WLS 890AM (http://www.wlsam.com/Article.asp?id=2281782&spid=)

Are you kidding? 20,000 SAMS and many missing??

HOOOOOOOOOOLY fooooook man.

All this bs going on over there. Just one in the wrong hands will kill hundreds of people. Why isn't anyone stepping up to this? Oh that's right the US is more interested in spending money on bull#^&#^&#^&#^& bailouts instead of what's more important. :smash:

The article doesn't say that 20,000 SAMs are missing. It says Libya was estimated to have about that number, and it's unknown how many may be protected or not.

Still a big concern though. I would have thought we would have seen a similar thing in Iraq.

-spence

Yes, but probably on a few thousand high numbered double-digit sams. Coming soon to AF/PAK, Middle East, and an Airport near you!

Concern will be, uhh, elevated, with prospects of flying over the next few years.

"Still a big concern though. I would have thought we would have seen a similar thing in Iraq."
But that is OK. because Bush made a blunder there is a precedence here and he can still be blamed.

concern elevated? Can you say pucker? yikes

Don't matter if 10 are missing. Holy fried jumbo jet batman

Spence read what I said. Many are missing.

The article specifically says "HRW estimates there are 20,000 surface-to-air missiles in Libya, and many of those are now missing."

Define MANY then for us. Cuz it's more than one or two, more than a few, more than a few dozen, more than a gross, more than 1/2 cuz otherwise they would have said up to half are missing...it's less than all of them, so it's roughly 5/8-3/4 of them?

Dood you better start taking the train on your business trips cuz I can guarantee you these will make it into the US.

Spence read what I said. Many are missing.


Thousands.

Folks guarding the borders have done a bang up job of keeping things like that out for a long time know. You can be sure there are more out there and have been out there other than the ones from Libya. The shoulder fired ones generally cannot bring down commercial aircraft. Secret Service deployed a bunch around DC after 9-11, but they new they were pretty much pea shooters if another jet liner was inbound on the capital or white house. They would need to shoot out all the engines to bring one down. The preceding is not nearly alarmist enough for the general media these days though.

Watch out for your "neighbor" loading a boatload of propane tanks or fertilizer into the back of his SUV though.

But that is OK. because Bush made a blunder there is a precedence here and he can still be blamed.
Always the positive thinker aren't ya? Oy vey...

I think it's a pretty safe bet that al Qaeda already has access to SAMs, or could easily get their hands on as many as they want.

An influx of a large number of weapons could encourage their use, sure, but there are a lot of variables here.

As a said, it's a big concern.

-spence

As a said, it's a big concern.

-spence

A "BIG CONCERN"?Just ONE can take down a passenger liner and kill hundreds.Thousands are missing...that's a little more than a "big concern" don't ya think?

Why is this a political issue?This is a possible death to many Americans issue.Get a grip people and stop politicizing these threats,
we're ALL in it together!

Folks guarding the borders have done a bang up job of keeping things like that out for a long time know. You can be sure there are more out there and have been out there other than the ones from Libya. The shoulder fired ones generally cannot bring down commercial aircraft. Secret Service deployed a bunch around DC after 9-11, but they new they were pretty much pea shooters if another jet liner was inbound on the capital or white house. They would need to shoot out all the engines to bring one down. The preceding is not nearly alarmist enough for the general media these days though.

Watch out for your "neighbor" loading a boatload of propane tanks or fertilizer into the back of his SUV though.

Disagree. The shoulder fired SAMs can bring down a commercial airliner. Maybe not all of the time but 60-80% of the time they are likely succesful. The probability of kill likely increases the newer the design missile.

Always the positive thinker aren't ya? Oy vey...

I think it's a pretty safe bet that al Qaeda already has access to SAMs, or could easily get their hands on as many as they want.

An influx of a large number of weapons could encourage their use, sure, but there are a lot of variables here.

As a said, it's a big concern.

-spence

A lot of guvmints have been working very hard for a very long time to keep man portable SAMs (and service life extending components like batteries) off the black markets in general and out of AQ hands in particular. They have been fairly successful.

This stirs up a bit oh bleep factor.

As for as my Bush reference, that was my Oi Vaay for your Iraq reference :yawn:

I tried to find the death threat forum but it seems to have been deleted ;)


A "BIG CONCERN"?Just ONE can take down a passenger liner and kill hundreds.Thousands are missing...that's a little more than a "big concern" don't ya think?

