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.

 

Best Action if Al Qaeda Goes Nuclear

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 12:17 AM
link   
I should probably say "Best Course of Action". Ahem..

So in a hypothetical situation, if Al Qaeda was to by some means acquire a Long Range Nuclear Weapon, by whatever means, and we were unable to know the exact location of these (may it be one, or a few) Nukes, how should the US, or the world as a whole handle this situation.

We couldn't sit idly by while knowing the threat was out there, especially from a organization built almost entirely upon martyrdom. The mindset of the people would be maximum damage, and to act fast, we cannot expect them to have a stand off with their "enemies".

We would be forced to act, and we would be smart to act fast, but what way should this situation be handled?




posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 12:21 AM
link   
In relation to war with nations, I am against first strike. The same for action against an organization within a nation without that nations approval.

In situation you presented, if the nation in which they are in with the weapon(s) gives the green light, we execute by whatever means they allow quickest. Ideally, that would be a precision air strike and not a ground team.

If the hosting nation is not cooperating, the congress MUST declare ware, and then whatever force we deem necessary takes care of the situation.



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wolf321
In relation to war with nations, I am against first strike. The same for action against an organization within a nation without that nations approval.

In situation you presented, if the nation in which they are in with the weapon(s) gives the green light, we execute by whatever means they allow quickest. Ideally, that would be a precision air strike and not a ground team.

If the hosting nation is not cooperating, the congress MUST declare ware, and then whatever force we deem necessary takes care of the situation.


Let's assume though that we are unsure of where the location of the Nukes are, that we know they are in the country, but are unsure where, and under time to act fast, should be shock and awe, hoping we get lucky? or do we do a ground invasion scoping around, and interrogating which may leave us extremely short on time, given how eager they would be to have it launched.

Also, I'd like to know what you would expect as the means to stop this.



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 12:36 AM
link   
You know that AlQuaeda is just a name the US government uses for calling their make up "terrorists" that managed to flew two planes into the WTC and succesfully make THREE biuldings collapse.
Maybe the question would be what to do if Osama Bin Laden is given US nationality.... sarcasm



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 12:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Republican08
what way should this situation be handled?


Discreetly.

Bombard the area with radiation or a strike from orbit. Deny everything.

Or if one wants to remain conventional, send in special forces to disable the device and kill all those who know how to use it. Deny everything. Have the assault team dress up as Arabs too.

Then there is airstrikes using stealth craft. That could be used to get into another country.

*From orbit, recovered meteorites could be dropped onto the target, steered by a discarding/self-destructing guidance system and shield.

This would make for a good plausibly deniable strike.



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 12:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Republican08
Let's assume though that we are unsure of where the location of the Nukes are, that we know they are in the country, but are unsure where,
...
Also, I'd like to know what you would expect as the means to stop this.


I assume you mean a known foreign country and not the USA.

So, we somehow know they have them, but don't know where exactly.

Well, then we either get approval via the host nation to go in on search and destroy, let them on our behalf, or declare ware and do whatever we want. The later is the least productive, and would most certainly result in the launch/detonation of the weapon.

From my understanding, you can destroy a nuke with conventional weapons without it going thermonuclear. Although, their would be some degree of fallout, but not the same as with the weapon being employed itself.

If it cannot be seized, then destroy it.



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 12:47 AM
link   
If the Al-Qaeda went nuclear, it'd probably be all thanks to your own government. This is assuming that the Al-Qaeda actually exists.



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 12:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by Republican08
what way should this situation be handled?


Discreetly.

Bombard the area with radiation or a strike from orbit. Deny everything.

Or if one wants to remain conventional, send in special forces to disable the device and kill all those who know how to use it. Deny everything. Have the assault team dress up as Arabs too.

Then there is airstrikes using stealth craft. That could be used to get into another country.

*From orbit, recovered meteorites could be dropped onto the target, steered by a discarding/self-destructing guidance system and shield.

This would make for a good plausibly deniable strike.



Discreetly wouldn't fly, the backlash from the Arab countries would be tremendous.

All well in good, but we're still assuming we have no exact location, at best we know what country it is in, but other than that, we have nothing to go on.



