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.

 

Iran May Build EMP Warhead

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by snafu7700
i dont think you guys are looking at the big picture here. an emp attack from a civilian freighter off the coast of the eastern US would effectively take us out of world politics for quite awhile. not only would it shut down trivial things like computers and all cars built after 1983, but it would shut down the airtraffic system, and about 90% of commercial aviation in the effected areas would just fall out of the sky, because they are fly-by-wire with computer controlled engines. we're talking about massive damage....the kind that would make katrina and 9/11 look trivial.


What absolute bollocks
, conventional EMP weapons have bugger all range. It would take thousands of such weapons to shut down the East Coast. A conventional EMP weapon would have a range of maybe 1 km, no more.
This isn't EMP from a nuclear blast, so stop pretending it is.
Anyways, all critical systems would be protected by Farrady cages which would not allow the pulse to do any damage. There is no threat from Iran and it's possible EMP warhead LMAO.

Seems many people really overestimate the power of conventional EMP warheads.


and guess what? we have absolutely no technology in place to detect and stop an attack of this kind that close in to our shores. in the aftermath, we would have to bring all our troops home to help control the effected areas and rebuild.


Like I said it would require hundreds of missiles and there warheads and they wouldn't even affect critical systems
So your scenario isn't possible.


it's a very real threat, boys and girls, and i hope our government is looking at it that way, because you can bet iran has considered it. like i have mentioned several times, their missiles keep blowing up at precisely the altitude needed for an effective attack.

coincidence? i dont believe in those.


A very real threat lol, in that case so is America being invaded by gnomes.




posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 12:18 PM
link   
I dont think many people fully understand the reprecussions of an EMP attack on the US. It would only take one. So, we may have 40,000, doesnt matter. They would not need to invade us. All they have to do is find some one willing to carry it on their boat and shoot it off. Once it is in the air, they cant stop it because that is where it is intended to go off. Once it goes off it is like lightning striking all electronics in the US. Lets think about this for a min. shall we. No Walmart, no refridgeration, no telephones, tv, radio, cars. Food would spoil leaving millions of people to fend for their own. Talk about chaos. If you dont know how to hunt, fish, farm, or how to prepare your food to make it last (canning, drying, etc.) you will die. The people will kill each other off. No one will know what is going on in the world. The country man who knows how to live in the wild will be fighting off desperate people. This might sound silly, but since I know how to live in the wild so I am not worried about finding food and shelter from the elements, so my biggest fear at that point is all the zoo animals getting out. That and the fact that there would be no more medications avaliable. So many things we dont think of because we can just go to the Dr. and get an antibiotic. The emp bomb is by far my biggest worry. Its an effective cheep shot. One bomb, and we'll self distruct.


Scientists, including President Reagan's top science adviser, William R. Graham, say there is no other explanation for such tests than preparation for the deployment of electromagnetic pulse weapons – even one of which could knock out America's critical electrical and technological infrastructure, effectively sending the continental U.S. back to the 19th century with a recovery time of months or years.



[edit on 4-2-2006 by mrsdudara]



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 12:24 PM
link   
i guess you didnt actually read all of my posts either. go figure.


Originally posted by mad scientist
What absolute bollocks
, conventional EMP weapons have bugger all range.


who said anything about conventional emp weapons? i'm talking about nukes launched at the correct altitude to do the damage in question. if you dont believe the capability exists in the middle east, that is your perogative. but when iranian missiles keep blowing up at precisely the correct altitude to effect this type of damage, and they are trying to appropriate nuclear weapons (allegedly, i'll admit) the evidence is a little more than circumstantial.



Like I said it would require hundreds of missiles and there warheads and they wouldn't even affect critical systems
So your scenario isn't possible.


and like i said, you obviously made that assumption without actually reading what i was saying.



A very real threat lol, in that case so is America being invaded by gnomes.


disagree with it all day long. debate me on the issues even. but comments like this just make you look like an ignorant bumpkin. care to try again?



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by mrsdudara
I dont think many people fully understand the reprecussions of an EMP attack on the US. It would only take one. So, we may have 40,000, doesnt matter. They would not need to invade us. All they have to do is find some one willing to carry it on their boat and shoot it off. Once it is in the air, they cant stop it because that is where it is intended to go off. Once it goes off it is like lightning striking all electronics in the US.


Not even close. I assume you're talking about a nuclear weapon, because a conventioanl EMP warhead, as I have already said has an effective range of about 1km.
If you're talking about nuclear weapons, then it would take several Multi-meagton warheads placed precisely in orbit over the US. But they wouldn't affect critical systems as they've been hardened using Farraday Cages and other devices.



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by snafu7700
who said anything about conventional emp weapons? i'm talking about nukes launched at the correct altitude to do the damage in question. if you dont believe the capability exists in the middle east, that is your perogative. but when iranian missiles keep blowing up at precisely the correct altitude to effect this type of damage, and they are trying to appropriate nuclear weapons (allegedly, i'll admit) the evidence is a little more than circumstantial.


Ahem, the correct altitude which is what ? FYI, that would be hundreds of km's above the target country, and it requires thermonuclear weapons, not the piddly 20kt fission bombs the Iranians may be able to produce.


What is this precise altituted you talk about ? Give me a figure, you must have one to back up your claims ?



[edit on 4-2-2006 by mad scientist]



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 12:33 PM
link   
Really mrsdudara, head over to the clue store and pick up a couple.

The only way anybody could accomplish the scenario you describe is with a large nuke. Any country lighting a nuke over or at the US will cease to exist 30 minutes later.



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by iqonx

thats propaganda.

iraq on paper had the 4th largest army of which nearly all the tech was old and outdated. eg. there tanks t72 which had no night vision and only a 105mm cannon while the tanks of that time russian version had night/thermal vision and 125mm cannon.

they didnt even have mobile wire-guided anti-tank missiles which allowed american armour to overrun there country.

also we must factor they took on america + france + britian etc.. it was iraq vs the most powerfull countries on earth. it wasnt just america vs iraq it was the west(dozens of countries) vs iraq(1 country) it was an unfair fight.

Its not propaganda its fact in sheer number size it had the fourth largest army in the world at the time over a million men. See thats how the determine size of a army by the numbers of it. Is that a hard concept to understand?

Yes compared to the armies of modern global powers like the US and UK their tanks were proven sub par. The US MBT was at that time a unproven weapon in real combat. But less advanced tanks can win battles if used correctly and in the right numbers. Look at WW2 the sherman was crap compared to Germans tanks and they still crushed the Germans.



Originally posted by iqonx


thats propaganda.

iraqs air defense was mostly anti air artilley which is useless above 3.5km altidude and on top of this it was not even radar guided air artillery and was being blind fired by iraqis basically the world most expensive fireworks/light show.

iraq actaully didnt have that many working modern sam systems and the ones they did only made up a small percentage of there air defense the rest of there sam missiles where worthless also there lack of stinger/sa14 type missiles showed becuase they couldnt take out the helicopters and low flying aircraft.

there air defence was a joke and is over hyped for media propaganda value. there air defence on paper was the most heavily guarded but actaul defence in real life was less then average when counting the modern air defence equipment they didnt even have mobile low altidude I.R defence systems like stingers or hell even crappy sa-7b styles SL-sams.


See once again you say on paper but thats because its a fact. They had some 20,000 launchers of all types. Short-range shoulder-fired SAMs, thousands of AAA guns of 23mm or larger.long-range ex-Soviet SA-2, SA-3, and SA-6 SAMs.

Oh and they had The fiber-optic Tiger Song air defense network thanks too the Chinese. Fiber optic defence network in 1991 but if we believe you Iraq was some backwater country LOL

So yes that was one of the Largest air defense networks like I said its a fact. But against a military super power armed with advanced weapons like Stealth bombers it proved moot.


Originally posted by iqonx
no the war will be completly different iran first of all has enough wire-guided anti-tank missiles to destroy or disable every american tank and they have reverse engineered stingers and hn5c(one version above sa7b) which make low level flight very dangerous unlike in iraq.

also you have to ask yourself who will backup america in this war will it be 1 on 1 like US vs IRAN or will it be unfair team gang action like america + allies vs IRAN. conventional war with iran will be completly different becuase you must also rember iraqis quit the army and surrenderd to america becuase of low morale and dislike for saddam but in iran morale and pride are very high amougnst the army so they will fight to the end.


You talk about the Gulf war coaltion yes there was alot of counties vs Iraq but with exception of the UK that other countries really didnt do anything. The US with the help of the UK won that war plain and simple.

Iran would fall in a convential war all the same their air force would be wiped before it ever got off the ground thanks to things like cruise missiles they could not defend against . With a working airforce their armoured divisons wouldn't stand a chance. The US military was designed to fight large scale convential wars against much better and stronger countries then Iran and they do it very well.

The best Iran could hope for is to wage a long gorilla style war.

[edit on 4-2-2006 by ShadowXIX]



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bozorgh

Originally posted by ShadowXIX

Originally posted by tomcat ha
Well another reason why Iran wont be a pushover. If Iran will get invaded it will be like Iraq times 1000.


Please at the time of the Gulf War Iraq was the forth largest army (larger then Iran) with some of the most heavily defended airspace in the world and still had its butt handed to it.

In a convential war Iran would fall all the same.

