4 ms·
Um... I'm going to assume this isn't a troll or written while inebriated. What's the big deal for weapons of mass distruction. Okay well dirty bombs for one are
by Scipio_Afri 7y ago
Um... I'm going to assume this isn't a troll or written while inebriated. What's the big deal for weapons of mass distruction. Okay well dirty bombs for one are easy to do once you have the nuclear material.
Maybe Somalian pirates are relatively chill on the non nation state armed groups out there crazy scale but ISIS and many other terror groups most definitely are not chill. When someone even figures out how to build a powerful conventional explosive you get things the Oklahoma City bombing.
So yeah that's kind of a big deal. The US did essentially invent the weapons and only one to use them in warfare. I think it's also the responsibility of the US make sure it doesn't happen again where they are used against humanity.
- ianai 7y agoOkC isn’t a great example anymore. Many security systems are in place to keep that from happening again. Takes a lot more these days. Fools with nukes have a way of harming themselves. Even Putin did so recently with his nuclear rocket blowing up.
- FDSGSG 7y agoI think you'd be wrong. I think it'd be easy for a single motivated and patient individual with the funds to pull off another OKC. There simply are no effective mechanisms to prevent this, we're just lucky that domestic terrorism isn't very profitable.
- billfruit 7y agoUS was even committed to building two LWR nuclear reactors in North Korea in the late-90's, and as per reports, even some work had started on the sites. If US can provide nuclear reactors to North Korea, I think there wouldn't be much fear of these reactors being repurposed for a weapons program.
- simonh 7y agoThe program you're referring to was about swapping out North Korea's breeder reactor program, designed to generate enriched weapons grade fissile material, for LWR reactors not usable for generating weapons grade fissiles. They absolutely could be used to produce material for dirty bombs, but that's not a factor with North Korea, which has plenty of material to do that anyway.
- Scipio_Afri 7y agoThanks this a really great reply.
- billfruit 7y agoWhy is it a great reply? It does not explain the fact that US would handover two nuclear reactors to North Korea sounds such a bold step, diplomatically speaking. Would US do that today with North Korea or even other countries.
- sterlind 7y agoIsn't Al-Sheebab based in Somalia? They'd probably have a keen interest in nuclear material.
- sudosysgen 7y agoAl-Shabab, but yes.
- hunter-gatherer 7y ago》I think it's also the responsibility of the US make sure it doesn't happen again where they are used against humanity. Interesting. How would you suggest the United States goes about ensuring nuclear technology is never used against humanity again?
- Scipio_Afri 7y agoInternational law and arms control. Like they've been doing post WWII...