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 12:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Republican08
 


You don't really have to worry about a non existant and non organized group acquiring nuclear weapons now do you?

Especially one trained and funded by the CIA. Originally at least.

I'm worried about extremists using Nuclear weapons, however they've already acquired them.

They are called North Korea and the current Israeli administration. Notice how I said administration.

~Keeper

[edit on 7/5/2010 by tothetenthpower]



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 12:55 AM
link   
If the boogeyman nukes you, you can only forgive him. Any other course of action will only make him stronger.

What would Jesus do?



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 12:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Republican08

Discreetly wouldn't fly, the backlash from the Arab countries would be tremendous.


Well then that wouldn't be discreet would it?

So you and I aren't talking about the same thing.

By the time we got done with whoever had that nuke, there would be nobody left to talk about what happened, the electronics in the area would all be fried and there aren't going to be any pictures or video coming out.


*And if the owner of the country wants to cry foul, then they must have been working with the terrorists and their terrorist nuke. Tough luck for them.



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 01:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by Republican08

Discreetly wouldn't fly, the backlash from the Arab countries would be tremendous.


Well then that wouldn't be discreet would it?

So you and I aren't talking about the same thing.

By the time we got done with whoever had that nuke, there would be nobody left to talk about what happened, the electronics in the area would all be fried and there aren't going to be any pictures or video coming out.


*And if the owner of the country wants to cry foul, then they must have been working with the terrorists and their terrorist nuke. Tough luck for them.





I guess you're talking about detonating an aerial EMP?

Still though, when all contact is lost within an area, eyebrows will be raised.


Unless it is an extremely isolated place, and electronics are few and far between. Could be the best plausible option though.



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 01:12 AM
link   
Explanation: S&F!

Whats wrong with M.A.D.??? Doesn't it work anymore???


Oh WAIT!.... Nope! Here is why...

Pyrrhic Victory [wiki]

Suicide Attack [wiki]


The Muslim Hashshashin (Assassins) of the late 11th century and later were known for going into their missions knowing that death was virtually certain, and energized by the promise of Paradise that had been made vivid for them in an artful scenario that was used as a recruitment tool. Allegedly the prospective assassin would be given hashish and then taken into a garden full of beautiful women, and told that he was enjoying a taste of Islamic Paradise, after which he was told that to return to that paradise he had to go out and kill his victim, and be killed in the process.


Personal Disclosure: Why not join your enemies and live with them?, so you can have your enemies at your fingertips for dispatching them at a moments notice and also you'd be in the perfect position to breed them out!
Will they really still want to nuke you if you are cohabiting in their own/nwo local area???
:shk:



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 01:28 AM
link   
Well, you have to find them first. There's no way around that unless you want to nuke maybe thousands or hundreds of thousands of square miles all at once.

This means human intel and detective work.

This is the sketchy part, because you never know how good your intel is ... the longer it takes to verify your target with certainty, the more chance you have that they move on (remember how Clinton missed).

Anyway ... airstrike, cruise missiles ... take your pick. And then you send SF in to verify you got what you came for.



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Republican08

I guess you're talking about detonating an aerial EMP?

Still though, when all contact is lost within an area, eyebrows will be raised.



That would be one of the options available to us yes.

But our bomb would be using microwaves and the damage radius would be limited. Communications failure would be attributed to power failure.

*My scenario assume the nuclear weapon to be somewhere in the desert, away from densely populated areas.

Also, Unless parts of our bomb are found, the country where our strike took place wouldn't know it was us.



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 01:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by area6
And then you send SF in to verify you got what you came for.


Or drones.

Properly equipped drones.



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 01:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by area6
And then you send SF in to verify you got what you came for.


Or drones.

Properly equipped drones.


Maybe, but I say boots on the ground (SF). You have to be sure you got what you came for. Besides, you don't leave that nuclear grade material lying around for someone else to pick up.

Diplomatically, this is the kind of situation where you just do it and say you're sorry later - at least, that's how I see it being played out.



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 01:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by area6

Diplomatically, this is the kind of situation where you just do it and say you're sorry later - at least, that's how I see it being played out.



Correct, the use of special forces to extract the nuclear material is what should be done.

And we should make that task as easy for them as possible.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join