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.


Top 6 best places to nuke for maximum destruction

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 04:16 PM
Wow this guy has me topped.

I was just thinking that nuking the Hoover Dam, the oil refineries in Galveston Bay, the Port of Long Beach, or the Mississippi River delta would be devestiating enough to destroy the economy of the U.S.

But this guy is proposing placing a nuke in the Yellowstone Volcanic Caldera.

Talk about serious fallout.

Hundreds of cubic kilometers of magma at high pressure. A five kilometer cap that limits eruptions to only every million years or so. A well-placed explosion that destroys that cap in the space of a few seconds. A lava plume ten times taller than Mt. Everest, followed by perpetual and global night that lasts for years. This one requires a nuke slightly larger than 1-megatons - 20-megatons ought to be sufficient.

Top 6 best places to Nuke to destroy the world economy.

1) Tehran, Iran
2) Washington, D.C.
3) Destabilize an oceanic shield volcano next to a methane clathrate deposit.
4) Manhattan
5) Knock off a chunk of Cumbre Viejo at La Palma in the Canary Islands
6) Yellowstone Caldera

[edit on 27-7-2008 by In nothing we trust]

posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 04:47 PM
I think you'd like this newsgroup:

posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 04:48 PM
reply to post by In nothing we trust

This is eye opening to say the least. The author gave much thought to these potential targets and the possibility of their destruction, but I wonder if he gave any thought about him being the one that GIVES THE IDEA to terrorists looking for the most effective soft targets...

I'm glad I'm in the mountains...

posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 05:27 PM

Originally posted by Tapped In
I wonder if he gave any thought about him being the one that GIVES THE IDEA to terrorists looking for the most effective soft targets.

Don't you think that the terrorists are smart enough to think of this stuff themselves?

They were smart enough to co-ordinate the 9/11 attacks to co-incide with the beginning of the Egyptian Coptic calendar which begins at dawn on 9/11.

[edit on 27-7-2008 by In nothing we trust]

posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 05:30 PM

Originally posted by In nothing we trust
...1) Tehran, Iran
2) Washington, D.C.
3) Destabilize an oceanic shield volcano next to a methane clathrate deposit.
4) Manhattan
5) Knock off a chunk of Cumbre Viejo at La Palma in the Canary Islands
6) Yellowstone Caldera

[edit on 27-7-2008 by In nothing we trust]


The scariest place of all is about 200 miles above Kansas, for a fairly big nuke.

The EMP blast would take out the entire United States.

posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 08:33 PM
If all you wanted to do is destroy the economy you wouldn't even need to set one off. All you have to do is tip off ICE to one coming in on a shipping crate. Then you threaten that there are others.... economy goes by bye!

posted on Jul, 28 2008 @ 03:18 PM
Any financial hub that is disabled would cripple the world. A small airburst of around 5 kilotons over SF, NY or Chicago would make 10 square miles unihabital and completely useless. The world would drop into a deep depression and many area of the US would fall into anarchy.

posted on Jul, 30 2008 @ 11:43 AM
It really wouldn't make any difference where you set it off, the mere fact that nuclear weapons are now in the hands of terrorists would destabilize the world economy in hours.

posted on Jul, 30 2008 @ 12:01 PM
Lets say the Islamic world acquired 6, 10 megaton warheads, and decided to use them against the western world.

1. New York City
2. London
3. Rome
4. Jerusalem
5. Toykyo
6. Bejing

New York City
The 9/11 attack caused a recession in the USA if the entire city was destroyed not only would we have 10 million causality's but I think it would destroy our economy.

Same as New York

Same as New York but would also destroy the seat of the Catholic Church.

Same as the others but would also destroy the most holy places for both Christian and Islamic cultures, and if the USA could not help Israel, it would be doomed. If it lead to the fall of Israel I do think the Muslims would bomb, despite the Dome on the Rock.

With NYC, London, Rome and Tokyo destroyed it would lead to the economic destruction of the entire western world.

