980s.[4][this primary source citation needs verification]

While the explosive power of the W54—up to an equivalent of 6 kiloton[5] of TNT—is not much by the normal standards of a nuclear weapon (the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of World War II were around 16 to 21 kilotons each), their value lies in their ability to be easily smuggled across borders, transported by means widely available, and placed as close to the target as possible. Even a 1-kt. nuclear weapon would be many times more powerful than even the largest truck bombs for purposes of destroying a single building or target."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suitcase_nuke FULL ARTICLE