shnuggs 0 Report post Posted May 18, 2006 That's an excellent point shnuggs. I've often wondered why they didn't plant some WMD in Iraq, it seems like it would sure be a pretty easy thing to do, and probably would have saved a lot of headaches. Moving Nuclear material is not easy. Moving it into an ememy state is harder. Be realistic. But to set up a multi stage terrorist attack on your own country using demolition chages, tomohawk missiles, jumbo jets, and an abducted bunch of american hostages, all under secretive cover all within a 2 hour span without any leaks is realistic?Im comparison a nuclear bomb -- not nuclear material -- to be transported by one of the dozens of military flights everyday in and out of iraq would be much more realistic to me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mrusse01 0 Report post Posted May 18, 2006 Iraq is not an enemy state anymore. It's a big country, they could still 'find' some WMD that would justtify the war. And who is to say it has to be nuclear material? Nobody ever really suspected the Iraqis of having nukes, it was more chemical and biological weapons. Say CNN reports today that the US has found a stockpile of anthrax in Iraq. Even if it is false, how would you prove it? You can't ask for a sample to verify it is indeed anthrax, or even if it really is, how would you know the US didn't put it there? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vapor 0 Report post Posted May 18, 2006 I dont know what your trying to say... I do not believe in the conspiracy... AT ALL. So I dont know what your trying to prove.I believe you are speaking of ignornace if you think that moving a nuclear bomb is a snatch and drop job... because, my friend, it is not. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shnuggs 0 Report post Posted May 18, 2006 I dont know what your trying to say... I do not believe in the conspiracy... AT ALL. So I dont know what your trying to prove.I believe you are speaking of ignornace if you think that moving a nuclear bomb is a snatch and drop job... because, my friend, it is not. Havent you ever watched 24? :lol: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vapor 0 Report post Posted May 18, 2006 Havent you ever watched 24? :lol: I stand CORRECTED Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gavin 0 Report post Posted May 18, 2006 I did some research on the bombing of Japan in WWII and believe me, back then moving a nuclear bomb was a snatch and run job. They were moving the thing around and the security and staff at the airbase had no clue. I don't know how much most complicated it would be today. But if they have elementary nuclear weapons, it would not be much different from American technology in the 50's. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vapor 0 Report post Posted May 19, 2006 lets see the research Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jim A 4 Report post Posted May 19, 2006 everytime a plane goes down in the past 20 years someone always screams missle, get over it..there's always the pictures showing "plume of smoke" and that a plane doesn't break that way...someone made reference to the towers being a demo job - f'off buddy..was video upon video (the one from CBS's show being exceptionally chilling) of the planes smashing into that building and ending the lives of dozens of friends at FDNY/Cantor Fitzgerald and the like not enough because some guy you met at the site in NYC told you otherwise??? Why do things never look like we think in real life (planes in fields etc) because our only point of reference is how things happen in movies and showsThe threat of hijacking was mentioned way back in Clinton's days...the 9-11 commission report is a good read..however the government (and I'm no fan of it) is so skewed and fractured that I don't doubt for one minute that info didn't cross company lines (NSA, FBI, CIA, etc) and that the cooperation between them was little to nil, I work for a company with offices in Dallas, Houston and NYC and trying to keep my little project centered and everyone abreast of what's going on with it is a huge pain in the ass for 12 people. Never mind many of those NSA 4AM briefings go right into the cabinet's circular file..The Pentagon is an antiquated place, do you think they even considered someone being able to fly a plane into their building? Of course not, a little prop guy into the White House, sure who gives a crap..but not the Pentagon.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gavin 0 Report post Posted May 20, 2006 Vapor, you're asking for some research I did on a WWII topic in freaking undergrad? It's pretty public knowledge stuff, and in grad school you don't use anything that you researched in college. So, my research is sitting in a filing closet somewhere, but 2 minutes on google will get you the "research" you desire:http://www.afa.org/media/enolagay/03-001.aspRead wiki articles on Tinian air base, the "little boy" and the 509th. The Tinians was a regular airbase, and not even the brass on base had any clue what was going on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites