Good news: Radioactive smuggling doubles since 2002
posted at 9:48 pm on October 5, 2006 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Enjoy this little Foley interlude while it lasts, kids:
Smugglers have been caught trying to traffick dangerous radioactive material more than 300 times since 2002, statistics from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) show. Most of the incidents are understood to have occurred in Europe.
The disclosures come as al-Qaeda is known to be intensfiying its efforts to obtain a radoactive device. Last year, Western security services, including MI5 and MI6, thwarted 16 attempts to smuggle plutonium or uranium. On two occasions small quantities of highly enriched uranium were reported missing. All were feared to have been destined for terror groups.
Here’s a tip for the non-nuclear savvy among us: if all you want to make is a dirty bomb, you don’t need highly enriched uranium. If you’re after HEU, your goals are rather more ambitious.
FYI, Iran’s gone ahead and “cleaned up” that old letter from Ayatollah Khomeini about nuclear weapons that was published last week. No biggie. Just a word or two removed after the fact.
Eighteen years after the fact.
When did Ahmadinejad turn into Greg Mitchell?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Something positive about the war on smuggling and terror
Thank you Richard Clarke (if your a leftist)
Defector01 on October 5, 2006 at 10:25 PM
H-BOMBING: The ultimate flattery.
Dr. Charles G. Waugh on October 5, 2006 at 11:58 PM
Kinda puts US-depleted-uranium-snackbars-for-Iraqi-kids in perspective, don’t it?
HerrMorgenholz on October 6, 2006 at 12:22 AM
No, I’m not really concerned about a “dirty bomb.” Why? Because copious amounts of water on identified “hotspots” will solve the problem if they can’t identify the specific piece of material.
The dirty bomb concept is largely a production of Hollywood. Will radioactive material be spread? Yes. At the same rate and dispersion of any other physical piece of debris from a conventional explosion. But, it won’t be so fragmented that it will turn an entire city (or even a region) into a hotspot for decades as some movies would have you believe.
You have to understand that it takes a shitload more power than normal explosives contain to “force” a nuclear chain reaction unless those explosives are perfectly constructed/detonated around the nuclear core. “Perfectly” isn’t about to happen unless Pakistan coughs up an actual warhead to the terrorists (not to be discounted).
Unless that happens, I see chunks of radioative material dispersing as far as bomb fragments and no further. Smart use of rapid evacuation, detection equipment and decon procedures will minimize or eliminate widespread radioactive contamination at what could be considered lethal levels.
Will it suck locally? Yes. Will a dirty bomb cause utter catastrophe (what the islamists hope for)? No.
That said, a true nuclear detonation would be quite different. Waterwashing an entire city is far more problematic than just hitting isolated sectors.
Greg B on October 6, 2006 at 2:00 AM
People complain about radioactive smuggling, and then the same people complain about the high price of uranium.
Hypocrits.
frankj on October 6, 2006 at 7:30 AM
Greg B:
You have a point, but I think the psychological effect of such a thing will be far more potent than the actual destruction. Imagine three or four of these things detonated in different cities on the same day. You think that wouldn’t have a massive effect on our psyches and our economy?
Farmer_Joe on October 6, 2006 at 9:49 AM
Yay! You threw us loyals a bone. Thanks!
The smuggling doubled because everyone realized, thanks to people like Joe Wilson and Richard Clarke, that you can deal in uranium with no problems from the U.S. because we hate our President more than we hate them.
Cary on October 6, 2006 at 10:18 AM
So Radioactive is not used as a metaphor here.
I agree the psychological effects will be the most devastating result on people and the economy.
Fear is a weapon of choice for terrorism.
Kini on October 6, 2006 at 12:11 PM
Muslims should just stop… I’m embarrased for them. If you can’t beat them [the USA, Israel, etc] join them.
ar_basin on October 6, 2006 at 4:34 PM
Comment pages: