Russian Analyst Calls For Nuclear Attack on Yellowstone National Park

originally posted by: Silcone Synapse
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.

He's no different than far too many military analysts.

Make problem...get money to create solution.

Wash, rinse, and repeat.

originally posted by: peck420

originally posted by: Silcone Synapse
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.

He's no different than far too many military analysts.

Make problem...get money to create solution.

Wash, rinse, and repeat.

It's like a bad smelly brand of shampoo.

Overpriced at $100 Billion per bottle.

a reply to: bullcat
Relax.

I am a very strong advocate of diplomacy.

Hell, 15 years ago, if NATO had rounded up the West and requested open cultural exchanges with Russia, Iran, the boogeyman du jour, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

The greatest weapon the West ever created, is always the one they are the most resistant to use...peaceful cultural dispersion. Kids just love it.

originally posted by: peck420
a reply to: bullcat
Relax.

I am a very strong advocate of diplomacy.

Hell, 15 years ago, if NATO had rounded up the West and requested open cultural exchanges with Russia, Iran, the boogeyman du jour, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

The greatest weapon the West ever created, is always the one they are the most resistant to use...peaceful cultural dispersion. Kids just love it.

The Warsaw Pact is no more, why is NATO here?

Oh yes, Mission Creep.

originally posted by: bullcat
The Warsaw Pact is no more, why is NATO here?

Oh yes, Mission Creep.

Meh. In my personal opinion, I would state that NATO lives on due to the failure of the UN, more so than anything else.

Granted, the jaded side of me thinks it has a lot in common with this analyst...make problem...get money to create solution.

It's like that joke on Guardians of the Galaxy when rocket raccoon says "why do you want to save the Galaxy? What's it ever done for you?!?" And star lord says "because I'm one of the idiots that lives in it!" This Russian has been sippin on too much vodka. I hope the guy with a finger on the button ain't drunk too.

Russia read my mind. I knew Yellowstone would be a soft spot for a bombing or something.

Who says a nuke could even trigger or would trigger it to erupt? And if it didn't you sure wasted your element of surprise in an attack..

What a complete moron.. Igniting Yellowstone would likely cause an extinction level event. Yes, that would include Russia.

Moron..

While this is interesting news, this means nothing. Modern nuclear strategy dictates that a nuclear attack triggering the destruction of the United States as a whole will also lead to the destruction of Russia as a whole. In the event of a nuclear attack on the US, all available US nuclear ICBM's would be launched in retaliation. Therefore what does Russia have to gain? Absolutely nothing. There is absolutely zero chance that Russia could launch a nuclear attack on the US and eliminate all of the US' missiles and missile reserves. Partly this is because launch sites are highly protected underground facilities, but also because a portion of our nuclear arsenal is somewhere that cannot be reached...under the world's oceans. Why bring this up? Because the only chance of avoiding retaliation is to eliminate an enemy's nuclear arsenal immediately. Then of course there is the fact that a counter-salvo of missiles would already be in the air once the attack was confirmed, before Russia's missiles even struck the US.

There is ONE option that Russia has for success, but it is highly risky. Most military leaders know that a nuclear attack from another nuclear power is going to involve a large number of missiles. They would not launch a single missile for instance. Actually, this very fact is what kept Russia from launching a retaliatory strike on the US on one occasion during the Cold War. The Russian missile operator knew that if this truly were an American attack on Russia, there was likely to be a large barrage and not just a few missiles, thus the decision was made by low-ranking soldiers with their hand on the button to not launch a counter-strike. What I am driving at is that Russia MIGHT be able to launch a single missile, and this single missile could be misidentified as being a glitch or some other phenomena, and thus a US response is not forthcoming. But this overlooks one very important matter...By the time the missile struck, the US commanders would realize what had occurred, and before the Yellowstone volcano caused damage nation-wide, a counter-strike could be launched. And again, we still have submarines capable of launching missiles, and these subs would not be harmed initially. They might not have anywhere to go if the US was destroyed, but if the US were going out they would definitely take Russia with them.

a reply to: JiggyPotamus

And a suitcase atomic weapon explodes at yellowstone. Hard to prove who brought it in or who set it off but lets respond by launching icbm's against Russia. Is that the plan?

originally posted by: CrikeyMagnet
Important to consider that a) This is one analyst, and b) the US likewise has probably explored all avenues of the exploitation of geological weaknesses of its enemies... even the bats**t-insane ones.

It's not a solution to take the US out of commission... it's a solution to end life on Earth. This goes on the same page as "Mutually Assured Destruction".

There is a difference between exploring possibilities and publicly stating the action should be taken.

a reply to: glend

Really think a suitcase atomic bomb would do the trick? Probably not. Some of you guys seem to be so lacking in critical thinking you'd think a gunshot at the ground would be a threat.

Tsar bomba left a crater 250ft deep, and from a quick google search, the depth of the chamber is "several thousand feet deep". Unless you were going to repeatedly nuke it, wait, nuke again, wait, nuke again. By that point Russia would be facing retaliation needless to say. And if that was the case, you'd be better off just bombing big cities and do enough damage with just that, and not have to deal with the negative effects of a super volcano erupting and being much more detrimental to Russia..

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

I didn't say it was a sure thing. I'm actually incredibly doubtful of a surface strike setting off yellowstone, just saying it's not a mad man move to want to annihilate three key NATO targets with one shot.

IF it were to work, it would be the most brilliant military strike ever.

originally posted by: Hijinx

IF it were to work, it would be the most brilliant military strike ever.

Until the Earth was covered in ash and all of mankind perished.

Sivkov was quoted on RT for another report.

The president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, Dr. Konstantin Sivkov, told Sputnik that this is part of an overall strategy by NATO to secure its eastern borders gained after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact. rt.com...

It is just terrible to think the consequences of Yellowstone explosion. I want to believe this is something as a last warning of a much smaller nuclear or non nuclear war, and not a real possibility for the planet. The immediate danger is in those "small wars" that could go tactical and then strategic and that could kill many of us, long before any fault lines or Yellowstone, I hope. Let remember to the Mr. Alex Jones and Mr Sivkov as well, that the human beings live now, not in imaginary future of apocalypse, and suffer now from much smaller causes. And have every chance to die long before Yellowstone or asteroid wipes out the earth. Be it natura, man made or alien made.

....um, maybe I'm just stupid when it comes to military strategy, but

If they were planning such a move, would they tell the world about it first?

Somehow I doubt it.

a reply to: ghaleon12

Probably not but small explosions can be set to bring down reservoirs so I don't dismiss the possibility.

one thing that does stand out obviously is that governments have been testing and or using natural disaster event style weapon's on certain country's.
remember this from four years ago.

Who nuked Nagasaki and Hiroshima? If anyone will drop bomb on Yellowstone, that will be USA. And yes I know Yellowstone is in USA. Twins were too.