NationStates Jolt Archive


Would you mind if al-Qaeda set off a nuke?

Remote Observer
11-06-2007, 16:07
Latest news ('http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2099634,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront')

A British company has been closed down after being caught in an apparent attempt to sell black-market weapons-grade uranium to Iran and Sudan, The Observer can reveal.

Anti-terrorist officers and MI6 are now investigating a wider British-based plot allegedly to supply Iran with material for use in a nuclear weapons programme. One person has already been charged with attempting to proliferate 'weapons of mass destruction'.

During the 20-month investigation, which also involved MI5 and Customs and Excise, a group of Britons was tracked as they obtained weapons-grade uranium from the black market in Russia. Investigators believe it was intended for export to Sudan and on to Iran.

A number of Britons, who are understood to have links with Islamic terrorists abroad, remain under surveillance. Investigators believe they have uncovered the first proof that al-Qaeda supporters have been actively engaged in developing an atomic capability. The British company, whose identity is known to The Observer but cannot be disclosed for legal reasons, has been wound up.

Ok, so we can assume that some of the people involved were sympathetic to al-Qaeda.

We can also assume (despite assertions to the contrary later in the article), that the people had some idea that the material would not be used for "peaceful purposes". Come on - why would someone be buying weapons-grade enriched uranium on the black market? As a party favor?

Which leads me to this - if you're participating in helping someone gather weapons grade uranium, you obviously have no problem with them using it somewhere.

Say you work at a US uranium enrichment facility. You obviously have no problem with the US turning that product into warheads - and perhaps you have some belief in the publicly expressed policies the US has on the use of nuclear weapons.

So, if you're selling to al-Qaeda, and you're selling weapons-grade uranium obtained on the black market, you obviously have no problem with the publicly stated goal of blowing up one or more major Western cities.

So, here's the question:

Would you mind if al-Qaeda set off a nuke?
Dundee-Fienn
11-06-2007, 16:09
I'd mind if anyone did
Rambhutan
11-06-2007, 16:09
Well that's capitalists for you. Personally I mind if anybody sets off a nuke.
Khadgar
11-06-2007, 16:10
Only an idiot would actually use a nuclear weapon.
Isidoor
11-06-2007, 16:10
Would you mind if al-Qaeda set off a nuke?

yes
Dundee-Fienn
11-06-2007, 16:12
I have to add though that my level of caring is proportional to the impact that said explosion would have on my own life
Cookesland
11-06-2007, 16:12
No, I'd just sit down watch some tv, and give money to the survivors

i'd be ticked if anyone set off a nuke
Myu in the Middle
11-06-2007, 16:14
Well that's capitalists for you. Personally I mind if anybody sets off a nuke.
QFT, but I had to vote Slartibartfast anyway for the HG2G reference
Regenius
11-06-2007, 16:16
I feel like ticked off is a little weak for my tastes. I'd be shocked and appalled maybe become physically ill. I'd probably be furious too, but this is assuming I survive... I live just a few miles outside D.C., a likely ground zero if terrorists set off a bomb as they don't need a government to surrender.
Ifreann
11-06-2007, 16:16
Nukes are bad, mkay?
Manfigurut
11-06-2007, 16:16
Only an idiot wouldn't care if those wackos get hold of nuclear material.
Dundee-Fienn
11-06-2007, 16:18
I feel like ticked off is a little weak for my tastes. I'd be shocked and appalled maybe become physically ill. I'd probably be furious too, but this is assuming I survive... I live just a few miles outside D.C., a likely ground zero if terrorists set off a bomb as they don't need a government to surrender.

Is this how you have reacted to past tragedies which didn't directly affect you. The tsunami for example?
Zarakon
11-06-2007, 16:18
I think I might have a few objections, yes.
Zarakon
11-06-2007, 16:18
Is this how you have reacted to past tragedies which didn't affect you. The tsunami for example?

