A Terrorist’s Dream, An American Nightmare (EMP)
Thematic-Device @ Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:02 pm
EMP from a nuclear device is even more unlikely then a regular nuclear device, since then, not only do they need to acquire a nuclear device, they need to acquire one which will blow up in the upper atmosphere, so they're probably going to need a russian delivery system (since the US is out of the question), and a silo, and the people to program it... Well pretty much they're going to need russia's nuclear program working for them...
A compression flux generator is a possibility... But I highly doubt anyone capable of building one of those is going to be working for fundamentalist extremists.
Jaime_Souviens @ Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:19 pm
The Moon! The Moon!!! ---AAaaahhhhHHHH!!!!
Scape @ Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:24 pm
Is it implausible that there are satellites in orbit already that may be emp armed that could be dropped from orbit at anytime? Does an EMP pulse have to be fired from a silo when Japan, India and Brazil have rocket technology that is already getting payloads in orbit?
Thematic-Device @ Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:34 pm
Scape Scape:
Is it implausible that there are satellites in orbit already that may be emp armed that could be dropped from orbit at anytime? Does an EMP pulse have to be fired from a silo when Japan, India and Brazil have rocket technology that is already getting payloads in orbit?
Does japan have delivery systems strong enough not only to get a satellite into orbit, but to get a satellite with a nuclear weapon into orbit? And similiarly technology not to simply bring it down in the pacific (a pretty big target) but to bring it down to a specifically targeted location, and simultaneously have the very same highly advanced satellites just ready to be taken over by terrorists?
Scape @ Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:44 pm
Brazilian Space Agency VSV-30
Japan announces moon program
India Plans to Send Spacecraft to Moon
Every one of these efforts were done in concert with other nations in sharing vital intel that the US has denied them for security reasons. Thus intel networks have sprung up in the absence of such technology being readily available to them. This intel has zero regulation. Countries like Iran and North Korea have just as much access to this information as the aforementioned nations. Is it such a stretch to think a well financed terrorist could not get access to such technology as well?
Thematic-Device @ Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:50 pm
As it stands scape, the only countries capable of launching ballistic missiles which have any accuracy are Russia and the US. Lots of people can launch inaccurate missiles, lots of people can launch satellites, the gap between the two is a large one.
The next gap is getting a nuke, not only a nuke but a very modern one, which is light enough to be launched into space.
A further gap for N.korea or Iran is to find people in their own country capable of producing such items. Look at china's attempts to integrate modern weaponry into their army, even with full schematics and support it hasn't been working.
N.Korea, and Iran, don't have those and no one is sharing the information.
xerxes @ Tue Dec 06, 2005 4:57 pm
Exactly. Life is not 24. Some people give terrorists too much credit.
Istanbul @ Tue Dec 06, 2005 11:43 pm
Forget about terrorists using a bomb. It is more likely to be used by a rogue State. Iran or N Korea.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/ebomb.html
Terrorists more likely will use suitcase sized EMP weapons to down airliners.
Much like a laser gun they will fire magnetic pulses.
A terrorist atop a highrise near LA may be within a few hundred yards from a airliner taking off.
All new airplanes are fly by wire. That is electrical pulses in wires control engines, flaps and other control surfaces. There is limited mechanical backup.
Have you hugged your wife today? Your kids? Your girl friend? Your neighbor's wife? You have been warned.
Scape @ Wed Dec 07, 2005 2:26 am
Thematic-Device Thematic-Device:
As it stands scape, the only countries capable of launching ballistic missiles which have any accuracy are Russia and the US. Lots of people can launch inaccurate missiles, lots of people can launch satellites, the gap between the two is a large one.
If a missile was to be fired today, from any nation, it would be seen identifying that country to a counter attack and annihilation. However, satellites can be parked in orbit indefinitely and can be guided to a target the size of a continent with ease. A freighter could fire a scud just off shore of the US and by the time it detonated it would be all over.
Thematic-Device Thematic-Device:
The next gap is getting a nuke, not only a nuke but a very modern one, which is light enough to be launched into space.
As I have shown several nations have plans on the moon, payload is not an issue. The technology is out there although commercial/private space flight would be limited to something like Virgin Galactic. This does not mean that a consortium of interests would not want an ace (or several hundred) in orbit. I hear France and Russia have plenty of rockets for hire.
