• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Al-Qaida nukes already in U.S.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Saurus

Member
"WASHINGTON – As London recovers from the latest deadly al-Qaida attack that killed at least 50, top U.S. government officials are contemplating what they consider to be an inevitable and much bigger assault on America – one likely to kill millions, destroy the economy and fundamentally alter the course of history, reports Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin."


http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45203
 
So what is this, orange alert or red alert? This sounds like a purple alert to me.
 
In addition to detonating its own nuclear weapons already planted in the U.S., military sources also say there is evidence to suggest al-Qaida is paying former Russian special forces Spetznaz to assist the terrorist group in locating nuclear weapons formerly concealed inside the U.S. by the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Osama bin Laden's group is also paying nuclear scientists from Russia and Pakistan to maintain its existing nuclear arsenal and assemble additional weapons with the materials it has invested hundreds of millions in procuring over a period of 10 years.

The storyline for MGS4
 
George Noory was talking about that crap last night. Coasttocoast jumped the shark over the weekend and just continued the downward spiral last night. Talking about Iran controlling hurricanes to damage the oil refineries. So most of the refineries are in the Houston area, but we haven't had a hurricane hit us in years.
 
Thank god the U.S. have a strong and intelligent leader......cough

God damn, alarmist much?
A nuke in the middle of New York, Chicago or L.A. would definately alter the course of history, destroy the economy and kill millions
 
There are two kinds of minority thinkers in this world. People who want to destroy the world, and those who secretly hope that they can pull it off.

I'm so sick of the "oh, the world is doooomed" crowd.
 
Al-Qaida has obtained at least 40 nuclear weapons from the former Soviet Union – including suitcase nukes, nuclear mines, artillery shells and even some missile warheads. In addition, documents captured in Afghanistan show al-Qaida had plans to assemble its own nuclear weapons with fissile material it purchased on the black market.

Wow, he went shopping for nukes and got not one, not two but large numbers of them? If they had said one or two I would be more prone to accept this fantasy, but 40 nuclear weapons do not go 'missing' :)
 
Hrm, 14 replies and no reference to Jack Bauer? I'm ashamed GAF!

bauercmate4xu2iq.jpg
 
Phoenix said:
Wow, he went shopping for nukes and got not one, not two but large numbers of them? If they had said one or two I would be more prone to accept this fantasy, but 40 nuclear weapons do not go 'missing' :)

at least... meaning there could be more! maybe 41 or 1000000000000
 
I love how people call this "alarmist," and are quick to deride it (which is somewhat understandable given the source), when the fact of the matter is that it is only a matter of time before a nuclear device is detonated on US soil. It may be "alarmist" now (in that it might not happen in the immediate future), but in the years to come it will be a tragedy, and all the smartasses who are so quick to mock reports like this will feel like assholes for having ever opened their mouths. Sorry for the tone, but seeing as how I live in NYC, and how it's likely to be my family and I who are incinerated in an eventual attack, I get kinda pissy when people try to downplay the gravity of the situation.


The only way such a situation could be avoided would be to fundamentally change the way our government (and the corporations who run our government) does business abroad in order to address the oftentimes legitimate grievances other factions/nations have against us (i.e., a nation which acts justly in all its dealings does not have many enemies), and also to completely lock down our northern and southern borders and inspect every ship coming into port and every plane departing from foreign soil for our nation's airports. Since that's not going to happen (though it could-- and it should have-- if the government was truly serious about protecting our citizens from terrorism; the cost would have likely been less than the Iraq war, anyway). But since neither "remedy" is going to be implemented (either a change in the character and policy of our nation or tighter border/port security), a nuke is inevitable. I really wonder what the people who believe that it's not are thinking sometimes...
 
Loki said:
I love how people call this "alarmist," and are quick to deride it (which is somewhat understandable given the source), when the fact of the matter is that it is only a matter of time before a nuclear device is detonated on US soil. It may be "alarmist" now (in that it might not happen in the immediate future), but in the years to come it will be a tragedy, and all the smartasses who are so quick to mock reports like this will feel like assholes for having ever opened their mouths. Sorry for the tone, but seeing as how I live in NYC, and how it's likely to be my family and I who are incinerated in an eventual attack, I get kinda pissy when people try to downplay the gravity of the situation.


