ISIS has a dirty bomb???????

[Braznor]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/british-isis-fanatics-built-dirty-4721561

British ISIS fanatics have built a dirty bomb and boast of the damage it could inflict on London

• Nov 29, 2014 22:34
• By Nick Dorman, Neil Doyle

The fighters are said to have made a device using radioactive uranium stolen from Iraq’s Mosul University after seizing control of the city last June

• 53 Shares
• Share
• Tweet
• +1
• Email

Bomb attack: The scene in Tavistock Square, Central London, Thursday July 7, 2005, after a bomb ripped through a double decker bus Islamic State fanatics have built a dirty bomb, it has been claimed.
The fighters are said to have made a device using radioactive uranium stolen from Iraq’s Mosul University after seizing control of the city last June.
And this week they were boasting of the damage it would cause if blown up in London, although sources insist security measures would make it almost impossible to transport here.
Among those bragging about the bomb’s development is Hamayun Tariq, of Dudley, West Midlands, who is now training fellow Brits in Syria.

VIEW GALLERY Tariq, 37, who has had his passport cancelled by the Home Office, told fellow militants via a social media account that jihadist dirty bombs are now a reality.
“O by the way Islamic State does have a Dirty bomb. We found some Radio active material from Mosul university,” he posted online.
“We’ll find out what dirty bombs are and what they do. We’ll also discuss what might happen if one actually went off in a public area.
“This sort of a bomb would be terribly destructive if went off In LONDON becuz it would be more of a disruptive than a destructive weapon”.

Do you think ISIS will reach Europe?

• Yes
  
• No
  

A fellow militant replied: “This will likely escalate western involvement, but Allah knows best.”
It is claimed the device includes uranium from a stash of 40 kilograms looted by IS.
Iraq’s UN Ambassador Mohamed Ali Alhakim informed UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon of the theft in a letter on July 8.
He wrote: “Terrorist groups have seized control of nuclear material at the sites that came out of the control of the state.”
If the bomb does exist, militants are far more likely to use it in Syria or Iraq, rather than trying to smuggle it into a Western country.

This is very serious if found to be true. D:

UPDATE To THE OP:

A question to the experts here:

Whats the difference between conventional ordinance containing depleted uranium and this dirty bomb built with uranium stolen from the Mosul University?
___________

 

[piasabird]

Terrorists in tennis shoes. How cute!

 

[piasabird]

Dirty bomb will indiscriminately kill Muslims and Arabs also. It will kill slowly and cause birth defects. However, what kind of payback is possible. Would England start a genocide program?

 

[Braznor]

Nevermind. Updated the question in my original post.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Ok, calm down.

Did you notice "it would be far moredistruptive/I] than a destructive bomb?


People ought to read just what this really means in terms of the physical damage involved.

 

[Blanky]

So let me get this straight: a group of people who are demonstrably uneducated are claiming to be the first group ever to construct a dirty bomb?

Forgive me if I am more concerned with cyber Monday deals. Isis is just the west's trending monster at the moment and nothing more. It is a real threat in Iraq and Syria to be sure but they will absolutely never kill me, anybody I have ever known, or anybody who has ever known anybody I have ever known.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

So let me get this straight: a group of people who are demonstrably uneducated are claiming to be the first group ever to construct a dirty bomb?

Forgive me if I am more concerned with cyber Monday deals. Isis is just the west's trending monster at the moment and nothing more. It is a real threat in Iraq and Syria to be sure but they will absolutely never kill me, anybody I have ever known, or anybody who has ever known anybody I have ever known.

Step 1) make an IED

Step 2) put some uranium in it

Step 3) ????

Step 4) PROFIT!

 

[bshole]

So let me get this straight: a group of people who are demonstrably uneducated are claiming to be the first group ever to construct a dirty bomb?

Forgive me if I am more concerned with cyber Monday deals. Isis is just the west's trending monster at the moment and nothing more. It is a real threat in Iraq and Syria to be sure but they will absolutely never kill me, anybody I have ever known, or anybody who has ever known anybody I have ever known.