It could be from the radioactive fallout.
Risottia
11-06-2007, 16:19
Actually, if someone sets off a nuke over a city everywhere, this would prompt Bush to nuke some countries at random... total nuclear shit ensues.:rolleyes:

Fuck nukes.
Dundee-Fienn
11-06-2007, 16:22
It could be from the radioactive fallout.

Could be but if there was no direct effect
Myu in the Middle
11-06-2007, 16:22
Is this how you have reacted to past tragedies which didn't directly affect you. The tsunami for example?
Actually, the tolls of the Tsunami made me genuinely quite ill. 200,000+ people dead? I'd be shocked if it didn't make anyone's stomachs churn.
Khadgar
11-06-2007, 16:31
Could be but if there was no direct effect

You need to read up on nuclear weapons if you don't think the fallout is a direct effect. The ones who get vaporized are the lucky ones.
Jello Biafra
11-06-2007, 16:33
I'd mind if anyone didThirded (or whatevered). Nobody should have nukes.
Neo Art
11-06-2007, 16:34
that's one of the few times I've seen a strawman set up in a thread's title....
Remote Observer
11-06-2007, 16:35
that's one of the few times I've seen a strawman set up in a thread's title....

Umm...

the smugglers were dealing with al-Q.

What do you think they thought the weapons grade black market uranium was for?

Porch lighting?
Remote Observer
11-06-2007, 16:35
Nuclear weapons are dull and uninteresting.

Nanoplagues are excitingly fascinating. :)

Strangelets are more fun....
Lunatic Goofballs
11-06-2007, 16:36
Would you mind if al-Qaeda set off a nuke?

Nuclear weapons are dull and uninteresting.

Nanoplagues are excitingly fascinating. :)
Remote Observer
11-06-2007, 16:39
I guess what I'm really asking is this:

1. If you know your customer is al-Qaeda, and
2. You're selling them weapons grade uranium...

do you honestly think they're not going to be building a bomb, and

do you honestly think they're not going to set it off in some Western country, and

do you care if they do?
Ifreann
11-06-2007, 16:39
Nuclear weapons are dull and uninteresting.

Nanoplagues are excitingly fascinating. :)

This needs an entirely new thread where we can all agree on something. Would you mind if Al-Qaeda released a nanoplague?
Call to power
11-06-2007, 16:39
I'd make a thread on NSG about it where some troll (just 1 I hope)would be talking about nuking the whole country of them-istan

What do you think they thought the weapons grade black market uranium was for?

a dirty bomb is my guess...course the idea of using radioactive material instead of smallpox is silly
Regenius
11-06-2007, 16:40
Is this how you have reacted to past tragedies which didn't directly affect you. The tsunami for example?

Tsunamis don't usually result in nations sending other tsunamis at the perceived culprit.
Deus Malum
11-06-2007, 16:42
Would you mind if al-Qaeda set off a nuke?

Yes. This has been another edition of "Short answers to incredibly stupid questions."
Allanea
11-06-2007, 16:42
Only an idiot would actually use a nuclear weapon.

How so?
RLI Rides Again
11-06-2007, 16:42
No. Well, someone had to say it...
Lunatic Goofballs
11-06-2007, 16:43
This needs an entirely new thread where we can all agree on something. Would you mind if Al-Qaeda released a nanoplague?

A nanoplague that consumes all synthetics would be ever so exciting. I look forward to it. :)
Ifreann
11-06-2007, 16:44
A nanoplague that consumes all synthetics would be ever so exciting. I look forward to it. :)

You just want everyone to be naked.


You've got my vote :D
Compulsive Depression
11-06-2007, 16:44
a dirty bomb is my guess...course the idea of using radioactive material instead of smallpox is silly

Dirty bombs are the most rubbish fnord ever. And, in this case, would be a waste of perfectly good fissile material.

