Glowing

This too shall pass.

Re: Glowing

Postby YMix » Sat Dec 12, 2015 11:23 am

Typhoon wrote:A well curied ham.


:)
“There are a lot of killers. We’ve got a lot of killers. What, do you think our country’s so innocent? Take a look at what we’ve done, too.” - Donald J. Trump, President of the USA
User avatar
YMix
 
Posts: 4288
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 4:53 am
Location: Department of Congruity - Report any outliers here

Re: Glowing

Postby Typhoon » Sat Dec 12, 2015 5:26 pm

Mr. Perfect wrote:I guess then my website is of great value.


If one is absolutely convinced that such a scenario is "imminent", then such a website is superfluous.
More to the point, it is deadly dangerous to rely on it.
Getting the margin of safety wrong is the difference between life, of a sort, and one of the most unpleasant deaths imaginable.

Rather simply move to N/S Dakota or Nebraska or Kansas*. As far away from both coastlines as is possible in the continental USA.

I recall that there are former missile silos for sale in that area. Bespoke homes for survivalists, one would think.

*Or, better yet, Canada: Manitoba or Saskatchewan or Alberta or Yukon or North West Territories :wink:
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 13655
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Glowing

Postby Mr. Perfect » Tue Dec 15, 2015 7:22 am

Personal defense advice from "Colonel Sun".

"In the event of a nuclear detonation know as little about it as possible".

Image

[Sorry, the requested page does not exist.
Please check the URL for correct spelling and capitalization.]

To each their own.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Mr. Perfect
 
Posts: 12654
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Not Glowing

Postby Alexis » Tue Dec 15, 2015 2:57 pm

Mr. Perfect wrote:
Putin raises possibility of using nuclear weapons against terrorists - but hopes they ‘will never need’ them.

(...)
Putin is not a man with a real history of empty threats. It's a part of life now.


Nuclear use against Jihadist-held territory is not completely excluded:
- A moderate leader like V V Putin refuses nuclear use and "hopes" to be able to continue refusing it in the future.
- A less moderate would-be leader like Ted Cruz has stated he would use nuclear weapons against the I.S.

That being said, this is unrelated to "nuclear war" as in: both sides have nukes. Notably, ICBMs, SLMBs and MRVs are excluded... because no Jihadist, even no Muslim-majority nation has any (Pakistan's nukes are regional range)

As for the nuclear terrorism scenario, only nations are able to build nukes and nuclear theft is not really an option because devices are well guarded. So if somebody put a nuclear bomb on a freighter in a US harbor, that "somebody" would have to be Pakist... sorry would have to be a nation rather than a terrorist group. I disagree with Typhoon: the US would not invade Borneo in response.

And the predictible US reaction is precisely why this scenario is very improbable: reprisal would be extremely painful.
User avatar
Alexis
 
Posts: 1235
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 2:47 pm

Re: Glowing

Postby Typhoon » Tue Dec 15, 2015 6:14 pm

Mr. Perfect wrote:Personal defense advice from "Colonel Sun".

"In the event of a nuclear detonation know as little about it as possible".

Image

[Sorry, the requested page does not exist.
Please check the URL for correct spelling and capitalization.]

To each their own.


Not clear to me what benefit there is to be gained from unreliable and inaccurate misinformation.
A false sense of security is of little benefit when dealing with nuclear blasts.

On the other hand, move to the middle of the USA and homestead a former missile silo is, well, concrete advice.
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 13655
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Glowing

Postby Mr. Perfect » Wed Dec 16, 2015 1:19 am

What was inaccurate about that site. I can think of a dozen useful things it provides, such as what escape routes will be available depending on how large of a blast you endure. I can't imagine how ignorance would be of any benefit. To each their own.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Mr. Perfect
 
Posts: 12654
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Not Glowing

Postby Mr. Perfect » Wed Dec 16, 2015 1:24 am

Alexis wrote:
Mr. Perfect wrote:
Putin raises possibility of using nuclear weapons against terrorists - but hopes they ‘will never need’ them.

(...)
Putin is not a man with a real history of empty threats. It's a part of life now.


