Originally Posted by Welshwarrior

You are a strange fish missileer, so you have to have a degree in Nuclear Physics to comment on the USA's tardiness when it comes to losing bombs . I did woodwork at school! Does that qualify me to comment about the destruction of the rainforests? I have cut and pasted this your answer onto another military web site, just to cheer the troops up, I know you won't mind.

Good, thank you very much. You're strange but I'm afraid fish is a little high on the evolutionary ladder. Just which troops are you cheering up, Al Queda?

Originally Posted by Missileer

Good, thank you very much. You're strange but I'm afraid fish is a little high on the evolutionary ladder. Just which troops are you cheering up, Al Queda?

You have this very odd trait missileer of reading something that has not been posted. Let me just recap the story for some of our readers that have fallen asleep at the back of the room. You made a comment about the Russians and their handling of nuclear material in a quite disparaging way. I commented that people in glass house's should not throw stones, and mentioned the loss of nuclear bombs by American Forces over the years . Your responses have rambled a bit e.g Do I have a degree in Nuclear Physics? What bearing that had on the thread continues to elude me. And now we have your latest effort, Al Queda. What they have to do with the discussion is quite beyond me. This is a healthy and robust discussion, yet you seem to see my posts has a personal criticism. I neither bear you or your country any ill will, in fact I have had the pleasure of serving with and alongside American Forces (some who are still my friends)and have the greates respect for them. They were never as sensitive to criticism has you seem to be, they gave as good has they got, but they were of a tougher generation.

One of the legacies of the Soveit era was a network of nuclear-powered weather stations deployed throughout the empire. These self-contained units, about the size of a large crate, were powered by a low capacity nuclear power cell. The units were "secured" behind a chain link fence and visited periodically by local authorities. A significant number were located in Chechnya, and the Republic of Georgia, with more than a few in the areas that came under the control of Moslem extremists associated with terrorist organizations. This information has periodically made its way into the western press; usually in the context of a request by the member of the ex-empire for resources to remove or secure the materials.

I am not surprised to hear that these materials may have been removed from these abandoned stations or that they are a potential source of fissile materials suitable for incorporation in a dirty weapon. The question is the ability of the bad guys to move the material undetected from their current porous location to a suitable target.

There was a documentary on UK tv some time ago about that GC, from what I can can remember, the Russian Government are no longer sure where a most of them are, which is a little worrying.

Originally Posted by Missileer

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/09/13/lost.bomb/
I wouldn't worry much about a Russian trawler picking this baby up.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Government experts are investigating a claim that an unarmed nuclear bomb, lost off the Georgia coast at the height of the Cold War, might have been found, an Air Force spokesman said Monday.

http://www.cdi.org/Issues/NukeAccidents/accidents.htm
Seems to suppose a lot but I still don't see any getting into a foreign nuke.

"Even the updated estimate does not tell the entire story, for no additional list of nuclear weapon accidents acknowledged by the Pentagon has been released since 1980. Moreover, the list included only those instances that were judged severe enough to fit the Pentagon's conservative definition of a nuclear weapon "accident." Many more mishaps which could have been catastrophic were excluded as "nuclear weapons incidents."

http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn07302005.html
CounterPunch Diary

Lost Nuclear Warheads from a B-52 Now in Iran?

By ALEXANDER COCKBURN
Iran may have the weapons-grade uranium out of three nuclear warheads dumped out of a B-52 back in 1991. Or so at least the US government might have some reason to believe, according to a [seemingly well-informed person talking to CounterPunch last week.]

Darn those seemingly well-informed persons, they're everywhere.


http://www.commondreams.org/headlines/081300-01.htm

"COPENHAGEN - A long lost U.S. nuclear bomb probably lies on the seabed off Greenland near Thule airbase, which the United States wants to use for its controversial anti-missile shield, a Danish newspaper reported on Sunday.
Classified documents obtained by a group of former workers at Thule, an Arctic air and radar base built by the United States in 1951-52, suggest that one of four hydrogen bombs on a B-52 bomber that crashed there in 1968 was never found, the daily Jyllands-Posten said."

If it was never found, I guess it wouln't be just rolling around on the top of the ground. 1951-1952, I don't think much could be gained from salvaging this one.


You're right about the USA losing warheads but in almost every case since 1951, they have been monitored or located. These aren't being swapped for camels in the Middle East. You will be able to "Google" up pretty much anything you want to read these days, especially if it has an anti American slant.

Conventional wisdom indicates the lost Mark 28 is probably buried deep in the Greenland ice pack north of Thule. Sufficiently buried to make location and recovery impossible to this point.