I can just imagine the headlines if they set off a nuke near here:

AL-QAEDA NUKE CORBY
"I guess they're not so bad after all", says Blair
MILLIONS OF POUNDS OF IMPROVEMENTS REPORTED
Chantilandia
11-06-2007, 16:46
I dont think it matters if its a western country or not. No one should be nuked.:gundge:
Bottle
11-06-2007, 16:50
Add me to the list of people who would mind if anybody set off a nuke.

I'm guessing the OP will find that insufficiently interesting, though, so here's something for him to chew on:

I would be MORE pissed off if my own country set off a nuke than if Al Qaeda did.

Why, you ask? Because Al Qaeda are terrorists. By definition, they are assholes. It's not really possible for me to dislike them more than I already do.

My country, on the other hand, is not a terrorist state. Or, at least, it's not fucking well supposed to be. If my country sinks to that level, then I've lost a whole lot more than if some terrorists sunk to a level that they're already pretty much on anyway.
Lunatic Goofballs
11-06-2007, 16:53
You just want everyone to be naked.


You've got my vote :D

I'm getting predictable. :(

:)
Hugohk
11-06-2007, 16:55
Only an idiot would actually use a nuclear weapon.

Indeed and what countries have set off Nuclear bombs? well, there's the USA and the USA and ofcourse the USA and i can ofcourse not forget the USA.
(oh no, i did not just call you're government idiots, no i didn't, there is no conspiracy!)
RobertoThePlato
11-06-2007, 17:01
Only an idiot would actually use a nuclear weapon.

Would it really be likely that al-Qaeda would use any nuclear weapon it had? What would they have to gain?

Note: Yes I would care if al-Qaeda used a nuke. Or anyone for that matter.
Regenius
11-06-2007, 17:09
Add me to the list of people who would mind if anybody set off a nuke.

I'm guessing the OP will find that insufficiently interesting, though, so here's something for him to chew on:

I would be MORE pissed off if my own country set off a nuke than if Al Qaeda did.

Why, you ask? Because Al Qaeda are terrorists. By definition, they are assholes. It's not really possible for me to dislike them more than I already do.

My country, on the other hand, is not a terrorist state. Or, at least, it's not fucking well supposed to be. If my country sinks to that level, then I've lost a whole lot more than if some terrorists sunk to a level that they're already pretty much on anyway.

A very good point. Ten thread points to Bottle.
Remote Observer
11-06-2007, 17:11
A very good point. Ten thread points to Bottle.

The implication of her post is that the US government is most certainly composed of assholes, and would most certainly do something like use a nuclear weapon, with the sole purpose of pissing her off.
Deus Malum
11-06-2007, 17:12
The implication of her post is that the US government is most certainly composed of assholes, and would most certainly do something like use a nuclear weapon, with the sole purpose of pissing her off.

No, the implication of her post is that should the US use a nuclear weapon, it would have sunk to the level of terrorists, and any sane, rational individual would have lost all respect they had for this nation, regardless of how much they initially had.
Khadgar
11-06-2007, 17:15
The implication of her post is that the US government is most certainly composed of assholes, and would most certainly do something like use a nuclear weapon, with the sole purpose of pissing her off.

I don't think you read the same post everyone else did.
Remote Observer
11-06-2007, 17:17
No, the implication of her post is that should the US use a nuclear weapon, it would have sunk to the level of terrorists, and any sane, rational individual would have lost all respect they had for this nation, regardless of how much they initially had.

We've already used nuclear weapons.

Twice.

And for decades, we've had a policy of planning to use them by the tens of thousands, in a war of annihilation.

You were saying?
Deus Malum
11-06-2007, 17:18
We've already used nuclear weapons.

Twice.

And for decades, we've had a policy of planning to use them by the tens of thousands, in a war of annihilation.

You were saying?

That if we ever set off a nuke in another country for no other reason than to foster terror and cause property damage, we would have sunk to the level of terrorists.

Fail.
Ifreann
11-06-2007, 17:19
I'm getting predictable. :(

:)

Why do I get the feeling you're preparing to unleash a new and unexpected kind of madness on us all, just to prove your not predictable?


