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.

 

Theresa May says "Yes," she's prepared to kill hundreds of thousands in nuke attack

page: 5
12
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 09:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: SprocketUK

Sarin is only one of the many agents that has been weaponized but yes i think that is indeed what Iraq used against Iran.

Im talking about the other agents through like VX and there like. Never mind the rest that we dont hear about. The ones that are airborne based and highly communicable.

You dont need missiles to delver such an attack just a few canisters released at strategic positions. Perfect first strike weapon if you ask me with plausible deniability if delivered in a covert fashion.


How would nukes serve there supposed purpose then when you have no clue who to strike back at?


You described a short acting agent which is why I mentioned Sarin.

VX is persistent. It won't be gone after a couple of days.

Sure, some rogue state could synthesise some vx. Chances are the UN would know about it though as there are only so many sources of the precursors which are closely monitored, not to mention the number of people able to make it must be tiny.

You would think it would be easy to stash a few cans, but cctv would inevitably find the persons responsible and from there the likely agency behind any such attack.

That aside, there isn't a scenario in which chemical and biological weapons are a better choice for retaliatory strikes than a nuke.

Which was kinda the point of the thread.

Chem weapons just aren't viable as a deterrent.
The only practical use is to deny ground with vx and anthrax or slow down the enemy with those plus non persistent agents.

They just aren't much use for anything else.
Even the Russians gave up on them in the end.




posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 09:40 AM
link   
a reply to: SprocketUK

What about the chimera viruses developed by our soviet cousins and probably our own nation?

There are multiple scenarios in which such weapons could be used. And as to how long they remain active? They can probably tailor that factor to suit the situation.

As to the CCTV system we have in place, granted its impressive, but not impervious to persons that know how to circumvent the system. CCTV did not stop the 7-7 attacks or prevent the botched Glasgow airport attempt of terror.

Nukes aren't much use for anything if you ask me other than an obsolete deterrent that drains our nations coffers.

Sorry if im drifting off topic by the way.
edit on 22-7-2016 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 09:43 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

Cctv generally gets the guys after.

Anyway, I stand by my point that we don't need nor posess these weapons.
We have nukes and just don't need to develop the other stuff as it is always going to be less effective as a deterrent than an enormous bang and loads of radiation.



posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: SprocketUK

"don't need to develop the other stuff as it is always going to be less effective as a deterrent than an enormous bang and loads of radiation."

Nukes are simply over kill through, whats the point in irradiating the land for the next 10,000 years and destroying the info structure when you can have it intact and occupiable in a matter of weeks?

There has to be some spoils of war for the prospect to remain viable, stands to reason. Nukes simple take away that factor and replace it with total desolation. Thats crazy and serves no meaningful purpose if you ask me.


edit on 22-7-2016 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 10:35 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

You are talking about an offensive weapon though.
One to be used in a campaign of conquest.

The whole thread is about a weapon of deterrence.

Theresa May never once said she'd immolate hundreds of thousands of people to conquer a country. Merely to respond to that kind of attack upon us.



posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 08:24 PM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

I was not speculating as to whether or not she had the cajones to actually use the weapons...


I merely said she is not unlike any of the other "folks" who seek to be in a similar situation of power.



new topics

top topics
 
12
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join