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.
originally posted by: 727Sky
a reply to: seasonal
The 90% figure has been batted around for some time now.. It is based off of a year without electricity and no delivery trucks or rail shipments.. I doubt that the US military would be sitting idle during such a crisis for there will be some things that should still work depending on their distance from the most severe effects of the EMP..
Needless to say a real one or two EMPS placed optimally would be a bad day for all in any first world country..
The aftermath of such an event.... we can only guess what would happen.
originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Edumakated
It would be brutal. Wonder what country would try to invade first?
Haven't read the book, but it is on youtube audio book. I will listen to it.
originally posted by: Nyiah
90%, eh?
Well that's far-fetched as all hell. Then again, if we really were that dependent on electricity and tech for survival, we'd probably deserve an EMP to "wipe us out". Darwin Awards would be quite busy handing themselves out at breakneck speed.
originally posted by: NightSkyeB4Dawn
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Sorry. After Wilma my community went 3 months without power. Nobody killed anyone, and no one died. I found it quite peaceful. Missed the a/c but slept on the porch. Didn't take as long as I thought to get used to the nightly concert put on by the nocturnal critters.
Just last month, went a whole week without power, and I still have no land line because of hurricane Irma.
Living without power is an inconvenience, not a death sentence. It hasn't been that long ago that people lived without electricity and indoor plumbing. It was the foundation that America was built on.
This is not new... the 90% rate has been consistent since 2012
originally posted by: Tempter
OK, so in this scenario I'm expected to believe that NK has launched an ICBM and will detonate it ABOVE some area or city?
I'm supposed to believe that after all of this work to develop an intercontinental delivery system that they wouldn't hit ground?
What are we doing the whole time this missile is in flight? Twiddling our thumbs?
originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
a reply to: infolurker
Not to mention people that need medications to live, those will run out w no way to replenish them....the elderly, the infirm....
Lots of factors
originally posted by: Darkblade71
a reply to: TobyFlenderson
A nuclear bomb lets out an EMP when it explodes.
If a large enough EMP is let off over Kansas or that area, it supposedly could shut down the power grid over a vast area.
I do believe that is the idea.
So you only need a very high altitude detonation of a nuclear bomb.
originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
originally posted by: NightSkyeB4Dawn
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Sorry. After Wilma my community went 3 months without power. Nobody killed anyone, and no one died. I found it quite peaceful. Missed the a/c but slept on the porch. Didn't take as long as I thought to get used to the nightly concert put on by the nocturnal critters.
Just last month, went a whole week without power, and I still have no land line because of hurricane Irma.
Living without power is an inconvenience, not a death sentence. It hasn't been that long ago that people lived without electricity and indoor plumbing. It was the foundation that America was built on.
Now imagine if there was no outside help coming, no hope that it would come back on, there was no law enforcement like before and that everywhere else the exact same conditions were the same.
For an idea of how people would be acting in this scenario, the best place to look was how people were behaving those final few days before it hit (the "Headless Chicken Syndrome"). I know it all too well.
originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: seasonal
Is anyone even considering the refugee crisis it would create? U.S. citizens would be made refugees -- masses of them. Borders would be forced open...if other countries would let us in. (I think they would).
But it would be the perfect goal for globalists.
And no one would suspect that's exactly what Trump wants because he is a globalist *Fabian style* just like his predecessors. Just like his dear, long time friends...the Clintons.
He has convinced most people he is a nationalist...but I doubt that. He would never have been *allowed* to run (and given press coverage) if he was a nationalist.