If you mean nuclear ones, then probably not, in fact. If you mean a truck full of diesel and fertilizer, that's a harder question. It is certainly harder to construct such a bomb today and not be noticed, because they've taken to watching sales of the ingredients in significant quantities, but if you could construct it, then probably you could set it off.
At this point, half a dozen farmers are going to pipe up telling me that buying fertilizer is dirt easy and a rural resident of some sort will point out that you can replace diesel with fuel oil. To them, I say this:
First of all, yes, you can replace diesel with fuel oil. And in fact, you probably should, as this will be easy to get away with - but it will require actually having a residence out in boonyville that you don't want heated for a few months to make it work. That's a logistics problem in storing fuel and so on, but it could probably be done if you were clever, careful, and had enough land to hide the operation. Another means which has been suggested is to buy a used diesel rig and repeatedly fuel it up at different places. This could possibly work, but carries additional risk of exposure due to paperwork associated with collecting taxes on fuel used by such trucks and so on. A bad idea, I think.
Second, remember that just because they're not making you fill out a bunch of forms and running a background check like you're applying for an FFL doesn't mean they're not tracking sales of fertilizer. They most certainly are, and the amounts sold don't vary much in a given region year to year - unless of course, there's a visible reason, like farmer Bob selling his land to be used as a new suburb or Jim the terrorist constructing a large bomb.
Finally, a simple note: fertilizer bombs suck. For what you have to put into them in the way of money, prep time, testing, and effort, you don't get much back, because they don't have much power. Had a real explosive been used on that federal building, there would have been nothing left. It may seem easier to get a fertilizer bomb, but consider this: if you were a terrorist(not some idiot kid who wants to blow his school up or something, but a real terrorist, with things like "connections" and so on,) do you really think the several thousand you'd spend to get a working truck-fertilizer bomb wouldn't buy you a good sized case of C4 and the required detonation gear? The C4 would do a lot more damage, be a lot easier to conceal, a lot easier to handle, and wouldn't require advance testing just to make sure it'd go off.
That one was used is to me a sign that the guy who did it was just some disgruntled relatively clueless chump. Don't expect the likes of al Queda to bother with such things; they can certainly get C4, dynamite, and other passably good explosives, and probably have the resources to outright make them.
I personally think blowing shit up is a very antiquated method of getting attention. So are hostages. You want to get attention by terrorism(which I do not), kill someone important. Not anyone too important, or you will get caught, but someone important enough to scare the people who ARE that important. Screw hostages; they're just an ongoing opportunity to get caught. Screw blowing lots of people up; instead of being scared, people get pissed off(well, ok, so a few idiots get scared, but they're not the ones you want to affect.) The added advantage is that if it doesn't work, you just do it again until it does. People in the middle east have understood this for quite a while, I think, judging from a lot of the things that happen there.
'God dammit, your posts make me hard.' --LilDebbie
[ Parent ]