With the above cities destroyed. The only power that could stand up to the Islamic world would be China, unless Beijing was destroyed.

posted on Jul, 30 2008 @ 12:04 PM
hmmm thats actually a big weakspot,place a nuke at yellowstone and the USA would crumble...not good having a super volcanoe in your back yard...guess the most of the world would come with you though....

[edit on 30-7-2008 by Lethil]

posted on Jul, 30 2008 @ 12:41 PM
I had the same thoughts about London and Tokyo for the economic collapse. Even Hong Kong would provide a very big hit on the economy.

Nuking Jerusalem or Tehran would just do the USA a favor and be the death of Islamic terrorist for the next couple of generations.

The EMP above the USA or Europe is the economy killer with no damage other than toasted electronics.

posted on Jul, 30 2008 @ 01:43 PM
reply to post by LDragonFire

Im with LDragonFire on this one. Taking out the largest and most important cities among the powerful western, middle east and oriental nations would certainly do the trick.

2 planes/2 buildings = massive ammounts of chaos (commercial, social, infrastructural, logistical etc...).

6 nukes/ 6 major cities = the above times 600+

The entire worlds commercial, social, infrastructural, logistical (etc) funtions would easily cease to exist as we now them... forever.

[edit on 30-7-2008 by Grock]

posted on Jul, 30 2008 @ 01:50 PM
Nuke shmuke. Load 6 terrorists with bio agents (say, a mixture of hemorrhagic fever viruses and small pox). Send them to Grand Central, Union Station, LAX, O'Hare, Logan, and Atlanta.

posted on Jul, 30 2008 @ 01:50 PM
the best thing to do with a nuke is to blow up a country and say someone else did it.

example: blow up Moscow and point fingers at china. russia invades china starting WW III. all the countries will start firing missiles and soon we are all dead. refer to the video below for more info.

posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 05:43 AM
Any terrorist that detonates a nuke seriously should be considering the ending, because that what it would be an ending , of all , of everything.
Sure a couple of jets into buildings makes headlines ,causes many deaths, and financial chaos.
But a nuke , come on, wheres the logic in that, a small yield would make sure the local community suffered, and their children would as well for a few generations ( if we all live to have another generation). But firing a nuke at the supevolcano enough to start it off, let me see, a mile high plume at least , millions of tonnes of magma, not to mention poison fumes. Think about Krakatoa, that went off in the dark ages and look what happened there.
Lots of smoke and and fumes, a lot of death in the vacinity plus a smoke covering the whole world, hence the name the 'Dark ages').
A nuke at major cities or financial centres NY London HK etc, would leave the world a ruin. Not only would economies collapse as the terrorists want, but look at the bigger picture. Not only would their enemy suffer but also the people theyre supposed to be fighting for.
It would be supremely selfish of anyone to start down this road, we would end up back in the stone age, all technology gone, no fuel to power cars , supply homes or hosptials. Food stocks would diminsh, millions would and will starve, the few that remain would fight and kill for whatever food and water not contaminated , hence the end of all human life on earth. hey presto even the super eilte wouldn't be able to buy anything because money wouldn't be worth the paper its written on and gold wouldnt even be able to be bartered for food.
The land itself unfit for habitation or cultivation. so using a nuke is self defeating for any terrorist to use, but saying you have one and are prepared to use is where the terrorist real power lies. Also if they wanted using small arms, bombs , planes etc is more practical as it means the country your attacking has to deal with it and keep it to the forefront of its mind. People still go on about 9/11 7 years after the event and will do for years to come. The terrorists win with fear of attack. Its all well and good the US attacking a foreign country and removing dictators but you have to deal with the aftermath, thats where all combat falls down. you come, you shoot , you leave. sorry it doesn't work like that for me. the populace have to want to help them selves in the run as well.
terrorists use fear tactics, and win, theres is no gun or bomb that can be more powerful than fear. only one thing is more powerful than fear, and thats death. But why can't we as a world , just try to live, yes we have differences , thats why we're not clones or ants. we're people, black, white, yellow, red, christian, mulim, hindu, who cares, all our blood is red and our poop is brown. get over it and try to get through a day with love for man instead love for money and power.
The future will be great for all of us if the power of love overtakes the love of power.
right im done moaning , i'm off , laters.

top topics


log in