by J. Vega - 11/7/12 10:01 PM
In Reply to: He won't "react" by Josh K
Iran will play the games they are playing until they get 2 weapons. 2 because one must be test detonated proving to the rest of the world that they have the ability. A "gun device" is not all that hard to make. Consider something: When most people think about a "nuke', they envision a technically complex device that is small enough to fit in a rocket, and capable of surviving a trip on one. Iran is a country that supports terrorism, and uses their religious beliefs to base their actions upon.
A rocket can be a delivery device for a 'nuke', but so can a terrorist, especially one who is willing to die as a result of his delivery and activation of such a device. If you're not producing a device to be delivered on a rocket but in something like the hold of a ship, the device can be comparatively "crude" in size, shape, and design. Things like safeties can be quite minimal. If someone having one does not care if they die activating it, the timing provisions don't need to be complex at all, just a simple switch, which when thrown detonates it.
A device designed to be given to a terrorist to detonate at the target can be designed quickly. I think one could be made that would easily fit into a foot locker. If that locker had enough lead shielding (to avoid or delay detection) and were in the hold of a ship heading for a port or say a train box car heading north from Mexico, would we detect it in time? Remember, if it's under the control of a suicide bomber, he can flick the switch and detonate it when he sees he has been detected. He might not have been at his planned target yet, but that detonation would cause destruction and secondary effects anywhere in the location where it was detonated.
On Obama's reliance on intel for safety, consider what recently happened in Libya.
Was this reply helpful? (0) (0)