It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is it time to play the Nuclear Option again 70 years later

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 09:34 AM
link   
The world is on the brink of a major war that has not been seen since WW2. This is not the Cold War and posturing. These are not conflicts to establish bases to strike from as the US has done for years. It is the final step in globalization and some are not willing to go along...what happens.

So let's say with the latest pact between the Ukraine and EU that is goes south quickly. Fighting steps up and our hands are shown in the MSM that we are helping and have been all along. This is the Western Theater...

You have daily drone strikes that do nothing but remove one figurehead and (insert new named guy we cannot pronounce) gives us a new one in the MIddle East. ISIS, a funded group by...the US?...is marching now towards Saudi and Turkey with no means of stopping. The major players are all in place. What will be the spark? Will Israel finally act as it did in Syria to stops its programs.

NK finally launches a nuke? I mean, there has to be someone to sacrifice themselves for the greater good.

EMP over the US? This would cripple us and with open borders allow more in than we really want.

The list goes on and on as to the events that can, could and will unfold but one thing in history stopped everyone cold and ended WW2...a nuclear strike.

If the US picked a few 'terror/regime' targets and used the B61-11 to effectively stop the propagation...what would happen? Hit NK, ISIS/AQ bases and Taliaban strongholds.

Finally, I am not saying this is what I want but rather is this something that could happen...I look forward to your responses.




posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 09:45 AM
link   
Here is an idea...we just tell the world "Don't attack this country, our our actual closest allies, otherwise, enjoy your self determination" and we simply get out and let them resolve their own issues...buy their oil regardless of who is in charge, and back nobody up unless they are a actual ally (and an ally based on similar principles, law, and culture...not on a few royals greasing the wheels to consolidate their power).
And finally, we seriously need to stop selling weapons to other countries...

Anyhow, people become radicalized when their life takes on less and less daily meaning..when they suffer great loss...your solution of make them suffer great loss and remove their incentive to have a good life by bombing their country and losing their jobs and such will be about as effective in removing radicals as spraying ants with sugar.

We should step back from the global police force...that is the UNs job, not this nations specifically...if the UN doesn't see fit to sort it out, who are we to?



posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 09:56 AM
link   
The War has already begun and has been cooking for some time. The next phase of war was triggered by this so called ISIS group. The world needed a new enemy, Al Qeada just doesn't resonate enough, is used more as a punch line and its effectiveness in social engineering is waning.

Once ISIS begins to simmer in the back of our minds......WHAM! A new false flag. Something tells me we have been cooking up a pretty nasty one for some time. One that strikes so much fear in the hearts and minds of my countrymen, it will spark a blind outrage against our perceived enemies that the masses will beg the west to use nukes......or nuke back, rather.

edit on 27-6-2014 by Rosinitiate because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 09:59 AM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

Bombing perpetuates the cycle of hate.
Covertly sterilizing all the males would be much more effective.
BTW, just because I know how to do something doesn't mean I condone it.



posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 10:02 AM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

I don’t think nuking some folks is going to solve our problems. In fact, that just might be the dumb act that sparks an Armageddon-like showdown.

Besides, do YOU trust the people who have control of the nukes? Do YOU think the people in this administration are the people we want picking targets?



posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Pmsl Nuclear option dont be silly.

If this time they decided to do the same it will be more along the lines of an EMP in my opinion. (Thats all it os though an opinion)


I would also like to stray off topic here and forgive me for that but I would like one of the mods or experienced ATS members to possibly do me a favour and create a new thread in regard to the increased terrorist attacks and suicide bombings also explosions that seem to be going on globally.
Silly?
The reason I ask is because I have noticed that many seem to result in book shops and markets been destroyed.
Books......

Books are knowledge and we're all aware that books are slowly getting replaced by online information.

Its almost as if......its deliberate.

Now I may be wrong but wasn't it stated that quite a while a ago publishing rights were bought up and things books republished?????



posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 10:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Rosinitiate



or nuke back, rather.

As much as it sucks to believe...
I am afraid that you are dead-on correct with that one.



posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 10:28 AM
link   
Deployable nuclear arsenals are hidden under the oceans in submarines and have been for a long time. They are essentially undetectable by all the opposing forces who have them. This includes Russia, US, UK, France, China and possibly others.

A single nuclear strike against anyone in the world by anyone would instigate retaliator strikes all across the world. I imagine the US would bear the brunt of most of these retaliator strikes whether they instigated the initial strike or not since they are the current major superpower. This is why proxy wars are constantly fought in regions without nuclear weapons because an attack on a nuclear nation could easily result in an all out nuclear war which understandably serves no-ones interests.

Its all cold war and posturing - its standing there and knowing your strength. When enemies see a weakness they strike, but only in the knowledge that you're playing by the same rules and can retaliate. This war is being played out on foreign soils and under false pretences for a reason.



posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 10:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Rosinitiate MH370 - ISIS responsible



posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 10:50 AM
link   
Here is something interesting. Since the first nuke was dropped 70 years ago, during the "war to end all wars" we have had not one day without war. In fact, the "nuclear deterrent" hasn't discouraged any war. Mao and Stalin killed tens of millions and there was no fear of Nuke stopping them at all.

