It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


What if Washington DC was Nuked?

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 21 2007 @ 02:47 PM
How would it affect America if Washington DC was nuked and most of our leaders were killed.
And if Bush was on the west coast or somewhere else safe, what would he do?
Would him being involved in something like this be to his benefit? Wouldnt this help his NWO or would it hender the NWO.

All leaders in the current line of succession reside in the vicinity of DC.

posted on Jun, 21 2007 @ 02:53 PM
If President Bush was somewhere besides DC and it was nuked, he would be rushed to Airforce One and the plane would take off, and remain airborne until it was determined that it would be safe to land somewhere.

My guess is it would land at a military installation and then the President would be taken to secret underground facilities where he would remain in command.

As far as the line of succession, everyone can be replaced, those positions would be filled and government would continue.

posted on Jun, 21 2007 @ 02:57 PM
The cynic in me suggests that the rest of us would be a lot better off if the federal government suddenly ceased to exist...

However I have friends in DC so I can't say I'd like to see it happen.

posted on Jun, 21 2007 @ 03:11 PM
Is it possible the military could temporarily take over?

They would be the most powerful entity immediately standing following that type of catastrophic event. Lets not underestimate the impact of a nuclear bomb exploding in a major city. There is a short term void that could be filled by the military, with the excuse of trying to prevent break downs and keep social order.

Also, a nuclear bomb in Washington DC is a clear act of war, and retaliatory action is necessary almost immediately. If all our major leaders are wiped out, as well as the foundations for major organizations like the pentagon, FBI building, etc.,... could a group of new leaders manage the chaos that would follow in DC and the greater US, as well as handle the pressure to respond with nukes of our own in the immediate aftermath of such an event?

I think that would create a military state, lasting long into a greater campaign of bombing in who knows where in the world. This could inevitably be described by the "police state" that some people talk about. Our allies will be major trump cards on the international scene.

posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 02:25 PM
I'd also like to know what if the Nuke was a "backpack" nuke and the USA could not find out who or what nation was responsible? What kind of response would you expect?

posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 02:30 PM
Slick, somebody always gets blamed. If there is nobody to blame, or you can't find someone to blame, then that is viewed as a sign of incompetence. You can bet on someone being "found guilty" by whoever wants to be the new leader of America.

posted on Jun, 26 2007 @ 07:02 AM
If DC was nuked or any city for that matter life as we know it will change forever. This would be bigger than 9/11 tenfold.
And the scary thing for me is its very possible considering how easy it is to cross the border.
Ive met hundreds of mexicans that sneaked across the border and how easy could it have been for one terrorist to come also.
He could have easily caught a ride to DC and BOOM!
Yea I think it would be that easy, and how would you stop him?

posted on Jun, 26 2007 @ 07:47 AM
Man... screw congress, the White House, the Pentagon and all that crap; we can function as a country without those parasites.

If Washington was nuked we'd lose the Smithsonian and all those other fine museums, the Library of Congress and the National Archives.

Politicians and their ilk can be replaced; just turn over a rock, but our national treasures are irreplaceable.

posted on Jun, 26 2007 @ 07:51 AM
For all the billions invested into this war on terror and all the new laws that infringe on your rights, if someone was serious about planting a bomb anywhere in the U.S. then it would be a piece of cake. As you said, getting across the border is more than easy. Only about half of it is fenced. And even if a terrorist wasn't able to get direct access to Mexico, I would be willing to bet that given Jihadist would have many friends scattered thought South America. A smorgasbord of infiltration points!

Getting up to DC would be easy. Buy a rust-bucket, hitchhike, whatever. The radiation detectors scattered throughout the capital would be a slight problem, but nothing adequate shielding couldn't get around. And if the bomb-makers didn't have any lead handy, there's a plethora of ways to get covertly around cities if you open your eyes. For example, I know how to get around the tunnel systems under Melbourne.
There really is no defence against terrorists . . . which is why they are called terrorists. They can strike at any time, any place, and there's nothing anyone can do. You think it is all just going to go away once Bin laden is killed?
People have been hijacking planes long before he came along.

I don't think terrorism is that well understood. It is merely an extension of the political campaign advertisements you see on TV. It's just that terrorists think that hurting and killing people is a better way of getting their message across. You can bet that the Iraqi child who had both his parents and all his siblings killed when an American bomb dropped on his house will remember George Bush's name quicker than any 5 year old in the U.S.

posted on Jun, 26 2007 @ 07:52 AM

Originally posted by grover
our national treasures are irreplaceable.

I agree with you. It would be a major cultural loss. NYC, DC, Philly ... the big terror 'hit' spots all have major cultural treasures that are irreplaceable.

On the other hand - HOLLYWOOD is a culture that we could do without.

posted on Jun, 26 2007 @ 08:00 AM
As long as they take out Paris Hilton when the take out L.A. its fine with me.

"Tip America on its side and everything loose lands in L.A."
"There's nothing wrong with Florida that a good rise in the water level wouldn't cure."

(both quotes are Frank Lloyd Wright's)

new topics

top topics


log in