Unless..... the fucked up American government starts sending ground troops into the meat grinder. You know they REALLY REALLY REALLY want to. They just need a justification to do it.

 

[JEDIYoda]

If that I true, anybody can make a dirty bomb abd I am sure it would have alrady be done!

Excuse me if I am more concerned with my next bowel movement!

 

[TechBoyJK]

So let me get this straight: a group of people who are demonstrably uneducated are claiming to be the first group ever to construct a dirty bomb?

Forgive me if I am more concerned with cyber Monday deals. Isis is just the west's trending monster at the moment and nothing more. It is a real threat in Iraq and Syria to be sure but they will absolutely never kill me, anybody I have ever known, or anybody who has ever known anybody I have ever known.

Does ISIS come across as demonstrably uneducated? Because their military adventures over the past year have come across as absolutely brilliant strategically. Most of ISIS' leadership is incredibly educated. While they have many grunts and dummies doing their hardwork, at the top of the chain are smart people.

I wouldn't call them uneducated at all.

 

[Newell Steamer]

A piece of irradiated metal can indeed kill/harm people who venture near it,.. including the carrier(s) of the bomb.

So, if you gather enough irradiated materials, to harm a huge city, you will need a substantial amount of lead to:
- shield/block radioactive readings
- prevent the carrier from getting killed by the radiation, before detonation

A dirty bomb isn't the same as an explosive device, since the dirty bomb is deadly well before it even detonates,.. especially to the carrier.

I am not ruling out, or nay-saying the utilization of irradiated materials,.. but, the logistics just aren't feasible.

 

[Newell Steamer]

Step 1) make an IED

Step 2) try to put some uranium in it, but, die from radiation poisoning

This is what I would imagine would actually occur.

Uranium is easy to get; sure.

Transporting it, stockpiling/storing it, and transfering it to the site; not so much.

But, lets say ISIS her perfected the transporting, stockpiling/storing and transfering of uranium,.. this would need quite the coordination AND hardware to prevent themselves from getting radiation poisoning. So, all that activity (and, the high probability of leakage,.. which will allow to trace it) is basically painting a huge bullseye on themselves.

I just don't think it's worth it.

 

[mikeymikec]

A fellow militant replied: “This will likely escalate western involvement, but Allah knows best.”

Wait, you consulted Allah before considering these dipshit ideas?

 

[Moonbeam]

If the gentleman is correct that it will happen if Allah wills it, then we have nothing to worry about.

 

[Zstream]

This is what I would imagine would actually occur.

Uranium is easy to get; sure.

Transporting it, stockpiling/storing it, and transfering it to the site; not so much.

But, lets say ISIS her perfected the transporting, stockpiling/storing and transfering of uranium,.. this would need quite the coordination AND hardware to prevent themselves from getting radiation poisoning. So, all that activity (and, the high probability of leakage,.. which will allow to trace it) is basically painting a huge bullseye on themselves.

I just don't think it's worth it.

You do realize they blow themselves up on a daily basis?

 

[Fern]

A piece of irradiated metal can indeed kill/harm people who venture near it,.. including the carrier(s) of the bomb.

So, if you gather enough irradiated materials, to harm a huge city, you will need a substantial amount of lead to:
- shield/block radioactive readings
- prevent the carrier from getting killed by the radiation, before detonation

A dirty bomb isn't the same as an explosive device, since the dirty bomb is deadly well before it even detonates,.. especially to the carrier.

I am not ruling out, or nay-saying the utilization of irradiated materials,.. but, the logistics just aren't feasible.

Yeah, thank God they don't have people who would sacrifice their lives to transport such a bomb. [/sarcasm]

Fern

 

[Fern]

Ok, calm down.

Did you notice "it would be far moredistruptive/I] than a destructive bomb?


People ought to read just what this really means in terms of the physical damage involved.

Not sure what you mean, but a dirty device might, in fact, be more "destructive" than a conventional bomb.

Sure, the conventional bomb would have a more destructive blast. I mean a more destructive physical effect on buildings etc, but if sufficiently 'dirty' could render an area uninhabitable. That would be even more destructive. Imagine a chunk of downtown real estate in Manhattan or London rendered useless.

