EMP The Worst Case Senerio????

[Redmanfms]

Hant Ha there is this book called on fart after that says we all well be using ox carts and indian smoke fire signals to communicate. And be sides didn't you play COD then you would know how bad it sucks to use iron sights.

Are you drunk?

[Thomas M-4]

Are you drunk?

Not quite yet but I am working on it

[Just a Jarhead]

The average person is concerned with country X getting nuclear weapons. What they don't think about is - how is country X going to deliver that nuclear device? That's the harder part of the equation. Are they going to use a ballistic missile? Developing a warhead that could survive the stresses of re-entry and deliver the nuclear device with some level of accuracy is much more difficult than most people realize.

You obviously did not take the time to read the link I posted two post up, from perhaps the worlds leading scientist regarding this, Dr. Vincent Pry. An intercontinental ballistic missle is not needed. I prefer to listen to the experts rather than all the talking heads that "think" they know what they are talking about on any given subject.

Dr. Peter Vincent Pry: Any state or group possessing any nuclear weapon and any missile capable of reaching an altitude over 30-40 kilometers can make an EMP attack. An ICBM is not necessary. An EMP attack can be delivered by a short-range missile launched from a ship, such as a commercial freighter, operating near U.S. shores. Iran has practiced such a delivery mode. Iran already has missiles, such as Scuds and its Shahab-III, capable of delivering a nuclear warhead......and from bullet point #4...Iran, North Korea, China and Russia all certainly understand this, as reflected in their military writings.

Likewise, I listen to Nouriel Roubini, Peter Schiff, Gerald Celente, Dr. Marc Faber...these men got the stock market collapse and housing bubble bust right, years prior to these events, while the "Haaaarvard elite" & "Mass News Media" mocked and ridiculed them as being doom & gloom, like a few of the blinded, ignorant, uninformed on this site who venture onto these threads to mock ocassionally. Once again these men (all of them) say buckle your seatbelts folks, it's going to get extremely bumpy. It's vital where you get your information and who you listen to.

[TheJRK]

You obviously did not take the time to read the link I posted two post up, from perhaps the worlds leading scientist regarding this, Dr. Vincent Pry. An intercontinental ballistic missle is not needed. I prefer to listen to the experts rather than all the talking heads that "think" they know what they are talking about on any given subject.

You're right, I didn't read the article you linked to because I'm well aware of what Dr. Pry has to say since I've spent the last 15 years working in U.S. missile defense. In this case YOU are the talking head with no technical knowledge/training or background on such matters and instead try to ride on the intellectual coat tails of others.

[Just a Jarhead]

You're right, I didn't read the article you linked to because I'm well aware of what Dr. Pry has to say since I've spent the last 15 years working in U.S. missile defense. In this case YOU are the talking head with no technical knowledge/training or background on such matters and instead try to ride on the intellectual coat tails of others.

Please feel free to post your credentials proving why anyone should/would listen to you over Dr. Peter Vincent Pry http://www.google.com/search?q=dr.+p...rlz=1I7GGLL_en , or feel free to post studies or articles on the subject matter that you have had published http://www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/Fi...20Security.pdf or any high level committees or organanizations that you chair, sit on, testified before, or act as an advisor to. CIA like Dr. Pry? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR of the Task Force on Homeland Security like Dr. Pry? Or just post your name and we'll do the googling ourselves. Surely with your vast expertise and knowledge you have testified and advised Congress mutiple times on the subject. I didn't think so.

The statement "I've spent the last 15 years working in U.S. missile defense" is hollow, shallow, unsubstantiated meaningless fluff on the Internet. For all we know you swept the floors. Since you have the audacity to openly call the statements of one of the leading experts on this subject b.s., prove your expert knowledge on the subject.. Otherwise....bow out gracefully, have a nice day and let's just move on before you embarras yourself even further!

[TheJRK]

Where did I call Dr. Pry's work bullshit? If I'm familiar with what someone has said on a matter why should I have to read it again because someone posted it on a gun forum? I was calling YOU out. You try to come off as some EMP and ballistic missile expert simply because you post links and papers by someone else. What is it that YOU do for a living? You say that Iran has Scuds and Shahabs... but don't realize that those are two separate missile systems (a Shahab being an improved version of the Russian SCUD). In short, Iran doesn't have any "SCUDs". But you probably already knew this right? Or do I need to give you time to dig up another unclassified paper paper so that you can post a link and feel self righteous?

You are trying to rally others to your cause by falsely claiming that I claimed to be more of an expert than Dr. Pry.

You're obviously taking this discussion as a personal attack on your prepper mentality which was never my intent. Don't think that you can cyber bully someone out of a forum.

[kmrtnsn]

I think there is a lot of ever statement of the effectiveness of an EMP device. Even during the height of the cold war, U.S. and Soviet plans for such devices never extended beyond the tactical use, which means they only had a small and limited effective range, perhaps to deny use of an airfield, or staging area. Detonating an EMP device in the path of inbound bombers was one situation I remember reading, but really, there are more effective and less expensive ways to stop a plane, or several of them.

One question would be, who has an intercontinental delivery system, that could reach a target in the U.S.? That list is very small. The next would be who has the technological wherewithal to build such a device? That list is as small, or smaller. The next question, should an EMP device make it through our defensive measures how much long term damage would it do? My thinking is that that I would be more concerned about the residual radiation that whether or not my car started.

A lot of this EMP effectiveness talk is definitely overstating the threat.

[ashooter]

bypassing the "my dick's bigger than yours" discussion... and please forgive me for not wading through every post in this thread.

The scenario I fear (as a non-expert with a tiny dick) is that somebody could get one of these nukes that is purpose designed to give off a big EMP yield on top of a SCUD or something similar. Then they bring that(those) missle(s) into the Gulf of Mex or off the coast of Kalifornia or New York in a container ship(s), launch it(them) from 50-100 miles offshore and f*ck up our world.

Is this scenario feasible, or paranoid delusion?

[TheJRK]

The scenario you are referring to is typically called "SCUD in a tub". The US actually conducted a test to see if it was technically feasible to load a SCUD TEL unto a container ship, sail it out to sea, erect the missile, and then launch it.

They concluded that it was possible, given a competent crew (both that was familiar with launching the missile in question and sailing a vessel of sufficient size to carry it).... and ideal weather (sea state and calm winds at altitude). Remember a system like a SCUD is designed to be launched from land, not from a ship that is rocking and rolling on the high seas.

That being said, the scenario is highly unlikely for one main reason. The "bad guys" or "bad country" would have to acquire:

1. A ship of sufficient size to carry the (in this case let's say a SCUD).
2. The missile itself plus the TEL to transport it and launch it.
3. A nuclear device small enough to fit in the missile.
4. A crew that can launch the missile as well as a crew that can sail the ship (or a crew that could do both).
5. Access to a port to load the missile on the ship.
6. Sail the ship within distance of the US (SRBM range in this case).

Now... they would have to do all of the above steps WITHOUT BEING DETECTED BY US/ALLIED/ISRAELI/ETC. INTELLIGENCE ASSETS.

This is the part that a lot of people don't consider.

*Edit - I should've thrown in a disclaimer that I learned all of the above information while sweeping floors. So take it with a grain of salt.

[ashooter]

Thank you, TheJRK.

All of that makes sense. I hadn't really considered the fact that the "bad guys" would be likely to get detected by the "good guys" even if they had port access and tech support from somebody like Iran or NK, or even PRC. I will sleep a little easier tonight.