The only way such a situation could be avoided would be to fundamentally change the way our government (and the corporations who run our government) does business abroad in order to address the oftentimes legitimate grievances other factions/nations have against us (i.e., a nation which acts justly in all its dealings does not have many enemies), and also to completely lock down our Northern and Southern borders and inspect every ship coming into port and every plane departing from foreign soil for our nation's airports. Since that's not going to happen (though it could-- and it should have-- if the government was truly serious about protecting our citizens from terrorism; the cost would have likely been less than the Iraq war, anyway). But since neither "remedy" is going to be implemented (either a change in the character and policy of our nation or tighter border/port security), a nuke is inevitable. I really wonder what the people who believe that it's not are thinking sometimes...


I think everyone realizes this but we hear it everyday. What are we supposed to do? Act astonished and run around like chickens with our heads cut off? No, its called accepting the reality of the world in which we live.
 
Loki said:
I love how people call this "alarmist," and are quick to deride it (which is somewhat understandable given the source), when the fact of the matter is that it is only a matter of time before a nuclear device is detonated on US soil. It may be "alarmist" now (in that it might not happen in the immediate future), but in the years to come it will be a tragedy, and all the smartasses who are so quick to mock reports like this will feel like assholes for having ever opened their mouths. Sorry for the tone, but seeing as how I live in NYC, and how it's likely to be my family and I who are incinerated in an eventual attack, I get kinda pissy when people try to downplay the gravity of the situation.


The only way such a situation could be avoided would be to fundamentally change the way our government (and the corporations who run our government) does business abroad in order to address the oftentimes legitimate grievances other factions/nations have against us (i.e., a nation which acts justly in all its dealings does not have many enemies), and also to completely lock down our Northern and Southern borders and inspect every ship coming into port and every plane departing from foreign soil for our nation's airports. Since that's not going to happen (though it could-- and it should have-- if the government was truly serious about protecting our citizens from terrorism; the cost would have likely been less than the Iraq war, anyway). But since neither "remedy" is going to be implemented (either a change in the character and policy of our nation or tighter border/port security), a nuke is inevitable. I really wonder what the people who believe that it's not are thinking sometimes...

We could all go at anytime, I am not going worry about it day and night.... otherwise I would get nothing done and would be scared to leave my house...
 
Blackace said:
We could all go at anytime, I am not going worry about it day and night.... otherwise I would get nothing done and would be scared to leave my house...

Hey, I don't live in fear either-- I live my life as usual. I just don't think it's right to always be so dismissive of reports like these when it's inevitable.

I think everyone realizes this but we hear it everyday. What are we supposed to do? Act astonished and run around like chickens with our heads cut off? No, its called accepting the reality of the world in which we live.

Yes, I know. I was more referring to those of the "these reports are nonsense, and it won't happen" stripe. They don't know how wrong they are.
 
Loki said:
I love how people call this "alarmist," and are quick to deride it (which is somewhat understandable given the source), when the fact of the matter is that it is only a matter of time before a nuclear device is detonated on US soil.
Well, sure. But the point of articles like this (given, as you said, the source) is to be alarmist -- to make people think that gee golly, this could happen tomorrow, let's all pay real close attention to the terror alert color and watch our neighbors carefully!

I have no problem with people making level-headed reasonable statements about future attacks on U.S. soil (which are inevitable, of course, and that's one of the reasons why I have a problem with news articles like these, which report on that inevitability with all the breathlessness of a 10 year-old who just found out that the sun will eventually implode), but there's no reason to insinuate that it's going to happen any day now or to boost up everyone's anxiety level by using carefully-placed descriptors designed to get a rise out of you.
 
I just see a nasty chain reaction if the US gets nuked. Trigger happy Bush will launch nukes at anything without white skin after that and that will spur other nations to launch theirs.
 
Loki said:
Hey, I don't live in fear either-- I live my life as usual. I just don't think it's right to always be so dismissive of reports like these when it's inevitable.

so if it is inevitable, why not dimiss them? You can't change it it is inevitable... Shit I think Japan is next anyways.. New York, London, then Tokyo... but I cannot worry too much about it.. Just live through it if I can...
 
