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.

 

You WILL survive a nuke attack!

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 02:43 PM
link   
Actually, I am amazed by some posters naivete about nuclear war. MAD never kept the superpowers in check -- it kept the Soviet Union from rolling over all the green hills of Europe.

Face it, America would have never used its nuclear might to literally take over Europe. That was the very real threat of the USSR.

That being said, there could be such a policy as geographic-specific MAD. Much like the containment of the Soviet Union, the U.S. and its allies can contain smaller radical states that happen to get the bomb by supplying overwhelming nuclear force along the friendly borders of said enemy nation.

In the case, for instance, of N Korea, we add to our regional nuclear deterence in S. Korea, allow Japan to seek nuclear weaponry, and staff the Asian waters with a fleet of nuke subs and the like. We offer Kim Il Jong a simple scenario: You launch a single nuke, and your country is obliterated. It's an unbalanced MAD, but one that would contain adventuresome maligned despots.




posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 02:54 PM
link   
You may count yourself amongst the lucky to survive the initial strikes, but the aftermath would make you wish you had been instantaneously vapourised...If you've never seen the movie Threads then you are in for a (gruesome) treat...although it may seem somewhat dated, it portrays a very realistic and very brutal scenario



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Actually, can anyone give us info on the science behind radiation.

Do iodine pills really work? I guess being a child of the '80s, I grew up believing that if you survived the initial strike of a nuke war, your fate would be to slowly deteriorate from radiation poison and die. Either that or turn green, grow a shell and learn ninjitsu.



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 04:42 PM
link   


posted by Echtelion

This propaganda is aimed at desentizing people on the danger of nuclear weapons. There are more than 10,000 nuclear warheads over 10 megatons and most are possessed by the US and Russia. There are nations like China, UK, France, Israel and perhaps North Korea and Iran who have a dangerous nuclear capability. The Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs, even with the massacre they have caused, were grenades compared to the nukes the most powerful countries have today . . It would only take a dirty bomb to explode somewhere, a nuclear holocaust would begin and it'd be a matter of days or weeks before you're running for the hills out. [Edited by Don W]



Look here, Ech, at the nuclear plant explosion in the Ukraine. The city of Chernobyl was abandoned in 1986 due to the disaster at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, which is located 14.5 kilometers (9 miles) north by northwest. The power plant has been named after the city, and was located in Chernobyl district, but the city and the plant were not directly connected.

Currently, there is no permanent population in the city. Workers on watch, and administrative personnel of the Zone of alienation are stationed there on short term rotational basis. Before the accident the city was inhabited by 14,000 residents.

On April 26, 1986, the fourth reactor of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, exploded at 01:23 AM local time. All permanent residents of Chernobyl and Zone of Alienation were evacuated because radiation levels in the area had become unsafe. About 100,00 sq km. (38,000 sq m.) Can you imagine the cost if our 3 Mile Island had gone another 30 minutes? 250,000, dead, 1,000,000 made ill. Several trillion dollars for the taxpayers to pay.

society.guardian.co.uk...



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 04:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Echtelion
THis is propaganda, aimed at desentizing people on the danger of nuclear weapons.


I don't know if it's propaganda or not but it's obnoxiously optimistic. If you're close enough to a nuclear blast to need the advice in this article, your life is going to be hell for a long time, provided you don't dying a slow, agonizing and lingering death.



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by LL1

They stated their next attack will be an "unexpected, unlikely, something not watched, not a landmark and more devastating than the WTC" type of an attack.

I have questioned what can be "unexpected", well that's easy, anything we are
not told or know about.

"Unlikely", what could be "unlikely"? Expecting "nuke", maybe that's not even it.

"Something not watched", well I think/believe they have everything covered and are protecting and watching everything. But what is "not being watched"?

"Not a landmark", well this would leave out major bridges, buildings, and tunnels etc. right? What's "not a landmark, that's not being watched"?

What could be "more devastating than the WTC"? That's more than 3,000 people.



I think anyone that thinks "nukes", is way off base.

If you want to know the next attack, look at the food supply. Who's watching the food supply? A bit of botulism here and some anthrax there in, say, milk or the water and you have your next attack.

If you consider that milk is usually only a day or two from cow to fridge, with little security, plus any bio-contaminent is likely to propogate and reproduce well in Milk or Water, it makes for an effective way to target millions of people (bear in mind, alot of children drink milk, because we tell them it's good) with no one noticing before it is far too late..

Anyhoo, now I've left you with that thought, I'm off to make a cup of tea with some full fat milk...



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Echtelion
This propaganda is aimed at desentizing people on the danger of nuclear weapons. There are more than 10,000 nuclear warheads over 10 megatons and most are possessed by the US and Russia.


I think you'd be hard pressed to find a warhead over one megaton in either the U.S. or Russian arsenals. The high yield weapons were a product of the early nuclear age when accuracy was suspect regardless of delivery method. I think the most common strategic yield in the U.S. arsenal is 550 kilotons and reflects a compromise on throw weight vs. yield. Today's nuclear weapon design figures more prominently on the accuracy and survivability (MIRV's) to target than total yield (if you can't "git-r-dun" with 550 kt then you probably shouldn't be trying). A 10 Mt weapon is a huge, heavy affair... Why put all your eggs in one basket?


Originally posted by donwhite
Look here, Ech, at the nuclear plant explosion in the Ukraine. The city of Chernobyl was abandoned in 1986 due to the disaster at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, which is located 14.5 kilometers (9 miles) north by northwest. The power plant has been named after the city, and was located in Chernobyl district, but the city and the plant were not directly connected.


The Chernobyl "explosion" wasn't a "nuclear" explosion but actually chemical explosion that was thermally driven by nuclear fission. Most of the explosive force was generated by steam (due to uncontrolled reactions when the emergency shutdown failed). Since no fissionable material was "consumed" in the "explosion" the lingering "dirty bomb" effects are much greater than an actual nuclear weapon detonation. Case in point, you can go to Trinity (first test site in New Mexico), Hiroshima, or Nagasaki and stand at ground zero a scant 50 years post detonation (and be safe)... I would bet a ground zero visit to Chernobyl would be fatal for hundreds if not thousands of years.

[edit on 15/9/2006 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason

If you want to know the next attack, look at the food supply.


It makes you wonder what this is all about.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 05:10 PM
link   
Funny you should mention that, Grady. We keep having e-coli outbreaks here in the UK, mainly in schools and, rather more disturbingly, in nurserys (kndergartens for you cross-ponders). Seems to one every fortnight.

It does make you think and worry, for I have a 2 year old who goes to nursery. But, having said that, worrying gets you no where.

[edit on 15/9/06 by stumason]



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 05:55 PM
link   
Here's what it would be like in L.A.



Airburst with a yield of 200 Kt the blue is complete destruction, the red is great destruction and the yellow is lots of people to die soon, most everything burns and then you can imagine a smaller zone outside of this with some light fires and radiological damage, that's before the Fallout comes down, pray the winds are not offshore which could push the Fallout as far as Las Vegas and beyond.

Oh yeah, the Hollywood Hills and Santa Monica Mountains will probably burn to the ground as well. Use Google Earth or Windows Live Local to see the area without the overlay and consider that an explosion of this magnitude WILL kill as many as 3 Million souls right off, practically destroy the Hollywood Television and Film Industry and hit the Financial and Trade sector so hard it will rock the world.
Add to that the losses in Great Art and non-replaceable historical documents and artifacts.



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 06:19 PM
link   
Airburst affects more of an area than a ground level burst, which is more likely. The buildings will contain much of the enrgy of the blast, so the circles would be smaller. Good illustration of what could happen though


EDIT to add: A ground level explosion would cause more material to be ejected in the blast, if I remember correctly, so fallout is a bigger problem... I may be wrong on that though..

[edit on 15/9/06 by stumason]



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 07:39 PM
link   


posted by Mirthful Me

The Chernobyl "explosion" wasn't a "nuclear" explosion but actually chemical explosion that was thermally driven by nuclear fission. Most of the explosive force was generated by steam (due to uncontrolled reactions when the emergency shutdown failed). Since no fissionable material was "consumed" in the "explosion" the lingering "dirty bomb" effects are much greater than an actual nuclear weapon detonation. Case in point, you can go to Trinity (first test site in New Mexico), Hiroshima, or Nagasaki and stand at ground zero a scant 50 years post detonation (and be safe)... I would bet a ground zero visit to Chernobyl would be fatal for hundreds if not thousands of years.



Thanks for the update.



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 10:23 PM
link   
Wishful thinking, wishful thinking folks. If you do survive a nuclear attack you'll end up wishing you were evaporated in the blast.

Coz whomever pulls the trigger, terrorists or roque states, do you think a nuclear war can be contained? I think it's wishful thinking.

If engaged in such kind of thinking you should read

The Nuclear Winter by Carl Sagan.
Except for fools and madmen, everyone knows that nuclear war would he an unprecedented human catastrophe. A more or less typical strategic warhead has a yield of 2 megatons, the explosive equivalent of 2 million tons of TNT. But 2 million tons of TNT is about the same as all the bombs exploded in World War II -- a single bomb with the explosive power of the entire Second World War but compressed into a few seconds of time and an area 30 or 40 miles across …

(....)

...In the Bravo test of March 1, 1954, a 15-megaton thermonuclear bomb was exploded on Bikini Atoll. It had about double the yield expected, and there was an unanticipated last-minute shift in the wind direction. As a result, deadly radioactive fallout came down on Rongelap in the Marshall Islands, more than 200 kilometers away. Most all the children on Rongelap subsequently developed thyroid nodules and lesions, and other long-term medical problems, due to the radioactive fallout.

(....)

...we then began to turn our attention to the climatic effects of nuclear war. The scientific paper, "Global Atmospheric Consequences of Nuclear War," was written by R. P. Turco, 0. B. Toon, T. P. Ackerman, J. B. Pollack and Carl Sagan. From the last names of the authors, this work is generally referred to as "TTAPS."


...and this is what they found out.

We knew that nuclear explosions, particularly groundbursts, would lift an enormous quantity of fine soil particles into the atmosphere (more than 100,000 tons of fine dust for every megaton exploded in a surface burst). Our work was further spurred by Paul Crutzen of the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry in Mainz, West Germany, and by John Birks of the University of Colorado, who pointed out that huge quantities of smoke would be generated in the burning of cities and forests following a nuclear war.

(...)

In addition, the amount of radioactive fallout is much more than expected. Many previous calculations simply ignored the intermediate time-scale fallout. That is, calculations were made for the prompt fallout -- the plumes of radioactive debris blown downwind from each target-and for the long-term fallout, the fine radioactive particles lofted into the stratosphere that would descend about a year later, after most of the radioactivity had decayed. However, the radioactivity carried into the upper atmosphere (but not as high as the stratosphere) seems to have been largely forgotten. We found for the baseline case that roughly 30 percent of the land at northern midlatitudes could receive a radioactive dose greater than 250 rads, and that about 50 percent of northern midlatitudes could receive a dose greater than 100 rads. A 100-rad dose is the equivalent of about 1000 medical X-rays. A 400-rad dose will, more likely than not, kill you.

(....)

But what if nuclear wars can be contained, (....) ...a war in which a mere 100 megatons were exploded, less than one percent of the world arsenals, and only in low-yield airbursts over cities. This scenario, we found, would ignite thousands of fires, and the smoke from these fires alone would be enough to generate an epoch of cold and dark almost as severe as in the 5000 megaton case. The threshold for what Richard Turco has called The Nuclear Winter is very low.


No, NONE but - in a figurative sense - a handful will survive a nuke attack. You wanna be among that handful, go on with your wishful thinking.

[edit on 15/9/06 by khunmoon]


LL1

posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 10:43 PM
link   
Ramadan begins next week 9/23/06 to 10/22/06.

They never indictated (USA) states by names, but during
OBL's request for permission from the Saudi cleric Al Fahd to attack, all articles have indicated
"7" states.

I've looked at populations
in several states. There are 6-7 that fit within the 10 million.

But again, in October the USA population increases to 300 million,
minus 10 million it equals 290 million. There is just something about this, may not even be October.
But why 10 million, and not 4, 3, or any other number?
That 2 and 9 equals 11, and they seem to be so fond of the use of the numerical system.

You have to really think out the box type of thought, as who would have ever thought
planes into buildings!

Their messages of verbal threats of attack are all connect the dots messages. They warn us,
as it is in their religious belief, "warn your enemy prior to attack".



posted on Sep, 16 2006 @ 08:56 AM
link   


posted by Behindthescenes

You WILL survive a nuke attack! We're no longer dealing with a MAD situation where millions will perish across the globe in a matter of minutes. Instead, we're dealing with terrorists who will use low kiloton detonations. Statistically, you will survive. But how to survive in the long haul i.e., avoiding radiation fallout, future cancer, etc will depend on how you prepare. [Edited by Don W]



To which accurate but not profound observations one can only add, Amen! Many of us, including me, got off on a tangent and began arguing the effects of megaton bombs and even went so far as to mention air bursts as if such bombs were delivered by an ICBM of high quality. None of which bears a direct relation to Mr. B/T/S’s original proposition.

Yes, most of us would survive a dirty bomb - low yield - smuggled into the US of A via a cargo container. I would label such after effects more an inconvenience and not Armageddon. Reflect back on the documented fact that Germany was able to raise its war munitions output until the end of 1944. The decline was due mainly to the shortage of fuel - gasoline. And that - war production - was despite the endless day and night bombing of Der Vaterland. That is why I’d describe the rendering useless of say, Baltimore harbor, for example, would be just an inconvenience to the US.

Prepare? Well, we ought to use a cost effective scale. We can’t afford to spend tens of billions on a project the enemy will spend only a few millions on. That is my major gripe about Bush43's WoT. The “enemy” can whipsaw us, and has done so quite effectively up to this time. We are nowhere on ending “terror tactics” and our spending is approaching $1 T. They, on the other hand, have spent just a few millions. We can’t win this kind of disproportionate war! This is asymmetric war with a vengeance!



posted by LL1

“ . . during OBL's request for permission from the Saudi cleric Al Fahd to attack, all articles have indicated "7" states. There are 6-7 that fit within the 10 million. (1)

“ . . in October the US population increases to 300 million . . There is just something about this . . why 10 million, and not 4, 3, or any other number? You have to really think out the box type of thought, as who would have ever thought planes into buildings! (2)

Their messages of verbal threats of attack are all connect the dots messages. They warn us, as it is in their religious belief, "warn your enemy prior to attack". (3) [Edited by Don W]



(1) Although I have heard of this “permission” that OBL supposedly sought, I’m doubtful if whatever he did had the same meaning in Arabic as we are assigning to it in English. As one of the writers of the Holy Writ said in reference to the rich and poor, “It is a gap across which we cannot cross.” Well maybe that’s more of my Yiddish? But whether it was as it has been reported or not, it is useless to us to predict the future. Of which I assure you, none of us can do.

One of the greatest fallacies of Christianity and its cultural derivatives, is the mistaken belief and misunderstanding that “prophet” in the Hebrew Bible means foretelling the future, when in fact their word for “prophet” more nearly means “preacher” in our modern lingo. Even though educated people know foretelling the future is hokum we still sometimes like to engage in it, as if we were playing with a Ouija board. It would be far more profitable for us to try to understand the past than to waste our time trying to predict the future.

(2) You are right on the unforeseeable “plane rams building” scenario. For that no one needs to accept “blame.” Blame implies willful or negligent ignoring of the obvious. I don’t know why Americans are so fascinated on assigning blame. It’s really juvenile. As was our knee-jerk response. But that for another thread.

