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.

 

Nuclear Threat with a deep Gulp !!!!!

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 06:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Alethea
 


I understand, but what I am saying is that, at least with the way things were during the cold war, any such incident would have started an automatic escalating response. They did not care where it came from, back then, it would have been assumed it was from the Soviets or one of their allies. How things would play out today is another question though.




posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 07:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by john124
Russia does not have a nuclear defence pact with Iran.


A bit dated, but here you go…

Attack Iran and you attack Russia

The barely reported highlight of Russian President Vladimir Putin's visit to Tehran for the Caspian Sea summit last week was a key face-to-face meeting with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

A high-level diplomatic source in Tehran tells Asia Times Online that essentially Putin and the Supreme Leader have agreed on a plan to nullify the George W Bush administration's relentless drive towards launching a preemptive attack, perhaps a tactical nuclear strike, against Iran. An American attack on Iran will be viewed by Moscow as an attack on Russia.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 07:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Izarith
reply to post by Alethea
 


Any way, only from south of the US boarder would this be possible, if it were possible, which it is not. Ships that are not chartered would definitely send a red flag before it even made is halfway past the Atlantic.

To cross the sea you need a ship large enough to feed yourself and have enough fuel. You need a crew and most of all you need port authority enter US water space. a none response would be tracked and interrogated, failure to comply would result in a sunk ship many. many miles from any shore.

not going to happen sorry.

[edit on 2-12-2009 by Izarith]


Hi Izarith:

How about this scenario:

They get a ship big enough to house and feed all terrorists, have enough fuel to travel the world, have a nuke on board, and sets sail from anywhere that has loose shipping regulations... (Somalia) towards the USA.

I am assuming the East Coast (NYC) would be their target, but I think if they were smart, they would target San Francisco because the nuclear fallout would travel across the USA via the jet stream. BIG problem!

Let's stay with the East Coast. They travel towards NY Harbor (or any other city's harbor). Once near the US within the legal off-shore distance, the nuke is "turned-on", but not blown up yet.

Then they point the ship at New York Harbor. Accelerate to Flank Speed!

They guide the ship in, despite all the police and military presence trying to stop that ship. Once in the harbor or close to the harbor, it does not matter what happens next. They are attacked and the ship blows up, along with the nuke, or they plow the ship into some pier or something like that and then set-off the nuke, or they just set it off where they are near NYC.

Either way NYC is screwed. The whole area will be contaminated, rendered useless for a very long time. Clean-up will be impossible.

Trying to catch THIS SHIP at sea would be very hard and it is not illegal for a ship to be in the open sea, registered or not, chartered or not. How does any one know which ship has the bomb and terrorists? We don't, unless our government is conspiring with the terrorists. (Possible Black Flag situation?)

This is what I see as a major concern for me.

Yes, they have nuke detectors, but the Port Authority will have a hard time because any ceramic tile or even some clay made items naturally give off ratiation. They have to search each shipping container individually to detect traces of radiation from an unexploded nuclear bomb.

So how are they going to tell which ship has the bomb? Bear in mind that the bomb is radioactive-proof (don't want to contaminate everywhere the bomb goes) until it explodes.

We have next to no capability of stopping that kind of attack. If we stop such an attack it would be our pure luck that it was stopped and I would strongly suspect a Black Flag deal.

Scary, isn't it?

-EII



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 07:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Izarith
 


its only a matter of time before it does happen......you dont need a large ship to move a small a nuke in......it will probably detonate in the trunk of a car



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 07:14 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


If the Russian's deliver the S-300, then I'd consider the possibility. Until then, it's looks to me that it's just the Russian's using the carrot and stick approach depending on which one suits them.

Iranian protestors are sure the Russian's backed the military coup by the revolutionary guards in June, hence the "death to Russia" slogans. The The Russian's are smart enough to understand that they cannot keep doing business with Iranian's when the regime falls, if they continue to back it until the end. Therefore I highly doubt the Russian's will desire to back them - it's not really a matter of western pressure on Russia. The Russian's will do what they decide is best for themselves. It's possible they may see a benefit to continue to back them that I haven't yet considered, but I hope not.

[edit on 2-12-2009 by john124]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 07:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alethea
reply to post by defcon5
 

I am not suggesting mass destruction. If you clicked on the first link I provided it describes the scenerio of what a blackout could accomplish. I don't see that as starting any free for all. With this type of EMP attack we would instantly be in the dark ages and utter chaos. There would be no retaliation.


Well I wouldn't say no retaliation - an EMP, or should I say a single EMP can only affect a finite area depending on it's strength... But even if you had an infinitely powerful device you still could only affect a finite part of the planet because of the curvature of the Earth - of course the higher the altitude of the burst event then the more of the Earth you could get...

So we will take North America as the example... The missile silos will be hardened against EMP and independent of the main power grid - so a good proportion of those on US main land will still be operational... And an EMP blast will do nothing to conventional firearms - so there will still be just as many of those in private and military hands.

And the US has missile silo's all around the world, and subs on active duty and ships and aircraft stationed left right and centre - some nice cruise missiles... It is totally inconceivable that there would be no retaliation.

Here's the kicker - there are certain natural events that can give the same results as an electro magnetic pulse! events from out in the cosmos that, well travelling at the would give us no warning! and well, if this hypothetical celestial event lasts for only a few seconds, only part or half of the globe will be affected... Seriously changing the current power balance.... Of course if it lasted up to 24 hours then the whole world would be back to the industrial revolution era or earlier.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 07:25 AM
link   
Obama sounds more and more like BUSH. I don´t get it. I bet he is being forced to be this way, and now he must have some understanding for Bush, they were both puppets. How embarrassing.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 07:30 AM
link   
I can see by the posts in this thread that Obama's plan succeeded. Everybody is so busy talking about his uneasiness on the podium -- that he was noticably/visibly "off" -- he seemed almost paranoid looking from right to left so quickly he focused on noone -- IT WAS DONE ON PURPOSE!!

Today the question is: There must really be an imminent threat for Obama to be acting like that....

The world's greatest speaker has managed to do it again.

The question today SHOULD BE: When the hell did we also declare war in Pakistan?????

Here's the thing:

Last night, Obama made it quite clear that we are not only at war in Afganistan, but heading into Pakistan as well.

Some may argue that we have to -- why push the terrorists from Afganistan to Pakistan.

I say -- we should have gotten the heck out of Afganistan either when Obama took office (or shortly there after), when yet another election was riddled with fraud and corruption (how can you rely on a "partner" that cheats, lies, and threatens its own people).

The other important factor to consider is that Obama passed a bill stating that anything presented to congress had to also have the necessary funding. Since this is an EXTENSION of the current effort in Afganistan, he should, if he follows his own rule, also have to provide to congress how this is going to get paid.

It seems that the idea of a war tax is at the forefront of acceptable methods to obtaining said funds. If that's the case, I believe that the American People are going to crumble.

Between the costs of war, the current taxes, the lack of employment, tanking house prices, inability to secure modified mortgages, and the fact that the markets and banks ARE NOT stable -- I say many people lay your cards down and declare "we fold".

On top of this, we are facing increased costs associated with healthcare reform that is slated to begin in 2010 as well.

I think we have found the straw that broke the camel's back -- somewhere between Afganistan and Pakistan.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 07:53 AM
link   
reply to post by john124
 

All good points.



Originally posted by Now_Then
Here's the kicker - there are certain natural events that can give the same results as an electro magnetic pulse! events from out in the cosmos that, well travelling at the would give us no warning! and well, if this hypothetical celestial event lasts for only a few seconds, only part or half of the globe will be affected... Seriously changing the current power balance.... Of course if it lasted up to 24 hours then the whole world would be back to the industrial revolution era or earlier.


Yep a good CME could most assuredly take out the majority of our old, overworked, Power Grid. I think that the last time I heard something about it, they said that if it ever occurred it would take 4 to 6 years to get it all fixed back again. The main reason why it takes so long is that it takes a long time to build transformers, and they do not stockpile them.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 08:03 AM
link   
Assumed scenario..........
Barack places another 30000 troops into Afghanistan.
Not on my watch within the US.
The operation has to take place within the designated war zone area.

An attack is achieved from inside Pakistan killing countless American troops within Afghanistan. It also alleviates an area in which there is a no win or gain situation.
The immediate area is shutdown and thousands upon thousands of troops are sent to neighbouring areas.
This would send shockwaves around the world.
Within days...A one world government would be on the table as a saviour.
It took 11 days to get the CIA operating at maximum speed after 911. It would take hours after an attack of this magnitude. Everyone will suffer deeper knowing the soldiers were there for a reason no-one understands.
Im not sure if I am wording this right, but maybe having a mass death toll would be the answer for TPTB.
My point is..have they run out of the fabled al qaeda story.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 08:15 AM
link   
reply to post by lpowell0627
 


Could it be another deal has been struck with the UK, Gordon Brown announced as recently as Sunday or Monday evening that "We know that Osama Bin Laden is in Pakistan", could this not be the reason that the US has suddenly decided to increase the number of troops in Pakistan or as you so rightly ask "When the hell did we also declare war in Pakistan?????"



[edit on 2/12/09 by wiser3]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 08:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by wiser3
reply to post by lpowell0627
 


Could it be another deal has been struck with the UK, Gordon Brown anounced as recently as Sunday or Monday evening that "We know that Osama Bin Laden is in Pakistan", could this not be the reason that the US has suddenly decided to increase the number of troops in Pakistan or as you so rightly ask "When the hell did we also declare war in Pakistan?????"







Its all starting to make me wonder too.......
I forgot about the one eyed scum announcing that Osama was in Pakistan....Perhaps we are onto a new stage here. Times are swiftly moving.
30000 troops in..wants to be out by 2011....geez....when has any President put a timeline like that after 8 years of fighting.....Fukin strange if you ask me.
Its now or never I think for them



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 09:19 AM
link   
Since 9/11, i tend to look between the lines on these things, and what is going on in the background that this type of thing is covering up, keeping peoples attention just where they want it, and away from the real story. So i for one will be looking at the small print so to speak.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by neo5842
Since 9/11, i tend to look between the lines on these things, and what is going on in the background that this type of thing is covering up, keeping peoples attention just where they want it, and away from the real story. So i for one will be looking at the small print so to speak.




Give them disclosure.....lol....Lets show them true disclosure is what I think




top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join