U.S. Needs To Prepare For An EMP Attack or CME Event

[Knight Templar]

I'm surprised so many people are mocking this as a trivial possibility.

Even ignoring an EMP attack, what about a CME? We had that one in 1859 that had telegraphs catching on fire across the U.S. (where they had them). Needless to say that would have collossal effects today.

And 153 years ago is a trivial amount of time when it comes to a solar phenomena.

At the very least, purchasing enough transformers and other vital supplies to rebuild the power grid and vehicles that do not have electronic ignition systems, plus shielded communications seems reasonable.

I feel like I'm talking to that congressman on the committee that examines problems like this who sneered that it was all "science fiction".

 

[Knight Templar]

Yup, we just need them to steal the biggest bomb in the world,.

Once again, there is ZERO evidence that it would require a megaton range nuclear warhead to severely disrupt electronics across the United States.

 

[horatio83]

There are supervulcanoes you wanna have an eye on, potential asteroids hitting Earth, not to mention the less catastrophe-movie-style problems of climate change, resource scarcity and overpopulation that will actually not have a probabilistic but a certain impact upon the lives of people everywhere.
Some stupid solar storms that could shut down communications and electricity for two days are trivial in comparison. But hey, if some scientists say it is a real risk, go ahead and force electricity companies to spend a couple of hundreds of millions of bucks on their nets. Good luck with that in corporate capitalism.

 

[cooleddie74]

Unless someone has a Minuteman III, SS-24, SS-25 or SS-27 Topol intercontinental ballistic missile tipped with a single high-yield RV(warhead) and they could work out the precise altitude and location for the warhead to detonate then I wouldn't worry about an EMP attack on the United States in the foreseeable future...and even rogue regimes that detest our guts like North Korea and Iran simply don't have ICBM technology. The North Koreans can't even get most of their medium and long-range missiles off the launch pad without them falling into the Pacific or blowing up. And like others have said, what do Russia or China have to gain from an obvious and detectable EMP strike? A limited or even global nuclear war? Some Russian and Chinese leaders are assholes but they're not insane.

 

[Knight Templar]

Once again, you don't need an ICBM with a large nuclear warhead to generate a wide ranging EMP effect across the United States.

You can launch a short range ballistic missile off the U.S. coast from a container ship.

And there is no need for precision as to where or at what altitude it detonates.

180-250 miles give or take.

Within a rough circle 500 miles above the United States.

40 year old basic rocket technology can achieve that.

 

[Knight Templar]

Some stupid solar storms that could shut down communications and electricity for two days are trivial in comparison. .

A CME like 1859 won't just knock out communications or electricity for a "couple of days".

Try for years.

And estimates are that even a "couple of days" of such disruption in the U.S. alone would kill 300-500,000 people.

 

[Kemaiku]

Wow, you need the full three layers of tinfoil right there.

 

[cooleddie74]

You can launch a short range ballistic missile off the U.S. coast from a container ship.

Even a short-range ballistic missile is a bulky thing that requires a launch platform...normally a wheeled or tracked TEL(transporter-erector-launcher) that itself is bulky. I just don't see a system like that being loaded onto a container ship without law enforcement, the Coast Guard or intelligence satellites noticing that something unusual is mounted on the uppermost deck of the ship that doesn't match a normal cargo profile. Your average Soviet-built short range ballistic missile(Scud, Scaleboard, Frog) isn't exactly a tiny thing that would go unnoticed, and with a supporting launch vehicle and system that just makes things much, much more difficult for the enemy/terrorists to pull off without being detected and stopped.

And there is no need for precision as to where or at what altitude it detonates.

180-250 miles give or take.

Within a rough circle 500 miles above the United States.

40 year old basic rocket technology can achieve that.

For maximum effect over the most square mileage you do need more precision and know the right altitude for warhead detonation. If you want to affect most of the lower 48 states there are better areas than others.

 

[Knight Templar]

^ Not hard at all.

Drive the Transporter-Erector-Launcher onto a ship. Cover it with a tarp and sale to the U.S.

You aren't one of these people that thinks that every one of thousands of cargo ships approaching U.S. shores are monitored by satellites, aircraft, or the Coast Guard are you?

 

[cooleddie74]

No, not at all...but you're suggesting that a large and complicated launch vehicle be broken down along with the actual missile into separate components and then hope that the terrorists on the container ship are skilled and fast enough to successfully rebuild both the SRBM and TEL all within a matter of a few days or even hours so the missile can be launched? By the time the container ship got to within range of a U.S. port the time window for launch would have already arrived or be very imminent. Breaking down a large transporter vehicle as well as its missile into separate parts and then hoping like hell you can get everyting reassembled in time for the ship to reach its destination is just way, way, way too complicated and nonsensical. If you're going to do that, then just sneak a low- or medium-yield backpack nuke into the city with a suicide bomber. A whole lot less time and cost involved and you don't need an army of technicians and mechanics to come along for the ride.

