Survivalist Forum banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Wild Edibles Expert
Joined
·
10,167 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I've put the paragraph we're most interested in, in bold.

A financial apocalypse isn't nearly as scary as a nuclear one

By John Diamond

Nuclear terrorism, the most serious existential threat to our homeland, has fallen off our priority list. The startling crisis on Wall Street, and the threat it poses to Main Street, has relegated national security to an afterthought — when it should be anything but.

Four years ago, during the presidential campaign, President Bush and Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., agreed that the possibility that a terrorist group could obtain fissile material, fashion a crude nuclear weapon and set it off in an American city was our greatest threat.

This year, the topic barely got a mention in the presidential debates. Go to the websites of Barack Obama and John McCain and click on the "Issues" buttons. In neither case does the drop-down list include a separate category called "terrorism." Once you click through enough layers, you discover that they both agree on the importance of securing nuclear weapons material. Both have endorsed the concept of "a world without nuclear weapons." And they both support gradual but significant reductions in the U.S. and Russian arsenals.

The absence of a sharp disagreement between the candidates on responding to the nuclear terror threat might explain why it has all but disappeared from view as the fall campaign approaches. Yet perhaps our leaders and their constituents have not fully grasped the consequences of such an attack beyond the grim image of a mushroom cloud over an American city.

The aftershocks

As the Saga Foundation — a non-profit organization focused on the threat of terrorism involving weapons of mass destruction — argued in a recent white paper, the vast damage at and around a nuclear ground zero would be dwarfed in scope by the national and global economic aftershocks. These aftershocks would stem not only from the explosion itself but also from a predictable set of decisions a president would almost certainly have to make in grappling with the possibility of a follow-on attack.

Assuming, as the experts believe likely, that such a weapon would have to be smuggled into the country, the president could be expected to close the nation's borders, halt all freight commerce and direct a search of virtually any moving conveyance that could transport a nuclear weapon. Most manufacturing would then cease. In a nation that lives on just-in-time inventory, these developments could empty the nation's shelves in days.

The effects of post-attack decision-making go far beyond this example. If U.S. intelligence determined that one or more countries had somehow aided and abetted the attack, we would face the prospect of full-scale war. Even short of that, the nation would demand, and the president would almost certainly order, a level of retaliation at the suspected locus of the attacking group that would dwarf the post-9/11 military response. The possibility of follow-on attacks could transform our notions of civil liberties and freedom forever. And as former 9/11 Commission co-chairman Lee Hamilton has pointed out, a nuclear terrorist attack would prompt a collapse in public faith in the government's ability to protect the American people.

Think your 401(k) hurts now?

The presidential nominees, and the American people, should reconsider the tendency to view these two issues — economic crisis and the threat of catastrophic terrorism — as separate problems. A nuclear attack on a U.S. city would not only devastate the target and kill possibly hundreds of thousands, it would also create instantaneous national and global economic ripple effects with incalculable consequences.

To put it in personal terms, if you think things are tough in the nation's financial sector now, imagine what your 401(k) — or your paycheck — might look like six months after a nuclear detonation in Lower Manhattan or downtown Washington. Saga's study merely began what must become a much larger-scale effort to understand in the fullest detail possible the consequences of an act of nuclear terrorism, not only the attack itself but also the decisions that would almost certainly follow. The idea is not to depress people but to motivate them.

While some of the consequences are obvious, others are not, and it is the less understood aftershocks that could damage our world as well as transform it — and not for the better.

John Diamond is a Washington fellow of the Saga Foundation. He is also a former national security reporter for USA TODAY and author of The CIA and the Culture of Failure.
 

·
Founder
Joined
·
16,867 Posts
A Financial breakdown is nation wide, a nuclear explosion would be regional. Unless the nuke took out new york, LA or houston, the rest of the nation would continue to function.

But lets say that all transportation was shut down, and an example like the town I live in. This community only has 2 grocery stores. The nearest large stores are an hours drive north or south. This town would empty out the stores in a matter of days, maybe even hours if panic buying kicks in. Within a week, most people would be out of food.
 

·
Wild Edibles Expert
Joined
·
10,167 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Wow.. From boxcutters to nukes in under 8 years..

Any nuke that goes off in the US, will have been manufactured in the US and will most likely have "Halliburton" written on the side and will cause the effect exactly as stated.
That is juvenile rhetoric and ignorance combined (I am not saying you are juvenile or ignorant. I am saying the assertion is juvenile and ignorant.)

As far as box cutters and nukes. The Islamics have committed thousands of acts of terrorism over the last 40 years. And have been trying to get nuclear material for at least 20, sometimes almost getting it. To measure from 9/11 to now is to ignore the long-term effort they have embarked upon.

One cannot wage any military event today without the help of corporations. It is reality. They are not going to wound the cow that gives them milk. Where as Pakistan is a nuclear sieve and as we all know there are no radical Muslims in Pakistan.

I hold an MMD and a TWIC... port security is high but it is not fallible at all. More so, together Muslims nations can also launch a nuclear missile at the US from off shore.

Of this you can be sure: There will be a nuclear attack on the US, and it will be Muslims not Haliburton. Personally, I would avoid New York and Washington DC.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
173 Posts
Nuclear possibility

If a smart jihadist group, or a domestic enemy masquerading as one, were to wander the Iraqi countryside, they could collect, literally, TONS of depleted uranium... and use it in a dirty bomb stateside... or with the application of some scientific knowledge they could refine it into the necessary isotope and produce their own nuclear device. Something to think about. We have unleashed more radiation in Iraq in the two wars we've fought there than 100 Hiroshimas and Nagasakis combined. This is not an exaggeration. Do some research on Depleted Uranium use in Iraq (DU for short) and you will see we have found a novel method of disposing of alot of nuclear waste.

EQV

Edit: Also... look up Iraqs current birth defect rate... it is through the roof. No explanation is currently available. Glad we found those WMDs.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
653 Posts
imagine what your 401(k) — or your paycheck — might look like six months after a nuclear detonation in Lower Manhattan or downtown Washington.
I'd accept the lower paycheck and 401k hit and consequences of one in DC, just as long as Congress was in session.....
 

·
Information is Ammunition
Joined
·
22,122 Posts
A Financial breakdown is nation wide, a nuclear explosion would be regional. Unless the nuke took out new york, LA or houston, the rest of the nation would continue to function.

But lets say that all transportation was shut down, and an example like the town I live in. This community only has 2 grocery stores. The nearest large stores are an hours drive north or south. This town would empty out the stores in a matter of days, maybe even hours if panic buying kicks in. Within a week, most people would be out of food.
*sings* We gotta get outta this place- if its the last thing we ever doooo
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,121 Posts
That is juvenile rhetoric and ignorance combined (I am not saying you are juvenile or ignorant. I am saying the assertion is juvenile and ignorant.)

As far as box cutters and nukes. The Islamics have committed thousands of acts of terrorism over the last 40 years. And have been trying to get nuclear material for at least 20, sometimes almost getting it. To measure from 9/11 to now is to ignore the long-term effort they have embarked upon.

One cannot wage any military event today without the help of corporations. It is reality. They are not going to wound the cow that gives them milk. Where as Pakistan is a nuclear sieve and as we all know there are no radical Muslims in Pakistan.

I hold an MMD and a TWIC... port security is high but it is not fallible at all. More so, together Muslims nations can also launch a nuclear missile at the US from off shore.

Of this you can be sure: There will be a nuclear attack on the US, and it will be Muslims not Haliburton. Personally, I would avoid New York and Washington DC.
You fail to see the conspiracy that is going on right under your nose.. If the Bush administration hasn't proven to me through the coup type behavior in the past 8 years that our government isn't only filled to the rim with corruption of every kind, but is completely psychopathic, both democrats and republicans, I would still believe and share the same exact view you have.

But since they have opened my eyes enough to start doing research on events myself, I've found beyond ANY reasonable doubt that the US government is famous for false flag attacks. Simply because all of the state run media outlets don't report these issues, doesn't make the research people have done on their own untrue. There are many more facts to back my statement up than to debunk them.

Also, I totally understand that it takes corporation involvement to fight a war and run a military. The problem arises when CEO's of those major corporations that have long term no bid contracts end up in our white house. A more blatant conflict of interest does NOT exist.

So aside from the fact that the federal reserve has been scamming the majority of us out of our wages by making us pay an illegal income tax, which simply is used to pay the federal reserve the interest that they are charging our government for printing the play money we use out of thin air, our leaders are involved with directly profiting off of every bomb in every war that is dropped. And this isn't just Iraq, this has been going on forever. It's no secret that the people at the top are making BILLIONS off of the war.

This should be a far bigger pill to swallow than the juvenile and ignorant assertion that our "leaders" would conduct another false flag attack to either sway the voters and get more support for more wars against people we can't beat who are actually only mad at us because of our "leader's" juvenile and ignorant foreign policy. Which brings me to the fact that the CFR and Trilateral commission is at the top of the pyramid scheme here.

These quotes and videos show that there is much more going on that make my claims seem less juvenile and ignorant, and more that of someone who just goes a little further out of the way to connect the dots than you and most of America who would conveniently like to keep blaming Muslims for everything.

I'm honestly no fan of the Muslim religion, and I'm also NOT anti war, for the record. I AM just aware that a game is being played and can see who is moving the pieces.. And it ISN'T George Bush, and WON'T be Obama or McCain.




Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes the laws. - Mayer Amschel Rothschild


This present window of opportunity, during which a truly peaceful and interdependent world order might be built, will not be open for too long - We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order. - David Rockefeller


The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists. - J Edgar Hoover




David Rockefeller's CFR:

**** Cheney, ex director of the CFR shows who his boss really is.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top