• I am sure they already have, they have just chosen that it is not to their advantage to use them just yet.
  • I think they already did
  • It is unavoidable a rogue state or a terrorist organization will someday have one to use or blackmail the world with. + 5
  • You have North Korea and Iran working on it. There are some unaccounted nukes from the fall of Russia. So, yes.
  • someone doesn't like me i went from 6 to 1 boo hoo
  • It may not be the case yet but the longer there are lunatics in charge of certain countries, the more likely it becomes that terrorists will be getting their murderous hands on such a device!
  • where have you been? North Korea ring a bell? and Yes they have them.
  • to add to the answers already given the taliban are halfway to gaining control of pakistans nuclear weapons.
  • Possibly.
  • The main question I am stuck with is what makes terrorists any different than any other country/state/whatever. Nuclear Weapons (all weapons for that matter) are a medium to subject people to your will. So my question to you is: does it make any difference?
  • they already do u not see the leader of N Korea as a terrorist? to others and a terror to their own? look what they do to S Korea.... hussein was a terrorist ,even to his own peoples....and surrounding countries....he would have gotten his hands on them sooner or later....because it was APPARENT to the world he WAS TRYING ..just like N Korea is RIGHT NOW>>>>
  • I don't think that it matters if they do (if they haven't already) there isn't much difference between Kim Jong Il, President Obama, or Bin Laden possessing nuclear, biological or any other type of mass casualty weapon. The result of using the weapon would be the same, the only difference is the group of people that suffer from the initial attack.
  • i think they are in the hands of terrorists now.
  • What do you consider a terrorist? I think a lot of countries would consider us terrorists. We have certainly terrorized our share of people, and we have nukes for sure.
  • I would be more inclined to view biological and chemical weapons as the greater threat ( if we define terrorists as groups like al Qaeda and not rogue nations like North Korea ). There are enormous technical and logistical obstacles confronting any group attempting a nuclear attack. So far neither al Qaeda nor any other group has come close to demonstrating the means to overcome them.
  • The Russians are already afraid of our nukes. So yeah, in a sense, they already are. What DO we need nukes for, anyway?
  • yes. the question is will they use them the way they did in "sum of all fears"
  • Considering that the American Military already has them, I say that the mission is accomplished.
  • Without doubt. Money talks and as the world economy fails people will sell anything, they sell people why not some nukes.
  • Most likely - but I wouldn't be too worried about it, nuclear weapons are great for bluffing with - but a bitch to use - and any terrorist group that uses one will have a very short lifespan afterward.
  • If Obama stays in office for four years it's going to happen.
  • I am quite sure it will happen one day.:)
  • "Terrorist" is a bullshit political word with little objective meaning. As many have said before me" one man's terrorist is another man's 'freedom fighter'" Acts that are often portrayed as "terroristic" have been used by many countries, including our own (U.S.). We have certainly trained and armed groups who use such tactics to wage war against regimes that are technically legitimate but we feel pose a threat (prime examples that there exists plenty of documentation on include the Contras and Bin Laden in the 80's). Many (if not all) the people who currently have nuclear weapons are regarded as "terrorists" to somebody. This club will likely grow. The consolation for now it is unlikely that non-government sanctioned groups will have access to a long range delivery system for a nuclear weapon. This, for now, limits any detonation to a fairly short distance.
  • By terrorists do you mean those who may use it and attack another country with it and kill hundreds of thousands of people? Since this happend once then I think it already is!
  • If a corrupt government was to supply them ... yes! As with most of what they do not tell us re terrorism ... this is indeed a huge possibility ...
  • If a Republican wants to be President bad enough, you can be guaranteed of such. Got Iran/Contra?

Copyright 2020, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy