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.


Escalating Tension and the Preemptive Strike

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 12:09 PM
After following the increase in tension between the superpowers in the world, it appears the pieces are being set up perfectly. I've studied subjects like chess, fencing, and strategy in general; I find them very fascinating. However, I'm not a military man, so I can't anticipate what our military leaders are thinking, especially in countries other than our own.

So allow me to get to the purpose of my post, a preemptive strike on the United States. Economically, as things progress, we are seeing old enemies appear from the woodwork with a weapons upgrade. They really seem to be seriously preparing for conflict, in my opinion.

I think a nuclear preemptive strike would be most effective in the middle of the night. Perhaps when everyone is amassed downtown in their cities watching fireworks for the new year. This could really cripple us since the final line of our defense is armed US citizens. With a plan to conquer our military with a bigger stick, that leaves just the rest of us in the way.

Now I'm not suggesting that we're going to be in a scuffle anytime soon, this is only speculative. I wanted to pick your brains on what you think the perfect first attack would be against the US, and who is going to do it?

posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 12:30 PM
reply to post by Avarus

Though somewhat crippled by such an attack the U.S.A`S response would be total annihilation of the would be aggressor.

Also don`t forget as peeved as us Europeans seem with American foreign policy from time to time , Europe's response collectively or as individual nations would not be found lacking .

Are you suggesting a rogue nation or an established nuclear power as initiating the attack ?

posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 12:43 PM
IMO, that would be a very poor strategy. Just look at how successful Japan and China have been at dismantling the US from the inside out, and how dependent our economy is on those countries.

Then you have our Oil Dependence on the Middle East, and our European Foreign Policy ties to keep Russia in check. The US is interdependent on most of the rest of the world, and any strike would just Unite all those ties against the aggressor.

In contrast, buying up our corporations, financing our economy, and bankrolling our Political Wannabes is working better than China or Japan could have ever hoped for!! There is no need to do a preemptive strike on a Nation that has lost its identity already?

Any strike on the US will only be a false-flag or a desperate attempt to draw attention to some Ideological cause, it won't be a true act of war.

posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 12:43 PM
reply to post by Avarus

A pre-emtive nuclear strike against the US would by hugely unpopular on the world stage and would unnecessarily destroy and contaminate huge portions of the US and it's economic assets, rendering the country wothless to the conquerors.

If someone wanted to mount a pre-emtive assult on the US the best place would have to be an assult on the economy.

Destroy the Dollar, rendering our currency worthless to purchase oil, steel and the other natural resources necessary to conduct a war or operate the domestic economy.

The US produces so little of it's own natural resources anymore, it would be quickly rendered helpless if it lacked the ability to purchase those resources from the outside by it's worthless currency.

The only threat then would be the US's massive existing military. Would the US use it's military for conquest to grab the resources it needs in the event of economic collapse? I don't know but, if I were hell bent on the destruction of the US I wouldn't rule it out.

A limited nuclear exchange targeted against miltiary installations and particularly our naval assets might be the best answer. After that it would come down to a war of attrition to use up all of the existing US military assets.

I don't believe the US would respond with nuclear arms for fear of destroying the natural resources it so desperately needs. If backed into a corner however...

A conquoring force would have to portray itself as coming to render aid to the impoverished US citizenry in order to allay citizen as well as govt fears.

The armed citizenry could create problems for years but, the US Congress and states have helpfully provided detailed gun registration lists for our conquerors to disarm the people.

We're screwed.

[edit on 31-12-2009 by FortAnthem]

posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 12:46 PM
reply to post by UmbraSumus

I personally see the most likely situation to be an existing nuclear power as the aggressor, perhaps in response to one of it's less powerful 'allies'. Here's one a scenario:

1. North Korea provokes the US in some way.
2. The US responds with drastic sanctions and or attacking one of their ships (that's in "International water")
3. China is obligated to take sides with their ally (likely just as an excuse to take action when they're ready).
4. Russia works with China behind the scenes to coordinate an attack.
5. Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Venezuela, and others all take part in crippling us. They could embargo their resources and/or provide direct military support. Even some of our 'allies' may not be as friendly as we think. When our enemy has something they need... we may find our friends on the other side of the line.

Unfortunately, we rely heavily on what many would consider to be our enemy. Given time, and initiative, I think we could reverse our reliance, however I find this unlikely, given our complacency.

posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 12:46 PM
There is no profit to be gained with everyone dead. If one nuke flies be prepared for thousands to be following it ie a nuclear attack by a major power against another will never happen. If it does say bye bye to our modern human was a good run while it lasted.

posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 02:25 PM
reply to post by Avarus

You really need to watch "The Hidden Empire" from;

And understand Albert Pikes plan for the three world wars, two of which went off exactly as he had planned. The Bible is also a good source of info as the Zionists are doing everything they can to execute the plan.

"The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the "agentur" of the "Illuminati" between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion…We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view. This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time." - Albert Pike's letter to Mazzini, dated August 15, 1871. (see former Royal Canadian Navy Intelligence Officer, William Guy Carr's books "Satan, Prince of this World" and "Pawns in the Game", p. xv-xvi, which includes extracts of Pike's letter

new topics

top topics


log in