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.
Nukes are still nukes and depending on the density of the population they can kill alot.
Atleast that's what I read at one place. Ex: Manhattan can suffer 1M killed by the same nuke that would only kill 50K in say Minneapolis.
Worst item of the nukes is the radiation related sufferings and it can be years before the area becomes normal again.
Do not try to water down the evilness of nukes. You are making it sound as if a mere cup of breakfast jelly spilled on the floor and wiping it all off is a matter of few minutes.
Originally posted by DarthMuerte
We definitely should not use ground forces. We can completely devastate Iran with an air campaign. Just level everything and come on back home. IF they are building nukes, then I see no problem with nuking those facilities.
Any nuke produces an EMP blast, as far as my knowledge goes.
That alone would cripple any city and bring it down to it's knees. Sure, many basic infrastructures would still be functional, especially the military who already have protections against EMP blasts.
But not civilians. It would cause chaos.
If 9/11 had the consequences it had around the world, and it was "just" three buildings falling, imagine what would be to wipe out most of New York and then a several mile radius where nothing electronic would work. And not only cellphones and house appliances. Even stuff like the energy grid system would take years to be functional again.
In an age so dependent of electronic and computer infrastructures (especially in western countries), a nuclear attack would not only cripple the population, but the cities they live in.
The failures observed were generally in the unprotected input stages of receivers or in rectifiers of electronic equipment; transients on the power line probably caused the rectifier failures.
Indeed, the main damage in the Soviet test #184 appears to have been caused by the E3 component by its coupling to the long-lines which functioned as antennae for the low frequency pulse.
It needs to attack Iran to justify using new and deadly weapons as they are a big player in the middle east..
It wouldn't have the same effects using them against some Somali pirates or a car full of taliban.
well it's been 20 years since America went "Looky here at what we got now" So I'd expect Iran to be hit by.. oh I dunno, laser technology maybe EM railguns or hyper sonic stealth bombers.. who knows maybe even space based weaponry
Originally posted by Aim64C
Russia has said they will defend Iran - but, honestly, that's posturing and an attempt to show good will and testament to the old USSR. They wouldn't get involved beyond selling Iran weapons and contracting military advisers out to them. Russia is starved for cash and doesn't want to admit they are still a shadow of the power they once were. They are still a serious contender, but won't be sticking their own necks too far out on the line for anything not in direct defense of their homeland.
Originally posted by victor7
reply to post by Aim64C
www.parowanprophet.com...
Contradict this 1 Megaton scenario on Salt Lake City. It won't be back to normal over a long weekend.
End of it all, STAY THE F*****k AWAY FROM NUKES!
Contradict this 1 Megaton scenario on Salt Lake City. It won't be back to normal over a long weekend.
End of it all, STAY THE F*****k AWAY FROM NUKES!