From Nuclear War Survival Skills
(intro, Edward Teller)

[The Russians] have effective plans to evacuate their cities before they let loose a nuclear strike... [some people] may say that the Russians could strike without previous evacuation. This could result in heavy losses on their part which, I hope, they will not risk.

True ?

-- Ct Vronsky (vronsky@anna.com), June 02, 1999

Answers

Unless the use the millennium bug as a decoy....

Sorry Billy Jeff, that one got away from us while we were doing remediation... that's OK, we didn't need Colorado Springs anyway....

gettin' scratched....

The Dog

-- Dog (cmpennell@juno.com), June 02, 1999.

How much warning do you need? Chernomerdyn this week said we are closer to nuclear war than at any time in this decade. If I remember correctly we came within 5 minutes of all out nuclear war just a few years ago because of the misidentified launch of a satellite. The Chines have openly threatened to nuke L.A. if we intervene in their takeover of Taiwan. The N. Koreans just last month threatened to turn the U.S. into a pile of ashes. The Russians have upped their draft while the volunteer forces are at an all time high. In the last three months they have added avoer half a million soldiers and sailors to their forces. They have put nearly their entire nuclear armed submarine fleet to sea, which outnumbers our by the way by nearly a 3 to 1 margin. the N. Koreans have put a million troops on alert and moved the bulk of them to the DMZ across from Seoul. The Chinese have set up a multitude of missile sites adjacent to Taiwan and are digging in anti-ship missile emplacements on the Spratley Islands. Saddam Hussein has alerted his forces to be ready for the "Big One". Despite repeated Russian warnings of imminent global conflict the U.S. and G.B. continue to plan a land invasion of Serbia. If you haven't recognized the warnings by now you never will.

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), June 02, 1999.

anyone other than a terrorist who attempts an attack without warning will not do so with a single weapon. No one would attack another nuclear power while their own counry was vulnerable to a counterstrike.

Arlin

-- Arlin H. Adams (ahadams@ix.netcom.com), June 02, 1999.

Nik,

Did you listen to Nyquist last night? He said that he is being told that China has bunkers outside L.A. for ammo troops etc. He said he hasn't been able to confirm this, but it is possible.

Ct,

There are a number of ways that the Soviets can get their people off the streets without alerting the U.S. that they are planning an attack.

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), June 02, 1999.

, we have four. The United States operates under confirmation of impacts before launch authorization, the Russians operate under launch on warning. All this added together absolutely guarantees that the Russians will win a nuclear war with the U.S. hands down.

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), June 02, 1999.

I don't know what happened to my post above, over half of it just vanished. The missing information was that he Soviets have an anti ballistic missile defense sytem, and we don't. The Russians have 47 - 50 ballistic missile subs deployed, we have four out of eighteen on station. The Russians are outfitting 180 Mig-29 fighter bombers with 9500 mile fuel tanks, which would allow them to hit the U.S. with nuclear warheads. The Russians and Chinese have signed an alliance treaty against the U.S. Most of our weapons systems are a full generation behind the latest Russian systems, hence we no longer hold a technological edge. After the gps rollover of Aug. we will be extremely vulnerable to a first strike, and our retaliatory ability will be extremely limited at best.

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), June 02, 1999.

Hi Nikoli, I'm new to lurking here but your posts... well, I'll just say they impress me more than most. I've been looking at about the same picture. Most Americans have no knowledge of the NK DMZ buildup, even though disclosure came from the office of the Joint Chiefs - incredible. Saddam's explicit threats, along with Russi'a coupled with all the BS floating around about how China would never do anything to us, after all, we're trading partners?!? That, and the dog-and-pony show Klinton has going on in the Balkans, which will/has conveniently positioned almost all our military outside the country, adds up to a bleak picture. My take on it is that the U.S. is being maneuvered in a position where the only options will be complete destruction without much hope of retaliation, or... abject surrender.

BTW, don't know if you're the type (though you sound it), but there are some good patriot/firearms boards that could use your input. Just something to consider. In any event, appreciate your posts, keep it going.

klm

-- klm (klm@nwhre.not), June 02, 1999.

B B,

The Chinese bunkers outside L.A. are probably located in Long Beach... From what I understand, they have taken over the old naval ship yard... supposedly, the COSCO ships use this for all of their retail imports to the U.S.,... however, Cosco is controlled and operated by the Chinese military... additionally, they have acquired the use of an old oil rig off of the California coast... supposedly for satalite communications or some other nonsense... however, it provides them with a perfect nuclear launch site with all major U.S. cities in easy range... I'd say the U.S. has been very generous to the Chinese... nuclear technology and all...

-- Texas Terri (DeepInTheHeart@Texas.com), June 02, 1999.

(1) A (single) nuclear strike without warning could be attempted iff (if and only if) an enemy thought that they could do it and get away with it... For example, by sending the nuclear weapon into a US port in a container on a container ship. We wouldn't necessarily know where it came from.

(2) The assumption that the Russians or anyone else would evacuate first presupposes that their leadership is acting rationally and in the best interest of the population. That may be too big of a supposition. How many of us believe that the US leadership always acts rationally and in the best interest of the people?

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), June 02, 1999.

er, Nik - not to put too fine a point on it, but you were claiming that there would be some sort of terrorist attack last weekend...and there wasn't any. I'm not just trying to flame you here, but to get you to realize that your sources are mega messed up on both their data and their interpretation of the real data that's out there - they can't even tell the difference between a mothballed sub and a deployed sub.