Let's turn our attention to an entire squadron of P38's, lost on the Greenland ice cap and eventually buried under 268 feet of ice. http://www.thelostsquadron.com/

One of the P38's was recovered, restored and made sufficiently airworth to take to the skies.

Things that are "unrecoverable" and "lost forever" have a funny habit of turning up. Sufficient quantities of time and resources can find anything if there is sufficient will to spend them.

So why can't we find today's greatest lost "treasure? Osama is still out there because the collective "we" isn't prepared to spend the time or resources to "find" him.

GWC
.

Not true GWC, I don't think it is a question of resources or time, its a matter of political will. He is in Pakistan and our choice of allies in this war against terror has put us in bed with the enemy. The Pakistan government and in particular its army is aiding him. There are interviews with terrorists who clearly state this fact. There is the additional oddities as well like after a devastating earthquake US forces from the border with Afghanistan were not allowed to cross over with tonnes of food and supplies desperately need for over two months. Very odd behaviour from an ally and especially one in need unless they are hiding something and don't want anyone to accidentally trip over OBL's beard. Then again once he is secured the blank check being used now by this US administration will have been cashed and the party is over.

I read that no word has been heard form or of him for a year now.

Same is true of Shamil Baseyev but he is still going strong as well. This is the thing about a terrorist, to me they are in the same boat as our spec warriors, if they're successful you don't hear diddly.

imho the chances that OBL is still alive is tiny... why would be have other people say that he is alive? :/

shouldn't surprise me if he got pwned...

Meanwhile back at the ranch...

Despite agreements and investments the Russian government continues to deny U.S. officials access to many nuclear warhead stockpiles, weapons-grade nuclear material storage sites and biological facilities, preventing the U.S. from devising security upgrades, a NATO report said.

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the U.S. and Russia have been working together to safeguard Russia’s stockpiles of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. Nevertheless, more than 6,500 Russian strategic nuclear warheads have been secured from visiting foreign experts, the country’s first chemical-weapons disposal site is working, and three others are under construction. Of the estimated 185 tons of plutonium and 1,100 tons of weapons-grade uranium stored in Russia, only half have received security upgrades, the report estimates.

Aware of how lax security is at many former biological weapons sites, Russian authorities worry that U.S. inspections of those sites could produce information leaks that ultimately could help terrorists target those locations, Vladimir Orlov, a nuclear security expert with the PIR Center, a Moscow think tank was quoted by the Chicago Tribune as saying.

“The Russian government feels uncertain and vulnerable about its biological complex facilities,” Orlov said. “But the (NATO) report is right in saying that Russian authorities haven’t put a high enough priority on securing biological sites.”

The U.S., Russia and other members of the Group of 8 leading industrialized countries have fared better when it comes to destruction of Russia’s stockpile of 40,000 metric tons of chemical weapons — the world’s largest. Work has started at a disposal plant in the south-central city of Gorny to destroy mustard gas and lewisite, both blistering agents.

Construction at three other disposal plants has begun, including a facility at Shchuchye that will destroy Russia’s vast nerve-gas stockpile. Russia has 32,500 metric tons of sarin, VX and soman nerve gas stored in shells, rockets and bombs at five sites across the country. This disposal plant is expected to go into operation in 2008.

However, Russia the U.S. and other Western governments have not tackled the question of tactical nuclear weapons, which are worrisome because of their small size and portability, according to the report.

“Tactical nuclear weapons could cause destruction far more severe than the Sept. 11, 2001, assault,” the report warns.

Russian authorities said they had destroyed more than half their tactical nuclear weapons but they have not provided any concrete data on the reductions or on numbers of existing tactical nuclear arms. Likewise, the U.S. has not formally declared the number and location of its tactical nuclear weapons.

http://www.mosnews.com/news/2005/12/23/russiawmd.shtml

Again, this does not make me feel safe and this is what chaps my hide about this whole deal. Everyone is pretty aware of the conventional wisdom which goes something along the line that Russia is too impoverished to make the sort of upgrades et al that are needed to dispose of or safeguard this material. If this is the truth then it still does not explain one iota why in the hell they don't let other countries who have the money and the expertise come in and help do it for them? If your fly is unzipped and you have no arms why would you refuse the assistance of a person who is not handicapped in zipping you up? The only conclusion I draw from this is that there is most definitely weapons that have grown legs and most likely with assistance (ie sold by Russian officials) and they don't want the rumours to be proven as indeed facts.