Why is this a political issue?This is a possible death to many Americans issue.Get a grip people and stop politicizing these threats,
we're ALL in it together!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

agree with BW

alls it takes is one

A lot of guvmints have been working very hard for a very long time to keep man portable SAMs (and service life extending components like batteries) off the black markets in general and out of AQ hands in particular. They have been fairly successful.

This stirs up a bit oh bleep factor.

As for as my Bush reference, that was my Oi Vaay for your Iraq reference :yawn:
Can't believe there's not still a market for them out there.

My Iraq reference wasn't meant to be negative.

-spence

Can't believe there's not still a market for them out there.

My Iraq reference wasn't meant to be negative.

-spence

There is a tremendous market out there. MANPADS are a great equalizer in many environments.

Spence, sometimes it is real hard to tell.

(And no, that is based on your bias & track record, not my bias and track record )

(x2 just doesn't feel right using smileys today)

There is a tremendous market out there. MANPADS are a great equalizer in many environments.

Spence, sometimes it is real hard to tell.

(And no, that is based on your bias & track record, not my bias and track record )

(x2 just doesn't feel right using smileys today)

The point was that in Iraq we saw a similar dumping of weapons into an uncontrolled situation. A lot of this ordinance was turned right around and used against US troops...but I don't believe we've seen any increase in international terrorism that's been enabled by an influx of weapons.

I don't think the Libyan rebels are stupid and would likely retain as much weaponry as possible to maintain their position or quite likely be employed in sectarian squabbles.

Perhaps the greatest risk is a SAM getting into the hands of someone not affiliated with al Qaeda and just taking a random pot shot.

-spence

The point was that in Iraq we saw a similar dumping of weapons into an uncontrolled situation. A lot of this ordinance was turned right around and used against US troops...but I don't believe we've seen any increase in international terrorism that's been enabled by an influx of weapons.

Most of the ordinance used against US forces was not portable sams. SAMs make a horrible IED. The SAMs were used against military and commercial aircraft.


I don't think the Libyan rebels are stupid and would likely retain as much weaponry as possible to maintain their position or quite likely be employed in sectarian squabbles.

Perhaps the greatest risk is a SAM getting into the hands of someone not affiliated with al Qaeda and just taking a random pot shot.

-spence

I think both of those statements are at minimum naive

I think both of those statements are at minimum naive
And at most pretty prescient.

I don't think al Qaeda would place much hope in the chance a SAM might take out an aircraft. Their track record is in large dramatic events and will show patience to plan and execute them.

A random pot shot by a small group not on the radar would be very difficult to stop in advance.

Like I said, it's a big concern, but I'm not sure if even the scenario became true would be a game changer. The Semtex might be even more of a concern.

Naive and biased in the same thread. I love it when you get all snippy :gh:

-spence

Uhh, prescient was not what I was thinking.

AQ has been underwhelming in large scale attacks, certainly in the west for the past few years, in that many of the major plots have failed. Though they have still tried (and inspired) smaller scale attacks this is where they are more successful outside of US/Eur.

No, portable SAMs, especially late model Russian models, would be a nasty and effective use in civilian areas. The portable SAM track record over the past 30 something years is the loss of over 30 aircraft and 800 dead. With about 60% effective rate.

But maybe we can click our heels three times and change the narrative. Then it won't happen.

Semtex? Your kidding, right?

That and other high explosives that could be easily re purposed. I'd rather take my chances with a single SAM than 100 shoe bombers.

All things considered it's certainly not a great situation although I'm sure a risk assessment was done in advance. Let's hope his nuclear program was really dismantled...

-spence

I believe it was a SAM that killed 35 of America's best not to long ago.
Greed will win out over anything else in Lybia and if a buck can be made, some of these will kill more American's, I'm afraid.

I believe it was a SAM that killed 35 of America's best not to long ago.

Shhhh - you'll disrupt the narrative. While that is speculation, there are a lot of serious folks speculating.

I think the narrative has been very consistent in that this is a big concern. The reality is more complex...None of us really know how it will play out, or if the net benefit is positive.

Aside, I've never heard that attack was carried out with a SAM. Is there reporting on this?

-spence

I saw a few places (which don't encourage Tin Foil Hats btw) that were hinting at either shoulder fired SAMs or guided Anti-Tank weapons. Reports also had the Taliban boasting of their recently required weapon / super missile.

If I run across those links I'll post them.

There is also a few "news" sites that speculate that as well but I don't know how valid.

