Could North Korea fly it's 6-10 weapons on commercial airliners to targets on the West Coast?

On 9 Oct 2006 10:28:48 -0700, wrote:

Robert Sturgeon wrote:
On 9 Oct 2006 08:52:42 -0700, wrote:

Tim May wrote:
In article om, Axis
of WhoCares wrote:
The strike on these centers of welfarism, decadence, and homosexuality
may be the only way Middle America can recover.

Do not interference with the Will of a Vengeful God.

These "centers of welfarism, decadence, and homosexuality" are engines
of economic growth that pay taxes that support lazy, backward,
unproductive Middle America. The blue states pay much more in taxes
than they get back from the federal government, and the difference goes
to subsidize poor red states. Those are the real centers of
"welfarism".

If that's so, why don't those blue staters demand lower
Federal taxes and less Federal welfare??? The red staters
would agree, and we'd all have lower Federal taxes and less
Federal welfare. So what are those abused, over-taxed blue
staters waiting for???

Hah hah hah! Let me wait a minute to stop laughing. Red states want
LESS federal welfare?! What planet are you from? Just try to take away
federal subsidies to red-state farmers and see what happens.

ROFLMAO!!!! Just you wait.
Sue


-Gniewko

On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 12:19:06 GMT, "Mysterion"
wrote:


"Axis of WhoCares" wrote in message
ups.com...
If the US could drop a Fat Man bomb back in WWII, how hard would it be
for RNK to retro-fit several commercial airliners to hold a single
nuclear weapon. Using suicide pilots on a normal, scheduled flight plan
across the ocean and striking targets such as Anchorage, LA, Seattle,
Portland etc?

Even well hidden and shielded warheads can be found using neutrino
detectors.

Are they used on airliners?
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"

On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 09:08:13 -0400, Shawn Hirn
wrote:

In article om,
"Axis of WhoCares" wrote:

If the US could drop a Fat Man bomb back in WWII, how hard would it be
for RNK to retro-fit several commercial airliners to hold a single
nuclear weapon. Using suicide pilots on a normal, scheduled flight plan
across the ocean and striking targets such as Anchorage, LA, Seattle,
Portland etc?

Why bother? Considering how open our ports are and what a bunch of boobs
we have in the White House, all the N. Koreans need to do is send a
nuclear device to us via freighter.

While it's ceretainly possible (and has been for decades), why would
they?
NK isn't among those few who think dying for a cause is preferable to
living. Their nuclear capability is for defense (as blackmail, so to
speak). It's dangerous, because their Great Leader is certifiably
crazy, but the idea that they/he will actually deliver a nuclear
device to the US as a first trike has little basis in reality.
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"

In article om,
mumbled
If the US could drop a Fat Man bomb back in WWII, how hard would it be
for RNK to retro-fit several commercial airliners to hold a single
nuclear weapon. Using suicide pilots on a normal, scheduled flight plan
across the ocean and striking targets such as Anchorage, LA, Seattle,
Portland etc?


Besides the fact there are no scheduelde flights from North Korea to any
of those citites ?

Bob uecker wrote:
"Tim May" wrote in message
...

In article om, Axis
of WhoCares wrote:


If the US could drop a Fat Man bomb back in WWII, how hard would it be
for RNK to retro-fit several commercial airliners to hold a single
nuclear weapon. Using suicide pilots on a normal, scheduled flight plan
across the ocean and striking targets such as Anchorage, LA, Seattle,
Portland etc?


Please do not further discuss operational intelligence!

The strike on these centers of welfarism, decadence, and homosexuality
may be the only way Middle America can recover.

Do not interference with the Will of a Vengeful God.


What the **** is decedent about Portland? Is there really people in
Anchorage? LOL.

Jesus christ dude


Timmie (in misc.survivalism) hates everyone and thinks anything that
blows up or kills people is good, especially if any government workers
of any sort are included. Cops, firefighters, secretaries, whatever.

He's psycho and has been for a long time.

Jim

Too_Many_Tools wrote:
Or use a private jet to deliver an nuclear airburst over New York City?

And who would you blame since so many people who have or will have
nuclear capability hate the United States compliments of the Bush
Adminstration?

