On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:39:32 -0500, X ` Man wrote:

On 11/23/11 3:36 PM, John H wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 14:17:22 -0500, X ` wrote:

On 11/23/11 2:01 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 11:23:49 -0500, X ` Man
wrote:

On 11/23/11 11:19 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 08:05:17 -0500, X ` Man
wrote:

The mountains are going to give the Israeli air force problems, Cain
apparently thinks.


It will present a problem if the facility they are trying to destroy
is in the middle of one of these mountains. Our penetrators are pretty
good but there is still a limit to what they can punch through.


Most if not all of the Iranian nuke facility locations are known, and
they are not in the mountains. Think Peenemünde and Nordhausen, with the
facilities in underground bunkers.

If that is really true, they are going to lose them. The open question
is how long that really sets back the program and what the blowback
will be.


I think it is worthwhile to try to prevent countries ruled by lunatics
from having or developing nuclear weapons. Bombing, sabotage and other
methods that do not involve massive military effort seem reasonable ways
to accomplish that sort of goal.

The problem, of course, is that nukes-ready-to-go are available from the
weaponry stolen from the former Soviet states and, probably, from
Pakistan. Since we don't really patrol our borders or seaports, it seems
reasonable one can be "snuck" in to create havoc. When it goes off, I
hope it isn't going off in DC.

Adding a few million union jobs to patrol borders and seaports wouldn't stop a small nuke from
entering the country. I could carry a SADM in my little Key West and set it off under the Memorial
Bridge. Wouldn't have to be in a container on a ship. Of course, we wouldn't expect Pelosi, et al,
who want to add millions of 'port inspectors' to understand that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special...ition_Munition


Ahh...the GOP approach: let's not do anything because...someone might
get a job.

Stupid reply.

Hiring a million 'inspectors' would be a waste of money to prevent a nuke from entering the USA. I
suppose you would hire them anyway. Why? Just to make the government bigger?

On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 20:52:15 -0500, X ` Man
wrote:



GOP candidate discussion on foreign policy. According to Herman Cain,
Iran has mountains.

i loved his concern that any attack would be unable to contend with
the mountains...we're doomed!

guess he doesnt know why we mothballed NORAD's command post in
Cheyenne mountain

On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 22:20:32 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 21:22:14 -0500, Disgusted wrote:

On 11/22/2011 8:52 PM, X ` Man wrote:


GOP candidate discussion on foreign policy. According to Herman Cain,
Iran has mountains.



When were the mountains removed?

This spring when the Israelis start dropping all of those bunker
busters we sold them.

you mean that obama sold them after bush refused?

yeah, really proves what a muslim obama is, doesn't it?

On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 21:20:43 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:


Who knows he might. But could be his welfare check is more important
and Cain might cancel it. So long as there is a socialist black boob
might keep quite. Ditto harryk ... Who knows....

says a guy who lives in a social welfare state while complaining about
the US becoming a

social welfare state

On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 11:19:51 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 08:05:17 -0500, X ` Man
wrote:

The mountains are going to give the Israeli air force problems, Cain
apparently thinks.


It will present a problem if the facility they are trying to destroy
is in the middle of one of these mountains. Our penetrators are pretty
good but there is still a limit to what they can punch through.

there was an article in 'scientific american' a few years ago on
bunker busters...they're not very efficient.

On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 01:00:16 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 19:05:51 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 20:52:15 -0500, X ` Man
wrote:



GOP candidate discussion on foreign policy. According to Herman Cain,
Iran has mountains.

i loved his concern that any attack would be unable to contend with
the mountains...we're doomed!

guess he doesnt know why we mothballed NORAD's command post in
Cheyenne mountain


I was just there this summer and it didn't look "mothballed" to me.
They are still tracking everything from space junk to just about
anything that flies around the US.

dont read much, eh?

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Discer.../message/19252

and from norad's official website:

http://www.norad.mil/about/cmoc.html

Today, the Cheyenne Mountain Complex serves as NORAD and USNORTHCOM's
Alternate Command Center and as a training site for crew
qualification. Day-to-day crew operations for NORAD and USNORTHCOM
typically take place at Peterson Air Force Base.

On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 01:02:27 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 19:06:29 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 22:20:32 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 21:22:14 -0500, Disgusted wrote:

On 11/22/2011 8:52 PM, X ` Man wrote:


GOP candidate discussion on foreign policy. According to Herman Cain,
Iran has mountains.



When were the mountains removed?

This spring when the Israelis start dropping all of those bunker
busters we sold them.

you mean that obama sold them after bush refused?

yeah, really proves what a muslim obama is, doesn't it?

It proves Obama is just another NeoCon.

ah. a buzzword you heard on fox.

let's see...obama's ending 2 wars

and to the right that makes him a neocon!

HAHAHAHAH

On 11/24/11 12:53 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 14:17:22 -0500, X `
wrote:

The problem, of course, is that nukes-ready-to-go are available from the
weaponry stolen from the former Soviet states and, probably, from
Pakistan. Since we don't really patrol our borders or seaports, it seems
reasonable one can be "snuck" in to create havoc. When it goes off, I
hope it isn't going off in DC.

If I was going to worry about Iran it would be if they simply leaked
out some high level material, not really fissile but bad enough to
shut down a city with a dirty bomb.
You really hope our borders are secure enough to prevent it but they
manage to bring in tons of illegal drugs with no real problem.

DC is the natural target, although New York would probably cause more
real damage.



The borders of this country have never been "secure," and I doubt
Americans are willing to pay the price to make them so. Sigh. I know DC
is the primary target...I'd rather it were anywhere in, say, Texas.

--
http://flickr.com/gp/hakr/8272ug

On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 08:36:37 -0500, X ` Man
wrote:

On 11/24/11 12:53 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 14:17:22 -0500, X `
wrote:

The problem, of course, is that nukes-ready-to-go are available from the
weaponry stolen from the former Soviet states and, probably, from
Pakistan. Since we don't really patrol our borders or seaports, it seems
reasonable one can be "snuck" in to create havoc. When it goes off, I
hope it isn't going off in DC.

If I was going to worry about Iran it would be if they simply leaked
out some high level material, not really fissile but bad enough to
shut down a city with a dirty bomb.
You really hope our borders are secure enough to prevent it but they
manage to bring in tons of illegal drugs with no real problem.

DC is the natural target, although New York would probably cause more
real damage.



The borders of this country have never been "secure," and I doubt
Americans are willing to pay the price to make them so. Sigh. I know DC
is the primary target...I'd rather it were anywhere in, say, Texas.

the problem is that only the crazed, insane, delusional ron paul is
wiling to say what needs to be said:

end the war on drugs.it's a failure. that would end alot of the flow
of weapons and money over the border.

In article , dump-on-
says...

On 11/24/11 12:53 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 14:17:22 -0500, X `
wrote:

The problem, of course, is that nukes-ready-to-go are available from the
weaponry stolen from the former Soviet states and, probably, from
Pakistan. Since we don't really patrol our borders or seaports, it seems
reasonable one can be "snuck" in to create havoc. When it goes off, I
hope it isn't going off in DC.

If I was going to worry about Iran it would be if they simply leaked
out some high level material, not really fissile but bad enough to
shut down a city with a dirty bomb.
You really hope our borders are secure enough to prevent it but they
manage to bring in tons of illegal drugs with no real problem.

DC is the natural target, although New York would probably cause more
real damage.



The borders of this country have never been "secure," and I doubt
Americans are willing to pay the price to make them so. Sigh. I know DC
is the primary target...I'd rather it were anywhere in, say, Texas.

That's our resident bigot at work....