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.

 

This is how the USA can be nuked..!!!

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 03:18 AM
link   
As the situation with North Korea continues to heat up, so goes the discussion as to the real threat. Along with the threat from North Korea comes a new threat from "Al-Qaeda" of using Pakistani nukes against the USA.

Alot of people who are not thinking outside of the box so to speak are coming into threads about these topics and stating that there is no way they can nuke the USA.

You are dead wrong.

There are several flaws in the system that could allow groups such as the two listed above to accomplish their goals of delivering a nuclear payload to major USA cities. Even though there have been laws made and changed in order to try and prevent the most obvious way that nuclear devices can be delivered from groups that wish us harm, the laws will protect nothing.

The government even warned us about how these groups can accomplish their goals.


There is no specific threat to corporate jets, but the TSA said in its 260-page proposal that many are the same size and weight as commercial planes “and they could be used effectively to commit a terrorist act.” Private jets, possibly packed with explosives, could fly into a building or could transport terrorists or dangerous materials, the TSA said.


TSA Proposes Screening Private Jet Passengers

While we are being distracted by the ominous "missle threat" that truely posses little threat. That is if we do not want it to. We are not paying attention to how we actually could be attacked.

There was alot of stories of this topic even on the MSM when it first became an issue. Now there is little info to be found about it.

This would make the perfect false flag, with no evidence of who did it. If this does come to fruition, our freedoms what little we still have, will be gone. If we need WWW3 then this would be the perfect way to make it happen.

Just as a side note. It does not take a very large boat to carry a nuclear payload into a docking station. It could be assembled in the bow of a seemingly innocent boat then drove into port with little to no suspicion.

I am not trying to fear monger anyone, I am just trying to remind everyone to think outside of the box. Prior to 9/11 civilians never would have thought about jet liners flying into buildings.

Prior to the next event we, would have never thought of the way that they execute their mission.




posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 04:26 AM
link   
Even if the U.S. were hit by nukes, I doubt that it would be a large scale attack, not even big enough to take out half of the country. That may not be the point though.

I would suppose that one or two nukes could be detonated inside the U.S. by our enemies, killing several innocent people. Most of our enemies, with nuclear arms, may understand the concept of complete annihilation and may not want to start things off with a nuclear attack.

If you were the ruler of one of our enemy countries and you wanted to conquer the U.S., you would quickly realize that you couldn't do it with a country completely destroyed by the U.S.. Therefore, a nuclear stratagy would be out of the question.

In the extreme case where a ruler went absolutely crazy, in a suicidal sense, and just wanted to set off nukes for no appaerant reason, then perhaps we could be hit with nukes. There is no winning a nuclear war and every one knows it, exept perhaps a couple extremist, and I doubt that it will actually happen. It is possible, but so is me hitting the lottory and I'm still broke.



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 04:52 AM
link   
reply to post by 100% Real
 


And what country would Al-Qaeda be? We also must deal with the global politics of the matter. We cannot just go nuking North Korea even if they nuke us. We have fallout to worry about. Our allies will have to deal with collateral damage to their innocent people. A nuke attack on the US does not mean that we will return the favor.



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 05:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by LeaderOfProgress
A nuke attack on the US does not mean that we will return the favor.


well it does really, come on now.

i mean the US is the only country to actually deploy the damn things and fall-out wasn't really a concern at that point.



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 06:34 AM
link   
reply to post by LeaderOfProgress
 


I figured that it would come down to Al-Qaeda! Of course those people are the only loones that would try to nuke any one. That's probably why they can't get their hands on any nukes, nobody will sell them any nor show them how to make one!

North Korea may have the technology but it doesn't mean that they will use it to attack any one, maybe as a threat but it would more than likely be a bluff.

As far as global politics go, well, we wont care what any body thinks of us if we're all dead because other countries percieve us as nuclear push-overs. For idiot countries and extremist groups to realize that nuclear attacks aren't inconsequential, retaliation is a must.



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 07:29 AM
link   
It seems nuclear attacks are the new it thing in the MSM of late. However, we should all truly hope it doesn't happen in the United States because if you think we have it bad now or after the 9/11 attacks you are truly in for much more. This what the government wants because they know the panic will engulf the entire country in a matter of hours after such an attack. The government strives on panic and misunderstanding. In that instance the iron fist will come crashing down on all of us. Get ready for Marshall Law, curfews, censorship beyond epic proportions, people taking sides, and the dissolution of the Constitution.

