NationStates Jolt Archive

I feel it is inevitable that terrorist groups and rogue nations will eventually get nuclear weapons. I am also quite convinced that a sufficently determined group could get such a weapon into the country (infact it wouldn't be hard).

So, the question I pose to you NSG, how long until we're nuked?

With Kim Jong Mentally Ill confirming his possession of nukes, as crazy as he is, he could probably be persuaded to pass one off to Al-Qaeda, take a few million euros and order his guards to look the other way.

I don't think it's the nuke you really have to worry about. Sure, it'll kill a few thousand (maybe even tens of thousands of) people and make a right mess, but it's the events that happen afterwards, in our current climate of terrorist-paranoia and rising fascism that are more concerning.
It won't be a nuclear war, but maybe, afterwards, we'll wish it was.

Just hope the nuke is detonated by a rogue state rather than some enterprising group of terrorists.

I think it far more likely it'll be a terrorist organization. Probably aiming for a large city with high population density. Chicago or New York are the obvious targets. Proximity to the poorly guarded Canadian border with both. New York is a very obvious target and more likely to have detection equipment in my mind. Thus I think Chicago an excellent spot.

I feel it is inevitable that terrorist groups and rogue nations will eventually get nuclear weapons. I am also quite convinced that a sufficently determined group could get such a weapon into the country (infact it wouldn't be hard).

So, the question I pose to you NSG, how long until we're nuked?
Wat is enevitable looks like?

If Jolts server has anything to do with it ...we are being nuked right now along with the moon and mars.

So, the question I pose to you NSG, how long until we're nuked?
Does it still count if it's a missile and shot down on the way?

Ok, a little off topic, but if you were to plant a nuke in Chicago,then make a remote detonation device (unmarked, just a switch on a grey board), then send it to the whitehouse, do you think they'd accidentally detonate it? Would they realise? Would they tell?

Ok, a little off topic, but if you were to plant a nuke in Chicago,then make a remote detonation device (unmarked, just a switch on a grey board), then send it to the whitehouse, do you think they'd accidentally detonate it? Would they realise? Would they tell?

Luckily, the Secret Service is not made up of politicl appointees, so I doubt anyone would just go and throw a "switch on a grey board." :p

Nuclear attacks are soooo last century!

It's all about nanoplagues! *nod* :)

Nuclear attacks are soooo last century!

It's all about nanoplagues! *nod* :)

Nanoplagues! I like it!

And I keep reading the title as "How long until we're nAked." Maybe I should go home.

A nuclear attack against the U.S is unlikely (though it could happen).

1)North Korea only has the technology to launch a nuke as far as to the Sea of Japan, so that eliminates them.

2) Russia is neutral towards us, and won't start a nuclear war unless we start one (like how they were during the Cold War).

3) Who else has nukes? Pakistan won't launch 'em for fear of Isreal, and India wouldn't launch 'em against us bnecause they are neutral towards us, also.

There is Iran, but their program most likely won't be done until 20 or so years (which was why I voted "20 years" on the poll).

Remember, us getting involved and using our nukes is different than us getting nuked.

Nanoplagues! I like it!

And I keep reading the title as "How long until we're nAked." Maybe I should go home.

Go home naked. :)

I say France gets pissed off with all the frog jokes and lobs one at Bible Belt America.

If it's going to happen, then I'd bet on 10-20 years. But that is not very likely, rather just some chance, and quite possibly the attack could be only partially successful. And whether it's going to happen depends greatly on how aggressive the international politics of the US will be.

Go home naked. :)

:p It's a little chilly here today.

:p It's a little chilly here today.
Pretend you're a polar bear.

A nuclear attack against the U.S is unlikely (though it could happen).

1)North Korea only has the technology to launch a nuke as far as to the Sea of Japan, so that eliminates them.

2) Russia is neutral towards us, and won't start a nuclear war unless we start one (like how they were during the Cold War).

3) Who else has nukes? Pakistan won't launch 'em for fear of Isreal, and India wouldn't launch 'em against us bnecause they are neutral towards us, also.

There is Iran, but their program most likely won't be done until 20 or so years (which was why I voted "20 years" on the poll).

Remember, us getting involved and using our nukes is different than us getting nuked.

I'm not worried about any nuclear power directly nuking us. I'm more worried that either Iran or NK would sell/give a nuke to terrorists, thinking that they wouldn't get bombed if the terrorists bombed us.

The president is taking several active measures to preclude such a possibility. He is working tirelessly to help seal the border against unwelcome intrustions, possibly by terrorist organizations with nuclear weapons. To read about measures Bush is taking to do this, visit this web-site (http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/immigration/).

Also, the president is taking measures to facilitate the gathering and exchange of information between various governmental agencies. For example, he passed and renewed the Patriot Act, which makes apprehending domestic terrorists much easier. To learn more about this act, visit this web-site (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/06/20050609.html). Also, you might want to read this excellent speech (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/06/20050609-2.html) regarding the act.

I am confident that we are safe from a terrorist attack as long as Bush is president and he can rely on Congress to pass whichever actions may be necessary to protect Americans against terrorism. You need but listen to Bush's own words on the topic to know that you're in safe hands.

The most solemn responsibility of the federal government is to protect the American people. And since September the 11th, the administration and the Congress have worked together and we've led an unprecedented effort to safeguard our homeland. In other words, we learned the lessons of that attack. We've more than tripled spending on homeland security. We've created a federal Department of Homeland Security with a single mission: to protect the American people. We've trained and equipped hundreds of thousands of state and local first responders. We've worked with public agencies and private companies to improve security at airports and aboard commercial airliners. We've strengthened protections at bridges and tunnels and other critical infrastructure. We have a responsibility to protect the homeland and we're meeting that responsibility.

The president is taking several active measures to preclude such a possibility. He is working tirelessly to help seal the border against unwelcome intrustions, possibly by terrorist organizations with nuclear weapons. To read about measures Bush is taking to do this, visit this web-site (http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/immigration/).

Also, the president is taking measures to facilitate the gathering and exchange of information between various governmental agencies. For example, he passed and renewed the Patriot Act, which makes apprehending domestic terrorists much easier. To learn more about this act, visit this web-site (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/06/20050609.html). Also, you might want to read this excellent speech (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/06/20050609-2.html) regarding the act.

I am confident that we are safe from a terrorist attack as long as Bush is president and he can rely on Congress to pass whichever actions may be necessary to protect Americans against terrorism. You need but listen to Bush's own words on the topic to know that you're in safe hands.

Well, there it is.

I don't think it's the nuke you really have to worry about. Sure, it'll kill a few thousand (maybe even tens of thousands of) people and make a right mess, but it's the events that happen afterwards, in our current climate of terrorist-paranoia and rising fascism that are more concerning.
It won't be a nuclear war, but maybe, afterwards, we'll wish it was.

Just hope the nuke is detonated by a rogue state rather than some enterprising group of terrorists.

Are terrorists real, or not?

Who are the fascists?

Would it be a good thing or a bad thing to take away nuclear weapons from those who would use them "for evil"?

Who would be able to take those weapons from "the bad guys"?



If a nuclear (or neucular!) bomb goes off, how are the above questions answered?

for some reason the song "Jumping Jack Flash" played in my head when reading this...:confused:

I'm not worried about any nuclear power directly nuking us. I'm more worried that either Iran or NK would sell/give a nuke to terrorists, thinking that they wouldn't get bombed if the terrorists bombed us.

Nah, if they qwould sell it to terrorists, the terrorists would then have to acquire the technology to launch the nuke. And I doubt Iran would sell them that, in fear of the terrorists bombing Iran (Iran isn't too popular among Muslim extremists...)

The president is taking several active measures to preclude such a possibility. He is working tirelessly to help seal the border against unwelcome intrustions, possibly by terrorist organizations with nuclear weapons. To read about measures Bush is taking to do this, visit this web-site (http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/immigration/).

Also, the president is taking measures to facilitate the gathering and exchange of information between various governmental agencies. For example, he passed and renewed the Patriot Act, which makes apprehending domestic terrorists much easier. To learn more about this act, visit this web-site (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/06/20050609.html). Also, you might want to read this excellent speech (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/06/20050609-2.html) regarding the act.

I am confident that we are safe from a terrorist attack as long as Bush is president and he can rely on Congress to pass whichever actions may be necessary to protect Americans against terrorism. You need but listen to Bush's own words on the topic to know that you're in safe hands.


