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.

 

If the USA gets nuked

page: 2
1
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 04:31 PM
link   
Immortal has said exactly what I was going to say.

Sure the States would dish out some hard kickings for countries responsible (cough) but MORE SO it has the chance to go to war against its own people. FEMA will go to town, those 'unused' camps in the midle of nowhere will soon have use. Family zones, report to the group leader by 7pm. In by 10pm, lights out by 12am. You don't agree with our tactics? you must be a terror suspect then, prision no trial!

Reason I think this is because if terrorists got nukes inside the US it proves anyone could have helped them and ANYONE could be a potential terrorist. So.....LOCK THEM ALL DOWN! Military Govenment time!! Guilty until proven innocent.

Also I think the US allies will follow suit sooner or later. As ever, thats my thoughts.




posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 07:12 PM
link   
just wait till they claim that a domestic terrorist group played a role.

anything that even hints at being "anti-government" will be attacked, denounced, even destroyed... you got a small taste of it with linda ronstadt earlier this month and the dixie chicks before that.



posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 07:51 PM
link   
Aha lets be a little more rational with our thinking shall we? How would the government go about locking up even 30% of its own people and be able to afford that and wage war, seeing as the income from their hard working sheep that goes to their weapons and staff will be cut off.

You honestly think even 10% of the population would just sit by while troops march through the streets, "ok everyone get into the prison buses to go to neverland, anyone who resists will be shot" I am sorry but I will 100% put my life on the line resisting that rather than just complying.

I will also be honest in saying I am not afraid to lose my life to give this country back to its people and therefore would actively participate in any civil uprising in the near future. Unlike many others who simply say things need to be done and go into detail about going to war with the government, yet fail to realize they will have to be the ones who will put their lives on the line as they are the ones that need to make the changes.

Back on topic however, I do believe the government would definetly take the initiative to make full use of ALL of their military technology in order to remove any advesaries and threats from around the globe. It is also more likely that a civil war would erupt as a result on an attempt to clamp down on civil liberties and freedom for the people rather than a majority of the population just simply being locked up. Again I am not afraid to say I will most likely be one of the first to die fighting for my freedom rather than sit by and be imprisoned indefinetly.



posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 07:55 PM
link   
The government could never impose martial law on a population our size. It would be political and national suicide. The government depends on us to give them money and keep the economy going, even if people did abide, which we wouldnt, the country would go under quickly as the economy would dissolve. Do you think the special interests that really run things are tired of being rich? On top of that Im sure the government doesnt want to go to war with its own people (most of whom are armed), which would happen if they attempted to take away all of our rights. What purpose would that serve? So they can have total control? Of what? It just wouldnt happen. In the very unlikely event we are hit with a small terrorist nuke, one thing that will happen is we will rain fire down on those even remotely responsible, there will be no punches pulled like last time. For example, if we had the terrorists holed up in Tora Bora after a nuke attack, Tora Bora would glow in the dark for some time to come. The same goes for any countries that harbor terrorists (i.e. Syria), I think they would give up all the militants real fast then. Who knows maybe even WWIII would break out, but I doubt the government would turn on its own people, again that would serve them no purpose.

[edit on 28-7-2004 by 27jd]



posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 09:16 PM
link   
If we were hit by a small nuke, I think that the American people would be in such shock, for at least 72 hours, that anything could occur. Think of it: it's our big nightmare. So, it finally happens. People will be extremely freaked and will either cower, try to grab every weapon they can get hold of, head for the hills, or , for some with their own agendas, take advantage of the chaos that occurs.
What would our government do? There would be a response. They would feel they HAD to respond. Who would they respond to? Probably the countries already on their list of troublemaking, nuclear capable enemies.
Martial law? Hard to enforce, but I'd bet my bottom dollar, that martial law would be declared.
Detention? It's happened before with far less reason.
Protesting in the streets? It would take several days before people even began to think about anything except self-preservation or preservation of their families. I doubt many would be in the mood for a political statement. Because of that, all sorts of draconian things could happen in the intervening period.
Think back to 9/11. People were scared. They just wanted to make sure their loved ones' were safe and that they were safe. Daily life was totally disrupted. Yes, people wanted to retaliate, but the first thoughts were of home and family. Ok, multiply that event by 100 and you get the idea of how the country would react to a nuclear blast.
The government would fear (and probably rightfully so) that there were other bombs planted. Therefore, an immediate lockdown would be imposed on the country. Borders would be sealed. Traffic would be prohibited. Someone would have to insure that people didn't loot or grab all supplies. Any way you look at it, it's not a pretty picture.
I would like to think that I'd be in the streets demanding constitutional rights, but, in reality, I would probably be inside my house and guarding my family from a real or perceived danger.
People would be immobilized by fear or, on the other extreme, would use the chaos to their own advantage.
joey



posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 10:33 PM
link   
the regimes in Iran, Korea and Syria would be nuked. The subs are off-shore now, the missles are ready and the targets tracked and locked-on on an ongoing basis. In the event of target location uncertainty, multiple locations would be attacked simultaneously. A great fire, a great pain, a great suffering would be unleashed. Al Queda, the Muslim Brotherhood and perhaps the entire Wahabi sect would be hunted down like dogs. Their bodies, or at least those bodies that could be found, would be wrapped in pigskin. Their women and children would become "collaterall damage" randomly and often and would suffer and die painfully. Those that survive, won't want to have survived.

Sudan and Cuba would be taken with an aircraft carrier and a small number of marines.

Certain mountains and mountainous passes in the Hindukush would melt as the energy of a thousand suns burst on their summits.

Pakistan would be ordered to stand down and dismantle their nuclear forces.
India would be ordered to stand down and dismantle their nuclear forces. Scared #less, the French would surrender their entire inventory of nuclear weapons although they would go out of their way to surrender them to someone other than the US or Britain. The US, Great Britain, Russia and China would reach an agreement to end nuclear proliferation. This would include the monitoring, inspection and potential interdiction of all goods traveling through all borders and all oceans and seas worldwide.

Isreal would agree to dismantle their nuclear inventory after reaching an exorbitant financial settlement with the US...and would secretly and strategically store multiple weapons and systems in a "break glass in the event of fire" precaution.

Special Forces would fan out across the world with shoot on sight orders. Many bad guys would die. Many of their innocent freinds and family would as well. That would be unfortunate but acceptable.

Martial law would rule the day in the US for many months. Any dissent or even the hint of dissent, anywhere in the hemisphere, would be quietly snuffed. I would not want to be Muslim and living in North or South America or England. Those living in the oil producing states or in France should be relatively safe...but the CIA and Special Forces would be everywhere and their weapons would not be on safety.

[edit on 28-7-2004 by hideous_toejam]



posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 11:04 PM
link   
Man what a strange thread. You don't seriously think that US would go Holocaust on the mid-east if a handful of psychopathic serial killers hiding behind religion let off a nuke in the US do you? Look at 9/11, just about all the protaganists were Saudi's.....didn't see any invasion or taking out of Saudi on the News. Ironically the mini nukes you speak of are been developed by the US themselves, and they don't come cheap. A big military is all fine and dandy if ya up against a military foe...but this war is a war against shadows...phantoms...civillians by day, suicide nutters by night. Do you think nuking the s#$t out of the place would solve your bin Laden problem? Where is he? How many millions of innocent victims would die without you even hitting your target? You'd prolly be lured into bombing a tarrget that OBL himself wanted you to destroy. Here you are saying who can and who can't have atomic technology, yet in the very same breath you talk about nuking people to appease your paranoia.
You guys sound more dangerous and wacko than Kim il Sungwhatshishandle


[edit on 28-7-2004 by Zero Point]



posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 11:50 PM
link   
Zeropoint what do you think would happen. America would just take it on the chin and be like alright you got us very funny, as Newyork and several million people lie dead.



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 12:08 AM
link   
its not gonna be as simple as people just describe on a thread...

1. our atmosphere has so much damage its not even gonna bargain or negotiate with holding all this contamination/pollution rates a ''small'' nuke will give off.

2. once they use the new ''atomic'' energy or ANTIMATTER have it, the UN is gonna allie with us like always and burn all the bats out of ever cave out there. plus our intelligence is probably watching obl anyhoo.

3. security measures are so desperate now theyre thinking about having missle protection in certain states. if theyre already having the nukes in our country we can find them easily through certain kinds of screening. if you ask me our intelligence should have a type of sensory in our satellite systems to we can just point and click out where all this is being distributed/if it is.

sure itd be a wakeup call to the world, and nations will become ''active.'' i mean hell, theres alot of problems on our planets that people simply ignore. cough cough, certain evils....



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 12:10 AM
link   
I would completly dissagree with IMORTAL and agree with DYepes.

America would not put a nation wide curfew or start locking everyone up that says anything anti-government.

I think that we would lick our wounds for 24 hours and relize all the damage and then after 48 hours tops, we would would go on the offensive, if you think America is on the offensive now just wait and see what would happen if that went down.



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 12:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zero Point
Man what a strange thread. You don't seriously think that US would go Holocaust on the mid-east if a handful of psychopathic serial killers hiding behind religion let off a nuke in the US do you? Look at 9/11, just about all the protaganists were Saudi's.....didn't see any invasion or taking out of Saudi on the News. Ironically the mini nukes you speak of are been developed by the US themselves, and they don't come cheap. A big military is all fine and dandy if ya up against a military foe...but this war is a war against shadows...phantoms...civillians by day, suicide nutters by night. Do you think nuking the s#$t out of the place would solve your bin Laden problem? Where is he? How many millions of innocent victims would die without you even hitting your target? You'd prolly be lured into bombing a tarrget that OBL himself wanted you to destroy. Here you are saying who can and who can't have atomic technology, yet in the very same breath you talk about nuking people to appease your paranoia.
You guys sound more dangerous and wacko than Kim il Sungwhatshishandle


[edit on 28-7-2004 by Zero Point]



The United States Military doesn't have "Mini Nukes". The Military wanted them but once it got to congress it was cancelled, because they didn't like the idea of, we could use nukes more freely and with less consequence.
Hence, the reason they are now developing the 30,000 lb bomb. It will be the ultimate bunker buster and will be operational in 2 years.


UK

posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 04:56 AM
link   
seriously guys, think about this...

a "suitcase" nuke realistickly would be a bodge job, im sure the chances of the radioactive sample goin critical would be about as good as a rockinghorse winning the grand national...BUT should it go it wouldnt be as big as most people would think...may 5ktons max!
in the middle of a city it would probs take an area bout a square mile but outside of that you would probably be fairly safe..

and all this # about the US nuking people, come on...think about it...
as someone said earlier the country would be in shock, im sure some of it would lose power as a result of the EMP taking down systems around the area it hit and they would have a lot more to think about then who did it..
ie, "they've done it once, they can do it again" but this would by no means allow marshall law.

and hopefully the muppets on capital hill would have enough sense to ask for help catching the people responsible rather then just pressing a couple of red buttons..



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 09:39 AM
link   

You don't seriously think that US would go Holocaust on the mid-east if a handful of psychopathic serial killers hiding behind religion let off a nuke in the US do you?


There is a BIG difference between 911 and a nuke going off in a US population center.... HUMONGOUS difference... While I don't believe we'd retaliate with nukes, I fully believe that it would mean a serious invasion of EVERY country with a suspected cooperation with terrorists...or at the very least, a massive air bombardment of their defenses, to simply put them out of business (preferred method). They'd be spending too much to rebuild those defenses to support terrorism...



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 10:21 AM
link   
I cannot see nuclear retaliation from the US, however I can see us entering more conflicts around the globe. (Iran,NK,etc) There would be less surgical strikes(somewhere else in the thread this was mentioned) and I think we would give a # less who in the global community opposed us. (We turn our nose now but...) Israel would use it for an excuse for pre-emptive strikes against anyone it deemed dangerous. Cats and dogs, living together, mass hysteria.....



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 01:07 PM
link   
lets just pray to God that this DOES NOT HAPPEN. EVER. TO ANY COUNTRY.

it doesnt have to be a nuke people, any form of attack on America on a larger scale than 911...caught on tape to brainwash the world will lead to either a widespread mid eastern conflict or a world war. look how america acted after 911?? Afghanistan and Iraqi were taken. it doesnt matter who is in the white house, if an another attack happens it will affect every person on earth in some degree.

we dont need this stuff. this is serious evil going down. who was responsible or 911 anyway?? was it al queada?? if it was then why doesnt america spend money on hunting them down and NOT billions on invading countries??

