# When Will We See The Next Nuclear Attack on Another Country? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [March 11, 2013, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-will-we-see-the-next-nuclear-attack-on-another-country/652653 "2013-03-11T20:17:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Diceman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Diceman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diceman)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2013, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-will-we-see-the-next-nuclear-attack-on-another-country/652653/21 "2013-03-12T16:22:11Z")
I say within the next dacade, and the most likely source will be North Korea. If the sanctions cause things to get sufficiently desperate, then the leaders might well figure that they have little left to lose. Also, if they have bunkers capable of surviving a nuclear strike (or, if they _think_ they do), then that just might be enough to make them willing to call our bluff and start a war. Any “terrorist” nuclear strike would, IMO, most likely be a covert attack by a nation, using the terrorism angle to provide deniability. As unlikely as this seems, there’s reason to believe it might work. The 9/11 attackers were almost all Saudis, and yet Saudi Arabia is still considered a US ally. As is Pakistan, even though it is widely believed that Pakistani intelligence was protecting Osama bin Laden right up until the day of his death. ---
**Author:** ![Slypork](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9fc29f/32.png) [@Slypork](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slypork)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2013, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-will-we-see-the-next-nuclear-attack-on-another-country/652653/22 "2013-03-12T17:35:04Z")
I say within the next 5 years. I’m not going to be looking for a mushroom cloud over Miami but a dirty bomb is incredibly easy to make, transport and detonate. Some pack of wackos (al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, PETA, The People’s Liberation Front of Judea, etc.) will decide that now is the perfect time to show how serious they are by irradiating their enemy. Imagine the emotional impact of seeing Wall Street or Jerusalem turned into a radioactive ghost town like Chernobyl. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2013, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-will-we-see-the-next-nuclear-attack-on-another-country/652653/23 "2013-03-12T17:52:09Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > There are several plausible ways a nuclear weapon could be used: > > - Iran develops, or is about to develop, nukes. U.S. or Israel know where they are but they are underground and can only be destroyed by nukes. Not likely, but not impossible. I think it’s much more likely that if there was a US military response, they’d basically try and destroy the airshafts and tunnels to the bunker and just effectively bury them. I don’t see the US ever first-using nuclear weapons, unless one of the 50 states or Puerto Rico is directly threatened. The Israelis on the other hand might well try that, assuming they have an effective bunker-buster nuke. > [@septimus](#): > > - Kim Jong-un, shy awkward young man who is Supreme Leader of N.K., gets suicidal. Even most dictatorships have some top-level command structure to protect against a single maniac, but are we sure N.K. does?v This is more what I think will happen. Kim Jong Il or Ahmadinejad or an Islamist junta gets control of Pakistan, loses all sense and restraint, and nukes someone because they can. > [@septimus](#): > > - Some country, e.g. North Korea, miscalculates and begins a very high casualty war. U.S. calculates quick nuclear retaliation will save lives. I think that would work the other way around; N. Korea miscalculates, starts a war that moves them onto the defensive very quickly and nukes a S. Korean city or US/S. Korean troops in the field in a last-ditch effort to stave off defeat. > [@septimus](#): > > - Renegade individual gets control of nukes. He might detonate one just as a demo for potential purchasers. I don’t see this happening; the last thing you’d want to do if you had nuclear weapons for sale would be to tip your hand in such a grand fashion. Every Western, and a lot of non-Western security and intelligence services would be hunting you harder than Osama Bin Laden. > [@septimus](#): > > - It recently came to light that in 1962 a Soviet submarine almost fired a nuclear torpedo at U.S. ship. Are such tactical nukes still in common use? No. I think the US retains some of these weapons, but IIRC, there aren’t any tactical nukes on submarines anymore, and the vast majority (if not all) that remain in the arsenal are B61 free-fall nuclear weapons dropped from planes. ---