All hail great leader Bush! May he reign eternal!

It's sortof surprising it hasn't happened already, if it were going to happen, given the number of warheads that went missing after the collapse of the USSR.

Despite this, I would point out to the above idiot who suggested that a nuke would come in through Canada, that containers of depleted uranium, with the same radioactive signature as a shielded warhead, have twice been smuggled into the US through its ports. So it's more likely that one will come in to a coastal city than a Canadian-border city, unless you're suggesting that terrorists will choose to risk bringing it into Canada, risk transporting it across Canada, risk taking it across the border, risk transporting it in the US, and then detonate it. Which, in case I'm not being sarcastic enough to make my point, is more difficult than just waltzing into an American port with it. http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/furanium.asp

Also, I would point out that it is the Americans who guard the border into America, so if there's problems at the border, it's your own fault.

The bad news - if al-Qaeda got hold of a nuke, someone in the U.S. is history, and a chunk of a large city becomes uninhabitable for about a half century.

The good news - al-Qaeda ain't getting nukes. Hezbollah's the scary ones, and if they get nukes, Israel and India start going nuclear on the Muslim world, and the Muslims are sorry they ever listened to Hezbollah.

Simply put, who has nukes now? The U.S., the UK, France, Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Israel, and coming soon, Iran and North Korea. Maybe.

The U.S. isn't about to nuke itself, nor is it about to nuke the British, the Russians, the Chinese, the Indians, or even the French, no matter how much they bug the U.S. It doesn't care to nuke the Middle East. The same goes for the British, French, Russians, or Indians. The Chinese don't really care to nuke the Middle East, and even in a total war with the U.S., it's doubtful wither the Americans or Chinese would launch a nuke.

We're down to Israel, Pakistan, Iran, and North Korea. Israel got them for defensive purposes. I doubt Israel wants to set off a firestorm by actually launching them. It certainly won't nuke the U.S. Nor will Pakistan, which will be renamed Glassparkinglotistan if it tries to launch a nuke at anything. So we're down to the "coming soon" nations.

North Korea? Please. That backward hellhole with no resources more vauable than tree bark getting a real-live nuke? They couldn't destroy South Korea with a nuke, let alone hit the U.S. Their nuclear test was pitiful. It was so pitiful that Kim Jong Il apologized for it. What are they going to test next, a Super Soaker? Come on. No one wants North Korea to have nukes. Kim Jong Il's an expert at keeping China and the U.S. from overthrowing his regime. Getting nukes? Not going to happen.

Iran's the last one remaining. Iran's a bit scary. However, when the younger crowd starts to grow up a bit, how much influence will the Ayatollahs really have? Getting nukes will take a lot of effort and a lot of sweat. There are three possibilities here.

Iran fails to get nukes before the Ayatollahs' luck runs out - let's say Khamenei or whatever his name is kicks off, there's a power vacuum, and the theocracy collapses. After some time in a political vacuum, a republic takes hold, and reforms begin. Political stability becomes a priority; the nuclear program is abandoned.

Iran gets nukes but uses them just to get the West to back off - let's say they get a workable nuke. So they have a nuclear program similar to Israel's, and a pissing contest between Iran and Israel takes off. In order to protect its interests, the U.S. funnels money into some weaponry for the Israelis; Iran, meanwhile, builds up non-state actors in Syria and Lebanon. Soon enough, they become nuclear states. However, Syria remains secular and Hezbollah becomes the only non-state organization with nuclear capabilities. No one uses them, and a long struggle between the Jews and Muslims ends in a bloody battle among the Muslims themselves while Israel sits back and does nothing.

Iran gets nukes and funnels nuclear technology to other Islamic states - basically, the Ayatollah does what Musharraf didn't. We soon have a nuclear Saudi Arabia, a nuclear Syria, and the Taliban even gains nukes. Nukes funnel into Iraq, and al-Qaeda gets its hands on them. If al-Qaeda has nukes, it's likelier to use them than anyone else. Using that, al-Qaeda detonates a nuclear bomb on U.S. soil if it can; if it can't, it finds a place where it can detonate nukes. Most likely, al-Qaeda uses a nuke in a fairly large area. The gold mine for al-Qaeda is, of course, the destruction of Washington D.C., and if the U.S. gets lax about security, D.C. gets turned into rubble. More likely, though, al-Qaeda picks a less obvious target, especially one in a blue state. A big chunk of, say, Los Angeles is blown to bits. It's traced to al-Qaeda, and the U.S. decides to go postal on the Islamic world. Tehran becomes a parking lot. Kabul is roasted. Baghdad becomes a wasteland. Europe condemns the U.S. for overreacting, but in reality, they are scared half to death. Over 100 million people are dead at this point, especially after Israel gladly helps out by carpet-bombing a chunk of the Middle East. Saudi Arabia is, miraculously, left alone.