"Inevitable" could mean 100 years from now, and even then "inevitable" isn't necessarily true. Getting hit with nukes isn't exactly a common occurence.
 
olimario said:
I just see a nasty chain reaction if the US gets nuked. Trigger happy Bush will launch nukes at anything without white skin after that and that will spur other nations to launch theirs.
actually, i wanted to get Loki's opinion on this (since he seems to have a brain cell or two).

Loki, what's your opinion on america's reaction once a does nuke goes off?
 
Blackace said:
so if it is inevitable, why not dimiss them?

Because the dismissal often comes with a certitude that is entirely unfounded (e.g., "this WON'T happen"), and I do not think that it's proper to make light of what will be a very serious incident just to try to make some larger sociopolitical point (e.g., that our press and gov't are frequently alarmist in nature re: terrorism).


If you knew that the world would end in some man-made cataclysm, and that it was inevitable, you wouldn't lament it simply for the human suffering and death it would cause? Because I would. To realize that humanity has allowed things to progress to a point where death and destruction is inevitable is a sad thing, not a "neutral" thing. I'm not saying to be actively depressed about it, or to live your life in fear, but a proper perspective would seem to indicate that it should be seen as a tragic thing, even if it is inevitable. And the fact that people seem so flippant about it at times really gets my goat.
 
People are discussing this as if this news were true, seriuosly after the Island this could be Michael Bay next movie
 
human5892 said:
I have no problem with people making level-headed reasonable statements about future attacks on U.S. soil (which are inevitable, of course, and that's one of the reasons why I have a problem with news articles like these, which report on that inevitability with all the breathlessness of a 10 year-old who just found out that the sun will eventually implode), but there's no reason to insinuate that it's going to happen any day now or to boost up everyone's anxiety level by using carefully-placed descriptors designed to get a rise out of you.

Fair enough, and I largely agree. I was referring to a certain type of person, and a certain type of objection:

Loki said:
Yes, I know. I was more referring to those of the "these reports are nonsense, and it won't happen" stripe. They don't know how wrong they are.
 
I haven't clicked the link, or done any follow up research, but I beg to ask the question, if a terrorist organization ALREADY HAD nukes in the U.S., what would they be waiting for to detonate them -- an invitation? If they had nukes there, we'd know about it since they'd set them off.
 
Doubtful.

But if it has to happen, I wonder if they'll target the biggest coastal cities or try to strike the heartland. The latter can be a pretty symbolic blow in itself with some big cities as targets.
 
Loki said:
Fair enough, and I largely agree. I was referring to a certain type of person, and a certain type of objection:
Ah, okay. I mistakenly took it as an attack on my earlier post, but no harm done. :)
 
Loki said:
I love how people call this "alarmist," and are quick to deride it (which is somewhat understandable given the source), when the fact of the matter is that it is only a matter of time before a nuclear device is detonated on US soil. It may be "alarmist" now (in that it might not happen in the immediate future), but in the years to come it will be a tragedy, and all the smartasses who are so quick to mock reports like this will feel like assholes for having ever opened their mouths. Sorry for the tone, but seeing as how I live in NYC, and how it's likely to be my family and I who are incinerated in an eventual attack, I get kinda pissy when people try to downplay the gravity of the situation.


The only way such a situation could be avoided would be to fundamentally change the way our government (and the corporations who run our government) does business abroad in order to address the oftentimes legitimate grievances other factions/nations have against us (i.e., a nation which acts justly in all its dealings does not have many enemies), and also to completely lock down our northern and southern borders and inspect every ship coming into port and every plane departing from foreign soil for our nation's airports. Since that's not going to happen (though it could-- and it should have-- if the government was truly serious about protecting our citizens from terrorism; the cost would have likely been less than the Iraq war, anyway). But since neither "remedy" is going to be implemented (either a change in the character and policy of our nation or tighter border/port security), a nuke is inevitable. I really wonder what the people who believe that it's not are thinking sometimes...


Well, NYC here, got a fam as well, and I still think this is alarmist bullshit. To clarify, I don't think it couldn't happen, but that's not the point. This is fear-mongering garbage at its best. Also, that Yellowstone "Super Volcano" will happen at some point, maybe even next month, but are we that concerned over it?
 
LaneMeyer said:
Loki, what's your opinion on america's reaction once a does nuke goes off?

