Nuclear attack on the United States

[Del Tachi]

So?

Option 1 for me...

[Middle-aged Europe]

Option 9 is the only one in the realm of possibility at the moment. Except that it really wouldn't be "full-scale" though.

[Del Tachi]

Option 9 is the only in the realm of possibility at the moment. Except that it really wouldn't be "full-scale" though.

Exactly what I was thinking.

A nuclear weapon falling into the hands of a foreign terrorist group poses the greatest threat to the United States.  However, it is highly unlikely that terrorists could come into possession of enough nuclear weapons (and a means to deliver them) to carry-out a "full scale" attack.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Pakistan seems to be the most unstable country and subject to takeover from people insane enough to be that. North Korea comes closely after.


The likelyhood is still close to 0 even for those countries.

[patrick1]

Many of those countries don't even have missiles with the range to reach the United States.

[Link]

So?

Option 1 for me...

Wow.  I had to check the date on your post to make sure I wasn't reading something from the 80s.

[Link]

Option 9 is the only in the realm of possibility at the moment. Except that it really wouldn't be "full-scale" though.

Correct.

[Middle-aged Europe]

So?

Option 1 for me...

Wow.  I had to check the date on your post to make sure I wasn't reading something from the 80s.

Well, since the United States and Russia are still the only nations in the world who are capable of launching a "full-scale" nuclear attack in the first place, it kind of narrows down the options.

Depends on how you define "full-scale" though.

[Link]

So?

Option 1 for me...

Wow.  I had to check the date on your post to make sure I wasn't reading something from the 80s.

Well, since the United States and Russia are still the only nations in the world who are capable of launching a "full-scale" nuclear attack in the first place, it kind of narrows down the options.

Depends on how you define "full-scale" though.

Just because someone is capable of doing it doesn't mean the probability would go above 0%.  I have easy access to the means to execute a Columbine type attack but I can assure you the chances of me even thinking about doing it are 0%.

[Del Tachi]

So?

Option 1 for me...

Wow.  I had to check the date on your post to make sure I wasn't reading something from the 80s.

Well let's go through the options:

--United Kingdom: Why would our biggest ally blow us up?
--France: See United Kingdom
--China:  Doubt that China would blow up their biggest customer; the Chinese nuclear arsenal is also somewhat limited
--India: We're pretty stable allies
--Pakistan: Like they have the means to launch a full-scale attack on the US...
--North Korea: They face the same issue as Pakistan
--Isarel:  See United Kingdom. 
--Foreign terrorists: Could never achieve something large enough to be classified as "full scale"
--Domestic terrorists:  Face the same problems as foreign terrorists.

So, that leaves Russia.

A "nuclear exchange" with the Russian Federation is still possibility, I believe.  The Russian missile warning system is very outdated, not having received an upgrade since the USSR days.  Therefore, any nuclear attack by Russia on the United States would, most likely, be the result of technological malfunction or miscommunication, not by malicious intent by the Russian government.

The most likely way a nuclear war would start?  By accident...

The most likely people to slip up?  The Russians...

[Antonio the Sixth]

--United Kingdom: Why would our biggest ally blow us up?
--France: See United Kingdom

There's something wrong there.

[Zarn]

--United Kingdom: Why would our biggest ally blow us up?
--France: See United Kingdom

There's something wrong there.

NATO, American Revolution


The most likely is highly unlikely, and that would be Israel.

[dead0man]

--United Kingdom: Why would our biggest ally blow us up?
--France: See United Kingdom

There's something wrong there.

NATO, American Revolution


The most likely is highly unlikely, and that would be Israel.

You seriously think Israel is more likely to launch nukes at the US than Russia?

As has been said, the only answer to this question is Russia because of the phrase "full scale".  Of course the odds of that are astronomically low currently, but that can change in fairly short order.  It's probably slightly more likely for us to get involved in a nuclear exchange with the PRC, but I'd be shocked if any of their targets would be US cities.

[t_host1]

 With Russia being a topic of going nuclue're, their lastest move, the claim of 380,000 sq. miles in the Arctic area, I guess it has to be international waters/ice, if not, w e l l, taking it - sovereign or international, I consider it going nuclue'er. They know that there isn't going to be any resistance from this US administration, probally given the go.
 Why lay claim?.. their future... called energy (methane - the good stuff). If Russia where to nuke the US, it wouldn't be for the fear of the USA being a threat to them, it would be for being complete idiots, not worthy of existence, for deciding to be lead to, the surrender to, the Obama ideology.

Russia

[Zarn]

--United Kingdom: Why would our biggest ally blow us up?
--France: See United Kingdom

There's something wrong there.

NATO, American Revolution


The most likely is highly unlikely, and that would be Israel.

You seriously think Israel is more likely to launch nukes at the US than Russia?

As has been said, the only answer to this question is Russia because of the phrase "full scale".  Of course the odds of that are astronomically low currently, but that can change in fairly short order.  It's probably slightly more likely for us to get involved in a nuclear exchange with the PRC, but I'd be shocked if any of their targets would be US cities.

Israel thinks it can get away with everything. Russia, believe it or not, thinks beforehand.

[Link]

 With Russia being a topic of going nuclue're, their lastest move, the claim of 380,000 sq. miles in the Arctic area, I guess it has to be international waters/ice, if not, w e l l, taking it - sovereign or international, I consider it going nuclue'er. They know that there isn't going to be any resistance from this US administration, probally given the go.
 Why lay claim?.. their future... called energy (methane - the good stuff). If Russia where to nuke the US, it wouldn't be for the fear of the USA being a threat to them, it would be for being complete idiots, not worthy of existence, for deciding to be lead to, the surrender to, the Obama ideology.

Russia

Hi.  How's it going.  I don't believe we've met.  I was wondering... Is English a second language for you?  I'm not trying to be funny.  I just don't quite understand your choice of sentence structure.  I am being serious.

[dead0man]

Israel thinks it can get away with everything.

What's keeping them from beating the sh**t out of their neighbors then?

[2952-0-0]

Israel thinks it can get away with everything.

What's keeping them from beating the sh**t out of their neighbors then?

Perhaps gaining thousands of square miles of smoldering wasteland isn't worth it.

[dead0man]

Yeah, 'cause nobody has ever fought over a smoldering wasteland before.

[bullmoose88]

Does a space burst EMP count?

How come a false flag option hasn't been provided either?

[TheGlobalizer]

NOTA.

There is no possibility of a full-scale nuclear assault on the US at this time.  Zero.