Of course, Islamic leadership vows retaliation, but with a weakened leadership and a poor nuclear program to begin with, they're completely sunk. Despite having overexerted itself in the Middle East, the U.S. is happy to declare a full-scale war, conquer those lands, and re-colonize them. Soon enough, all radical forms of Islam are banned. Restrictions are put in place that make people envy the Palestinians. Israel is given carte blanche to do whatever it pleases to the Palestinians and outlying lands, and a war between Israel and an alliance of Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan likely ends in a draw. No nukes are used in that battle. Over the next 20 years, states are redrawn; what's left of Afghanistan is among the last to become independent as the U.S. forcefully destroys the opium trade. Dictators are installed in Afghanistan, Iran, whatever Stan nations decided to pick on the U.S., as well as Iraq, which is cut into bits. Kurdistan is the first nation to become independent; Turkey allows part of Iraq to become Kurdistan. All the U.S.-backed dictators are told to do whatever is necessary to stamp out radical Islam.

Back home, the U.S. becomes more of an aggressive, borderline fascist state. A draft may have to be instituted among those who have no jobs. Some industries are forced to produce war materials. The press is discouraged from printing any negative images of rebuilding, and the government strong-arms the media into doing its bidding. People who oppose the recolonization are often blacklisted, though never thrown in jail except for egregious or trumped-up offenses. Massive propaganda campaigns go into effect, and they reach overseas. European companies and forces are encouraged to help; some take the bait. Lastly, the original aim of al-Qaeda is met - the U.S. removes its bases from Saudi Arabia. Now, it has bases in Iraq, Iran, Kuwait, Israel, and northern India. Musharraf is given lots of help in suppressing radical Islam. India's police forces watch Islamic groups very closely.

Massive good-news campaigns keep the Americans from tiring of the rebuilding process; most of the good news is at least partially true. However, resistance groups pop up and start causing trouble. In response, the terms of the President and Congress are extended; the President is given emergency powers (blatantly against the Constitution but hailed as a good move by many) and responds by granting Congress longer terms. Soon enough, the President doesn't relinquish power, and America officially becomes a fascist state. The likely outcome of this is civil war. After about ten years of that, the Islamic states seem far better off than the nation that recolonized them, and the Islamic states grow closer to Europe for economic reasons. Some evolve into democracies and shun the autocratic Saudi Arabia. The U.S., on the other hand, is a basket case.

This is many years off, of course, and it's a worst-case scenario. North Korea getting nukes isn't a big deal; it's not even that likely. Iran getting nukes, though, is a big problem.

Simple fact is building nukes is not even vaguely difficult once you have the materials. Other fact is that terrorist organizations buy weapons from all kinds of nations, these fellows are well financed. Given these facts I see terrorists with nukes as a relative certainty.

10-20 years. Duck and cover!

The problem is likely not all-out nuclear war and the extermination of multicellular life anymore, though. That's good.

The bad thing is instead of hurricane katrina, we might have nuclear johnny.

And another bad thing is the response. Imagine a nuclear 9/11 happening? The entire country signs up for nuking the entire middle east and committing genocide against Muslims. Maybe they feel bad about it afterwards - yay.

With Kim Jong Mentally Ill confirming his possession of nukes, as crazy as he is, he could probably be persuaded to pass one off to Al-Qaeda, take a few million euros and order his guards to look the other way.

yeah, the old athiest marxist - islamic fundamentalist axis. :rolleyes:

10-20 years. Duck and cover!

The problem is likely not all-out nuclear war and the extermination of multicellular life anymore, though. That's good.

The bad thing is instead of hurricane katrina, we might have nuclear johnny.

And another bad thing is the response. Imagine a nuclear 9/11 happening? The entire country signs up for nuking the entire middle east and committing genocide against Muslims. Maybe they feel bad about it afterwards - yay.

