Al-Qaida Calls For Romes Destruction

[Howedar]

Of course there will be no security there

[MKSheppard]

The destruction of a large city requires large numbers of nuclear weapons and the ability to get them in place. Al Qaeda does not have that ability.

You forget that they'd all be detonated at ground level, increasing
fallout massively. While the physical destruction would be far less
than with an airburst, the cleanup costs would be staggering.

[Rye]

The effectiveness of a biological/chemical weapon attack has been greatly exaggerated by the press. If a terrorist wanted to have any hope of infecting a large number of people, he'd have to deploy the weapon in an enclosed building, like a hotel or office building. And you can bet that the government would quarantine that zone very quickly.

Much of the vatican is crowded and enclosed in temple-like buildings, rome is a very crowded city overall and loads of people touch one another there due to their culture and the crowding problems. If a bioweapon (like, if it still existed, smallpox) with a week-long incubation period, imagine where it could get from there in a week.

You forget that they'd all be detonated at ground level, increasing
fallout massively. While the physical destruction would be far less
than with an airburst, the cleanup costs would be staggering.

Well, not necessarily, they could copy the 24 terrorists and rent/buy a plane for an airburst.

[Rogue 9]

Of course there will be no security there

I know there will be security there, but you know what suicide attackers do when they see security coming for them. They activate whatever weapon they're carrying as quickly as possible.

[Howedar]

Yes, and that will be outside.

[Durandal]

You'd need significant amounts of the weapon in question to achieve the optimal saturation for infecting a large number of people. Even if al Qaeda could get their hands on a dangerous chemical weapon, I doubt they could get very much of it without us knowing.

[Sidious]

We are not any American. We are people with a clue. We all knew that hijacking airliners was possible.

The destruction of a large city requires large numbers of nuclear weapons and the ability to get them in place. Al Qaeda does not have that ability.

Hijacking 4 planes in the United States at one time was once considered out of their capabilities too.

I find it interesting that anyone can scoff at something like this. Rumors abound of nukes on the black market after the fall of the Soviet Union, disgruntled scientists waiting for the right amount of money, etc etc.

I'm not saying its plausible at this point....but possible? Of course.

[Howedar]

Hijacking 4 planes in the United States at one time was once considered out of their capabilities too.

By whom? It was damned easy to hijack a plane back in the day: passengers were conditioned to think "go along with them and I'll go home at the end of the day". As experience showed, a few knives were enough.

Only a fool would think hijacking four planes at once was impossible.

I find it interesting that anyone can scoff at something like this. Rumors abound of nukes on the black market after the fall of the Soviet Union, disgruntled scientists waiting for the right amount of money, etc etc.

All of those nukes would have long expired by now. If they hadn't, we're still talking very low-yield devices. Virtually every major city has radiological detection equipment these days, especially after Sept. 11.

[HemlockGrey]

I don't doubt that there would be hate crimes, and certainly an increase in antiterror operations and support from European nations, but I highly doubt that Europe would commit to an all-out land war against Islam. It's not as though Europe is still the shining bastion of Catholicism it once was.

As for Catholic terrorist groups, were are they going to come from? Africa? America? How are they going to get into the Middle East? How are they going to get support, training, equipment, and money?

[Durandal]

Hijacking 4 planes in the United States at one time was once considered out of their capabilities too.

I find it interesting that anyone can scoff at something like this. Rumors abound of nukes on the black market after the fall of the Soviet Union, disgruntled scientists waiting for the right amount of money, etc etc.

Yeah, and all those nukes have probably deteriorated past the point of usability, too.

I'm not saying its plausible at this point....but possible? Of course.

Lots of things are possible, but al Qaeda getting their hands on and effectively deploying a chemical weapon is pretty improbable.

[MKSheppard]

Lots of things are possible, but al Qaeda getting their hands on and effectively deploying a chemical weapon is pretty improbable.

Like the chances of a Cult getting their hands on a chemical weapon
and deploying it in the subways of Japan?

[Illuminatus Primus]

Lots of things are possible, but al Qaeda getting their hands on and effectively deploying a chemical weapon is pretty improbable.

Like the chances of a Cult getting their hands on a chemical weapon
and deploying it in the subways of Japan?

That's just it; they didn't effectively deploy it. That gas could've killed thousands.

[Durandal]

Lots of things are possible, but al Qaeda getting their hands on and effectively deploying a chemical weapon is pretty improbable.

Like the chances of a Cult getting their hands on a chemical weapon and deploying it in the subways of Japan?