Fern

 

[Newell Steamer]

Yeah, thank God they don't have people who would sacrifice their lives to transport such a bomb. [/sarcasm]

Fern

You do realize they blow themselves up on a daily basis?

Given the potency and concentration of the radioactive material needed,.. they will probably die before they get a chance to detonate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acute_radiation_syndrome

Or, get really sick when handling the radioactive materials.

I mean, sure, let them play with radiation and let them get radiation sickness - please, by all means. But, after a month's worth of their followers croaking and no dead infidels, they would probably give this approach up.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Cool beans, won't be long and the draft will need to be reinstated. Those 34 years old and younger and haven't previously served in Iraq and/or Afghanistan will be the first to be called up.

 

[Data-Medics]

I wouldn't call them uneducated at all.

Agreed, I believe the word "Idiots" better suits them.

 

[inachu]

Spreading fear in the name of righteousness. Boths sides are guilty of it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ9SUbEPrhk

 

[MongGrel]

I still vote for B-52s and a few Arch Light type of missions in a spot or two.

But that's just me I guess.

 

[Subyman]

Depleted Uranium is essentially harmless*. They use it in large calibre artillery, airplane ballast, and I believe you can even buy it in small amounts. I guess they could use it as shrapnel, but there are certainly cheaper alternatives (like nails.)

Again, depleted Uranium is U-238 (with a negligible amount of U235), harmless from a weapons stand point and it has a very, very long half-life so its not very dangerous to humans. U235 is what is used in power reactors and some nuclear weapons. The difference between U-238 and U-235 is becoming a nuclear super power. Yeah, a huge difference.

*Anyway as a health hazard, the government shoots it out of cannons and leaves it on the battlefield. So... The only way it is really dangerous is if you eat it.

To answer the OP's question, "radioactive" uranium would contain more U-235. It is HIGHLY doubtful that it has a weaponized amount of U-235 (80%+). That is highly, highly regulated and would not be available to universities. They may have power reactor grade U235, which is around 20%. Still doubtful though.

The health effects of U235 don't make it a good dirty bomb material. It has relatively long half life, so much so that some is still around from the formation of the Earth. It would be a PITA to clean up, but there wouldn't be too much human damage from its radioactivity.

 

[MongGrel]

Or if something like an A10 gets mad at ya.

:biggrin:

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Depleted Uranium is essentially harmless*. They use it in large calibre artillery, airplane ballast, and I believe you can even buy it in small amounts. I guess they could use it as shrapnel, but there are certainly cheaper alternatives (like nails.)

Again, depleted Uranium is U-238 (with a negligible amount of U235), harmless from a weapons stand point and it has a very, very long half-life so its not very dangerous to humans. U235 is what is used in power reactors and some nuclear weapons. The difference between U-238 and U-235 is becoming a nuclear super power. Yeah, a huge difference.

*Anyway as a health hazard, the government shoots it out of cannons and leaves it on the battlefield. So... The only way it is really dangerous is if you eat it.

To answer the OP's question, "radioactive" uranium would contain more U-235. It is HIGHLY doubtful that it has a weaponized amount of U-235 (80%+). That is highly, highly regulated and would not be available to universities. They may have power reactor grade U235, which is around 20%. Still doubtful though.

The health effects of U235 don't make it a good dirty bomb material. It has relatively long half life, so much so that some is still around from the formation of the Earth. It would be a PITA to clean up, but there wouldn't be too much human damage from its radioactivity.

If they had a weaponized amount of HE uranium then they wouldn't be wasting it on a conventional bomb, not that there's that much they could get. So far you are the only one that gets it. The fact is that a dirty bomb is the ebola of terrorists. All it take is for one person to get here, like they did, and were all dead. Nope. It's a psychological weapon. What happens when one detonates? You hose things off and down the sewers it goes unless it rains first. I don't think people know the difference between nuclear weapons and dirty bombs. You cannot turn NY into Chernobyl by this means. The physics do not permit it.