Japan Broadcaster falsely reports North Korean missile launch

Its been documented more than once, however it doesnt have to be aliens if that makez you feel better.

Related concept though.

Any situation that causes the "WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!!" scenario, be it nukes, aliens, etc, is gonna be hidden and denied in the interest of keeping order here in the US.

I dont find it all that difficult to believe.

originally posted by: musicismagic

originally posted by: Spider879
My phone didn't go crazy on me, didn't know of the report till now, but it does seemed strange.

really the bars here in town are serving bombs over LA tonight

American ingenuity.. Lovit..lol

originally posted by: Urantia1111

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Urantia1111
a reply to: CaptainBeno

Im reading some speculation elsewhere that claims actual inbound missiles being neutralized and these reports of "false alarm" are the coverup for an actual attack takkng place.

Plausible.

The efficiency of our missile defense systems is a matter of concern. Having thwarted an actual attack would be a huge propaganda win for the US government and the #militaryindustrialcomplex. If there was gonna be a conspiracy in this arena it would be to fake an attack that they conveniently shoot down and sell more of their missile defense systems, along with giving the US an excuse to "counter-attack". Concealing the fact that NK tried to nuke us benefits precisely no one.

Your logic isnt terrible on the surface and applies nicely IF we had any hope of knowing EVERYTHING involved in such an exchange.

Im proposing that we dont.

If there had been actual nuclear weapons deployed against us, there would be panick in the streets and this country would fall apart in a matter of days. THATS why i consider it possible that it would be hidden.

You mean the panic in the streets like there was in Hawaii with the false alarm? So you purport they'd cover up a real attack to avoid panic by staging a false-flag false alarm that causes panic?

I realize how attractive conspiracy theories can be to feel like you know something other people don't, but please put your thinking cap on. Most of these "theories" aren't even internally consistent. They fall apart when given the slightest bit of scrutiny.

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Urantia1111

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Urantia1111
a reply to: CaptainBeno

Im reading some speculation elsewhere that claims actual inbound missiles being neutralized and these reports of "false alarm" are the coverup for an actual attack takkng place.

Plausible.

The efficiency of our missile defense systems is a matter of concern. Having thwarted an actual attack would be a huge propaganda win for the US government and the #militaryindustrialcomplex. If there was gonna be a conspiracy in this arena it would be to fake an attack that they conveniently shoot down and sell more of their missile defense systems, along with giving the US an excuse to "counter-attack". Concealing the fact that NK tried to nuke us benefits precisely no one.

Your logic isnt terrible on the surface and applies nicely IF we had any hope of knowing EVERYTHING involved in such an exchange.

Im proposing that we dont.

If there had been actual nuclear weapons deployed against us, there would be panick in the streets and this country would fall apart in a matter of days. THATS why i consider it possible that it would be hidden.

You mean the panic in the streets like there was in Hawaii with the false alarm? So you purport they'd cover up a real attack to avoid panic by staging a false-flag false alarm that causes panic?

I realize how attractive conspiracy theories can be to feel like you know something other people don't, but please put your thinking cap on. Most of these "theories" aren't even internally consistent. They fall apart when given the slightest bit of scrutiny.

So go ahead and scrutinize.

You really think they wouldnt want to minimize chaos by claiming false alarm if missiles were actually on their way and stopped?

If youre simply believing whatever youre told by your tv set, your scrutiny needs work.

OK what I do not get is the fact that Nuclear weapons make entire areas uninhabitable for very long periods of time , Also the fall out effects surrounding areas meaning other Countries or even possible the whole planet . So why on Earth would anyone ever use one or Start a Nuclear war ? There are no winners it plain doesn't make any sense. They should be banned from the planet and any countries that use them should be abolished - This is the reason I believe there should be a Real Planetary Enforcement agency We need protection from our leaders .

originally posted by: Urantia1111

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Urantia1111

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Urantia1111
a reply to: CaptainBeno

Im reading some speculation elsewhere that claims actual inbound missiles being neutralized and these reports of "false alarm" are the coverup for an actual attack takkng place.

Plausible.