The Neocon General Tommy Franks alluded to such an event with this quote which tells exactly what they have up their sleeves:



Franks said that “the worst thing that could happen” is if terrorists
acquire and then use a biological, chemical or nuclear weapon that
inflicts heavy casualties. If that happens, Franks said, “… the
Western world, the free world, loses what it cherishes most, and that
is freedom and liberty we’ve seen for a couple of hundred years in this
grand experiment that we call democracy.”



The quote was original given in an interview to "Cigar Afficionado," some years back and referenced on the website "Dig the Heavy News," and the link is below if you would like to look at it in more detail.

digtheheavy.wordpress.com... government/

[edit on 22-6-2009 by Jakes51]

[edit on 22-6-2009 by Jakes51]



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 07:44 AM
link   
reply to post by LeaderOfProgress
 


You're still thinking too much "in the box".

If you wanted to "nuke the US", had access to a nuclear weapon, and did not want to commit sucide (personal, or national), the best way to deliver your weapon would be by GPS-equiped high-altitude balloon.

Cheap, simple, and at 80-1000,000 FT, virtually undetectable and un stoppable.


And yes, any nuclear weapon small enough to be flown aboard a plane or carried aboard a boat could be easily lofted under a balloon; scientific packages weighing 2 or more tons have been sent aloft under balloons for decades.



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 09:11 AM
link   
reply to post by LeaderOfProgress
 


Its a interesting thesis..I used to work for this company that transported the cars of the people between airports..The little jetcenters where they took off had no tight security in controlling their "clients"..Most people don't own a plane but have something like a stamp card [like in the bus] with which they can buy hours flying..But when there's a PJ ready they can take off at any moment necesarry..In most cases with a very small airport/runway people can just board the plane from their car on the runway and take their stuff with them from the car without anyone looking at it..These are the very small jetcenters, but you only have to look and find it.
This way they don't have to use remote controlled mid air detonation devices, and just EMP a whole continent from mid air..



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 11:30 AM
link   
The way to do this is at about the day about the after Thanksgiving after a bad storm year that has hit the south. Take a ship under North Korea flag. Fire a scud with a e bomb at rush hour off New York. The e bomb would 1). Knock out electric power 2). Freeze all traffic *plugging* the roads, stop trains and air crafts. 3). Cut off water, stop pumps for sewer 4).Prevent trash pick up 5). Bankrupt the system 6). Cut off heat and power making it dark at night just as winter is setting in. The damage would take months to recover if in its state was possible. Then if the US were to fire on N.K. the west coast would be screwed from the EMP at best. Even if we won the war I doubt a means to recover today. Scuds and e bombs can be made rather cheep. The only terrorist loss would the ship and the crew.



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by 100% Real
 


No Nuke attach will take out half the country! Not unless you have 100's fired at us. But you only need one to make a lot of damage and a lot more than a few Hundred people.

The easiest way is on a containership mixed with 600-1200 other containers and impossible to search until its on Dry land in New York Habour. this is a Nuclear weapon it does not need to be positioned to cause a lot of damage. 5-10 mile blast radius will kill 2-5 million people in NYC. -



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 12:17 PM
link   
The possibility of a large scale nuclear attack is nil. The most liekly scenario has always been the exploding of a "dirty bomb," in a highly populated area...NYC for instance. The intention would be to instill fear of massive exposure to radiation. The resulting panic, even if exposure was minor could disrupt this country to such an extent that it could finally finish the job of crashing the econony.



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 12:38 PM
link   
If somone was to take out power infastructure in a whole country like the us, which would take months and trillions to repair, with an EMP more people would die from that.

EMP devices may be getting smaller much more rapidly than nuclear technology. Biological weapons are getting even more advanced as well.

We are coming to a point of technological advancement where everyone who would use it irresposibly must be killed or locked up for life. The risk of self destruction on a planetary scale is to great.



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 01:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Bhadhidar
 


The catch is that the only countries that would have the ability to track and predict weather paterns so as to make this work, have ICBM's and long range bombers. Why waste time with a ballon when you can lobb 500 nukes our way, knowing at least a couple are going to make it through our defenses.



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 05:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Foppezao
 


Nuclear bombs have an EMP signature. It would be interesting though, now, to know what effect and how sensitive our appliances are to a nuclear explosion's EMP field.



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 06:15 PM
link   
This is patently absurd. Time and time again we've read threats or opinions like this since the 50's and yet.....here we stand. I won't dispute that global hostilities haven't escalated but a nuke... not gonna happen. Would it not be more plausible for terrorists to target large open venues (malls, amusement parks, sporting events, etc.). Generally they have more relaxed security enforcement as opposed to borders or nuclear facilities. The impact would be catastrophic especially if co-ordinated attacks were to occur (hmmm where have we seen that before). People are already on shaky ground with the economy, acts like this would sink what's left of consumer confidence and spiral the US even more in financial circles.

brill



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by brill
This is patently absurd. Time and time again we've read threats or opinions like this since the 50's and yet.....here we stand. I won't dispute that global hostilities haven't escalated but a nuke... not gonna happen. Would it not be more plausible for terrorists to target large open venues (malls, amusement parks, sporting events, etc.). Generally they have more relaxed security enforcement as opposed to borders or nuclear facilities. The impact would be catastrophic especially if co-ordinated attacks were to occur (hmmm where have we seen that before). People are already on shaky ground with the economy, acts like this would sink what's left of consumer confidence and spiral the US even more in financial circles.

brill


Never say never. In fact I think that it is inevitable. I mean NK, Pakistan, Israel, India, China, and Russia all have nukes and anyone of them wouldn't be upset to see a "terrorist attack" on a US city.

Iran will be testing a nuke in what, 4 or 5 months?

It is inevitable.

But I agree the US is vulnerable in many ways.

That being said I would rather be vulnerable and free than locked down by the Patriot Act and the like.



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeaderOfProgress
reply to post by Bhadhidar
 


The catch is that the only countries that would have the ability to track and predict weather paterns so as to make this work, have ICBM's and long range bombers. Why waste time with a ballon when you can lobb 500 nukes our way, knowing at least a couple are going to make it through our defenses.





Not So.

Study your history (Or is it your "History Channel" nowadays?)


The Japanese did not have ICBM's during World War II (and still don't, although they Do an impressive, home-grown space program!), and yet they were able to bomb the US mainland using nothing more that hydrogen-filled balloons made of paper!

See the following link for more information on Japan's Balloon Bombs:


www.damninteresting.com...



Now that was more than 50 years ago, and I daresay that meteorolgical knowledge has improved, and somewhat disseminated, since then.


And yet, even with the relatively crude technology of war-torn Japan, 50+ years ago, those bombs flew over 6,000 miles, across the Pacific ocean, and some of then were still able to inflict damage on US soil.


Anyone sophisticated enough to acquire a working nuclear warhead and some parts from Radio Shack could easily have any city on the West Coast of the US in their sights.



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 07:42 PM
link   
reply to post by brill
 


The threats are there what more do you need to show you that it is a distinct possibility in the near future? What makes you so complacent to believe that a rogue regime would not use nukes or that Al-Qaeda would not if given the opportunity.



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 08:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeaderOfProgress
reply to post by brill
 


The threats are there what more do you need to show you that it is a distinct possibility in the near future? What makes you so complacent to believe that a rogue regime would not use nukes or that Al-Qaeda would not if given the opportunity.


There will always be threats, that will never change. Rationalizing those threats based on history and facts leads me to believe that the projected or desired effect here won't come into play. If the 9/11 terrorists could target the Pentagon then they could have easily targeted nuclear facilities but that didn't happen. Now with heightened security measures the chances are much less.

Going to the other side, sure its possible a rogue regime could wreak havoc on mankind, but its also possible that my gas guzzling SUV could run on cat pee and crush the oil industry. I'm not holding my breath in either case and certainly not losing sleep over it. I have no doubts another 9/11 is coming, possibly with greater consequences, but not in the method described here.

brill



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 11:15 PM
link   
the scenarios are interesting, but the weather balloon one was the best. i think terrorists these days lets say in quatar, iran,saudi, or north korea say for example. all they need to do is hack in the govt. installations and fire off a nuke by hacking into computers here and then say that usa did it and blame us for the happening. that way the person who did it wouldent even have to leave the country and then dissapear.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join