Nuclear use against Jihadist-held territory is not completely excluded:
- A moderate leader like V V Putin refuses nuclear use and "hopes" to be able to continue refusing it in the future.
- A less moderate would-be leader like Ted Cruz has stated he would use nuclear weapons against the I.S.

That being said, this is unrelated to "nuclear war" as in: both sides have nukes. Notably, ICBMs, SLMBs and MRVs are excluded... because no Jihadist, even no Muslim-majority nation has any (Pakistan's nukes are regional range)

As for the nuclear terrorism scenario, only nations are able to build nukes and nuclear theft is not really an option because devices are well guarded. So if somebody put a nuclear bomb on a freighter in a US harbor, that "somebody" would have to be Pakist... sorry would have to be a nation rather than a terrorist group. I disagree with Typhoon: the US would not invade Borneo in response.

And the predictable US reaction is precisely why this scenario is very improbable: reprisal would be extremely painful.

It appears that you guys here are several years behind the curve in nuclear war strategy. I'm amazed at the assumptions implicit in some of the reasoning here. Suffice it to say there are scenarios in play none of you have considered.

Prepare to your discretion. Choose ignorance if you want, or do a little open minded research and studying as you would for any other likely event.

Keep in mind the nuclear scenario as likely is something you liberals champion, from Kerry to Buffet to baramba himself.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Mr. Perfect
 
Posts: 12654
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Not Glowing

Postby Typhoon » Wed Dec 16, 2015 2:10 am

Mr. Perfect wrote:
Alexis wrote:
Mr. Perfect wrote:
Putin raises possibility of using nuclear weapons against terrorists - but hopes they ‘will never need’ them.

(...)
Putin is not a man with a real history of empty threats. It's a part of life now.


Nuclear use against Jihadist-held territory is not completely excluded:
- A moderate leader like V V Putin refuses nuclear use and "hopes" to be able to continue refusing it in the future.
- A less moderate would-be leader like Ted Cruz has stated he would use nuclear weapons against the I.S.

That being said, this is unrelated to "nuclear war" as in: both sides have nukes. Notably, ICBMs, SLMBs and MRVs are excluded... because no Jihadist, even no Muslim-majority nation has any (Pakistan's nukes are regional range)

As for the nuclear terrorism scenario, only nations are able to build nukes and nuclear theft is not really an option because devices are well guarded. So if somebody put a nuclear bomb on a freighter in a US harbor, that "somebody" would have to be Pakist... sorry would have to be a nation rather than a terrorist group. I disagree with Typhoon: the US would not invade Borneo in response.

And the predictable US reaction is precisely why this scenario is very improbable: reprisal would be extremely painful.

It appears that you guys here are several years behind the curve in nuclear war strategy. I'm amazed at the assumptions implicit in some of the reasoning here. Suffice it to say there are scenarios in play none of you have considered.

Prepare to your discretion. Choose ignorance if you want, or do a little open minded research and studying as you would for any other likely event.

Keep in mind the nuclear scenario as likely is something you liberals champion, from Kerry to Buffet to baramba himself.


Do inform us about how "up to date" you are.

Citations, if you please.
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 13655
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Glowing

Postby Mr. Perfect » Wed Dec 16, 2015 2:31 am

I've been studying post USSR nuclear war since 2004. It used to be a liberal talking point, John Kerry ran on terrorists getting nukes way back then, it was mainstream liberal ideology. Liberals were the ones who made this movie. Note the date. I watched it when it came out.

http://www.netflix.com/title/70129456

So it is amazing you guys forgot so fast, if you ever even followed politics then, but I would suggest watching this movie first the we can lead you to other educational resources.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Mr. Perfect
 
Posts: 12654
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Glowing

Postby Typhoon » Wed Dec 16, 2015 4:01 am

Mr. Perfect wrote:I've been studying post USSR nuclear war since 2004. It used to be a liberal talking point, John Kerry ran on terrorists getting nukes way back then, it was mainstream liberal ideology. Liberals were the ones who made this movie. Note the date. I watched it when it came out.

http://www.netflix.com/title/70129456

So it is amazing you guys forgot so fast, if you ever even followed politics then, but I would suggest watching this movie first the we can lead you to other educational resources.


