Nukes???

[HGROKIT]

I never indicated that we would LET them keep them. But let us suppose this.....

They find them first and keep us from ever knowing they truly have them or; they find them first, tell us they have them, refuse to turn them over and then ask us to leave their country? What would happen then? We have said that if we are asked to leave, we will.

Since Saddam is no longer in power, we cannot demand they give us the nukes. If we do, then we have to go right next door and demand that Iran give up theirs.

If there are nukes there and the new Iraqi government finds them first, it could put us in a very difficult position.

JMHO!

Agreed.

However, we will be very stupid to let them have them and I cannot imagine us doing so with the current state of their government. hell, I am not even sure I would be comfortable with any muslim nation having them. Since we are on a direct course of conflict with Iran, that issue will soon be addressed one way or another.

Could you imagine a muslim state having nukes? That would IMO definately be the start of Armageddon.

 

[Comrade]

Tell me how a sattelite can determine what is under ground? Even with a 1 meter resolution, a bunch of sand still looks like a bunch of sand. Most the WMDs are probably in Syria anyway...

Supposed the missiles were found under six feet of concrete.

Nothing sees through six feet of concrete.

 

[freeandfun1]

20 years ago, yes.

Do you know the average size of a surveillance satellite?

-A basketball.

How many do you think we can have up there?

Look, I represent one of the best manufacturers of microwave components used in the mfr of satellites. I am VERY FAMILIAR with satellite technology and its capabilities. I have worked on KoreaSat I, II and III plus several other satellite programs in Korea - military, commercial and research.

 

[freeandfun1]

Could you imagine a muslim state having nukes? That would IMO definately be the start of Armageddon.

Exactly and that is why this war is so important. Bush new that, you, me NewGuy and just about every other intelligent person knows that; it is only the dumbass Democrats that either 1) don't know that or 2) are too partisan to admit it under the watch of a GOP president.

 

[NewGuy]

Supposed the missiles were found under six feet of concrete.

Nothing sees through six feet of concrete.

Again, it wasn't me in the field.

I would think with all of our technology proving to be able to read in space as well as we do, and using vibration sensing equipment, radar type equipment, and others, it would be fairly straightforward to have something be able to determine density of storage containers such as a 6 ft concrete box and then tell the density of what was inside.

Once you have density, you add the stereoscopic image of layers to determine size and shape.

Once you have size, shape, and density, you then have basic idea of what is there.

I am just one guy, not an infinitely financed spy agency with ties to a federal reserve and ground troops.

If I can think it up, so can they.

It isn't that tough of a concept. Tempest was around 30 years ago. You think we just dropped it? You still have red and black rooms.

 

[NewGuy]

Look, I represent one of the best manufacturers of microwave components used in the mfr of satellites. I am VERY FAMILIAR with satellite technology and its capabilities. I have worked on KoreaSat I, II and III plus several other satellite programs in Korea - military, commercial and research.

So is that a cliam of denial to my statements about the technology?

 

[DKSuddeth]

Tell me how a sattelite can determine what is under ground? Even with a 1 meter resolution, a bunch of sand still looks like a bunch of sand. Most the WMDs are probably in Syria anyway...

i'm sure that those satelites have IR and can see heat, and i'm also sure that If there were nukes in the sand, we'd see the heat from them.

 

[freeandfun1]

So is that a cliam of denial to my statements about the technology?

no, but I know that there are limits to what we can learn using satellites. Yes, satellites are great when you are looking at a specific region at a specific time, but they can be avoided. That is all I am saying. So based on that, it is not inconceivable that, so far, they have eluded our watch. That is all.

 

[HGROKIT]

i'm sure that those satelites have IR and can see heat, and i'm also sure that If there were nukes in the sand, we'd see the heat from them.

do nukes give off heat when there is no reaction happening? I am sure there is radiation, but is that heat?

 

[Comrade]

Again, it wasn't me in the field.

I would think with all of our technology proving to be able to read in space as well as we do, and using vibration sensing equipment, radar type equipment, and others, it would be fairly straightforward to have something be able to determine density of storage containers such as a 6 ft concrete box and then tell the density of what was inside.

Once you have density, you add the stereoscopic image of layers to determine size and shape.

Once you have size, shape, and density, you then have basic idea of what is there.

I am just one guy, not an infinitely financed spy agency with ties to a federal reserve and ground troops.

If I can think it up, so can they.

It isn't that tough of a concept. Tempest was around 30 years ago. You think we just dropped it? You still have red and black rooms.

This kind of technology works with water through sonar, where density is determined by the time is takes for a sound wave to travel through the ocean.

I've never heard of a technology that can broadcast electronic energy from space, THROUGH six feet of concrete, reflect off the metal below it, and return all the way to the reciever on the sattlelight. The energy required for such a wave would be TREMENDOUS, well beyond any sattlelights potential power, it would also have to be focused and remain focused without dispersal.