*constructs bomb shelter*
Hooray for boobs
11-06-2007, 17:22
to be honest, I'd be pretty pissed off if anyone detonated a nuke anywhere. Especially if it was anywhere near me.
Buristan
11-06-2007, 17:36
Well that's capitalists for you. Personally I mind if anybody sets off a nuke.

Only capitalists have nukes, eh? I guess stalin was a entrepeneur

Only an idiot would actually use a nuclear weapon.

Not true, Truman was not an idiot, but he used one, to be fair to your claim however, no one knew the amount of destruction a nuclear bomb would cause

Only an idiot wouldn't care if those wackos get hold of nuclear material.

Accurate
Newer Burmecia
11-06-2007, 17:38
Well, people setting off nukes really grinds my gears.
Glorious Freedonia
11-06-2007, 17:38
All the countries that I want to see nuked would probably not be nuked by Al Qaeda. I would like to see North Korea, China, and any nation hostile to Israel or the USA nuked.
Northern Borders
11-06-2007, 17:38
Only an idiot would actually use a nuclear weapon.

Only an idiot would hijack a plane and fly into a building, killing himself in the process.

Shit happens when you give power to idiots.

Myself, I would care if anyone blew a nuke anywhere.
Buristan
11-06-2007, 17:40
Well, people setting off nukes really grinds my gears.

You aren't the only one, that is why the world has the NPT
Remote Observer
11-06-2007, 17:42
That if we ever set off a nuke in another country for no other reason than to foster terror and cause property damage, we would have sunk to the level of terrorists.

Fail.

We spent trillions of dollars setting up thousands of nuclear missiles, etc., for no other reason than to foster terror in our enemies by the mere threat of using them and in the event we decided to fire them, annihilate most of the human race, and render parts of the Earth uninhabitable, and vaporize most of the works of civilization.

You're saying we didn't sink very low by doing that?
Vectrova
11-06-2007, 17:48
Not to incite a massive flame fest, but no, I wouldn't. Odds are, by the time thus happens the world will be truly and unforgivably rotten. That's not exactly a world I'd enjoy living in, so...


Plus, if I get vaporized I won't have time to care. *dons fire shield*
Sominium Effectus
11-06-2007, 17:54
:confused: I would hope anyone would have a problem if al-Qaeda set off a nuclear bomb.
Remote Observer
11-06-2007, 17:55
:confused: I would hope anyone would have a problem if al-Qaeda set off a nuclear bomb.

Apparently, that didn't bother a few smugglers.
OcceanDrive
11-06-2007, 18:20
I'd mind if anyone didexactamente.
Neo Bretonnia
11-06-2007, 18:22
Not to incite a massive flame fest, but no, I wouldn't. Odds are, by the time thus happens the world will be truly and unforgivably rotten. That's not exactly a world I'd enjoy living in, so...


Plus, if I get vaporized I won't have time to care. *dons fire shield*

Not gonna flame you for that. You might just be onto something...
RLI Rides Again
11-06-2007, 18:36
All the countries that I want to see nuked would probably not be nuked by Al Qaeda. I would like to see North Korea, China, and any nation hostile to Israel or the USA nuked.

*walks in*

*erects a sign saying "Don't feed the troll!"*

*leaves*
Deus Malum
11-06-2007, 18:38
*walks in*

*erects a sign saying "Don't feed the troll!"*

*leaves*

We weren't, but I just might now to spite you :p
Deus Malum
11-06-2007, 18:40
:(

It's ok. It was just such an obvious troll post that I don't think anyone felt like responding.
RLI Rides Again
11-06-2007, 18:41
We weren't, but I just might now to spite you :p

:(
Dundee-Fienn
11-06-2007, 18:42
You need to read up on nuclear weapons if you don't think the fallout is a direct effect. The ones who get vaporized are the lucky ones.

