"The era of nuclear terrorism has arrived", page 1

privacy

Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times

Topic started on 6-2-2010 @ 04:07 PM by Nomad451

www.telegraph.co.uk...

Upon reading this article about Iran, in which Mr. Liam Fox clearly states that 2010 has to be the year to deal with Iran and reach a solution, even if that solution is an attack on Iran, a particular quote stuck out to me..

Now what stuck out the most to me is his quote that "the era of nuclear terrorism has arrived"...
Really Mr. Fox? So your saying that the next terror attack could very well be nuclear in nature? This statement struck me as being quite bold.

"The era of NUCLEAR TERRORISM has ARRIVED". I know this guy is just a politician, but how could he possible say such a thing unless he seriously thinks a nuke is going to go off somewhere in the name of terrorism, or he knows it?

Combined with the UK being on a sever terror alert, MSM articles saying that US Intelligence officials have told congress to expect "another terror strike on the US homeland by July"
timesofindia.indiatimes.com...

what do you think about this? Are we yet again simply being brainwashed to get back into fear mode of terrorism? fear fear fear?

OR are we being slightly prepared for the next False-Flag in 2010, being nuclear in nature? It could be nothing but it could be something.

[edit on 6-2-2010 by Nomad451]

[edit on 6-2-2010 by Nomad451]

reply posted on 6-2-2010 @ 04:41 PM by minkey53

We were told some time ago that several hundred suitcase nukes have gone missing from the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War days.

That's very worrying, anybody could stump up some cash and keep the ex Russian soilders or whoever has them in Vodka for many years.

One of these going off would maybe only wipe out one block in New York but the fallout and the the panic it would create would last for years.

If this happened, the World would change, far more than after 9/11.

And we're only talking about a suitcase, something that could be set on a timer and the offender could leave the area days before to save themselves.

That's would we should be looking out for, the one man who has just one of the missing hundred+ mini nukes that has no problem using it!

reply posted on 6-2-2010 @ 05:01 PM by Nomad451

Suitcase nukes are something I have only heard about but I haven't done any real research into them. It is something worth looking into seriously I believe, despite some people claiming them to be bunk.

Nothing is impossible in this world. A terror attack that is nuclear in nature would put 9/11 in the shade that is certain. MSM has been ramming "nuclear terror from Al Qieda" down our throats for years now, ever since the first few days after 9/11.

I have no doubt that the terrorists who perpetrated 9/11 would do it again if they could with a nuke, and yes I say terrorists but not as in the ones with turbans and box cutters and a middle-eastern accent. I don;t know who actually done 9/11, but whoever they were yes they were terrorists.

And they will probably do it again

reply posted on 6-2-2010 @ 05:14 PM by SaturnFX

I would venture to say that the era of "small scale" nuclear terrorism has arrived.

Its just as...or more terrifying when a entire nation has their warheads pointed at you and rattling the saber.

Terrorism is only terrorism when its not offically authorized by a government...large scale just changes the word from terrorism to tactic.

reply posted on 6-2-2010 @ 05:17 PM by loam

I'm not sure about the "era of nuclear terrorism", but I'm quite certain the era of political fear mongering remains strong.

reply posted on 6-2-2010 @ 05:29 PM by TwoTechnics

Originally posted by Nomad451
Suitcase nukes are something I have only heard about but I haven't done any real research into them. It is something worth looking into seriously I believe, despite some people claiming them to be bunk.

Could not tell you if they exist or is just a myth, I have heard and read that more than likely

that "suitcase nukes" are a thing fiction. The most portable nuclear weapons that I heard

one time on C2C is something much larger, but still somewhat portable. Say, the size of a

classic VW bug.

ATSers please come to the rescue and help! Are "Suitcase Nukes" fact or fiction?

[edit on 6-2-2010 by TwoTechnics]

[edit on 6-2-2010 by TwoTechnics]

reply posted on 6-2-2010 @ 05:30 PM by Karilla

The UK gov. has been warning about the likelihood of so called "dirty bombs" being used by terrorists for the past couple of years now, these are conventional explosives that incorporate nuclear material (some of the many missing nuclear fuel rods for instance) that would spread radioactive particles and, most importantly, fear and panic over a large area. I'm sure this is what he is referring to, rather than any new intelligence (precious little of which would be divulged to the opposition in any case).

This smacks of pre-election posturing to me, voicing the concerns of the Daily Hate Mail readership in light of the deal on nuclear fuel exchange with Iran.

reply posted on 6-2-2010 @ 05:41 PM by minkey53

www.youtube.com...

The shell in this gun can't be very big at all but look at what it does!

Imagine that outside the White House!

Suitcase Nukes are 30 years old now.

reply posted on 6-2-2010 @ 07:22 PM by Lostinthedarkness

The suitcase nuke I am sure exists , We have similar larger types . 2 person 160 lbs one .

www.youtube.com...

declassified navy video from the 60 s I am guessing

www.3ad.com...

Given the date the SADM film was made I am sure other countries also had done work on them as well . Add that to our miniaturization of circuitry it seems highly possible

reply posted on 6-2-2010 @ 07:45 PM by minkey53

reply to post by Lostinthedarkness

Has anybody got a more up to date picture / spec on our missing suitcase nukes?

reply posted on 6-2-2010 @ 08:23 PM by redoubt

reply to post by Nomad451

"The era of nuclear terrorism has arrived"

The age of nuclear 'terror' has been with us for almost 60 years. nations at dead-odds have held these weapons as threats to human civilization. The Cold War was the epitome of nuclear terrorism.

The difference between what was, and now is the surest threat is in who has the button.

Under the heavyweights of the United States and the former Soviet Union, there was the understanding that once war was unleashed, neither would survive and since both NATO and the Warsaw Pact had an acute affection for living, the madness was avoided... though not with \out some close calls and a lot of suffering.

Today's button keepers don't really have a lot of experience in what it means. Soviet Russia lost 22 million civilians, not counting military causalities, in WW2. The west had Germany and Japan as stark reminders of what total war was all about... two nations reduced to rubble and short of the help offered following the war, a return to the dark ages.

Iran, north Korea and those who hate more than they think, either don't remember or don't care. Death and destruction is the goal to be acheived, not the end to be avoided. Many zealots today are primed to give their lives in the name of a god or a movement. To see the world blaze in nuclear fire is not something they want to avoid... it is a dream to be realized.

Because humanity is so short lived, we breed generations that easily forget the lessons of history and race to embrace the dark beliefs that have always taken us to it. The young do not understand the pain, the suffering that comes with total war, nor the sacrifices that touch even their closest loved ones.

Whether Iran or Pakistan or North Korea or India or any other... the result will be the same and despite our best efforts, one finger pushing one button for any cause, will ignite the flames once again. Then maybe 50 or 60 years from that moment, today's geniuses... those that survive, will understand what we tried to tell them today.

Pages: ^^TOP^^