 

[NewGuy]

I think we can all agree that ANY energy can be detected from ANYWHERE with sensitive enough equipment.

The next logical, yet scary question is:

Why don't we have it after so many years?

-Because we know logically they MUST.

The next more feared question is:

Why don't we use it?

 

[Comrade]

I think we can all agree that ANY energy can be detected from ANYWHERE with sensitive enough equipment.

The next logical, yet scary question is:

Why don't we have it after so many years?

-Because we know logically they MUST.

The next more feared question is:

Why don't we use it?

You're not listening... oh well.

 

[DKSuddeth]

do nukes give off heat when there is no reaction happening? I am sure there is radiation, but is that heat?

the uranium and plutonium does give off heat.

 

[NewGuy]

This kind of technology works with water through sonar, where density is determined by the time is takes for a sound wave to travel through the ocean.

I've never heard of a technology that can broadcast electronic energy from space, THROUGH six feet of concrete, reflect off the metal below it, and return all the way to the reciever on the sattlelight. The energy required for such a wave would be TREMENDOUS, well beyond any sattlelights potential power, it would also have to be focused and remain focused without dispersal.

-Beyond their power in that METHOD.

Change the tools.

Change the power requirement.

You don't need to reflect off of something BEHINED the concrete, just read the change in the energy field with ANOTHER piece. -This works just like access control with cards and card readers that employees use as badges.

Come on, guys, I shouldn't have to piece the technology together like this like legos. This isn't far fetched.

 

[HGROKIT]

hmmm, I wouldn't have thunk that those elements while radioactive, would not give off heat. If one sticks around long enough, they will learn something new.

 

[freeandfun1]

This kind of technology works with water through sonar, where density is determined by the time is takes for a sound wave to travel through the ocean.

I've never heard of a technology that can broadcast electronic energy from space, THROUGH six feet of concrete, reflect off the metal below it, and return all the way to the reciever on the sattlelight. The energy required for such a wave would be TREMENDOUS, well beyond any sattlelights potential power, it would also have to be focused and remain focused without dispersal.

Ground Penetrating Radar

Ground penetrating radar (GPR, sometimes called ground probing radar, georadar or earth sounding radar) is a noninvasive electromagnetic geophysical technique for subsurface exploration, characterization and monitoring. It is widely used in locating lost utilities, environmental site characterization and monitoring, agriculture, archaeological and forensic investigation, unexploded ordnance and land mine detection, groundwater, pavement and infrastructure characterization, mining, ice sounding, permafrost, void and tunnel detection, sinkholes, subsidence, karst, and a host of other applications. It may be deployed from the surface by hand or vehicle, in boreholes, between boreholes, from aircraft and from satellites. It has the highest resolution of any geophysical method for imaging the subsurface, with centimeter scale resolution sometimes possible.

 

[Comrade]

the uranium and plutonium does give off heat.

Again, we're talking about six feet of concrete. And whatever minor amount of heat or radiation from such a core is dispersed in all directions, and any heat or radiation would not only have to penetrate the concrete but also travel all the way to space. I just don't believe it's possible with our technology.

Otherwise we would have detected this cache already, well before the intelligence led us to look there.

 

[JohnGalt]

Cmon guys!
You all sound happy that there might be nukes in that hell-hole!
Although it would be the best thing for Bush, you can't seriously say that if those wackos got a nuke they wouldn't Jihad the hell out of the closest target. Don't put your partisan prayers ahead of the saftey of MILLIONS. And besides, if they had NUKES we would have known (our eyes in the sky can see that stuff), mustard gas would sound a little more likely. If someone whispered nuke while in Iraq the story would explode, I am just hoping that this report is as stupid as they say. If it isn't, alot of people could be very screwed.

 

[pegwinn]

Wow, Look what happens when you take the day off and sleep in.

Lets assume that the first argument is correct and the weapons are there, encased in concrete (If I read the first link correctly, not had coffee yet), are they a danger? How tough would it be to break them out without spillage and set them up? I'm not worried about the gov lettiing anyone have them, even the Dems aint that stupid. I am worried for the poor bastards who are gonna have to handle them if all this is true.

Hey jimmy, we need a smily for Just my dos pennies.

IF you are from texas think about the old man in the latest six flags commercial

 

[Comrade]

Cmon guys!
You all sound happy that there might be nukes in that hell-hole!
Although it would be the best thing for Bush, you can't seriously say that if those wackos got a nuke they wouldn't Jihad the hell out of the closest target. Don't put your partisan prayers ahead of the saftey of MILLIONS. And besides, if they had NUKES we would have known (our eyes in the sky can see that stuff), mustard gas would sound a little more likely. If someone whispered nuke while in Iraq the story would explode, I am just hoping that this report is as stupid as they say. If it isn't, alot of people could be very screwed.

That's why I was saying I'm also optomistic the report is not true.