I said if
Dundee-Fienn
11-06-2007, 18:44
Actually, the tolls of the Tsunami made me genuinely quite ill. 200,000+ people dead? I'd be shocked if it didn't make anyone's stomachs churn.

I was shocked by it but I wouldn't say it made me feel physically sick. Thousands of people die every day but I don't feel much for them on more than an intellectual level
New Stalinberg
11-06-2007, 18:46
As long as it's not in America, Liberia, or Israel, the most freedom loving nations of I'll time, it's ok.
Minaris
11-06-2007, 18:59
Would you mind if al-Qaeda set off a nuke?

Dammit, do I really have to say this again? Second time today...

*Ahem*

Yes. In other news, fire is hot, water is wet, and gas burns.
New Manvir
11-06-2007, 20:04
yes...I would mind...unless it's in a third world country, then I'd change the channel from CNN to something else and get back to my dinner like almost everyone else in the "West".....
OcceanDrive
11-06-2007, 20:31
As long as it's not in America, Liberia, or Israel, the most freedom loving nations of I'll time, it's ok.Wh... (http://img68.photobucket.com/albums/v208/ozmjk7/sarcasm_detector.jpg) ???
CoallitionOfTheWilling
11-06-2007, 20:38
Indeed and what countries have set off Nuclear bombs? well, there's the USA and the USA and ofcourse the USA and i can ofcourse not forget the USA.
(oh no, i did not just call you're government idiots, no i didn't, there is no conspiracy!)

You're forgetting France, Britain, Russia, China, India, Pakistan, and North Korea.
Ninetailedfoxdemons
11-06-2007, 20:40
Only an idiot wouldn't care if those wackos get hold of nuclear material.

the whole world would be in danger if they got ahold of nuclear weapons.
Minaris
11-06-2007, 20:41
You're forgetting France, Britain, Russia, China, India, Pakistan, and North Korea.

I think he meant used in war.
Hugohk
11-06-2007, 20:50
You're forgetting France, Britain, Russia, China, India, Pakistan, and North Korea.
Indeed i did meant used in war but i just have to write this:
Really? I was not aware that France, Britain, Russia, China, India, Pakistan and North Korea has unleased their bombs at other "hostile" nations, no really i didn't know! Maybe, maybe it's because they never did, i know they have Nukes, but that they had ever used the Nukes, Now thats news!
Thank you, you really made my day :rolleyes:
Hydesland
11-06-2007, 21:52
Indeed i did meant used in war but i just have to write this:
Really? I was not aware that France, Britain, Russia, China, India, Pakistan and North Korea has unleased their bombs at other "hostile" nations, no really i didn't know! Maybe, maybe it's because they never did, i know they have Nukes, but that they had ever used the Nukes, Now thats news!
Thank you, you really made my day :rolleyes:

Thankyou captain obvious.
Lunatic Goofballs
11-06-2007, 23:40
Why do I get the feeling you're preparing to unleash a new and unexpected kind of madness on us all, just to prove your not predictable?


*constructs bomb shelter*

Dammit! :mad:

See what I mean?
UNITIHU
11-06-2007, 23:47
If al-Qaeda launched a nuke at an asteroid, and said I could watch, from a safe distance, with an HDTV, with 35 different angles, no, I would not mind.
Minaris
11-06-2007, 23:48
Dammit! :mad:

See what I mean?

And now we wait for his attempt at deviancy...

*Puts a pool of mud next to LG*
Gauthier
12-06-2007, 00:53
And this conclude's today's episode of "0h n035 73h 3b1l |\/|05l3|\/|5 r @ 1t @6@1|\|!!!" brought to you by the Deep Kimchi Scouts.
Hydesland
12-06-2007, 01:01
You need to read up on nuclear weapons if you don't think the fallout is a direct effect. The ones who get vaporized are the lucky ones.

Arn't modern nuclear weapons designed to have less of a nuclear fall out?
Hydesland
12-06-2007, 01:02
Thirded (or whatevered). Nobody should have nukes.

