Barksdale Missile Number Six: The Stolen Nuclear Weapon

Originally posted by mattifikation
Can I also write a book and use this site to promote it? It seems to be an effective marketing strategy. I've got this great idea to point out how my roommate's credit card number was stolen once, so it MUST have been used to purchase a bomb, probably by him, to be used on his own mother in order to scare his brothers into mowing the lawn for him.

This is my favorite quote in this whole thread. I'm quoting it to illustrate my point that you're a fiction writer. Hey, you have to eat too. I understand that.

But if you're going to lie to me be convincing, feeling lied to is insulting.
I was at least polite enough to tell you that I was lying to you at times.
But you kept responding!

Coincidently I work in IT my boss is ex-Army and a fellow D.S. vet he worked in communication systems and set up the links in Iraq the first time.

I HAD to show him this thread. He said thanks for the lunchtime chuckle.
I'll be sure to promote your views among the other vets in my office.

Us G.I.'s are easily amused.

Originally posted by Skeptical0neIf you'd just admit this is all just a bunch of bull and fiction. I'd be inclined to read it deeper. Tom Clancy has made millions with some artistic freedom and a good conspiracy theory.

But you shoveling this load out as FACT.

What cannot be denied is the fact that the USAF wrongly loaded nukes on a bomber which was to fly across the USA in the first place. Regardless of whether or not we guess or know, or guess we know, that one of them is missing, an undeniable truth is that normal operating procedures were circumvented. Very simply, as explained many times, this CANNOT happen by mistake. It is IMPOSSIBLE to load nuclear warheads ACCIDENTALLY onto a bomber, and then unknowingly fly that bomber across the USA. This can ONLY happen with direct orders, in writing, with multiple copies made, and many people down the chain of command aware of what is going on.

To suspend the munitions officer "responsible" is yet another smokescreen - for one single person CANNOT be solely responsible for a mistake of this type. Quite simply, this type of mistake just could not happen. The only way (the ONLY way) missiles with nuclear warheads could be loaded onto a bomber is if someone ordered them there.

So leaving aside the point that a warhead MAY or may not be missing, it is undeniable that something major happened. This is confirmed by the fact that the USAF is being stood down - "to review procedures and protocols" which have been set in stone for 30 or 40 years now. It is not unwarranted speculation or ridiculous conspiracy theory to question what happened and why - because as many people have said mistakes of this kind just do not happen. It was no mistake that 5 or 6 warheads were loaded onto a B52. Whatever the real reason was, it certainly was no accident. And when our "guardians" make "mistakes" of this type is it unwarranted to ask some rather pointed questions - and to demand answers?

Originally posted by scrapple
I might also add that looking at the bomb loading configuration shown on Wiki (near the bottom) does it seem 'unlikely' that less than a full compliment (pairs of three) would be loaded for flight. (Any USAF input on this)

en.wikipedia.org...

Although I am sure a b52 can handle the unbalanced load, it simply seems unlikely that they would go out with only 5 if they had 6. That these 5 were the last laying around the bunker seems a stretch.

Ok, I'll be serious for just a second.

I can not confirm, deny or acknowledge what types of munitions (if any) an aircraft may or may not carry. Furthermore, as to the number of weapons carried by any Air Force asset either internally or externally I can not confirm, deny or quantify.

I will say that the policy of the United States Air Force to adhere to all internal policies and treaties pertaining to the deployment of any such assets.

If you read that, and that is my official statement, and want to understand why this guy is full of it. I suggest that you read the publicly available version of the SALT II treaty.

That is as close as you'll ever get to a answer. I also think these are the types of questions that need to be kept out of the public forum in the interests of operational security.

Now less seriously. No were not going to tell you how many weapons we can carry, what types and in what configurations! Like Duh!

But you can read the treaties we made and follow with the Russians.
You can infer what you like from there.

[edit on 14-9-2007 by Skeptical0ne]

Originally posted by franzbeckenbauer
What cannot be denied is the fact that the USAF wrongly loaded nukes on a bomber which was to fly across the USA in the first place. Regardless of whether or not we guess or know, or guess we know, that one of them is missing, an undeniable truth is that normal operating procedures were circumvented. Very simply, as explained many times, this CANNOT happen by mistake. It is IMPOSSIBLE to load nuclear warheads ACCIDENTALLY onto a bomber, and then unknowingly fly that bomber across the USA.

If it even happened at all. Nobody will ever know.
Maybe we made it up so rumors like this would go around.

And anything can be denied. Didn't you know there is no Groom Lake?

I said at the beginning of all of this it is tradition and downright fun to make up stories and see who will believe them. Officers frown on this because it makes public relations a pain when people believe them. We're really not supposed to do so.

Originally posted by Skeptical0neI said at the beginning of all of this it is tradition and downright fun to make up stories and see who will believe them. Officers frown on this because it makes public relations a pain when people believe them. We're really not supposed to do so.

It would be dangerously irresponsible to assume for one second that this is a prank. Whilst it is not impossible, it is highly unlikely that the USAF would stand down just to see what the reaction was, and it would be servile, unpatriotic and downright stupid for the rest of us to assume there is nothing really going on.

Also, what good would it do the US forces to have the confidence of the nation in them dented because of a prank? The very idea is even more "out there" than the idea there is the possibility of a wider conspiracy. Subjective, I know, but having served for 15 years in the armed forces I'd suggest that armed forces NEED the confidence and backing of their country; after events such as Abu Ghraib and the wider goings on in Iraq and elsewhere, the last thing the US forces need is to lose the waning backing of the USA.

Skepticalone,
I don't mean to be offensive you will take it which ever way you want,*SNIP*
you wrote
"My Dad was in Vietnam they said he worked on teletype machines."

Who is "they" ?the other little kids who picked on you cause you wet your bed? The "Powers that Be"? I know, President Nixon and the First lady, right?
You have not added one single pertinent fact other then the one I posted above.
You being privy to the code to the Mens john would be a freakin stretch.
Why don't you stop posting your inane drivel and sit back and read, most people will make up their own minds and don'cha know, everyone thinks their right.
f3, that is all

Mod Note: Terms & Conditions Of Use – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 14/9/2007 by Mirthful Me]

Originally posted by Skeptical0ne
Now less seriously. No were not going to tell you how many weapons we can carry, what types and in what configurations! Like Duh!

The wiki picture shows three tomo's per strut.

A six verses five pack compliment is an inference based on visible aerodynamic structure and the captured operational procedure.

Hope that doesnt bunch-up the red white and blues too much

Hello,
Maybe I am a pest , or just outraged.
Here Mr Skepticalone this is for you,

"In December 2001, President George W. Bush announced the U.S.. withdrawal from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty"

www.armscontrol.org...



SALT 2

"As such, the treaty was never ratified by the United States Senate.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Arms_Limitation_Talks

SALT is no more.
get you head out of your derriere
f3

Originally posted by fossilfuelfugue
SALT is no more.
get you head out of your derriere
f3

Now now, don't be so harsh. You should know by now that the only people who know what's REALLY goes on are those whose daddies served in 'Nam. The rest of us are just an irrelevant annoyance getting in the way of really important people...

Civility and decorum are the hallmarks...

Of discussion here at ATS...

Please review:

Mod Note: Courtesy Is Mandatory – Please Review This Link.

Mod Note: How Not To Be Banned From ATS – Please Review This Link.

Mod Note: Posting Conduct… Play The Ball – Please Review This Link.

Mod Note: Terms & Conditions Of Use – Please Review This Link.

Thanks.

Azchuck, I understand that you are just trying to find people who might be able to help with your investigation. However, it appears to me that you are not investigationg to reach the correct conclusion - you have already stated the conclusion and you are here now looking for people who can somehow bridge the information you already have to the conclusion you would like to be reached.

That is not the way to find the truth.

You will find the truth by taking the information you have, and filtering out the information that either is obviously false or cannot be verified. Then add to that the information you can get through further research until the only way the information can be added up is the truth.

You have scared half the people on this forum out of their wits by presenting your so-far unfounded theory as truth. Because the first half of your scenario - the part about how the nuclear weapons have been handled improperly and the punishment not seeming to fit the mistake/crime - is well founded, you make it seem that you have somehow proven your entire theory.

You have not.

I'm not saying that your conclusion is wrong, mind you, I'm just saying I don't believe it yet because there is no evidence leading me to do so.

Good luck with your research. Hopefully you find some information that proves you completely wrong, because I don't want to be blown up.

reply to post by Mirthful Me


Well, this will probably be my last post. Maybe I was a bit hard on ol Skep1 maybe not, its your forum I guess you have the right to discern the meaning of any comment. If you think S1 comments were professional or polite , whatever. We are suppose to be grown-ups here, if I am in a discussion with a group of adults and one of those adults talks out of another part of their anatomy, guess what? I'll tell him or her to their face. Why should we put on these pretensions? The worlds going to hell and this board is worried about politeness? Madness.

f3

Originally posted by fossilfuelfugue
Skepticalone,
I don't mean to be offensive you will take it which ever way you want,*SNIP*
you wrote
"My Dad was in Vietnam they said he worked on teletype machines."

Who is "they" ?the other little kids who picked on you cause you wet your bed? The "Powers that Be"? I know, President Nixon and the First lady, right?
You have not added one single pertinent fact other then the one I posted above.
You being privy to the code to the Mens john would be a freakin stretch.
Why don't you stop posting your inane drivel and sit back and read, most people will make up their own minds and don'cha know, everyone thinks their right.
f3, that is all

Mod Note: Terms & Conditions Of Use – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 14/9/2007 by Mirthful Me]

Ok to clarify I should have said "he" as in my father. But also "they" as in the United States Army.

You also right I have not added a single pertinent fact.
And I will not other than this story is false. Believe what you want.

So since you're going to call me out on the carpet here.

I checked my AFF 2587 just to be certain that I have not added a single pertinent fact beyond what I already described.

I also have not violated the provisions of the Espionage Act 18 U.S.C 793, 794. Or The Atomic Energy Act 42 U.S.C 2274-2277. Or The Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C 783). I am bound by law not to for life. I am also bound by the same laws to report any violations to which I am privy.

Some here are recklessly slinging around information with no regard for consequences. Just like death and taxes there are always consequences for stupid actions.

So, that being said, let's be crystal clear about one thing. I am an Honorably Discharged war veteran. I love my country and I think the U.S. Constitution and Scripture are the greatest documents ever penned by man.

I would die for this country, I would kill for it and I darn sure well would make a phone call for it. You got me roger ram jet?!

If I saw anything of a sensitive nature here or on any website I would report it faster than you can say, "I guess I was right." It would be my duty, honor and privilege.

You should be thankful I am here. Because if it weren't for guys like me there couldn't be guys like you.

And none of us would enjoy they freedom and exchange of ideas that we're enjoying on this forum. Free speech is the speech you don't want to hear but you need to hear. I respect of rights of the others to say what want here no matter insane I think they are. All I ask that I am afforded the same right.

I think I've said enough in my posts to show I know a little. If it gets your panties in a bunch that I won't share that's your issue not mine.

So here I will contribute one pertinent thing.
The fact I nor anybody else bound by the same terms as myself, regardless of branch have reported this thread and it's users, should speak volumes for it's factualness.

Happy?

reply to post by scrapple



The official Air Force web page on the B-52 has gone AWOL. Perhaps all info about the plane is now classified.

Info is available from many other reliable sources. The Federation of American Scientists has quite a bit of detailed info on the B-52 at:

www.fas.org...

The B-52 can carry various numbers of bombs or missiles under the wings, depending upon what is carried.

The B-52 can carry a maximum of 12 Advanced Cruise Missiles such as were flown to Barksdale, six under each wing.

Everything I have been able to find reports the plane carried a full complement of 12 missiles. And, with eight engines, the B-52 can easily handle unbalanced loads.

The number of cruise missiles loaded with nuclear weapons is at issue.

Part of the confusion may be my fault. Early on, I spoke of weapons, which might have implied either warheads or delivery missiles. Sorry for that.

At least as of a few weeks ago, anyone can edit text on the Wikipedia site. I recall reading not long ago that government officials were changing text almost as quickly as it was posted. Apparently Washington has at least a room, most likely a huge room, filled with technicians who are paid, most likely well paid, to do nothing but monitor and change Wikipedia info.

My suggestion is to view their site contents with a large grain of salt and confirm through reliable sources. I do not trust any info from the site at all.

My attitude is, once they have displayed the possibility they may not be speaking truthfully, I ignore anything and everything they say. Hope this helps.

azchuck

Originally posted by Skeptical0ne
I would die for this country, I would kill for it and I darn sure well would make a phone call for it.

Then you are a part of the problem. No notion of "nation" is worth killing for. Ever. To even suggest this is in any way honourable is a sign of a disturbingly effective program of brainwashing, the existence of which is responsible for the state of the world in the first place. Without such ideas there would be no need for this discussion in the first place.

I too am a "veteran" although I treat such accolades with abhorrence. I am ashamed of the fact that I was so stupid (and yes, brainwashed!) that I spent 15 years swallowing the lies and distortions, ultimately for no reason other than to advance the agenda of people who care less about veterans than they do about "nations" - and they care nothing for "nations". This can be confirmed at any minute of any day by an open-minded (something that exists less and less as the TV generation unfolds) look at the treatment of Iraq "veterans" in the USA and UK, and the brazenly unconstitutional actions of our "politicians" and "leaders".