Thematic-Device Thematic-Device:
A further gap for N.korea or Iran is to find people in their own country capable of producing such items. Look at china's attempts to integrate modern weaponry into their army, even with full schematics and support it hasn't been working.
Only one weapon needs to fire for this to work. Integration is a non-issue. Thematic-Device Thematic-Device:
N.Korea, and Iran, don't have those and no one is sharing the information.
Wrong.
You could make your own
Not kidding
Bombs in orbit could masquerade as a dud satellite or communication drone to be called upon at a moment notice. That could be launched from most any nation perhaps even dupes at war/competing interests with each other because they are multi-national have no loyalty to any country they see the US economy as a pawn for profit, thus expendable. Why invade if they thought the US would not/could not react? The bombs in orbit could be put in position over a staggered time frame so no immediate target would present itself. This is the weaponization of space and the reality of it. Such a strike would shut down the US economy while other markets picked up the slack. Plausible?
Nuke over U.S. could unleash electromagnetic tsunami
$1:
Al-Qaeda is known to have a fleet of freighters.
One of those freighters could easily be outfitted with a short- range ballistic missile capable of getting a nuclear weapon to almost any point in the airspace above our country.
Thousands of Scud missiles exist around the world, and they are said to cost less than $100,000 to purchase from willing suppliers like North Korea. (In December 2002, a North Korean ship was intercepted, temporarily, as it prepared to deliver twelve Scud missiles to Yemen.)
North Korea has also declared its willingness to sell nuclear weapons to terrorists.
Iran has demonstrated it has the capability to launch a Scud missile from a vessel at sea.
Ship-launched ballistic missiles have a special advantage. The "return address" of the attacker may be difficult to determine, especially if the missile is a generic Scud type weapon, found in many countries' arsenals.
And this implied threat may not be empty words. In addition to their successful ship launched Scud missile test, the Iranian military has reportedly performed tests of its Shahab 3 medium range ballistic missile in a manner consistent with an EMP attack scenario.
One of those freighters could easily be outfitted with a short- range ballistic missile capable of getting a nuclear weapon to almost any point in the airspace above our country.
Thousands of Scud missiles exist around the world, and they are said to cost less than $100,000 to purchase from willing suppliers like North Korea. (In December 2002, a North Korean ship was intercepted, temporarily, as it prepared to deliver twelve Scud missiles to Yemen.)
North Korea has also declared its willingness to sell nuclear weapons to terrorists.
Iran has demonstrated it has the capability to launch a Scud missile from a vessel at sea.
Ship-launched ballistic missiles have a special advantage. The "return address" of the attacker may be difficult to determine, especially if the missile is a generic Scud type weapon, found in many countries' arsenals.
And this implied threat may not be empty words. In addition to their successful ship launched Scud missile test, the Iranian military has reportedly performed tests of its Shahab 3 medium range ballistic missile in a manner consistent with an EMP attack scenario.
You may have heard of this report so the US has not done a great deal to secure itself fatigue/complacency has set in. The US has also managed to create far more enemies as of late. To not expect retaliation at this stage would be naive.
BartSimpson @ Wed Dec 07, 2005 1:53 pm
IceOwl IceOwl:
$1:
Terrorists more likely will use suitcase sized EMP weapons to down airliners.
You've been watching too many bad Hollywood movies.
Since 9/11 outlandish ideas have become a tad less outlandish.
Prior to 9/11 if you told me there was a threat by terrorists to ram airliners into buildings I'd have giggled and told you to lay off the Tom Clancy books.
Will terrorists use EMP weapons against airliners?
I don't know.
I do know that if they can get their hands on such a weapon that based on past and recent experience it is a certainty that they would use the weapon.
Downing an airliner would be a waste though.
Setting it off on Wall Street in New York City would do far more damage than I think the little turds are capable of imagining.
Scape @ Wed Dec 07, 2005 2:12 pm
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
Setting it off on Wall Street in New York City would do far more damage than I think the little turds are capable of imagining.
Exactly, don't forget LA and Seattle the IT heartland. EMP there would have the amish laughing their heads off.