It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Report: Air Force lost track of nuclear missiles

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 07:06 PM

Originally posted by observe50
I thought that the military pilots always checked there planes before they flew. Don't you think they would have seen them?

they would have....however if you have read previous posts.....the aircraft was supposed to be transporting the missles....just not the warheads....

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 07:13 PM

Originally posted by Majic
"I Was Only Following Orders"

If that actually happened, then the problem isn't just with the weapons crews at Minot, but more fundamental and systemic in nature, and their commanding officers are directly responsible for this lapse and the security breach accompanying it.

There does seem to be an ulterior motive in publicizing this incident

These parts of your post gave me a thought. Is this a lead up to a bogus investigation? I think this "investigation" would implicate somebody who currently knows too much about something, and needs to be muffled. How long before this comes out? How public will the results of this investigation be? I don't know, I think that there's a darn good reason that this incident was made public.

I don't think it's possible to "accidentally" load nukes on a plane. Somebody either ordered this to happen, or leaked the false story to the press. Either way, I think somebody is getting into alot of trouble for something other than this story.

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 07:16 PM
Look as a matter of pure fact, the USAF does not transport nukes set for the scrap yard on B-52s. Does NOT happen like that. I cant imagine what went wrong to allow this mess. But to even get the things on the wings you need the HIGHEST ok. This stinks, it sounds like it was a paperwork error a major one....woof bad very bad. If that plane had went down we would or could have a hell of a mess if the core on one of those things split. No excuse for this one, someone needs his wedding knockers fed to him.

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 07:37 PM
What I don't get is I've watched various military documentaries on military aircraft and such, First everything thats in the load out is checked multiple times not only by the ordnance crew, Even the pilots go around the aircraft and observe to make sure everything checks out for the mission, Everything is accounted for and everything is cleared for that mission individually they dont just go to the armory take a few things and throw on on the aircraft, even to get out of the armory before going to the planes these things must be released..

If nukes were on the aircraft they knew about it before they took off..

[edit on 5-9-2007 by C0le]

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 07:48 PM
I am still leaning toward the thought that this is more of a message then anything (if it even happened at all). Either the US having a pissing contest with Iran, or something more sinister having to do with the NWO passing along secret messages in the media. What is the overall symbology of this event?
Lets not forget the 4bil in put options and troop deployment in DC. Not to mention all the chatter about something really big happening soon. I don't know you guys but I'm really starting to get the impression the next "terrorist" attack may be right around the corner...
Would a nuke going on off in one of our cities give ole' Bush the power to declare martial law? It certainly would be enough to invade Iran...

I guess only time will tell.

[edit on 5-9-2007 by Viszet Oki]

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 07:54 PM
Is it conceivable that the orders were indeed for it to fly with the warheads, but when some civilian authority (who might oppose the practice) found out, the USAF had to cover its ass by saying it was an accident?

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 07:57 PM
That could make sense... but how does any civilian authority know what the USAF is doing at any given time, come on this is the gov were talking about not American Airlines

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 08:01 PM
Because there can be some very, very highly ranked civilians. Or ranked highly enough to cause trouble if they disagree with "what's happening".

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 08:06 PM
Just to get access to an area containing nuclear devices:

Must ALWAYS have two people in team.
Must ALWAYS be in visual contact with the other person.
Must have proper pass to area.
Must always have ID on person.
Must be searched (person.)
Must have all tools/boxes searched.
Must have any involved vehicles searched.
Must stay in marked pathways.
Must never go near nuclear device unless two-man team is accompanied by two man security team.
Must sign into area.
Must sign in and out any items installed or removed from aircraft.
Must always remain in camera/tower view.
Must sign out of area when done.
All items searched on way back out of area.

All of this was just to fix a broken knob on a panel. And this is just the non-classified stuff that had to be gone through.

The thought that any nuclear device (much less five) could drop out of accountability is frightening. This simply could NOT happen by stupidity, nor by bad chance. It is only possible by utter negligence or intentional design.

The overflight is nothing of concern. Nada. The above just isn't suppose to happen.

(Working for a few years on and off of the alert pad with B-52Gs, I've seen people thrown to the ground and hauled off for a few hours in the jail just for not having an ID badge outside their shirt where it could be seen. We all took security that seriously.)

Take Care.

[edit on 5-9-2007 by MaxCola45]

[edit on 5-9-2007 by MaxCola45]

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 08:50 PM
It seems to me that after reading thru more of this thread that most people seem to agree that nukes don't mistakingly get put on a plane and sent cross country..

Someone had to secure those nukes to the B52 and someone had to inspect them to make sure they don't accidently fall out/off the plane...

And aren't B52's used for dropping, not transporting bombs?

And another thing, why say that we "mistakingly" transported nukes? Why make our military looks stupid and negligent? No one's buying that it was a mistake, at least no one on ATS.

[edit on 5-9-2007 by WASTYT]

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 08:52 PM
What if.....

Something different had occurred and we'd never have been told of this plane?

Instead we where told Iran built it's nuke and used it on Us/Isreal... Did someone with a sliver of intelligence sacrifice there lives/career to stop it..?

And this is what we are told?

Hi Ho.. Its off to work I go? or is it war, or is it camp.. Betcha someone gets rich in the process....

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 08:57 PM
Barksdale Air Force Base is being used as a jumping off point for Middle East operations?

Is that true????!!!

I just heard this on the radio.

The fact that someone leaked the information about nukes being transferred there (how else would the media get a hold of this story of a military screw-up?) combined with the fact they were moved to a base that is a staging ground for middle east operations is freaking me out!


edit: OK after doing a google of the story the radio host talked about I think I found the original claim that the nukes are being staged for Iran:

I called a old friend and retired B-52 pilot and asked him. What he told me offers one compelling case of circumstantial evidence. My buddy, let’s call him Jack D. Ripper, reminded me that the only times you put weapons on a plane is when they are on alert or if you are tasked to move the weapons to a specific site.

Then he told me something I had not heard before.

Barksdale Air Force Base is being used as a jumping off point for Middle East operations. ... Why would we want to preposition nuclear weapons at a base conducting Middle East operations?


[edit on 9/5/2007 by Gools]

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 09:06 PM
One would think this would be bigger news where Im at, considering I'm in the same city as Barksdale AFB.

[edit on 5/9/07 by MikeboydUS]

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 09:13 PM
Also, I'm wondering if maybe these USAF fellas were waiting for the opportunity to retaliate for the (foiled) terror-attack on Ramstein (which had been under surveillance for a while)...

Did the US maybe WANT the Ramstein offensive to be carried out so they could retalliate (blame Iran & nuke them?)?

Just thinkin'.

[edit on 5/9/07 by Fuggle]

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 09:19 PM
reply to post by Gools

Barksdale AFB has always been a point of Origin for B-52 strikes where ever they may be. I remember as I child watching the whole Wing take off one after the other like a massive convoy of B-52's back in 1991. I also remember watching on CNN not too long after that B-52s from Barksdale launched the opening salvo in the air campaign.

You dont need to preposition anything BAFB has numerous nuclear weapons. Its where we keep the majority of our B-52s.

Something might be up though over the past few months I have seen tons of weird things out here. Normally on base they have F-16s, A-10s, and the B-52s. Recently I have seen F/A-18s which are not Air Force, JSTARS, and AWACS flying around. The B-52s have been doing constant flights. Its been real busy in the air around Barksdale. Could be nothing though. They often fly to Afghanistan and Iraq.

Mod Edit: Converted large post quote to a REPLY TO: link.

[edit on 5-9-2007 by UM_Gazz]

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 09:55 PM
I wonder what would happen if that bomber had happened to suffer "mechanical failures" and went down over a city... Kindof scary that the military can screw up so badly.

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 10:17 PM
when i caught wind of this i couldnt wait to come home and see what all of us thought ...

a lot of what is being said in this thread makes sense ...but to my surprise only one person said what was on my mind...

Viszet Oki, i give you props for expressing concern over the possible relationship between the nukes and the 4 billion dollar bin laden bet.

i remember reading in a thread, related to the bin laden bet, something that made people ponder what it would take to have the market crash...and among those things was a nuclear attack...

now...i understand it would be somewhat of a strecth to assume that THIS is how its starting...and i def do give credibility to the notion that it is a show of force...

but i what if..ya kno...

just my two cents..

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 10:26 PM
I know a lot of people on this site like to blame our government for everything, but what about this theory. Our government has reliable intel that a terrorist group has a nuclear weapon inside the US and plans to use it. Our response is to show that we can put six of ours on a B52 and bomb where ever we want back to the Stone Age. We know if the terrorists had nukes and could use them, they would. Why do we always have to blame the US? There really is evil in this world, and they want to kill us. The fact that they have not been able to yet does not mean everything is a false flag.

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 10:34 PM
But what if the message is not to some other country but to us? Our country our freedoms what next? Just a suggestion. Great thread btw I am impressed with all of the knowledgeable people here that take scary spin and bring it on down to earth. Still scary though.

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 10:40 PM
Actually, in 1957 the military did accidentally drop a nuclear weapon on Albuquerque, New Mexico once while flying it from Ft Bliss Texas to Kirkland, A.F.B. The high explosive part of it detonated, but I believe the physics package was separated from the bomb. There have been several incidents worldwide. The link below only covers the U.S. caused incidents.

Nuclear Incidents

[edit on 9/5/2007 by TheAvenger]

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in