I believe it was a SAM that killed 35 of America's best not to long ago.
Greed will win out over anything else in Lybia and if a buck can be made, some of these will kill more American's, I'm afraid.
Wasn't it an RPG that hit the helicopter? SAMs are much different from RPGs.

Just curious as I've just not heard many reports of more advanced weapons being used against our troops at least not by the Taliban.

I'd think a SAM could take down a commercial aircraft pretty easily. At low altitude a large plane doesn't have room for error...just not enough thrust...or damage to a control surface could really screw them up.

Also just read somewhere that Saudi Arabia is still sending over a billion dollars a year abroad to sponsor terrorism. Too risky to use wire transfer so they just box up cash.

-spence

SAMs were supplied by us to the Afghan mujahedin guerrillas in the 1980s. I have read reports that SAMs have downed other US copters in Afghan also.
Point being...if it wasn't SAMs that downed the helicopter but instead it was a lucky shot by a grenade launcher, then why would we not worry about 20k missing weapons that are more capable then RPGs?

SAMs were supplied by us to the Afghan mujahedin guerrillas in the 1980s. I have read reports that SAMs have downed other US copters in Afghan also.
Point being...if it wasn't SAMs that downed the helicopter but instead it was a lucky shot by a grenade launcher, then why would we not worry about 20k missing weapons that are more capable then RPGs?
I believe the weapons we supplied Afghanistan in the 1980's are all probably used or defunct. Don't think we were sending spare batteries etc...

And as to my initial post in this thread. The report is not that there are 20,000 SAMs stolen. They can't account for them as the old government is not functioning and the new government isn't up yet. Russia reports that Libya bought 600-1200 shoulder fired advanced SAM's that would be the biggest concern. It sounds like some of these have been pilfered...but we really don't know how many as none of these reports seem to be confirmed.

-spence

Maybe they'll address the box wrong and it will land on my steps instead :)

Just curious as I've just not heard many reports of more advanced weapons being used against our troops at least not by the Taliban.

I'd think a SAM could take down a commercial aircraft pretty easily. At low altitude a large plane doesn't have room for error...just not enough thrust...or damage to a control surface could really screw them up.

Also just read somewhere that Saudi Arabia is still sending over a billion dollars a year abroad to sponsor terrorism. Too risky to use wire transfer so they just box up cash.

-spence
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Another article today

Nightmare in Libya: 20,000 Surface-to-Air Missiles Missing - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/nightmare-libya-20000-surface-air-missiles-missing/story?id=14610199)

"Peter Bouckaert of Human Rights Watch first warned about the problem after a trip to Libya six months ago. He took pictures of pickup truckloads of the missiles being carted off during another trip just a few weeks ago.

"I myself could have removed several hundred if I wanted to, and people can literally drive up with pickup trucks or even 18 wheelers and take away whatever they want," said Bouckaert, HRW's emergencies director. "Every time I arrive at one of these weapons facilities, the first thing we notice going missing is the surface-to-air missiles." "

WTFOOOOOOOOOOOOOOK they've known this and not stopped it? Well get ready folks. Like JohnR said....coming to an airport near you.....

Doubtful.

Well time will tell...

But are you saying that no-one could smuggle a sam into the US? If so you may want to rethink that.

Well time will tell...

But are you saying that no-one could smuggle a sam into the US? If so you may want to rethink that.
I'm not saying that at all. I fly a lot and on occasion am amazed at how easy it would be for a terrorist to take down a commercial airliner given the proper equipment.

However, aside from being aware of my surroundings and (no surprise to anyone here) continuing to be skeptical of everyone, I refuse to live in fear or worry of what *could* happen when it's complete outside of my sphere of control.

Millions of cargo units move through US ports without being inspected because it would be an impossible task to inspect everything. Considering that, the numbers game is in favor of terrorists. But again, nothing I can do to prevent that.

Well I'll say a silent prayer for you Johnny. I see this as a very serious problem. I could drive a sam through our border right now in any number of places.

I could see this as being their next major attack inside our border. I could also see other things they used to be on top of...like mass water poisonings etc too. $5 says uncle sam is not watching this like he was 5 years ago. Maybe in places like nyc etc but I bet not Boston or many other cities fed with outside water systems.

Still surprises me to this day why there are no and haven't been any ied roadside bombs inside our borders...when the same and more chemicals are available here and the instructions are online as Iwaq and Afganmustan .

Scott, are you off your meds?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device