 |
|
Vesayen
|
|
This author has been going on every talk radio show I can find for the last week.... every time I turn on the radio, there he is.
With varying degrees of evidence, he claims there are 20 nuclear weapons(low yield ones... but low yield is relative, its a nuke) in the U.S. in terrorists hands and they are planning to detonate them simultaneously.
So what does the U.S. do after this happens? Nuke Mecca and Medina?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Vesayen
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ninot
hmmm... it would be the wrong thing to do, (nuking holy lands) but if Terrorists are capable of such damage and have such great resources, how could the U.S. ever possibly retaliate on any level near that?
If americans are in fear of nukes, and think that no matter what they do (short of nuclear war) isn't gonna be enough, thats jut scary. |
I've been convinced... we are screwed.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lancer
|
|
Oregon Coast, USA! or Bohol, Philippines!
Apr 1999
time: 05:37
|
|
The US would be finished as a major power for quite a while. Sure, we would nuke every terrorism supporting state back to the dark ages. That point is moot. The resulting new power structure, with China at the lead, is what would interest me. Our financial and production backbone of our country would be wrecked. All of a sudden we would be at the national level of the UK, but still with a super military. That should remain super for maybe 20 years assuming no great tech advances make it obsolete, and we don't get involved in a war in which we couldn't replace essencial vehicles or parts.
The free world would lose it's strong leader. A consortium of fearful euro powers I wouldn't expect much from, except for the UK of course. They never fail to rise to a challenge.
What would China do? In ten years I bet they have Tiawan. Japan would have to quickly get off its ass and look to its own defense or become Finlandized by China.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Geronimo
|
|
st cloud USA
Jan 1970
time: 05:37
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Joseph
If you are up wind and at lease 30 to 40 miles away, stay there and don't go towards the blast area for several years.
If you are down wind and 20 or less miles away, don't worry about it. You will be dead in a few days or weeks. |
why? the vast majority of the people in Japan down wind from nagasaki and hiroshima were not harmed by the nukes.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lancer
|
|
Oregon Coast, USA! or Bohol, Philippines!
Apr 1999
time: 05:37
|
|
Nuking 20 US cities with millions of dead would bring on total war against Islamic states that sponser terrorism AT LEAST. It might just be a total war against the religion that is the foundation for terrorism, which would be over in a matter of hours. It might not be nice, but it's 'the only way to be sure.' American survivors would demand it, or would never feel safe again. People would always be wondering when the next bomb is going to go off. Mothers would worry for their children, fathers for their families. Truly, there would be no point to rebuilding our cities if the root of the problem were not removed.
Think of Rome sewing salt into the soil of Carthage.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Vesayen
|
|
I think putting every Arab in America into camps and irradiating the middle east is significantly more barbaric then carthage.
The one problem is... what about Israel?
Israel *IS* our loyal ally and glassing the middle east, would irradiate Israel.
Surley we won't destroy one of our only REAL friends, in vengance against the rest of the middle east?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
snoopy369
|
 |
Of the Peanuts Gallery
Apr 2004
time: 23:37
|
|
I'll repeat ...
Terrorrist nukes, even twenty, would not kill millions of Americans.
More than likely at most, a few tens of thousands would die within the year as a result of the dirty nukes. The problem is dispersal method - Terrorists don't have access to enough nuclear material to make an explosive bomb, and even if they did it would be too easily detected/traced, and too large.
Instead they basically make 'dirty' material that is then 'dispersed' through conventional methods - a bus exploding, for example, or even a backpack explosive ("Backpack nukes", or "briefcase nukes"). However, the dispersal would not kill a whole lot of people - it would be annoying, of course, but it would not kill that many more people than the bus itself killed, unless they got in a really good spot [like near a concert or something].
In fact, that's the most likely scenario, and the reason they're very concerned about stadiums - that a concert or a football game or some such is attacked. A terrorist could take out something around 15,000 people in a tightly packed concert, not immediately but due to radiation exposure.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lancer
|
|
Oregon Coast, USA! or Bohol, Philippines!
Apr 1999
time: 05:37
|
|
Nukes can be made fairly clean. People live in Nagasaki and Hiroshima. I don't see Israel being harmed. In fact, they would benefit. They could expand their borders, take as much land as they need.
You guys see this as business as usual. I DO see millions of Americans dieing if 20 cities got nuked, even with small bombs. People seem to think we would bother to find those behind the attacks. I think they would die with their civilizations, I have no doubt about it. The only thing I wonder about is places like Egypt and Pakistan. I'm not sure they would be nuked.
Syria, Iran, definately. Likely many more.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:37.
Apolyton Time is 00:37. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
14-07-2005 06:21
|