There's a segment of the population who believes we should just nuke Iraq and be done with it anyway.

There's a segment of the population who believes we should just nuke Iraq and be done with it anyway.

Don't I know it. I'm more afraid of that segment than of terrorists. Indirectly, of terrorists giving that segment more publicity and influence.

I don't want to live in a country that engages in genocide.

when talking about the us on this forum, do not use the word "we" not all NSers are americans.

when talking about the us on this forum, do not use the word "we" not all NSers are americans.

Well aren't you special. Do you have some form of anti-nuke shield or do you believe only the ebil americans can be attacked? 'Cause if you believe the latter I can point you to some Spaniards and Brits who'll testify otherwise.

It doesn't matter when someone’ll nuke us.

It is my firm belief that;

1) In 2010 California will be sunk into the Pacific by a massive earthquake.
2) In 2012, on December 21st the Earth will be struck with a massive meteor, thus causing the extinction of all of humanity and most other light-based life
3) Finally, in 2030 Germany will divide again, and one of those halves will win the 2034 World Cup.

Yes I know some things don't work out right, we're currently smoothing out the kinks to the theory.

It doesn't matter when someone’ll nuke us.

It is my firm belief that;

1) In 2010 California will be sunk into the Pacific by a massive earthquake.
2) In 2012, on December 21st the Earth will be struck with a massive meteor, thus causing the extinction of all of humanity and most other light-based life
3) Finally, in 2030 Germany will divide again, and one of those halves will win the 2034 World Cup.

Yes I know some things don't work out right, we're currently smoothing out the kinks to the theory.
well previsionist history is a nice change from the usual revisionist.

We will be nuked if we do not get ahold of the situaton, we have to stop trying to protect everyone and first arm ourselves and be ready for a massive attack......a nuke would take out way more than a thousand or even ten thousand, we cant make everyone happy but we can make ourselves happy by arming ourselves and being ready for a attack and by makeing our country better before we go marching off like robin hood out into the world, weve pissed enough people off and we need to come together and be ready for a attack because everyone we pissed off will react on our country.:mp5:

With Kim Jong Mentally Ill confirming his possession of nukes, as crazy as he is, he could probably be persuaded to pass one off to Al-Qaeda, take a few million euros and order his guards to look the other way.

Since when are convential weapons nukes?

I'll give you a precise date. I am good about these things.


It'll happen in Dallas-Ft Worth on January 17th,2016.


Do I get $5 if I am right?

I'll give you a precise date. I am good about these things.


It'll happen in Dallas-Ft Worth on January 17th,2016.


Do I get $5 if I am right?

That, and a special visit to one of the special places our special agencies in our special government has cooked up specially for you? :o

That, and a special visit to one of the special places our special agencies in our special government has cooked up specially for you? :o

Hooray! But that'd be my luck. I'm sure I am already on the list of potential bad guys for my statements elsewhere about a certain revolution killing a certain leader. ;)

lol your right how long well lets ask god.

hey god how soon are we gonna get screwed.

god: i donno why are you ask me do i look like doctor phill or somthing.:confused:

when talking about the us on this forum, do not use the word "we" not all NSers are americans.

Whoo, looks liek I'm wrong.

Seems like you're invincable to nuclear weapons, AND you're not human!

Wow, who would've guessed?

But, sarcasm over, who says that by saying "we" it means we're talking as if saying "us Americans"?

lol your right how long well lets ask god.

hey god how soon are we gonna get screwed.

god: i donno why are you ask me do i look like doctor phill or somthing.:confused:


lol you win the thread

Tomorow ;)

It could happen, but not in the short or medium term.

It could happen, but not in the short or medium term.

I think if its going to happens its going to be in the short term. 50 yrs from now, there'll be something more powerful than a nuke, or we'll have top of the line security by then, so long term seems out of the way.

And I keep reading the title as "How long until we're nAked." Maybe I should go home.

Me too! :mad: :(

"I fell in to a burning ring of fire.
I went down, down,down, and the flames went higher.
and it Burns, Burns, Burns, the ring of fire.

The ring of fire.

The ring of fire..."

http://www.simpsonstrivia.com.ar/wallpapers/mr-burns-wallpaper.htm