It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Planted Nuclear Devices

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Nov, 30 2014 @ 04:57 PM

originally posted by: CharlesT
a reply to: BS_Slayer
Yep, I'll bet my money on one of these 2 scenarios. Too much to go wrong trying to smuggle a nuke into the US and setting it off.

It would not be too much of a deal having 10 people smuggle parts in over several trips to different cities then assembling all the parts in one city. Those parts might be disguised as well for example disguised as parts for robotics or cars, I doubt custom officers know the different parts of nuclear bombs but they do check for radioactivity. Even then with some lead and disguise or smuggling it into the country can still be done.

posted on Nov, 30 2014 @ 06:06 PM

Just for the sake of discussion, If a nuclear false flag took place, who would instantaneously be blamed and start the war drums beating again? Iran, Russia, China or maybe even North Korea. Which one?

What's your plausible nuclear false flag scenario? North Korea launching a nuke and then somehow pretending that it was Iranian? What's in it for them? Making enemies of USA and Iran?

Right now, the one which would be blamed is the one with a known nuclear missile capability and known insanity and emnity: North Korea. Iran doesn't have the capability and China doesn't have the insanity.

Obviously the "cargo ship" would be boarded and captured in short time and the origin likely deduced. Properties of the missile track are also likely to reveal the missile technology and origin of manufacture.

edit on 30-11-2014 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-11-2014 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-11-2014 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 1 2014 @ 03:10 AM
a reply to: BS_Slayer

Because some people think its an automatic I win button.
Because some people think nuclear fallout stops at international boundaries.

Nuclear weapons can destroy a nations ability to feed itself.
Nuclear weapons can destroy a nations industrial capacity.
Nuclear weapons can destroy entire military units.

Its an AOE weapon.

The warning from Einstein -

I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.

edit on 1-12-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 1 2014 @ 03:20 AM
Can't speak for every city, but had a friend in DC undergoing radiation therapy for cancer. when he was allowed out to see the sites, he had to carry papers from the hospital because he set off detectors at every monument and random parts of the city thar brought a police response.

That would be 1 problem with a backpack sized dirty bomb.

posted on Dec, 1 2014 @ 04:26 PM
I think a dirty bomb would certainly be effective in it's own right but I also think it's too unreliable. Not so much in and of itself but using people as transport systems. Too much room for error, and even simple bad luck. As I understand it from what I'm reading there are enough people here that have a better understanding of nuclear energy and how its incorporated into bombs. So I can definitely see how devices similar to the ones dropped in World War 2 would have many of the limitations suggested. Between then and now however; how much has technology changed?

Would a specially designed nuclear device fabricated in the year 2014 or beyond have the same size, and need for maintenance? Even with my admittedly infantile understanding of nuclear energy and delivery systems, it doesn't seem like a stretch to get maybe even twice the power of Hiroshima out of a device half the size. If that is ridiculous I stand corrected of course.

I definitely agree that it would be challenging to get so many components into the right places, especially if we're talking about say, 10 - 15 detonations strategically placed throughout the United States. It sounds so difficult to achieve, but if you had asked the general populace in the 80s and 90s what the odds would be that 911 could have taken place the way it did, and that we actually had warnings.. they'd probably have laughed. The thing that kind of bothers me about it is that while they were heavily funded, their country of origin is still arguably a backwards 3rd world theocracy.

Just imagine what a country like China or Russia could do, or even North Korea, as much of a big bucket of 'wtf' Kim Jong is. In addition to this, we are currently plagued with internal strife; financially, politically, socially, and academically and it just so happens to be one of the toughest times to stop and observe an individual's activities when they appear suspicious.

In any event, I would agree about there being detectable radiation in certain places, but it's not like we have radiation detectors set up at random, at least not to my knowledge. One argument someone mentioned that I think is a very good point are getting the materials here. This is a long shot, but a country with as much military wealth as any of our hypothetical adversaries could buy up just enough of the infrastructure to be able to transport radioactive materials, and if not; why not the extremely sophisticated means of housing and disguising those materials? A powerful government with the financial means should in theory be able to pull it off I would imagine. As confident as many of us might feel in the daily functions of American society, it sure seems like we are missing every ball thrown at us in the last two decades.

edit on 1-12-2014 by BS_Slayer because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-12-2014 by BS_Slayer because: paragraph clarity.

edit on 1-12-2014 by BS_Slayer because: A There Their They're mishap...

new topics

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in