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.
originally posted by: stanislas
a reply to: ketsuko
The thread is not really about that so to speak. The thread is "Russian Analyst Calls For Nuclear Attack on Yellowstone National Park" as though he is calling for it as he has some voice that gets the west to be concerned and then enables more anti Russian sentiment. A bunch of conspiracy sites have linked this from two articles. The original and the smh article which I have posted earlier. Its not on Fox or CNN as of yet.
If you truly want to believe he really wants to do this then you have poor judgement imo. I am pointing out that this was an article on geo-political speculation on how Russia could respond from his view if the US decided to wage war on Russia. The original article is just that. Make of it what you want I guess. If you want this to be a discussion on if it was possible the fine. But my final answer still stands... we will all be dead!
A retired one, sure, but is anybody else seeing the differences between these two?
What you are saying is that a words spoken by a general have got absolutely no value nor credibility? Not to mention that you are comparing one general with some analyst.
originally posted by: wyrmboy12
Probably wouldn't even require a nuke to get the job done...drop a couple (GBU-28) "Saddamizers" in the right area and it would likely get you the same results...I can't seem to find the depth of the yellowstone caldera easily but these can penetrate 100ft of earth ..If that doesn't do the job there is always the GBU-57A/B which can do 200ft...my point..you probabaly don't need a nuke to do this...Im sure the russians have their equivalents...a reply to: Telos
originally posted by: olddognewtricks
The nukes are not too actually penetrate the magma chamber. The point would be to impart enough kinetic energy to tip the balance in favor of a collapse of the chamber and the resulting eruption.
originally posted by: peck420
originally posted by: olddognewtricks
The nukes are not too actually penetrate the magma chamber. The point would be to impart enough kinetic energy to tip the balance in favor of a collapse of the chamber and the resulting eruption.
I honestly don't think you need to worry. Exploratory drilling, around yellowstone, has gone significantly deeper than a EPW will, and hasn't set it off yet.
Aside from that, a nuclear weapon would probably not be the best weapon of choice, if it was capable of causing an eruption. The increased spread of radioactive material would almost certainly mean that the sender of said weapon would receive the fallout.
originally posted by: wyrmboy12
All i know for sure is that No One on Earth wants Yellowstone to erupt...Anyone that does should be commmittd imo...Talk about an ELE of mass proportions...i hope i never live to see it or know it happened...