The world just got alot more dangerous to live in.

Keep voting Republican and you will find out.....

TMT



Oh? They loved us before? How long was Bush in office before planning
started on 911? Oh, he wasn't. Your arguments don't hold water, and
your conclusion doesn't stand up to experience.

LiRM wrote:
On 8 Oct 2006 21:47:25 -0700, "Axis of WhoCares"
wrote:

If the US could drop a Fat Man bomb back in WWII, how hard would it be
for RNK to retro-fit several commercial airliners to hold a single
nuclear weapon. Using suicide pilots on a normal, scheduled flight plan
across the ocean and striking targets such as Anchorage, LA, Seattle,
Portland etc?

The weapon supposedly weighed in at 10 tons. That's a hefty load for
an airliner.

Think cargo ship and you've got a viable scenario.

Cheers,

LiRM

Let's see. 747, configured for passengers, about 400. Passengers at
175lbs. each, 70,000 lbs. You were saying?

Bill Funk wrote:
On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 09:08:13 -0400, Shawn Hirn
wrote:

In article om,
"Axis of WhoCares" wrote:

If the US could drop a Fat Man bomb back in WWII, how hard would it be
for RNK to retro-fit several commercial airliners to hold a single
nuclear weapon. Using suicide pilots on a normal, scheduled flight plan
across the ocean and striking targets such as Anchorage, LA, Seattle,
Portland etc?
Why bother? Considering how open our ports are and what a bunch of boobs
we have in the White House, all the N. Koreans need to do is send a
nuclear device to us via freighter.

While it's ceretainly possible (and has been for decades), why would
they?
NK isn't among those few who think dying for a cause is preferable to
living. Their nuclear capability is for defense (as blackmail, so to
speak). It's dangerous, because their Great Leader is certifiably
crazy, but the idea that they/he will actually deliver a nuclear
device to the US as a first trike has little basis in reality.

Well, we all hope you are right, but like you said, he IS crazy. WHY
does he need nukes? South Korea isn't going to attack, China isn't
going to attack, Japan isn't going to attack. WHO is he afraid of,
other than his own starving hordes?

On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 11:28:39 -0400, LiRM wrote:

On 8 Oct 2006 21:47:25 -0700, "Axis of WhoCares"
wrote:

If the US could drop a Fat Man bomb back in WWII, how hard would it be
for RNK to retro-fit several commercial airliners to hold a single
nuclear weapon. Using suicide pilots on a normal, scheduled flight plan
across the ocean and striking targets such as Anchorage, LA, Seattle,
Portland etc?

The weapon supposedly weighed in at 10 tons. That's a hefty load for
an airliner.

Think cargo ship and you've got a viable scenario.

Cheers,

LiRM


The DC-10 converted for fire fighting can carry 50 tons of water. 10
tons shouldn't be too much of a problem.

On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 15:33:42 -0500, Ron Hunter
wrote:

Bill Funk wrote:
On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 09:08:13 -0400, Shawn Hirn
wrote:

In article om,
"Axis of WhoCares" wrote:

If the US could drop a Fat Man bomb back in WWII, how hard would it be
for RNK to retro-fit several commercial airliners to hold a single
nuclear weapon. Using suicide pilots on a normal, scheduled flight plan
across the ocean and striking targets such as Anchorage, LA, Seattle,
Portland etc?
Why bother? Considering how open our ports are and what a bunch of boobs
we have in the White House, all the N. Koreans need to do is send a
nuclear device to us via freighter.

While it's ceretainly possible (and has been for decades), why would
they?
NK isn't among those few who think dying for a cause is preferable to
living. Their nuclear capability is for defense (as blackmail, so to
speak). It's dangerous, because their Great Leader is certifiably
crazy, but the idea that they/he will actually deliver a nuclear
device to the US as a first trike has little basis in reality.

Well, we all hope you are right, but like you said, he IS crazy. WHY
does he need nukes? South Korea isn't going to attack, China isn't
going to attack, Japan isn't going to attack. WHO is he afraid of,
other than his own starving hordes?




Ummmm Good ol' Georgie boy?
The Iranians? lol

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com