The only country that would be 1000 times worst then Iraq would be something like China or Russia.


lool oh please be quiet! Iraq had no army left after the war we had with them and they were poor and desperatley need for more military equipment, why do you think they decided to invade kuwait?. 8 years of war crippled Iraq's economy and military so don't even start with that talk again
.

[edit on 3-2-2006 by Bozorgh]


Perhaps if you read my post you would see I was talking about Iraq in 1991 when they were not "crippled"

After the Iran war the were not crippled they had the Fourth largest standing army in the world and were albe to roll over countries like Kuwait with the greatest of ease.



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by mad scientist

Ahem, the correct altitude which is what ? FYI, that would be hundreds of km's above the target country, and it requires thermonuclear weapons, not the piddly 20kt fission bombs the Iranians may be able to produce.


What is this precise altituted you talk about ? Give me a figure, you must have one to back up your claims ?



like i said, not reading my posts before you attack them.


200km. go back to the links i posted on page one, and you'll find it there. i'm not wasting my time reposting what you're obviously not going to read anyway.



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 02:16 PM
link   
Thanks ElTainte, but I do have a clue. I have studied up on it since I first got wind of it a year ago. I know what it is capable of.


EMP attacks are generated when a nuclear weapon is detonated at altitudes above a few dozen kilometers above the Earth's surface. The explosion, of even a small nuclear warhead, would produce a set of electromagnetic pulses that interact with the Earth's atmosphere and the Earth's magnetic field.

Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin first reported the shocking findings of the U.S. EMP commission that rogue nations, such as Iran and North Korea, have the capability of launching an undetected, catastrophic EMP attack on the U.S. – and are actively developing plans.

"These electromagnetic pulses propagate from the burst point of the nuclear weapon to the line of sight on the Earth's horizon, potentially covering a vast geographic region in doing so simultaneously, moreover, at the speed of light," said Dr. Lowell Wood, acting chairman of the commission appointed by Congress to study the threat. "For example, a nuclear weapon detonated at an altitude of 400 kilometers over the central United States would cover, with its primary electromagnetic pulse, the entire continent of the United States and parts of Canada and Mexico


I am sure that everyone said "It'll never happen" before Pearl Harbr too. So sure we can whomp them for doing it, it doesnt matter. The damage is already done. When psychos wanna go they go big. They dont care if they go down just as long as they took as many people they could with them. IF this fella has the capability to pull this off, then he is going to do so, and most likely right before he thinks we are going to attack him.

EDIT: All my quotes are from World net daily by the way.

[edit on 4-2-2006 by mrsdudara]



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by snafu7700
like i said, not reading my posts before you attack them.


200km. go back to the links i posted on page one, and you'll find it there. i'm not wasting my time reposting what you're obviously not going to read anyway.


I read your posts and they are unrealistic and very over exaggerated. As I hvae said ( do you read my posts ) a 20kt warhead isn't going to even knock out 5% of the East Coasts electronics. Multi Megattonne nuclear weapons are required for that. Something which Iran won't be able to do for decades.



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by mad scientist
As I hvae said ( do you read my posts ) a 20kt warhead isn't going to even knock out 5% of the East Coasts electronics. Multi Megattonne nuclear weapons are required for that. Something which Iran won't be able to do for decades.


im sorry, but i have to disagree. you claim everything of value is shielded, but i can tell you from first hand experience that it's not. the air traffic system computers and radars are not shielded for emp...at least not the new stuff. commercial aircraft are likewise not shielded for emp.

as far as your claim of only 5%:

a. considering the size of the east coast and the level of airtraffic there, that is still a huge amount of area, and would still cause massive damage.

b. could you provide some data to back your estimate? i dont claim to be a rocket scientist, so if you can prove what you are saying, i'll be more willing to concede you might be right. but personally, i think youre just pulling numbers out of your rear because you disagree that this scenario is possible.



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 04:25 PM
link   
^^^ I'll hvae a look later.

I came across an interesting article, which is precisely what you say is your idea seems you've been plagarising quite a bit, from the World Net Daily



Because the missiles never reached full height, some U.S. defense people have called them failures. On the contrary, Iran has called them successes. Why? Because they're not trying for an ICBM-range test. All the Iranians need to do is load one of these things into the hold of any friendly ship, get within 100 miles of the U.S. coast, and fire it way high

www.freerepublic.com...



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 04:26 PM
link   
Iraq didn't even have a navy, why do you think US troops were able to enter so easily into Iraq well prepaired and no problem at all, but dealing with us means you actually have to go through destroyers/frigates/subs/fast attack ships etc......