The efficiency of our missile defense systems is a matter of concern. Having thwarted an actual attack would be a huge propaganda win for the US government and the #militaryindustrialcomplex. If there was gonna be a conspiracy in this arena it would be to fake an attack that they conveniently shoot down and sell more of their missile defense systems, along with giving the US an excuse to "counter-attack". Concealing the fact that NK tried to nuke us benefits precisely no one.

Your logic isnt terrible on the surface and applies nicely IF we had any hope of knowing EVERYTHING involved in such an exchange.

Im proposing that we dont.

If there had been actual nuclear weapons deployed against us, there would be panick in the streets and this country would fall apart in a matter of days. THATS why i consider it possible that it would be hidden.

You mean the panic in the streets like there was in Hawaii with the false alarm? So you purport they'd cover up a real attack to avoid panic by staging a false-flag false alarm that causes panic?

I realize how attractive conspiracy theories can be to feel like you know something other people don't, but please put your thinking cap on. Most of these "theories" aren't even internally consistent. They fall apart when given the slightest bit of scrutiny.

So go ahead and scrutinize.

You really think they wouldnt want to minimize chaos by claiming false alarm if missiles were actually on their way and stopped?

If youre simply believing whatever youre told by your tv set, your scrutiny needs work.

As opposed to believing any cute sounding "theory" that pops up? I was in the Air Force 13 years. You'd be amazed what kind of screw ups happen. People aren't perfect. It's strange how conspiracy theorists don't "trust" the government, but you have so much blind faith in government you have to invent elaborate conspiracies because you can't believe they make mistakes.

originally posted by: Gargoyle91
OK what I do not get is the fact that Nuclear weapons make entire areas uninhabitable for very long periods of time , Also the fall out effects surrounding areas meaning other Countries or even possible the whole planet . So why on Earth would anyone ever use one or Start a Nuclear war ? There are no winners it plain doesn't make any sense. They should be banned from the planet and any countries that use them should be abolished - This is the reason I believe there should be a Real Planetary Enforcement agency We need protection from our leaders .

Most of this is faulty info. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were repopulated within 10-15 years after they were destroyed. They were low-yield devices compared to today's weapons. However, There have been over 2,000 tests of nuclear weapons over the years, some of which utilized warheads over 1,000 times as powerful as the ones we dropped on Japan, and somehow the planet and the whole population are still here. Air bursts don't generate as much fallout as ground or underground tests. Nuclear weapons are devastating, but the public has an exaggerated sense of just how devastating. It would take the major nuclear powers launching large quantities of their weapons all together to generate the doomsday effects popular in the media. And even then it's likely some humans would survive.

If North Korea nuked South Korea or the US nuked North Korea, that's obviously a big, big problem. But it's inherently a regional problem. The major powers escalating into a general nuclear war that will kill them all isn't very likely. The rest of the world gets elevated radiation levels, but not at dangerous levels. There's radiation around you 24/7. It's only once it gets above a certain threshold that it becomes dangerous. After the Fukishima disaster, the media was gleefully reporting that there were "elevated" radiation levels being detected in the western US. Of course they left out the part that even with the elevated levels, it was still orders of magnitude below dangerous levels. If they told you that, you just say "oh" and change the channel.

Just curious, how do you propose to go about "abolishing" a country that dared to use them? After all, they have nuclear weapons with which to defend themselves.

We would need Kinetic weapons located in Space , A Planetary Enforcement Agency would need to be a Mobile Agency allowed to travel the planet without hindrance, OH and we would need help from ET or more money then God .

Anything is possible right?

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Gargoyle91
OK what I do not get is the fact that Nuclear weapons make entire areas uninhabitable for very long periods of time , Also the fall out effects surrounding areas meaning other Countries or even possible the whole planet . So why on Earth would anyone ever use one or Start a Nuclear war ? There are no winners it plain doesn't make any sense. They should be banned from the planet and any countries that use them should be abolished - This is the reason I believe there should be a Real Planetary Enforcement agency We need protection from our leaders .

Most of this is faulty info. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were repopulated within 10-15 years after they were destroyed. They were low-yield devices compared to today's weapons. However, There have been over 2,000 tests of nuclear weapons over the years, some of which utilized warheads over 1,000 times as powerful as the ones we dropped on Japan, and somehow the planet and the whole population are still here. Air bursts don't generate as much fallout as ground or underground tests. Nuclear weapons are devastating, but the public has an exaggerated sense of just how devastating. It would take the major nuclear powers launching large quantities of their weapons all together to generate the doomsday effects popular in the media. And even then it's likely some humans would survive.