My opinion on what should happen, or on what I think will happen? Because they are very different things. As to the latter, I can't speculate, but I will say that the types of actions already undertaken by the current administration give us a clue as to how they'll react when a true calamity occurs. My personal response would likely be pretty similar to what I proposed above: close down all borders and ports, and fundamentally change the character and policy of our nation. Though it sounds trite, a nation which is just in its dealings, and honorable and noble in its conduct, will not foment hatred among the people of the world. We've fallen far short of that mark for a long time now, and, ultimately, that is the reason we're in the situation we're in.
 
Manics said:
I haven't clicked the link, or done any follow up research, but I beg to ask the question, if a terrorist organization ALREADY HAD nukes in the U.S., what would they be waiting for to detonate them -- an invitation? If they had nukes there, we'd know about it since they'd set them off.

Yes, obviously. But acting as if there is some sort of deterrent in place against them smuggling nukes in and detonating them (you know, like adequate-- or any-- border security), which would be the only reason that some people should be so smugly certain that it "won't happen", is silly imo since that's not the case.
 
The Faceless Master said:
jack bristow > jack bauer

Jack Bauer's look only would kill Jack Bristow!

Jack Bauer> Jack Bristow

Oh, and this is the plot for 24 season 6, the final season? :lol
 
If you knew that the world would end in some man-made cataclysm, and that it was inevitable, you wouldn't lament it simply for the human suffering and death it would cause? Because I would.

I certainly wouldn't because the inevitable is just that - inevitable. Why the hell would you cry over it? Don't you have enough drama in your own life without worrying about stuff that will happen but may happen years down the road, or perhaps not even in your/your childrens'/your childrens' childrens' lifetimes?

You must be a terribly depressing person to be around. =/
 
demon said:
So what is this, orange alert or red alert? This sounds like a purple alert to me.

BUSH: Step up to red alert!
CHENEY: Sir, are you absolutely sure? It does mean changing the bulb.
BUSH: There's always some excuse, isn't there?
 
olimario said:
I just see a nasty chain reaction if the US gets nuked. Trigger happy Bush will launch nukes at anything without white skin after that and that will spur other nations to launch theirs.
One of the "problems" with this sort of attack is there is no deterrent factor if the group planting the bomb isn't acting as an arm of an enemy government. I imagine that in terms of parallel retaliation we'd just have to sit there and take it if it were via a AQ or an AQ-inspired organization, although it's also entirely possible we'd massively retaliate against the source that provided the nuke tech.

I don't think a nuke attack is inevitable, but that doesn't mean not I'm surprised we haven't been hit with something akin to London, Madrid, etc...
 
All partisan bullshit aside, one would hope that our government would be competent enough to be able to find people who they suspected of having the "suitcase" bombs or whatever, but I'd really think if they had any information that could stop something like this, they would act upon it. I mean, proliferation of loose nukes and fissile materials is a bad bad thing, but if they thought there was a chunk of material or even a whole nuke anywhere in the US, why the fuck wouldn't they go out and get it? I think this article, is probably BS, but its a possibility. I just think that there would be forces ready to stop this kind of thing. I sort of laugh about how the article says Bush made anti-nuke proliferation terrorism his greatest national priority. It's just not the case. So in general,

article = bs.
principle = serious.
 
Wraith said:
I certainly wouldn't because the inevitable is just that - inevitable. Why the hell would you cry over it? Don't you have enough drama in your own life without worrying about stuff that will happen but may happen years down the road, or perhaps not even in your/your childrens'/your childrens' childrens' lifetimes?

I'm not crying over it. I simply feel that it is inevitable (unless certain measures are taken, which they won't be), and it saddens me that humanity has allowed itself to get to a point where events like this can occur (and indeed seem inevitable). I lament our nature, I deplore the corruption of our institutions, and I bewail the the fact that the good name of our people has often been used as a shield for dishonorable conduct at home and abroad. That doesn't mean that I think about these things 24/7, though, because I don't.

You must be a terribly depressing person to be around. =/

Actually, no, I'm quite lively.
emot-dance1.jpg
:D
 
olimario said:
I just see a nasty chain reaction if the US gets nuked. Trigger happy Bush will launch nukes at anything without white skin after that and that will spur other nations to launch theirs.

He's miss all the European islamic muslims so I guess Europe gets hit too :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom