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.

 

Russian Analyst Calls For Nuclear Attack on Yellowstone National Park

page: 4
34
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 03:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: stanislas
a reply to: ketsuko

The thread is not really about that so to speak. The thread is "Russian Analyst Calls For Nuclear Attack on Yellowstone National Park" as though he is calling for it as he has some voice that gets the west to be concerned and then enables more anti Russian sentiment. A bunch of conspiracy sites have linked this from two articles. The original and the smh article which I have posted earlier. Its not on Fox or CNN as of yet.

If you truly want to believe he really wants to do this then you have poor judgement imo. I am pointing out that this was an article on geo-political speculation on how Russia could respond from his view if the US decided to wage war on Russia. The original article is just that. Make of it what you want I guess. If you want this to be a discussion on if it was possible the fine. But my final answer still stands... we will all be dead!


Reading comprehension is a useful skill.


In no way, shape or form do I think he or anyone else is serious about this. Did you completely miss the part where I said we were mocking this?

If you did, I really think you should find that and re-read it and then consider what that means.




posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 03:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Nikola014




A retired one, sure, but is anybody else seeing the differences between these two?


There is no difference except that one man served his country and left to become a civilian military analyst, and the other is a civilian military analyst...not much different between the two.



What you are saying is that a words spoken by a general have got absolutely no value nor credibility? Not to mention that you are comparing one general with some analyst.


Not when it comes to what the military does, and who said anything about credibility?

What is it you don't seem to understand...I am comparing the two as for what they do it has nothing to do with the background of the individuals.

But keep showing that hypocrisy as it is funny to watch you do it.



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 03:08 PM
link   
a reply to: cavtrooper7

You get this all this time? Show me some examples please? For example you declare war on someone and you hear about how they will decimate you?

If you are minding your business and someone does not like what you do, they may decide to make decisions? Yes? So what is misconstrued? Explain to me deeply with your view on what is happening with the US/Russia relationship. Can you compare you own WANTS to either of them?



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 03:14 PM
link   
a reply to: stanislas

Yes anyone can.
AGAIN I will use a simpler explanation.
I believe what was expressed was an IDEA to accomplish an objective ,NOT the intent.
We have ALL KINDS of people who say they want the US destroyed on this board. IT DOESN'T mean they'll go try it.



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 03:33 PM
link   
a reply to: cavtrooper7

OK, so that means you disagree with the OP and that this thread is no longer saying that a Russian calls for or want's to bomb Yellowstone as in the SMH and other sites and we are now talking about how ridiculous that claim is?
Great!

So I would just like to add how ridiculous it is for a US General to claim that all Russians should be killed in the Ukraine. Ones with uniforms I guess.

Do you see where I am coming from?.. I am coming from the OP. If you are making fun of the person you are not following the OP and I would say derailing this thread to take on a new heading.

Do you agree that the heading is appropriate for this discussion? Or for mocking it?... should it be in another forum...like hoax?



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 03:47 PM
link   
a reply to: stanislas

I am explaining a point of PERCEPTION that is sometimes missed.



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 04:10 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko
Who cares about Hollywood if we are in nuclear war. Unless you live there you can worry about that first if you are still alive.

Everyone!!! What makes you think that you could survive a ww3 nuclear war? It wont be a computer game.



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 04:11 PM
link   
Well they have a super volcano we can nuke too! Sounds legit.

Doing so would result in MAD, more so than a nuclear war. However I'm very skeptical that Yellowstone would even go off if nuked. It would have to be a very powerful bomb because they would have to break a large amount of the surface, and Yellowstone is a huge place probably 100 square miles at least. I think still fairly thick in the thinnest places too.

Strategically wiping the USA or even Russia off the map by nuking a super volcano is just plain dumb. Because lets admit it, war is all about grabbing resources, not destroying land. Nuking a super volcano would ruin the land for hundreds of years. So all the natural resources and farmlands would be gone or inaccessible. Plus super volcano's can plunge the world into nuclear winter so there's that too. So what would be the point?



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 04:13 PM
link   
Probably wouldn't even require a nuke to get the job done...drop a couple (GBU-28) "Saddamizers" in the right area and it would likely get you the same results...I can't seem to find the depth of the yellowstone caldera easily but these can penetrate 100ft of earth ..If that doesn't do the job there is always the GBU-57A/B which can do 200ft...my point..you probabaly don't need a nuke to do this...Im sure the russians have their equivalents...a reply to: Telos


edit on 31-3-2015 by wyrmboy12 because: N/A



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 04:18 PM
link   
a reply to: cavtrooper7

explain with some examples. Show it! What perceptions. I have many years of it... what have I or others may have missed?

How enlightened are you? What experience can you offer that many of us have not received in regards to perception?

Please keep it on topic. I am very interested.



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 04:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: wyrmboy12
Probably wouldn't even require a nuke to get the job done...drop a couple (GBU-28) "Saddamizers" in the right area and it would likely get you the same results...I can't seem to find the depth of the yellowstone caldera easily but these can penetrate 100ft of earth ..If that doesn't do the job there is always the GBU-57A/B which can do 200ft...my point..you probabaly don't need a nuke to do this...Im sure the russians have their equivalents...a reply to: Telos

Primary magma chamber is between 3 (15,840 feet) and 9 (47,520 feet) miles below the surface.

The question should be, how much surface damage is required to let that go? As I don't think you have to actually penetrate the magma chamber to cause an eruption.



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 04:28 PM
link   
a reply to: stanislas

IF I describe my skills in war it's not because I enjoy war or killing only that I had the skill.
SOME equate that expression of such pride to being a war monger.
I'm not it sucks.
THE analyst was descrbing a military IDEA. NOT his values of it, just a tactic.
I very much DOUBT he wants it DONE.
If he wants to keep BREATHING,not to mention Norks scream crap like that ALL the time.
Can't ever DO it ,but they say they can.
It's a way to SCARE the AMERICANS he must think.
edit on 31-3-2015 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 04:39 PM
link   
a reply to: peck420

The nukes are not too actually penetrate the magma chamber. The point would be to impart enough kinetic energy to tip the balance in favor of a collapse of the chamber and the resulting eruption.

That said, check this out!

earthsky.org...


edit on 31-3-2015 by olddognewtricks because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 05:53 PM
link   
If this guy's attitude and ideas puts all nukes on hold or even better yet dismantled I for one and all for it.
If they actually act on that plan well this is my last post:-) I do think threads like this one help people keep their awareness of what is possible and all the screaming about this idea is actually positive in my opinion.

At the same time it could just be a gizmo in the news to increase military spending on one side of the world or the other. You never know and that is how the "People in charge" thrive in luxury whilst we all eat Kraft Dinner.

S&F
Regards, Iwinder



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 05:56 PM
link   
All i know for sure is that No One on Earth wants Yellowstone to erupt...Anyone that does should be commmittd imo...Talk about an ELE of mass proportions...i hope i never live to see it or know it happened.....a reply to: peck420




posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 05:58 PM
link   
How is this any different from this






??

So, because a Russian said it, its bad, but if an American said it, its..not ?

The people in these videos are in positions of power/influence, this Russian analyst is the Dumas court jester.

Which of the lot are the more dangerous? Hint: the two in the videos I linked, they also have a history of it. Has this analyst a history of dangerous acts (apart from one-liner entertainment sound bites)?


edit on 31-3-2015 by bullcat because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 06:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: olddognewtricks
The nukes are not too actually penetrate the magma chamber. The point would be to impart enough kinetic energy to tip the balance in favor of a collapse of the chamber and the resulting eruption.

I honestly don't think you need to worry. Exploratory drilling, around yellowstone, has gone significantly deeper than a EPW will, and hasn't set it off yet.

Aside from that, a nuclear weapon would probably not be the best weapon of choice, if it was capable of causing an eruption. The increased spread of radioactive material would almost certainly mean that the sender of said weapon would receive the fallout.



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 06:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: peck420

originally posted by: olddognewtricks
The nukes are not too actually penetrate the magma chamber. The point would be to impart enough kinetic energy to tip the balance in favor of a collapse of the chamber and the resulting eruption.

I honestly don't think you need to worry. Exploratory drilling, around yellowstone, has gone significantly deeper than a EPW will, and hasn't set it off yet.

Aside from that, a nuclear weapon would probably not be the best weapon of choice, if it was capable of causing an eruption. The increased spread of radioactive material would almost certainly mean that the sender of said weapon would receive the fallout.


That is the point of MAD. It is a last resort strike to end your aggressor especially since you are near the end yourself.

To deter, to make them reconsider, with the consequences. If they attack, well then Yellowstone is attacked also with grave consequences (perhaps).

Anyway, it is just words.

I just wish all Americans would GO HOME frankly.

Europe is always the one to pay the price for every American action done near us or involving us.

Take your little NATO army tanks/APC's on the road tour and go home. It is nothing but 1) annoying us 2) making us feel like were being occupied by you, and 3) provocation.

edit on 31-3-2015 by bullcat because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 06:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Telos
This Konstantin Sivkov sounded worrying at first.
But,looking into it,I think he is the equivalent of the Russian Glen Beck.

A complete goon,paid by the the power to broadcast a certain message.
Small,recent google history,possibly faked or at least altered.
Part of the attempted fakery of our reality through technology.

But as always,I know nothing,its just my opinion.



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 06:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: wyrmboy12
All i know for sure is that No One on Earth wants Yellowstone to erupt...Anyone that does should be commmittd imo...Talk about an ELE of mass proportions...i hope i never live to see it or know it happened...


A yellowstone eruption is not ELE.

If it was, we wouldn't be having this conversation, as the last eruption occurred around 640,000 years ago...which would have wiped out homo erectus, and therefore, us.



new topics

top topics



 
34
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join