IF the enemy is NOT within the american government itself, and is an external terrorist group..then the scenario is a massive giant (USA) being tripped up and stumbling due to a few tiny well organised people. America should concentrate on getting those responsible and NOT wiping out countries!!

when will this madness end?



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok

Just wipe out the middle east, stop immigration and cut terrorism in a few neat nuke blasts......


If only it were that simple....

But then you'd have the deaths of millions of innocents
Contamination of neighboring (non-targetted) countries, due to fallout
Political suicide
The risk of inciting other nuclear nations to use them and target you!

And....

You'd STILL be left with terrorists, and would have now given them nothing to lose....

Yep, nukes are indiscriminate, for sure. You can't just draw lines and say, "Ok, we'll only nuke up to this border." Once you launch a full scale nuclear attack, you're talking serious consequences. It's not just going to be a big parking lot and that's the end of it. In fact, I have my doubts that we even know what some of the bigger nukes are capable of destroying. We've obviously never tried any that could wipe out an entire small country or large state.


Originally posted by joey
If we were hit by a small nuke, I think that the American people would be in such shock, for at least 72 hours, that anything could occur. Think of it: it's our big nightmare. So, it finally happens. People will be extremely freaked and will either cower, try to grab every weapon they can get hold of, head for the hills, or , for some with their own agendas, take advantage of the chaos that occurs.

You're right about that. It would be the largest mass panic you've ever seen. People would go crazy. They'd probably freak and start looting to get whatever survival gear they don't have...especially guns. I wouldn't be surprised to see people looting Kmart and Walmart gun dept.

[edit on 29-7-2004 by Damned]



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 01:53 PM
link   
Remember, although a horrific event, a suitcase nuke would devastate a relativley small area. If this happend the US would get support from many many countries to find the group responsible and more than likely massive military support.

However if the response from the US was to nuke large areas of other countries in order to fight "terrorism", they would recieve no help or support,in my opinion. I belive that trade with the US would stop and eventially cripple the US.

I find it impossible that even Bush would start nuking countries, if he did, god help America....

Lets hope these rumours of terrorist nukes in the US are just that, rumours. Personnaly I don't think the rumours are true, something would have happend bu now. Also, 9/11 was unexpected, but not a feat of genius, I honestley don't think these "terrorists" are as organised as some people think.



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 02:20 PM
link   
Interesting thread. But something keeps flittering around in my mind about how martial law will be enforced...

In order for martial law to be called in effect, something BIG will have happened. But you have to think though - if something THAT big happens here in the USA, the government propaganda will kick on at HIGH speed, and a lot of sheeple will be pretty much brain-washed.

The numbers of military personnel we have are limited, so there will have to be another way to ensure that the public will stay right where the government wants us.

I think that so many sheeple will be so far gone in the propaganda, that they will honestly believe that martial law is the best option - and it will keep us "safe".

I think that the sheeple will be the ones to fear, not the military. They'll form their own brand of vigilante justice, and it won't be pretty. And if it's not vigilante justice, then there will be some sort of civilian task force that's formed. Almost like the plot in the book series "Left Behind". (A taste of the NWO?)

I dunno... Just a few rambling thoughts from a sleep & caffeine deprived person getting ready to go to work...

Edit to add: Just out of curiosity - how come so many people believe that FEMA will swoop down and become the bad guys?

[edit on 7-30-2004 by andhow]



posted on Jul, 30 2004 @ 07:26 AM
link   
Why would they stop at one device? ask yourself that question!

On 9/11 mulitple wmd were used against numerous targets! I would bet money on a Nuclear/Bio/Chem attack on numerous locations as this would bring any country to its knees, a single attack, although devastating, would not have the same effect and would not necessaraly change things to any extent.



posted on Jul, 30 2004 @ 07:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dakuma
I cannot say for sure if all i've read about the suitcase nukes is fact or fiction. But let's suppose that Al Qaeda does have such devices in the USA. Now let's say that they nuke ahhh Cleveland (picked by random I promise), what then?


Everyone knows if a nuke goes off in the US that the US will nuke at least one country, if we can't figure out where it came from we'd nuke the 3 most likely suspects. But I think a more relevent question is what will happen if 200 nukes go off in the US, if they can get 1 in they can get 200 in.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join