A nuclear attack will likely take place on US soil in the next ten years

"And when did I say I have spent 40 years on the nuclear industry? " "Some of it is gleaned from my over 40 years of work in the nuclear industry, including 7 years as Chairman of a Nuclear Technology Program at a major southern college, 2 years at the DOE PANTEX FACILITY, 5 years at Los Alamos National Laboratory and 2 Years at Oak Ridge National Laboratory." First round. "As I said, likelihood is NOT always based on numbers, but sometimes evidence." Likelihood is by definition based on at least a rough number system. It has no meaning otherwise, i.e., the likelihood is not specific. Without numbers, the term "Likely" is simply arbitrary-- something with one tenth of a percent chance of occurring and something with one tenth of a percent chance of not occurring are equally "likely" under such a meaningless framework, so long as you've seen some minimal evidence that each is possible in theory. "Only the president has the codes needed to launch the nuclear arsenal." It is impossible for me to believe that you typed this with a straight face. By definition, someone else has to know the code or the order could not be known to be valid by the person receiving the order. Also, the US military is known to have a significant black budget, it would not be terribly difficult to fit a nuclear weapon operated under different protocols under that budget, or, indeed, somewhere else in the imperfect bureaucracy that necessarily accompanies a stockpile of thousands of warheads. Legal procedures have already been known to have been violated by the military in regards to the handling of nuclear weapons. http://www.cbsnews.com.... "In this case, "likely" is based on evidence. I'm sure that someone could calculate the probability, but I can't." Likely refers to math, therefore, no, it is not based on evidence. Possible is, but possible is not in the resolution. " Actually, there are two top rated reviews. One says it is accurate and the other one says it's not. Since I've never read it, I suggest you flip a coin and place your bets." If the contents are unknown, the likelihood is even less calculable than before. :). " If the unlikely happened and by some twist of fate the packages would be inspected, no one would really suspect a six-pack of Coke or a coconut, right?" Well, it would probably feel warm to the touch you know, plutonium anyway. :They could go to www.amazon.com and buy a book called "How to build a nuclear weapon and other weapons of mass destruction" for around 5 bucks. After a week or so they would have detailed instructions for building a nuke, and since they have the material... Right, they definitely have gas cylinders for refining such things, and several years to wait around with them :) :Well, I'm sure there are hundreds of different terrorist organizations out there that are Shia. Shia terrorist organizations are primarily interested in regional conflicts (Knock Israel off the map and whatnot). They have no interest in investing their resources in a direct attack on US soil, that would be a waste of time for them. :And how could the nuke ever be traced back to Iran? The same way we trace guns manufactured in Iran back to Iran? Different countries, whether they like it or not, have different ways of manufacturing weapons, especially since they don't share their methods with each other. The most important point, again, is that probability (or likelihood) is a mathematical concept inapplicable to this situation.