"Something BIG Is About To Go Down In Syria"

page: 3
14
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 01:09 PM
link   

iRoyalty
reply to post by Domo1
 


Why wouldn't he just e-mail the news company he works for... Surely they are slightly better at getting news out than reddit is..


Quote - "Marginedas envió su última crónica el lunes 2 de septiembre desde la localidad de Qasr Ibn Wardan, cerca de Hama, en la que relataba la decepción en las filas rebeldes al ver cómo se alejaba la perspectiva de un ataque inminente estadounidense. "Obama habla, pero no hace nada", era el titular de la crónica que recogía este sentimiento y que fue publicada en este periódico al día siguiente."

Translation - Marginedas sent his last message Monday the 2nd of Sept fro Qasr Ibn Wardan, near Hama, in which he told of the feeling of betrayel in the rebel rank and file at the perspective of an imminent attack by the USA fading. "Obama talks, but doesn't do anything" was the title of the message, that spoke of the feelings of the rebels and was published in this newspaper (El Periodico, for whom he worked) the next day.

So officialy this was his last message, a message about the rebels critising the lack of US intervention and a feeling of betrayel.
Much more plausible than " the jihadis have got a nuke in a Samsonite".
edit on PM7Sun20141972 by andy1972 because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 06:56 PM
link   
reply to post by pheonix358
 


Actually, they will be able to tell the source of the nuclear device from its nuclear/fallout signature. That of course would be the beginning of the audit trail to determine who made the bomb or who supplied it, that is if any of the report is real and the weapon exists. The US government collects nuclear "signatures" from every piece of nuclear material produced that it can get its hands on. They will go to immense lengths to acquire that material also, like from the bottom of the ocean under 5000 meters of water.

Unfortunately, this could be a game by the US government to try and set up Iran or the NK. All the US would have to do is state that the signature traced back to Iran or the NK. As far as the original nuclear database data, that's easy enough to change to make Los Almos look like a different location, meaning the one the US wants to hit next.

Cheers - Dave
edit on 2/23.2014 by bobs_uruncle because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by bobs_uruncle
 


Agreed. Who made it and who used it can be entirely different. In fact it is not who made it that gives the signature but rather where it was mined. Typically the US will point the finger and Putin will laugh and point it straight back. China keeps a passive face while laughing on the inside. You don't watch the Chinese face, you watch for the silent belly laugh.

It will be no different to the use of chemical weapons in Syria. The US pointed the finger and Putin disputed it pretty quickly. He cut the US off at the knees.

P

edit on 23/2/2014 by pheonix358 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 07:32 PM
link   
guys/ gals it's not just the fall out signature. tritium is necessary or small fissile masses because they cannot go super critical on their own. you cannot just dump a can of tritium on a pit and get it to go. it has to be evenly distributed throughout the dense metal pit. that takes not one but several highly technical processes. a place that makes tritium gun sites or compasses cannot make the quantities of tritium necessary there are or were only two places on earth where that kind of tritium can be made. and one of them was shut down decades ago. the pit itself must be machined to exacting precision. and the whole thing must be redone before the tritium dopant is depleted enough to make the weapon non functional. soviet era mini nukes would have decayed 3 or 4 times over by now.

therefore you cannot blame it on stolen soviet bombs. those would not work as a nuke anymore.

The Chinese probably have tritium facilities but we do not know for certain that they do. but again due to the limited lifespan they would have to be less than a decade old and the fallout signature would pin it down to them if they did let one get into the hands of a rogue for plausible deniability. chinese strategic doctrine does not call for the use of such things anyway. that said the PLA 3rd Artillery Corps (the one responsible for Chinas IRBMs and ICBMs) has constructed a couple of vast nuclear hardened bunker and tunnel systems sufficient to hide 3000 Nuclear weapons. about 2750 more than they admit to having and more than they need for thier Nuclear Doctrine of limited pre-emptive strategic missile strikes. but since they are currently following the rest of thier doctrine WRT to gaining buffer islands as an initial defensive ring before fighting deep in chinese territory in the event of an Invasion. they are already engaged in that with territorial moves on several japanese, korean, fillipino and indonesian islands.

besides the above nations; no other power on earth can make mini nukes. not north korea, not india, not pakistan, not Iran, not even britain or france. i don't think even the U.S. can do it anymore.

the mini nuke thing is bunk.

edit on 23-2-2014 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)
edit on 23-2-2014 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)
edit on 23-2-2014 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 09:56 PM
link   

pheonix358
reply to post by bobs_uruncle
 


Agreed. Who made it and who used it can be entirely different. In fact it is not who made it that gives the signature but rather where it was mined. Typically the US will point the finger and Putin will laugh and point it straight back. China keeps a passive face while laughing on the inside. You don't watch the Chinese face, you watch for the silent belly laugh.

It will be no different to the use of chemical weapons in Syria. The US pointed the finger and Putin disputed it pretty quickly. He cut the US off at the knees.

P

edit on 23/2/2014 by pheonix358 because: (no reason given)


Actually, the centrifuge and process leaves a signature. So yes, you can tell where it was mined, but also where it was made and more than likely, who made it. Apparently, a lot of the initial raw material comes from Namibia (former South West Africa) and is partially under the control of the Rothschilds. I also understand that fairly soon, plutonium is actually going to become a commodity. In preparation for this, NM Rothschilds out of New York purchased a lion's share of the AECB/AECL in Canada. They already have partial control through PowerCorp (deMaraise's group which also appears to control prime ministers in Canada) over our nuclear generating stations which brings me to Maurice Strong in 1990 and his knowledge of the missing 27kg's from Bruce GS/Douglas Point in 1988/89 during the nuclear audit. The plot thickens....

Cheers - Dave



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 10:04 PM
link   
reply to post by bobs_uruncle
 


And only God knows how much is missing from the old USSR inventory.

People fall for the trap of thinking it is hard making nukes. The first two were constructed in 1940ish. They did not know if it would work. They had no computers. No computer controlled equipment, not even a cordless drill.

Once you have the ingredients it is not that difficult. We are told how difficult it is by those that do not want us to make them. Suitcase nukes are hard to make until some bright spark finds a better way. That bright spark could live in any country. All you can really say is that 'As far as we know it is hard. As far as we know they need servicing every decade.'

Quite frankly, we don't know!

P



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 10:43 PM
link   

pheonix358
reply to post by bobs_uruncle
 


And only God knows how much is missing from the old USSR inventory.

People fall for the trap of thinking it is hard making nukes. The first two were constructed in 1940ish. They did not know if it would work. They had no computers. No computer controlled equipment, not even a cordless drill.

Once you have the ingredients it is not that difficult. We are told how difficult it is by those that do not want us to make them. Suitcase nukes are hard to make until some bright spark finds a better way. That bright spark could live in any country. All you can really say is that 'As far as we know it is hard. As far as we know they need servicing every decade.'

Quite frankly, we don't know!

P


No, not hard. Critical mass for p239 is about 16kg's, so even if you took two halves weighing 9kg each and smacked them together using a bit of TNT or C4 in a contained cannon arrangement, yeah, not real hard, but the handling is a bitch. I could go into separators, but I won't. What get's tricky is when you want to use very small amounts of fissionable materials, geometry becomes important as well as the casing, coatings (cobalt and lithium seem to be favorites) and of course the trigger. With the advent of usable super-capacitors that have energy storage capabilities in 25k to 40k density range by weight in comparison to present, say lithium technology, lasers become usable as mobile triggers, especially stacked heterojunction class iv lasers in an array producing 100kwprf burst. In a chemical laser, CO2 as an example, a 100k laser is about 12 to 16 feet long, made of a long glass tube and requires quit a bit of energy, it certainly won't fit in a suitcase LOL. Regardless, the technology existed in 1988 for the production of low yield "softball" sized nukes out of Russia and I know that at the time, they cost around the price of a new 328i BMW (as quoted by my CO). The lasers were available from RCA near Kanata, Ontario, Canada in the mid/late 80's and they were roughly 1" in diameter, had a forward voltage/current of 400v/25amps and produced 850nm@1080wprf with a 2% duty cycle at ambient temperatures. By using cryogenic cooling, one could easily increase the output to 50% and roughly 10kwprf. The laser tech has been around for a while.

Cheers - Dave





new topics
top topics
 
14
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join