Netflix link does not work for those outside of the USA.

IMDB link?
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 13655
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Glowing

Postby Mr. Perfect » Wed Dec 16, 2015 8:22 am

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1572769/

obama says our biggest security risk is a nuke in NYC. obama is not a teabagger.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Mr. Perfect
 
Posts: 12654
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Glowing

Postby Demon of Undoing » Thu Dec 17, 2015 4:08 pm

Meh. Obama says lots of lavender.

The pros aren't really worried about it except in an abstract sense. On the tactical end there are assets and procedures in place to monitor the people that might want to make it happen ( no claims from here as to perfection of process).

There are no unknown nuclear materials. I think I have said it before, but every reactor has a specific signature, and the unknown reactors ( such as there are, few and far between) are able to be identified by largely process of elimination. Whoever provides that material to someone that uses it in a bomb is going to be at the mercy of the only nation to have ever used nukes to actually kill people. Under those circumstances, there will be no mercy, everybody knows it, and everybody with a reactor guards their material as best they can precisely because it is known exactly how badly that will turn out for them.

I lose sleep over lots of things. This isn't one of them.
Demon of Undoing
 
Posts: 1764
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 8:14 pm

Re: Glowing

Postby Mr. Perfect » Fri Dec 18, 2015 9:56 am

Did you predict Isis, Paris or San Bernardino.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Mr. Perfect
 
Posts: 12654
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Glowing

Postby Typhoon » Fri Dec 18, 2015 2:23 pm

Joking aside about the American neocon propensity to attack nations unrelated to attacks on America, Alexis and DoU have summed it up.

All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 13655
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Glowing

Postby jerryberry » Sat Dec 19, 2015 6:51 am

Mr. Perfect wrote:So I can only post a small portion of what I am on these forums, suffice it so say that when obama was elected it made nuclear war inevitable. As such with my contacts we began doing simulations. Can't really do a full briefing here, but start to use tools like this to learn about your area and challenges you face. If it isn't too late.

http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

There are some easier ones, but find one that works for you.

What is the simulation for how a bomb gets built and shipped here? I can only imagine a cargo ship delivering...From what point do your simulations start?
User avatar
jerryberry
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 6:53 am

Re: Glowing

Postby Torchwood » Mon Jan 04, 2016 4:41 pm

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENCE
---------------------

INSTRUCTIONS FOR CIVIL DEFENCE.

ON HEARING THE FIRST WARNING:

1. PROCEED TO THE NEAREST BUILDING.

2. STAY AWAY FROM LOOSE OBJECTS, AND DROP ALL GLASSES, BOOKS ETC. IN
YOUR HANDS.

3. REMOVE SHARP OBJECTS, SUCH AS PENCILS AND KEYS, FROM YOUR POCKETS.

4. LOOSEN YOUR NECKTIE, UNBUTTON YOUR COAT AND REMOVE RESTRICTIVE
ARTICLES OF CLOTHING.

5. REMOVE EYEGLASSES, EARRINGS, WATCHES AND OTHER JEWELRY.

6. UPON SEEING THE BRILLIANT FLASH OF A NUCLEAR EXPLOSION, BEND OVER
AND PLACE YOUR HEAD FIRMLY BETWEEN YOUR LEGS.

7. THEN KISS YOUR ASS GOODBYE
User avatar
Torchwood
 
Posts: 496
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 12:01 am

Re: Glowing

Postby Zack Morris » Tue Jan 05, 2016 2:44 am

Mr. Perfect wrote:sed to be a liberal talking point, John Kerry ran on terrorists getting nukes way back then, it was mainstream liberal ideology. Liberals were the ones who made this movie. Note the date. I watched it when it came out.

http://www.netflix.com/title/70129456


A vehement hatred of "liberalism" and, yet, his entire worldview is informed by liberal Hollywood entertainment. Freud would have loved to be alive today.
User avatar
Zack Morris
 
Posts: 2344
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2011 8:52 am
Location: Bayside High School

Re: Glowing

Postby Typhoon » Tue Jan 05, 2016 5:01 pm

Torchwood wrote:DEPARTMENT OF DEFENCE
---------------------

INSTRUCTIONS FOR CIVIL DEFENCE.