Remember: you should never, never take any information to be factualunless you can get hard confirmation of any given item from three *independent* sources.

*sigh*

Arlin

-- Arlin H. Adams (ahadams@ix.netcom.com), June 02, 1999.

KLM, could you give us a few of your favorite patriot/firearms boards. I'm always up for imput on those subjects. Maybe you've got some that I haven't found. Thank you.

MJ

-- MJ (workshy@eagledesign.com), June 02, 1999.

Arlin. I never said there would be an attack this past weekend. What I said was the possibility of an attack was at a higher level than usual. We still do not know if an attack did take place for that matter. Some of the biological agents which could be used have an incubation period of a week or longer.

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), June 02, 1999.

"The Russians would win a nuclear war"...

Sorry guys, but I don't think that anyonw would "win" a nuclear war between the US and Russia. At least not anyone human.

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), June 02, 1999.

also, the sale of the Long Beach shipyard to COSCO (the chinese holding company) was stopped by Congress last year.

Arlin

-- Arlin H. Adams (ahadams@ix.netcom.com), June 02, 1999.

Nik - as you may recall I bet you a 5 gallon pail of wheat that there would be no attack...now you don't have to reciprocate, but I continue to maintain the bet that no attack occurred. I'll also bet a 5 gallon pail of *honey* that no nuclear attack conducted using ballistic missiles or cruise missiles will occur against the United States during the next 12 months.

y'see I really do trust my sources, and my analysis...

takers?

Arlin

-- Arlin H. Adams (ahadams@ix.netcom.com), June 02, 1999.

Mad Monk - Where do you get your nuke war info? Russia has an extensive Civil Defense program of shelters and education - US has nothing. Russia has their 25 years old ABM ring around Moscow that has been modernized and up graded plus the very advanced national ABM system based on LSPA Radar with litterally thousands of ABM missiles. Russia has been expanding and improving all three legs of their nuclear attack equipment - US has downgraded, removed, or left stagnant the US nuclear force.

-- Ken Seger (kenseger@earthlink.net), June 02, 1999.

Now Arlin ....how would I collect if there is an attack? :D

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), June 02, 1999.

BB -

doggone it...I *knew* there was something wrong with that bet...I'm just too tired to have figured out what it was...hmm...if we put the honey in lead covered pail, and ...hmm...gotta work on this one some more...:-)

Arlin

-- Arlin H. Adams (ahadams@ix.netcom.com), June 02, 1999.

Arlin, I guess I missed the bet, but I assure you I'm not looking forward to nuclear war myself. I'm kinda like BB and wondering how I collect if I win too. I sincerley hope you are right, but I have zero confidence at this point.

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), June 03, 1999.

The bottom line for me since I "got it" has been nuclear/chem/bio type end scenario. Y2k may be bad enough in itself but I believe it highly possible that it ANY weaknesses in power, oil, banking, infrastructure will just make the US extremely vulnerable to any/all opportunists, native or otherwise, and their weapons. The "otherwise" are probably already here. We are not liked these days and thanks to BJ Clinton and his Dukes of Hazard sidekicks, no one seems to be getting any fonder of US.

-- Barb (awaltrip@telepath.com), June 03, 1999.

Sorry can't type well tonight, forgive the typos.

-- Barb (awaltrip@telepath.com), June 03, 1999.

You guys still haven't figured out how and why this is occurring? Come on, put it together. China pays Clinton 300,000 dollars in illegal campaign contributions, Clinton went to China and London during the Vietnam War. The Chinese Love Clinton, Why, because he is a Socialist and the constitution doesn't mean didly to him. If and When the Chinese or Russians threaten a Nuclear attack, Clinton will surrender glady. If they do launch, it will not be an all out attack, Just take out some of the major defenses and then walk in the front door. There will be no retaliation because Clinton won't want to bomb his buddies. He is a Traitor to his country and the Constitution, He is a die hard socialist and will not come out of power until the constitution lays in pieces on the floor and the American people are under Chinese/ Russian control. First he needs to demoralize and spread out our military, being done now. Then he needs to take our guns from us. They are working very hard on this right now. Then any foreign power that wants to, China/Russia, can just wipe out the rest of our defenses and walk right in.

This may sound like paranoia, but put all the pieces together and it all fits. Just my thoughts on the subject.

-- Richard (Hondacon@cnnw.net), June 03, 1999.

_"Slouching Toward Gommorrah" by Robert Bork, an interesting analysis as to why the conservatives have lost the culture war to the New Socialist Party, i.e. Clintonistas.

-- Barb (awaltrip@telepath.com), June 03, 1999.

Why do you guys continue to feed the paranoid antics of Nikoli???

He is obviously a very unhappy person who focuses on death and destruction. Leave him to wallow in his misery until he is ready to reach out and grasp onto hope and the good things in life.

-- Craig (craig@ccinet.ab.ca), June 03, 1999.

Klinton for Komisar of the "North American Protectorate".

-- A (A@AisA.com), June 03, 1999.

Robert:

Accurate in all points, except that in my estimation, Klinton isn't a Socialist, but a Marxist.

Craig:

How revealing that you presume to know Nikoli's frame of mind and emotional state. Your statement says much more about you than about Nik. Do you feel you know what's best for everyone, hmmm? Get a grip. If you'd open your eyes and learn the unpleasant truth the way that those like Nikoli and I have, your posts wouldn't be exactly "up", either. "Focusing on death and destruction" can be a wonderfully empowering experience, if you've got the guts for it.

-- klm (klm@nwhre.not), June 03, 1999.