In a perfect world. But given the current situation, I think only certain people should have nukes.
West Begorrahland
12-06-2007, 02:23
IMNSHO this is a stupid question!

Of COURSE I mind if al-Qaeda (or anybody else, for that matter) set off a nuke!

Why do you think you have to ask? Expecting some anti-American, al-Qaeda-supporting Muslims on NS, maybe?
Gauthier
12-06-2007, 03:22
IMNSHO this is a stupid question!

Of COURSE I mind if al-Qaeda (or anybody else, for that matter) set off a nuke!

Why do you think you have to ask? Expecting some anti-American, al-Qaeda-supporting Muslims on NS, maybe?

And you win the prize for guessing the Deep Kimchi Scouts' motives for most Remote Observer posts to date!!

Say... what is the prize anyways Bob?
Katganistan
12-06-2007, 03:47
I'd mind if anyone did

QFT.
Hugohk
12-06-2007, 06:59
Thankyou captain obvious.

Captain obvious to the rescue:)
*gets cape and flies away*
Cameroi
12-06-2007, 08:50
if they did, and i was a betting person, i'd put my dreams on it saying made in the u.s. on it somewhere. having been slipped to them by someone in the higher eschalons of the u.s. state department, maybe as agricultural supplies the way rumsfield funded them in the first place, under completely deniable orders from president rove, i mean, that george kid, to maintain the illusion of their being a creditable threat.

millions of al-cia-da opperatives are planing to destroy the america.

millions? really?

would you believe thousands?

no.

would you believe one boyscout with a knife?

=^^=
.../\...

(given the current situation, those what have nukes are the last folks in hell i'd trust with them. not that i'd want every boyscout to have one in his back pocket either, but trying to stuff genies back into bottles while thouroughly and systematicly destroying the environment's capacity to sustain our own speicies continued existence isn't exactly the most effective way to rescue humanity from mutual collective suicide)

=^^=
.../\...
Rambhutan
12-06-2007, 09:51
Only capitalists have nukes, eh? I guess stalin was a entrepeneur


My point was not that, as that was quite obviously not the case during the cold war. What I was getting at was the amoral free-market entrepreneurship attitude of the company involved - "hey there is a market for this we can make some money". I can do a large print version of this if you are still struggling...
Chiapas-Zapatista
12-06-2007, 10:03
the only thing scarier than these guys getting hold of nukes is america getting hold of them...oh wait.

i know whose more likely to set one off and i know whose more likely to aim it at the poor and innocent.
Hamilay
12-06-2007, 10:12
And you win the prize for guessing the Deep Kimchi Scouts' motives for most Remote Observer posts to date!!

Say... what is the prize anyways Bob?

the only thing scarier than these guys getting hold of nukes is america getting hold of them...oh wait.

i know whose more likely to set one off and i know whose more likely to aim it at the poor and innocent.

This thread has now been a success in Remote Observer's eyes.
Sabote
12-06-2007, 10:37
Al-Qaeda are no where near organised enough to set off a nuclear bomb despite the lies the wests capitalist propaganda machines tell you.
The only people who really scare me when it comes to nuclear armageddon is the good ole US of A. After all they are the only nutters to have so far used one. sorry two!!! You would of thought they would of been appalled at themselves after they dropped the first one, but no, the total obliteration of one city was not enough!! they had to do it again. Not because it was needed but to send a message to the Russians. Could they not just of sent a letter?
Hugohk
12-06-2007, 16:36
Could they not just of sent a letter?

Hehehe Word
Prumpa
12-06-2007, 16:46
I'd more than mind, especially by a non-state actor. They're the most likely ones to actually use a nuke.
Gauthier
12-06-2007, 23:24
This thread has now been a success in Remote Observer's eyes.

No. Success in their eyes would have been at least half the responders going "Yes, this is a problem. We do need to round up all those damn dirty Muslims and sterilize them so they won't get a chance to set off a nuke in this country."