Israel has nukes, a lot of them and yet according them they are attacked hourly by their immediate neighbors and are under threat every hour of every day. The world says it fears the US nukes more then anything, yet war is waged every day of every year.

Me thinks the nuclear winter as a result of war is a rouse of some sort, as I see no evidence the "deterrent" effect works. And for those of you who will reply "we have been attacked and that shows it works" that isn't actually true and is akin to saying "the war on terror" works because there has not been a repeat of 9-11. Both assume someone, anyone, wants to invade the US at all which is beyond silly as there is nothing to gain by it.

"They Peacemaker" it would seem fails to create peace.



posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 12:21 PM
link   
Apparently the US in the business of war. We are a warrior nation. We love war, if we didn't we would mind our own business.

Eventually Isreal will draw us into nuclear conflict that's been planned for some time and it's game set match for us all!!


edit on 27-6-2014 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 12:42 PM
link   


Is it time to play the Nuclear Option again 70 years later


There really is only one answer...

NO...

It shouldn't even be a consideration.



posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 12:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12

Eventually Isreal will draw us into nuclear conflict that's been planned for some time and it's game set match for us all!!



Not so sure it has been planned out as you suggest.
I feel it will come to that someday.... not today I pray.
I think the start will be more East shall we say, Far East........

Wars make money and a lot of it for TPTB. They have been doing for hundreds of years now and will not slow down.
If a rouge country Not under their control starts it, that is one thing, they "TPTB" will not start a nuke war as they know they will lose what they hold most precious.. $$$$



posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 12:51 PM
link   
Humans appear to be a very violent species there is war and killing by the day it never stops. The recent brutal violence in Iraq with beheadings and roadside executions on utube are like something from the middle ages.

As Plato said 'only the dead have seen the end of war'.

So true. WWI was the great war the war to end all wars. Sure. Then we had Hitler and the Nazis and the Japanese and WWII. Africa and the middle east seems to have a war constantly happening somewhere. The 20th century has been the most brutal and violent century in the history of mankind. Will the 21st century top it?



posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 12:58 PM
link   
As someone else pointed out...money. That was my point. If there was a nuclear strike by a terror organization there would not be a retaliatory strike. Just more drone strikes and sanctions.

But what about a pre-emptive strike that would start the war that is wanted by TPTB? A nuke at Mecca or in the heartland of the US or a strike against NK to show that the world tolerate open threats?

The greatest surge of prosperity occurred after WW2. Do TPTB believe it Would it be worth it to sacrifice and thin the herd so to speak to create a platform of less people to control? I tihnk they do...that is the fear. Again I am not endorsing the option but simply providing a spark for some critical thinking as to where the world could be in 5 years.

I feel that nothing will happen with the current administration. During the change in 2016 we could see something that alters the history of this nation and the world forever.



posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 12:58 PM
link   
(double post)
edit on 06pm30pmf0000002014-06-27T14:03:34-05:000234 by matafuchs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 05:26 PM
link   
No, I really don't believe that we would ever nuke anyone again. Not unless seriously provoked (with nukes) or unless someone else launches all out. WWII was something no one knew enough of to really adequately guess the horror.

I think all that's left is for someone crazy enough to get the nuclear trigger somewhere in the world.



posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 11:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Rosinitiate
The War has already begun and has been cooking for some time. The next phase of war was triggered by this so called ISIS group. The world needed a new enemy, Al Qeada just doesn't resonate enough, is used more as a punch line and its effectiveness in social engineering is waning.

Once ISIS begins to simmer in the back of our minds......WHAM! A new false flag. Something tells me we have been cooking up a pretty nasty one for some time. One that strikes so much fear in the hearts and minds of my countrymen, it will spark a blind outrage against our perceived enemies that the masses will beg the west to use nukes......or nuke back, rather.


Well said !! Just like Majhedeen in Afghanistan, US will use ISIS for various purposes of breaking countries and regions while handing out power to chosen groups. Once that is done, then via some false flag etc. ISIS will targeted and neutralized like AQ has been.

Ukraine was done to divert Russian minds and help to Syria. With Russians hands full, arms supplies to Syrian rebels and ISIS type groups will be jacked up in an attempt to topple Assad and create a new state out of the broken portions of Syria and Iraq. This way US enemy the Iranian state will also be weakened and be ripe for a civil war of its own.

It is very sad, that in all these US experiments, common people of third world nations suffer and bankers find new opportunities to rebuild the destroyed infrastructure in countries like Libya and Syria. Pathetic !!



posted on Jun, 28 2014 @ 02:44 AM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

Easier said than done. Like I said before, though, we really only have 3 choices:

1) Kill them all.

2) Become Muslim.

3) Hope they stop wanting to kill us.

Number one seems the most practical, to me.



posted on Jun, 28 2014 @ 03:28 AM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

putin doesnt want a fight, he wants to secure his only port in the region. russia doesnt have alot of ports, and they dont want to lose any. as horrible as this conflict has become, putins actions seem justified. our nation wouldve reacted with force far sooner. trust and believe.




top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join