(3) Another piece of useless information. I’m not addressing that remark to LL1, as he is not the first to say that. I mean, “so what?” I don’t like it because it is another gratuitous slur on Islamic culture by the currently dominate "born again" Christian culture. Of no value but to hatemongers demagoging the public. Like islamofascist. There is no better example of a violent religion than Judaism, unless it is Christianity, which makes all three of the so-called “three branches” of the True Faith, quite unjustified to referring to either of the other as violent. “True” being the operative hate word. It surely is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Ramadan begins next week, September 23 to October 22. That makes October 23 Eid ul Adna. A day of celebration and exchange of gifts. As in Hanukkah and Christmas.



[edit on 9/16/2006 by donwhite]



posted on Sep, 16 2006 @ 10:26 AM
link   
My statement or maybe question is, if OBL or any other terrorists decide to plant/detoniate a/an Nuclear device inside the US, isn't it probable that other nations would be funding it? I say Iran for sure, since they have been all defensive on their "Our right to have Nuclear Capabilities" and have continued developing it. Honestly, why would they need it? Yes, they might say for power, but being the nation they are, and the group that runs it (Hamas), I would say they have a deeper plan as to what it's going to be used for...Russia may also be up there as well as N. Korea...just a thought...



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 12:27 PM
link   
'The Nuclear Winter' and the like were talking about the ColdWar scenario of a major nuclear exchange between super powers when (as has been eloquently pointed out in the thread) delivery technology was less accurate so weapon yields were designned in the megaton range. That hasn't been the case since the early 60's. The liklihood of a major nuclear attack --- especially air launched --- is very small. What is a far greater possibility is one or a handful of warheads that have been acquired from some country's aresenal are detonated on the ground. Becasue of the technical complexity of the warheads (especially their detonation) it would be most likely that they would be smuggled into the country and setup in a fixed location (a house or warehouse).

Assuming this is done in a large city rest assured it will kill a great many people and many, many more afterwards from radiation from the fallout. But it is wrong to believe that the majority of the population would be killed either during or after the event. This is just not true.

We're not talking about a major nuclear war here but more likely a rogue/terrorist attack. There are very few countries with nulcear arsenals large enough to hit us with enough weapons spread over a large enough area to eradicate a majority of the population. And those strikes would be airbursts increasing the shockwave, thermal radiation and short-term direct radiation but lowering the fallout radiation (populations very far downrange would get to deal with that).



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 11:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by 2stepsfromtop
Here's what it would be like in L.A.



if it were to happen like that, id assume theyd bring the nukes over via the drug trafficking route and use helicopters instead of planes for detonation...

likely?



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by jtma508
As I pointed out in the other current ATS thread , most people are under the misconception that any nuclear attack would mean the end. Far from it. During the coldwar we routinely had air raid drills (yes, I'm that old) because the fear was a mutual exchange of hundreds of multi-megaton warheads.

These days we are far more likely to see a small number of isolated, kiloton range devices. The majority of people will survive this. But only if they know what to do (and not to do) and have the basic necessities to survive. It will only be necessary to shelter in-place for several days before radiation levels decay to a point where going outside is possible. But if you ARE going to survive you need to have some preparations in-place ahead of time.

Keep in mind, bugging-out (evacuation) for the vast majority of people in the affected areas is NOT going to be possible. Remember Katrina. It will be far worse. As stupid (and suicidal) as trying to relocate under the radioactive fallout would be, there would undoubtedly be martial law and serious travel restrictions. The government will be unable to help you or provide virtually any services. You will be on your own.

Here is one of many sites that can help guide you through the preparation process. There are many others on the web but start somewhere:

Disaster Prep

Whenever this issue comes up it's always 'guns and ammo... guns and ammo'. Forget your Mad Maxx fantasies. The roving, looting hordes won't fair quite as well as their Katrina ilk after a nuclear incident. Stored water --- a LOT of stored water --- should be #1 on everyone's survival list. Not just for drinking but for personal hygiene. Your Glock won't be worth a damn if you are debilitated by infection from your own feces. Don't think that will happen? Then you better start reading because you have a LOT to learn. And if you want to come for MY water... there won't just be water waiting for you.




wow man i wish I had the balls and the ability to throw away my pride and just leave the country



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 09:55 PM
link   
I've seen a few blast mappers, but none like that...can you put up a link to that???



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join