ON HEARING THE FIRST WARNING:

1. PROCEED TO THE NEAREST BUILDING.

2. STAY AWAY FROM LOOSE OBJECTS, AND DROP ALL GLASSES, BOOKS ETC. IN
YOUR HANDS.

3. REMOVE SHARP OBJECTS, SUCH AS PENCILS AND KEYS, FROM YOUR POCKETS.

4. LOOSEN YOUR NECKTIE, UNBUTTON YOUR COAT AND REMOVE RESTRICTIVE
ARTICLES OF CLOTHING.

5. REMOVE EYEGLASSES, EARRINGS, WATCHES AND OTHER JEWELRY.

6. UPON SEEING THE BRILLIANT FLASH OF A NUCLEAR EXPLOSION, BEND OVER
AND PLACE YOUR HEAD FIRMLY BETWEEN YOUR LEGS.

7. THEN KISS YOUR ASS GOODBYE


A classic.

More so as it is accurate.
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 13655
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Glowing

Postby Mr. Perfect » Sat Jan 16, 2016 1:47 am

Zack Morris wrote:
Mr. Perfect wrote:sed to be a liberal talking point, John Kerry ran on terrorists getting nukes way back then, it was mainstream liberal ideology. Liberals were the ones who made this movie. Note the date. I watched it when it came out.

http://www.netflix.com/title/70129456


A vehement hatred of "liberalism" and, yet, his entire worldview is informed by liberal Hollywood entertainment. Freud would have loved to be alive today.

As always, of course not. It's merely if you liberals want to argue with someone, you should argue with yourselves first. My threat assessments are years older and more informed

I'm amazed at just how insular you all have become. Even the slacker media knows way more about it than you guys do.

Last edited by Mr. Perfect on Sat Jan 16, 2016 1:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Mr. Perfect
 
Posts: 12654
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Glowing

Postby Mr. Perfect » Sat Jan 16, 2016 1:48 am

Typhoon wrote:A classic.

More so as it is accurate.

Quite a few survived the last nuclear war.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Mr. Perfect
 
Posts: 12654
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Glowing

Postby Mr. Perfect » Sat Jan 16, 2016 1:51 am

jerryberry wrote: What is the simulation for how a bomb gets built and shipped here? I can only imagine a cargo ship delivering...From what point do your simulations start?

You can watch the slacker media tape I posted, and it will answer most of your questions.

But here is a simple list:

1) The bombs are already built.
2) Put them on a boat and drive the boat around
3) Then put them on a truck and drive them around

Along these lines.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Mr. Perfect
 
Posts: 12654
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Glowing

Postby Mr. Perfect » Sat Jan 16, 2016 1:53 am

Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Mr. Perfect
 
Posts: 12654
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Glowing

Postby Typhoon » Sun Jan 17, 2016 7:24 am

Mr. Perfect wrote:
Typhoon wrote:A classic.

More so as it is accurate.

Quite a few survived the last nuclear war.


A couple of tiny nuclear weapons do not a nuclear war make.

Numeracy counts in all amounts.
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 13655
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Glowing

Postby Typhoon » Sun Jan 17, 2016 7:29 am

Mr. Perfect wrote:


Histrionic Vice clickbait is your "citation"?

In that case, why not just cite the Weekly World News and investigative journalism by Bat Boy.

Just as credible, if not more so.
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 13655
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Glowing

Postby Mr. Perfect » Sun Jan 17, 2016 7:44 am

Typhoon wrote:
Mr. Perfect wrote:
Typhoon wrote:A classic.

More so as it is accurate.

Quite a few survived the last nuclear war.


A couple of tiny nuclear weapons do not a nuclear war make.

Numeracy counts in all amounts.

Do you think the people of Japan consider WWII a nuclear war.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Mr. Perfect
 
Posts: 12654
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

PreviousNext

Return to Current Events

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron