If the next NWO step is to nuke a city...

Why do most seem to think that it would happen in U.S? I'm not saying it couldn't be, but being realistic, it could be anywhere else also.

reply to post by v01i0


Turning the entire USA into a police state after such an event would be difficult to pull off...

maybe London...

Britain would be an easier "test-bed" to try out their martial law tactics...since it is already the most heavily monitored place. (London, that is...)

reply to post by dirtonwater


OK I concede, if this is what you choose to see as reality, then I will back away as we have nothing in common. I liked how you brought Santa Claus into the mix to support your claim. Lets see Santa Claus and the NWO? Like I suggested before use your google search engine above and what you will find is that it links you to ATS/BTS topics. I am not being mean, just want you to read about what the forum members have written about the current state of intelligencia.

Originally posted by mazzroth
All this talk of Nuking an American city originated were ???? how come an urban myth has become so ingrained in people here on ATS ?.

Besides the real interesting part of this Urban Myth appeals to the Doomsayers and Apocalyptic crowd, perhaps because of some Hiroshima/Nagasaki guilt ? or perhaps the guilt ascosciated with all the DU rounds fired in the middle east in the last 5 years ?

Well the doomsday sowers of the "urban myth" are your government.

Bush and Cheney have invoked the possibility of a nuclear attack on the US repeatedly; a question in the last Democratic primary debate was on the order of "What would you do after a terrorist-planted nuke went off on US soil?"; the NY Times and Wash. Post regularly carry long articles outlining just this scenario, the USG had an exercise last year in Washington to simulate evacuation of the entire gov't in the event of just such attack; Warren Buffet--one of the richest men in America--is funding a think tank dedicated just for nuclear terrorism, we are actually paying ourselves to insure Russia's nukes are secured--need I go on? Think they've not been trying to scare everyone half to death for over a decade already?

In response to the OP, the most likely scenario of a false-flag nuke attack is to set off a stolen Russian or Pakistani black-market low-yield nuke--the smallest you can get away with--in a third-rank city's business district on a weekend evening, when almost no one would be in the area. Someplace in the heartland--so Middle America gets the point that terrorists will strike anywhere--with a population of 100,000 to 200,000. Someplace economically expendable and that votes Democratic. There is no gain from taking out a vital first- or second-tier city. Just setting it off is all you need to do to.

Appalling scenario, but this is something the PTB have been bracing themselves for for many years, false flag or real terrorists makes little difference if it goes off.

The canada or mexico theory has some merit but I am really thinking that it would have to be a US city for it to cause a complete downfall of society and launch us into the camps and martial law.

I was thinking it would be the dallas metroplex but (im pretty sure) cheney has a house here and I read sometime ago that bush plans on retiring here, so I think its pretty safe for us to cross DFW off the list.

It will have to be a major population center for the attack to have the desired effect of complete hopelessness.

plus jr bob dobbs was rumored to be still hanging out in dallas and who would wanna nuke him?

Originally posted by 911fnord
The canada or mexico theory has some merit but I am really thinking that it would have to be a US city for it to cause a complete downfall of society and launch us into the camps and martial law.

I was thinking it would be the dallas metroplex but (im pretty sure) cheney has a house here and I read sometime ago that bush plans on retiring here, so I think its pretty safe for us to cross DFW off the list.

It will have to be a major population center for the attack to have the desired effect of complete hopelessness.

plus jr bob dobbs was rumored to be still hanging out in dallas and who would wanna nuke him?

Remember how BIG our country is.

It would be Years before the NWO system could round up all the rural people out there just waiting for something like this to happen...

I am not saying it could'nt happen, I am just saying it would be one HECK of a tough thing to pull off.

My question is: Why a CITY? Sure ...kill LOTS of people; get those that survive terribly riled up and all that.
Would it not make better sense to destroy infrastructure that would also kill many? I am thinking dams: power generators with millions living downstream. Can you imagine the devestation after, for example, Roosevelt Dam northeast of Phoenix, was reduced to rubble? the wall of water would virtually flush Phx to the Colorado river.
Hitting Hoover Dam, near Las Vegas, probably not cause as many immediate deaths, but it would darken all the neon of Vegas, and some of CA; as well as, disrupt the water supply for LA and surrounding region.
Is there a thread here on ATS that speculates that as many as 10 US cities have been targeted by the "terrorists", with either limited nuclear, and/or "dirty bomb" devices?
The possibilities are real, I only hope NOT forthcoming!

When i read the OP's first post i immediately envisaged the use of this:

en.wikipedia.org...

A miniature nuclear device the size of an RPG, 2000 odd of which were on active deployment in the rather security lax regions of the former USSR?

Not good news at all!

[edit on 30-1-2008 by 44soulslayer]

[edit on 30-1-2008 by 44soulslayer]

I think a nuke strike on an american city or cities is entirely probable. New york of course being the prime candidate. I do belive that the threat is not imminent but perhaps by 2012(oh no theres that mayan calendar thing again). The reason I believe it is not imminent is because I believe there are still some NWO agendas that have to be completed first. I also think the biological thing is possible but I don't put any credibilty into the "saving the infrastructure" theory. New York is currently the financial center of the world but I believe the powers to be are trying to shift that power center to the middle east. Thereofre New York is no longer nessesary. Also you can research the NWO take on the environment and how they want to close off a large part of the world for it to remain in a natural state, in part that has to do with the population decrease. What better way to restore parts of america to a natural state than to erase it and let nature take over.