**Author:** ![panaccione](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/94ad74/32.png) [@panaccione](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panaccione)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2013, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-will-we-see-the-next-nuclear-attack-on-another-country/652653/24 "2013-03-12T17:59:24Z")
Am I jinxing it by picking never? I sure hope not. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2013, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-will-we-see-the-next-nuclear-attack-on-another-country/652653/25 "2013-03-12T20:49:54Z")
> [@Blaster\_Master](#): > > I don’t think MAD necessarily requires eliminating every single citizen of the other country, just the ability to do massive and irreversible damage. Sure, Russia and the US had enough nukes during the cold war to kill everyone in the othe country 10x over, but all it really takes is enough damage to make the consequences unthinkable. If Russia had only a hundred nukes, but aimed them all at the highest population areas like New York, LA, Chicago, Boston, DC/Baltimore, etc. it would have served as effectively the same level of deterent. They would have still caused a massive deathtoll, crippled our economy, and toppled our government into anarchy. To some extent, that is actually worse than just killing us all because there’d be more people left to suffer in the aftermath and likely other nations coming in and asserting power and all sorts of things. > > So, as far as India and Pakistan, I think they’re evenly enough matched that it still holds. Whereas a nation like North Korea doesn’t have enough to prevent another country from attacking them, within 5-10 years they could at best take out a city or two whereas most of the rest could wipe them out, so at least the self-preservation aspect ought to keep them in check and the rest I think are stable enough not to wantonly attack them. I think you underestimate the willingness of leaders to get their people killed “for a good cause”. [“At the end of the war if there are two Americans and one Russian left alive, we win!”](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_S._Power) > [@Slypork](#): > > I say within the next 5 years. I’m not going to be looking for a mushroom cloud over Miami but a dirty bomb is incredibly easy to make, transport and detonate. Some pack of wackos (al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, PETA, The People’s Liberation Front of Judea, etc.) will decide that now is the perfect time to show how serious they are by irradiating their enemy. Imagine the emotional impact of seeing Wall Street or Jerusalem turned into a radioactive ghost town like Chernobyl. “Dirty bombs” aren’t nuclear weapons and wouldn’t do that. They aren’t likely to kill anyone who isn’t right next to them, which is probably why no one tries to make one; it shouldn’t be too hard to get hold of enough radioactive garbage from a hospital or such for one. I recall a case where a bunch of kids in IIRC Mexico got themselves irradiated by playing with “glowing dust” they found improperly disposed of in a junkyard; if they could find some, so could terrorists. ---
**Author:** ![Slypork](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9fc29f/32.png) [@Slypork](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slypork)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2013, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-will-we-see-the-next-nuclear-attack-on-another-country/652653/26 "2013-03-13T20:52:41Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > “Dirty bombs” aren’t nuclear weapons and wouldn’t do that. They aren’t likely to kill anyone who isn’t right next to them, which is probably why no one tries to make one; it shouldn’t be too hard to get hold of enough radioactive garbage from a hospital or such for one. I recall a case where a bunch of kids in IIRC Mexico got themselves irradiated by playing with “glowing dust” they found improperly disposed of in a junkyard; if they could find some, so could terrorists. Maybe you are thinking of the [Goiania accident](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goi%C3%A2nia_accident)? I know that a dirty bomb won’t wipe out a large area but imagine what would happen if one was placed on the floor of the NYSE or in the middle of a museum or mall. Better yet, left in Times Square or a comparable location. The initial explosion kills a few people, the cloud of debris covers the immediate area and radioactive material gets carried by the air currents for a few blocks. The quarantine would prevent normal business from occurring and causing people to be more cautious in approaching public areas. Who would want to go shopping if they are afraid the next bomb might happen when they are browsing at Macy’s? The cost would be enormous as the radioactive material is cleaned up (roads and buildings scoured and the water siphoned off so it doesn’t go into sewers). Even if “only” a handful of people receive a dose strong enough to make them sick but not kill them the terrorists would have struck a huge psychological impact on our way of life. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-will-we-see-the-next-nuclear-attack-on-another-country/652653.md?page=1)