If you would so blithely "kill for your country" then I can only pity your mental state and the wellbeing of your "nation".

Just my opinion, of course...

OK, I thought Mirthful Me's comments were pretty clear. I guess it wasn't for everyone. Let's continue this discussion with decorum and discuss the TOPIC, not each other.

reply to post by franzbeckenbauer


You are certainly welcome to your opinion but I'm a bit confused about your dismassal of anyone who might be willing to kill if that meant preserving the national security.

Could you explain further? If we were under attack are you saying you wouldn't be willing to defend the country? Are you of the opinion that there are no real threats in the world? Or do you just not care?

Originally posted by franzbeckenbauer

Originally posted by fossilfuelfugue
SALT is no more.
get you head out of your derriere
f3

Now now, don't be so harsh. You should know by now that the only people who know what's REALLY goes on are those whose daddies served in 'Nam. The rest of us are just an irrelevant annoyance getting in the way of really important people...

And this remark is for you. Apparently American troops are better diciplined then our British "Allies".

As I read in your posts you seem to rather enjoy babbling on like a school girl.

Maybe this is why we had 2 beaches on D-Day and you had one, oh then WWI when you would have starved, then there was 1776 and 1812 and my favorite the time Iran nationalized the oil fields and kicked you and your oil companies out and had beg a favor from Ike (who was in charge of D-Day) to save your oil interests.

So we had a coup and made a major enemy in Iran, but your welcome.

Oh and great job hanging on to your "British Empire".
I guess we'll take that too

I apologize to the rest of Britain for attacking the whole lot of you.
However this individual lacks the hair to share anything personal and chooses to make personal attacks. I have to take what the coward offers.

I feel bad he's your citizen.

And frankly you missed one point, the war on terror is our war. Thank you for the British contribution. We'll put it as a credit on your account.

Keep the stiff upper lip an show your world renowned manners.
It is tacky otherwise.

reply to post by fossilfuelfugue



My view is that Putin is playing the game of world chess. Or the game Risk, for real stakes. Either, he seems to be playing very well.

Unfortunately for Americans, Russia has a much brighter and savvier chess player leader than we. In my mind, Putin is to be commended. Putin may be the last good hope for all Americans who wish to avoid nuclear war.

I view the story as a public warning that extremely dire consequences await those who dare attack Iran. Kindly recall Russia has un-repudiated defense treaties with both Iran and Syria. Meaning if either country is attacked, Russia is in.

I see the recent dissolution of the Russian government in the same light: Putin is not grabbing power. He is clearing the decks of bureaucratic inertia so Russia can respond to war very quickly.

As to the plutonium being tell-tale: I ask who will determine and will they be believable. The answer: the American government will determine. Their findings will not be reliable and perhaps not even credible. I cite 9/11 as a course of government conduct in this arena.

As to the Counterpunch article you linked, I see dis-information at work. In several places, notably this quote:

"... it almost certainly had to be an accident..."

This is the official Air Force line.

Please see posts from me and supporting posts from others, notably from franzbeckenbauer earlier today for why I still cannot believe this was an accident.

azchuck

Originally posted by franzbeckenbauer

Originally posted by Skeptical0ne
I would die for this country, I would kill for it and I darn sure well would make a phone call for it.

Then you are a part of the problem. No notion of "nation" is worth killing for. Ever. To even suggest this is in any way honourable is a sign of a disturbingly effective program of brainwashing, the existence of which is responsible for the state of the world in the first place. Without such ideas there would be no need for this discussion in the first place.

I too am a "veteran" although I treat such accolades with abhorrence. I am ashamed of the fact that I was so stupid (and yes, brainwashed!) that I spent 15 years swallowing the lies and distortions, ultimately for no reason other than to advance the agenda of people who care less about veterans than they do about "nations" - and they care nothing for "nations". This can be confirmed at any minute of any day by an open-minded (something that exists less and less as the TV generation unfolds) look at the treatment of Iraq "veterans" in the USA and UK, and the brazenly unconstitutional actions of our "politicians" and "leaders".

If you would so blithely "kill for your country" then I can only pity your mental state and the wellbeing of your "nation".

Just my opinion, of course...

Funny you'd say that because I have family that killed and died for yours.
And we took the night missions and anything else you couldn't handle.

Keep going I like this insult fight.