My other point is this, A nuclear strike on one or more likely several american cities will throw this country into a state of chaos never before experianced on this planet. With America being in such a state of chaos it will leave the door wide open for the U.N. to invade our country with the goal of restoring order. Can anybody say "goodbye" to our national soverignty. Thus eliminating the head strong americans with all the guns which will make life a whole lot easier for the NWO.

Another consideration is that Ultimatley the NWO will need to be controlled by one person. As I see it now there are now mutiple people or mutiple familes in charge. I believe there will be some huge power plays going on to narrow this field down. Currently they are probably working together as can be seen with the bilderberg group but dont think for a minute that the individual powers are not conspiring against each other.

Once the Bush family leaves Houston, Texas and Crawford, Texas for their new land in Paraguay, I suspect Houston and Dallas will be high on the disposable list.

reply to post by photobug


What you say makes sense.

The plan to return parts of the US back to a natural state would be hard, with major regions being irradiated. (nothing natural about that)

I just feel that our country is so vast that there would always be pockets of resistance...

Which may not be a concern to them in the grand scheme...

New York is a prime target but kind of obvious. I think DC becuase it would strike fear into the heart of Americans. Of course it would take place after the present inhabitants of the White House leave and most of the politicians would be on vacation. Kind of like the very small number of people in the twin towers or on the airlines during 9/11. The airforce might even be on a drill that was simulating a nuclear attack on a major US city.
An order to stand down might be given and of course everyone who fails to protect innocent Americans will be promoted for what a fine job they did.

[edit on 30-1-2008 by polanksi]

[edit on 30-1-2008 by polanksi]

If anything this thread is good for proving that SOMETHING has to happen to get the wheel rolling, and that something needs to be big.

I know thats vague but I think its a good point and one that needs to be made. We can theorize all day about what that event could be and who knows we might of just nailed it on the head (or thread hehe). Above all it proves something gotta give in order for them to execute an alex jones like outcome (think endgame).

also think bout the possibility of a epidemic bird flu or something like that breaking out and that being the catalyst.

reply to post by Pellevoisin


ohh yeah I forgot bout that little pearl of information. I stand corrected go ahead and put DFW on back on the list and its probably more likely than houston because houston has some strategic advantages like being a port city and uhhh well thats it I guess.

although if a nuke went off in houston one good thing is that it might somehow make the weather cooler

reply to post by 911fnord


A bird flu epidemic would be awful and very scary, but it seems to me that it would be hard to pin the blame for that kind of event on any one group.

Identifying the enemy seems to me to be important for the NWO to have the surviving public to focus it's hate on, like blaming Al Queda for 9/11...

reply to post by coastlinekid


I do not disagree with you.

What has always puzzled me, is how those doing it expect to be immune from the same radioactive effects hitting the rest of us. The air, water, and soil will be poisoned. Radioactivity will not simply stay localized, but will travel through the air internationally as the earth rotates. There can be no DEW, or any other nuclear, without electromagnetic radiation of high powerful kinetic and thermal energy of extreme toxic proportions.

I have come to the conclusion those, infatuated with WMD use for self-service, have deluded themselves into believing they are completely invincible. They are that far out of touch with humanity and the ecology of the earth.

The theoretical nuke would probably not have a relatively high yield, so it would be important to maximize both the effective power and the symbolic effect.

I assume it would be a fairly busy seaport, since it would be difficult to transport the device any distance without being discovered. There are radioactive source tracking satellites in orbit that will spot any noteworthy hot object without proper shielding. So the best bet would be to float it in on a container ship in a specially shielded container and detonate it in the harbor.

In that regard, you'd want to select a city that still has its business district close to the shore, so that would eliminate cities like Los Angeles.

New York City is the obvious choice, I suppose, which tends to make me think that it will be someplace else.

San Diego, California.

Seaport, large Navy/Marine base, downtown close to shore, backed by hills that will amplify the destructive force, as it did in Nagasaki. It's also close enough to Mexico to imply that terrorist forces have free run of that country, making it a direct and immediate threat. That would justify a huge movement of troops into Mexico, with the ultimate goal of consolidating the North American Union.

Just a guess. I'm not working on it or anything, so please Mr. FBI man, no need to knock my door down tonight.

Originally posted by OrionStars
reply to post by coastlinekid

 

I do not disagree with you.

What has always puzzled me, is how those doing it expect to be immune from the same radioactive effects hitting the rest of us. The air, water, and soil will be poisoned. Radioactivity will not simply stay localized, but will travel through the air internationally as the earth rotates. There can be no DEW, or any other nuclear, without electromagnetic radiation of high powerful kinetic and thermal energy of extreme toxic proportions.

I have come to the conclusion those, infatuated with WMD use for self-service, have deluded themselves into believing they are completely invincible. They are that far out of touch with humanity and the ecology of the earth.

Indeed, that is why I am inclined to believe it would be a tactical nuke with limited damage. An event that would be able to be covered by the Corporate Media to provide "Shock and Awe" to the public on a steady basis...


The public's mindset was intentionally steered into a state of fear and helplessness for a period of time after 9/11.

The real perpetrators used this period to establish their evil agenda.

Problem:Reaction:Solution

I am 100% convinced that such an event would happen during a "training exercise" of some sort. This is the modus operandi. Such large training exercises, their run dates, are posted on Prison Planet, when they come up.

reply to post by photobug


The Cleveland Clinic is erecting a massive complex in Dubai. Plus, that is also where Halliburton is currently moving their headquartersl:

www.ameinfo.com...

abcnews.go.com...

If it is true Bush and others are moving to Paraguay......

www.counterpunch.org...

Still, I do not understand why they think they are invincible, including moving so far away from the US. That will not stop high levels of radioactivity from affecting them too.