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by mad scientist

I came across an interesting article, which is precisely what you say is your idea seems you've been plagarising quite a bit, from the World Net Daily




alright, that's it! i've tried to be as nice to you as possible considering your negative demeanor, but I WILL NOT STAND BEING ACCUSED OF PLAGIARISM!!!!!!!

you claim to be reading my posts.....then why havent you noticed that in my very first post on this thread i linked to my original posts on this issue FROM OCTOBER OF LAST YEAR, and the article you linked to is DATED JANUARY 2006.

if youre too damned ignorant to debate the subject at hand, or even read the material before you make an ass out of yourself, just admit it......but dont start making accusations you cant back up.



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 06:45 PM
link   
correction....my first post on this subject was SEPTEMBER OF LAST YEAR.



posted on Feb, 5 2006 @ 01:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by snafu7700
alright, that's it! i've tried to be as nice to you as possible considering your negative demeanor, but I WILL NOT STAND BEING ACCUSED OF PLAGIARISM!!!!!!!

you claim to be reading my posts.....then why havent you noticed that in my very first post on this thread i linked to my original posts on this issue FROM OCTOBER OF LAST YEAR, and the article you linked to is DATED JANUARY 2006.


Well you are a plagarist, as I said the original article appeared in the World Net Daily in June 2005


worldnetdaily.com...

" Your " scenario is almost vernatm what appears in teh article, you gave them no credit and passed it off as your idea. That my friend is plagarism.

Let's see one of the links you give is : www.abovetopsecret.com...

Where you first passed this idea off as your own. You posted that on the 17/9/2005 several months after the article first appeared. Shame on you


PLAGARIST



posted on Feb, 5 2006 @ 08:06 AM
link   
Snafu, I too have read your posts. I understand that you are probably making your statements based on the news you read in world net daily, beings that they were the only sourse reporting it at the time. However, you have failed to give them credit for the information you are passing on. If you have this information due to another source, please let us all know so that we too can learn more about the subject.

Back on the subject though, it does wory me a bit to know that Iran has one half and N.K. has the other. It has seemed more than odd how they have been playing the attention game. It is the same game my boys used to play when they were trying to do something they wernt supposed to. One would even go so far as dancing on the kitchen table, and while I got him down the other would be getting into trouble. Seems to me that is what those two countries are doing now. First N.K. screams they have a nuke and their not afraid to use it, then Iran starts dancing on the table demanding attention away from them. After I read in world net daily how the N.K. has the exact nuke needed and Iran was testing the exact missles needed to pull off this nuclear EMP bomb, it is hard not to think that they are working together. I am wondering what March has in store. China and Russia were all for U.N. action as long as it was after March, and Before the pres. of Isreal became ill he cave the ok for an attack in March. Why March? Anyway, this bomb is a very good possibility, and a very big threat. That is not my opinion, but the opinion of our top military personel.



posted on Feb, 5 2006 @ 10:09 AM
link   
actually, my father and i started talking about the possibility of this scenario the first time we read about the missiles "failures." i dont normally read world nut daily, and before coming to this site in september of 2005, i didnt even know about world nut daily. just because they happen to come to the same conclusion does not mean that i read their report and copied it. i dont claim to be a genious, but why is it that after reading the same data from mainstream media outlets, i couldnt have come to the same conclusion as others....especially considering that my background happens to be radar air traffic control.....on the east coast of the US. did world nut daily mention anything about aircraft or the air traffic system?

oh, you'll also find the hal lindsay has been talking about this same thing, so for those of you who think world nut has the monopoly on the story, think again....which means that two known sources have come to the same conclusion. so why couldnt my dad and i over beers....especially considering our backgrounds? and that is all i'm going to say on this matter. i'm no plagiarist, and if you want to make those claims, you damn well better back them up with more than just a world nut article.

MAD SCIENTIST[/B]

this only proves that rather than talk about the subject at hand, you'd rather hijack the thread with accusations that as i mentioned before, are baseless and you cant prove. if you cant debate the subject and have to resort to such lowly tactics, i'd say your one of the most ignorant individuals here. so you continue to attack my character, and i'll continue to attack your ability to come at my theory with sources and numbers....especially considering that you laughed about the whole thing in your first post and then when you found out that i might actually know what i'm talking about, started making character attacks instead because you are one of those sad people that cant admit that they might actually be wrong.



posted on Feb, 5 2006 @ 10:27 AM
link   
Where did you read about the missle failures? I would like to read up on it more also. I understand that you have quite a bit of information beings your an air traffic controller. My brother in law is an air traffic controller in Texas. He does not talk about much, but he has said in the past that he can not talk about it and there is more that goes on than most realize. I hope you understand that I am not calling you a plagerist, I am mearly pointing out that if you dont tell people how you came about your information you are leaving yourself wide open for attacks. When people are attacked, they tend to clam up, and I would hate to see that happen, I for one would like to hear more opinions and information on the subject.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join