Yeah, perfect example of an effective deployment you fucking idiot.

[Admiral Valdemar]

Al-Qaeda won't be getting any real nukes anytime soon unless a gov't helps them and that would be suicide if proven.

Chemical weapons are, like nukes, area effect weapons and of limited use too. While the formulas for the likes of sarin, mustard and the deadliest of all, VX are easy to acquire. Actually making them and in enough quantity and releasing them to kill more than a few dozen is difficult at best.

They also won't be getting Smallpox unless a bent Russian gets access to some of the old Soviet GM strains and hands it out for a new BMW. The US has the only other samples, but they're under lock and key and not genetically engineered. If they somehow got Ebola (without dying that is) and released it in a crowded city, it'd be a bitch to stop. It would likely die out as it burns through the populace, but it'd play hell.

So nukes are out unless you talk dirty bombs or corrupt gov't officials who also don't mind giving them a nuke small enough for a Cessna to airburst (though ground burst would be better as stated). Chemical weapons are a no-no without expertise and a lot of the agent to spread, best bet would be water supplies. Bioweapons are also out unless you get some shitty thing like Plague that is only a threat to third world nations or you have a lab that the WHO would be envious of.

[MKSheppard]

That's just it; they didn't effectively deploy it. That gas could've killed thousands.

You call 1,200~ casualties "ineffective"? You and your assfriend are blithering idiots.

[MKSheppard]

Lets not forget the Anthrax mailings...it effectively shut down a post
office sort facility near me, and cost the government approximatley
One (1) shitload of money to decontaminate the building, and took
it out of operation for almost two years.

[MKSheppard]

Oh yes, lets not forget the moon suit guys going into the Senate office buildings
because of that....

That was a crude, simple method of distributing a biological weapon
(simply stuffing it into an envelope), and it caused far more terror than it
cost to simply buy some manila envelopes and tape 'em shut than to
develop an advanced spore dispersal system.

[Durandal]

That's just it; they didn't effectively deploy it. That gas could've killed thousands.

You call 1,200~ casualties "ineffective"? You and your assfriend are blithering idiots.

Compared to what it could have done? 1200 is small potatoes. When was the last time being "effective" was not even coming close to realizing full potential?

[Darth Wong]

Oh yes, lets not forget the moon suit guys going into the Senate office buildings
because of that....

That was a crude, simple method of distributing a biological weapon
(simply stuffing it into an envelope), and it caused far more terror than it
cost to simply buy some manila envelopes and tape 'em shut than to
develop an advanced spore dispersal system.

And two ass-clowns with an AR-15 terrorized the entire State of Maryland from the trunk of their dilapidated car, remember? So what?

[MKSheppard]

And two ass-clowns with an AR-15 terrorized the entire State of Maryland from the trunk of their dilapidated car, remember?

How can i forget. They offed a guy in my own frigging grocery store
parking lot.

[MKSheppard]

Compared to what it could have done? 1200 is small potatoes. When was the last time being "effective" was not even coming close to realizing full potential?

When casualties go into the four-digit range, I consider it "effective", even
if it didn't hit it's full potential. Tokyo is lucky those guys were lazy bastards
and didn't do the job right there.

[Howedar]

You call 1,200~ casualties "ineffective"? You and your assfriend are blithering idiots.

Compared to what it could have done? 1200 is small potatoes. When was the last time being "effective" was not even coming close to realizing full potential?

I was unaware 9-11 was uneffective. I'll keep that in mind.

[Sea Skimmer]

That's just it; they didn't effectively deploy it. That gas could've killed thousands.

They didn't refine it properly thus allowing five thousand people to live another day, though some in permanent comas. The deployment was perfect, you couldn't ever ask for better dispersment from such a small container.

[Darth Wong]

And two ass-clowns with an AR-15 terrorized the entire State of Maryland from the trunk of their dilapidated car, remember?

How can i forget. They offed a guy in my own frigging grocery store parking lot.

Pretty ugly story all around. But the point is that there are just too many damned ways of creating terror, and chemical weapons have a poor ratio of risks and costs to benefits from the terrorists' standpoint, especially against a relatively hard target. Japan was complacent.

[MKSheppard]

chemical weapons have a poor ratio of risks and costs to benefits from the terrorists' standpoint, especially against a relatively hard target. Japan was complacent.

That's why they don't hit military installtions. The Average joe blow doesn't
walk around with a FOX NBC detection vehicle trailing him, or a MOPP suit
in his pocket.