If North Korea nuked South Korea or the US nuked North Korea, that's obviously a big, big problem. But it's inherently a regional problem. The major powers escalating into a general nuclear war that will kill them all isn't very likely. The rest of the world gets elevated radiation levels, but not at dangerous levels. There's radiation around you 24/7. It's only once it gets above a certain threshold that it becomes dangerous. After the Fukishima disaster, the media was gleefully reporting that there were "elevated" radiation levels being detected in the western US. Of course they left out the part that even with the elevated levels, it was still orders of magnitude below dangerous levels. If they told you that, you just say "oh" and change the channel.

Just curious, how do you propose to go about "abolishing" a country that dared to use them? After all, they have nuclear weapons with which to defend themselves.

All of this very comforting to the thousands vaporized at the whim of politicians.

originally posted by: Gargoyle91
OK what I do not get is the fact that Nuclear weapons make entire areas uninhabitable for very long periods of time , Also the fall out effects surrounding areas meaning other Countries or even possible the whole planet . So why on Earth would anyone ever use one or Start a Nuclear war ? There are no winners it plain doesn't make any sense. They should be banned from the planet and any countries that use them should be abolished - This is the reason I believe there should be a Real Planetary Enforcement agency We need protection from our leaders .

Stay away from the post-apocalyptic games for a while.
Doesnt work that way...

a reply to: SaturnFX

Ok that was star worthy! lol

Grim

originally posted by: Urantia1111

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Gargoyle91
OK what I do not get is the fact that Nuclear weapons make entire areas uninhabitable for very long periods of time , Also the fall out effects surrounding areas meaning other Countries or even possible the whole planet . So why on Earth would anyone ever use one or Start a Nuclear war ? There are no winners it plain doesn't make any sense. They should be banned from the planet and any countries that use them should be abolished - This is the reason I believe there should be a Real Planetary Enforcement agency We need protection from our leaders .

Most of this is faulty info. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were repopulated within 10-15 years after they were destroyed. They were low-yield devices compared to today's weapons. However, There have been over 2,000 tests of nuclear weapons over the years, some of which utilized warheads over 1,000 times as powerful as the ones we dropped on Japan, and somehow the planet and the whole population are still here. Air bursts don't generate as much fallout as ground or underground tests. Nuclear weapons are devastating, but the public has an exaggerated sense of just how devastating. It would take the major nuclear powers launching large quantities of their weapons all together to generate the doomsday effects popular in the media. And even then it's likely some humans would survive.

If North Korea nuked South Korea or the US nuked North Korea, that's obviously a big, big problem. But it's inherently a regional problem. The major powers escalating into a general nuclear war that will kill them all isn't very likely. The rest of the world gets elevated radiation levels, but not at dangerous levels. There's radiation around you 24/7. It's only once it gets above a certain threshold that it becomes dangerous. After the Fukishima disaster, the media was gleefully reporting that there were "elevated" radiation levels being detected in the western US. Of course they left out the part that even with the elevated levels, it was still orders of magnitude below dangerous levels. If they told you that, you just say "oh" and change the channel.

Just curious, how do you propose to go about "abolishing" a country that dared to use them? After all, they have nuclear weapons with which to defend themselves.

All of this very comforting to the thousands vaporized at the whim of politicians.

Yeah, I would prefer the Japanese government didn't start a war, but that wasn't our fault.

Maybe Hawaii was also done to influence the Japanese opinion since many Japanese live there.

Perhaps it is being done to influence the Japanese to join a future war.

Japan just rewrote a section of their constitution that said they would not join any future wars and will remain a peaceful nation. However now I think it says something about joining a war if it were fro self defense. There was a big outcry about this change.

It's probably those nazis in antartica messing with everyone

Reminds me of the little boy who cried ICBM

*

I'd guess it was a specialized contractor wanting to sell fullproof detection and alarm systems but having 2 events so closely spaced and so similar precludes that possibility I think.

Something is going on, even a false flag...somthing is coming