 

[Knight Templar]

No, not at all...but you're suggesting that a large and complicated launch vehicle be broken down along with the actual missile into separate components and then hope that the terrorists on the container ship are skilled and fast enough to successfully rebuild both the SRBM and TEL all within a matter of a few days or even hours so the missile can be launched? By the time the container ship got to within range of a U.S. port the time window for launch would have already arrived or be very imminent. Breaking down a large transporter vehicle as well as its missile into separate parts and then hoping like hell you can get everyting reassembled in time for the ship to reach its destination is just way, way, way too complicated and nonsensical. If you're going to do that, then just sneak a low- or medium-yield backpack nuke into the city with a suicide bomber. A whole lot less time and cost involved and you don't need an army of technicians and mechanics to come along for the ride.

What are you talking about "breaking down" or "disassembling" the transporter, erector launcher and the missile?

DRIVE IT ON to the ship.

It isn't hard. There are a bunch of cargo ships that you can simply drive a tractor trailer aboard.

Come on CoolEddie, you are smarter than this. You know this is not that difficult to do.

And besides. which would a terrorist rather do? Kill 50, 000 Americans with a small nuclear device that can be easily traced and that the U.S. can easily recover from or kill tens of millions of Americans in an untraceable attack that the U.S. has to spend decades recovering from?

 

[cooleddie74]

Your original post above said "break it down into components" before you changed it just now to say "cover it with a tarp." Convenient. I see what you did there.

Well played.

 

[Kemaiku]

Your original post above said "break it down into components" before you changed it just now to say "cover it with a tarp." Convenient. I see what you did there.

You're really surprised he resorts to those tactics? he argument wasn't all that solid to begin with.

 

[cooleddie74]

Your original post above said "break it down into components" before you changed it just now to say "cover it with a tarp." Convenient. I see what you did there.

You're really surprised he resorts to those tactics? he argument wasn't all that solid to begin with.

Nope.

Moving the goalposts is a gold-plated KT standard, baby.

 

[Knight Templar]

Your original post above said "break it down into components" before you changed it just now to say "cover it with a tarp." Convenient. I see what you did there.

Well played.

I never posted the words "break it down into components" and you know it.

You are lying.

Just as you are either lying or woefully misinformed when you talk about "time windows". You would not have to have any kind of "time window" for a launch of a nuclear weapon over the U.S. You could do it any time of day or any time of the year.

 

[Kemaiku]

Your original post above said "break it down into components" before you changed it just now to say "cover it with a tarp." Convenient. I see what you did there.

You're really surprised he resorts to those tactics? he argument wasn't all that solid to begin with.

Nope.

Moving the goalposts is a gold-plated KT standard, baby.

SCUD's are about what? the length of an 18 wheeler? something that big moving slowly through a dockyard well past the point which it's supposed to stop and onload being mounted to a cargo vessel, while looking nothing like a typical truck, is going to stand out like a sore thumb.

Someone, somewhere is going to phone that in, and it would be visible to any half decent surveillance satellite, and reported probably before the ship even sets to sea.

The weight of the vehicle, weapon etc would make the ship carry somewhat lower in the water which would be a giveaway to any smaller vessel at the water line used to guide the main one into harbour.

The slow speed of such a ship means it could be stopped well before it even reaches American waters, depending on how quickly intelligence agencies are alerted. And I assume there are at least some naval presences out in the Meditarrenean, Gulf and Pacific/Indian region to investigate?

If it's right out on the top deck and not even covered at all then hell, any satellite has hours, days even to fly over and take hundreds of images, have experts analyse them before the ship gets halfway there.

Conspicuous doesn't begin to cover it.

 

[horatio83]

Some stupid solar storms that could shut down communications and electricity for two days are trivial in comparison. .

A CME like 1859 won't just knock out communications or electricity for a "couple of days".

Try for years.

And estimates are that even a "couple of days" of such disruption in the U.S. alone would kill 300-500,000 people.

I sense some serious hyperbole in here. Your sources have already been questioned so no need for me to point this out again.

 

[Knight Templar]

You're really surprised he resorts to those tactics? he argument wasn't all that solid to begin with.

Nope.

Moving the goalposts is a gold-plated KT standard, baby.

SCUD's are about what? the length of an 18 wheeler? something that big moving slowly through a dockyard well past the point which it's supposed to stop and onload being mounted to a cargo vessel, while looking nothing like a typical truck, is going to stand out like a sore thumb.

Someone, somewhere is going to phone that in, and it would be visible to any half decent surveillance satellite, and reported probably before the ship even sets to sea.

The weight of the vehicle, weapon etc would make the ship carry somewhat lower in the water which would be a giveaway to any smaller vessel at the water line used to guide the main one into harbour.

The slow speed of such a ship means it could be stopped well before it even reaches American waters, depending on how quickly intelligence agencies are alerted. And I assume there are at least some naval presences out in the Meditarrenean, Gulf and Pacific/Indian region to investigate?

If it's right out on the top deck and not even covered at all then hell, any satellite has hours, days even to fly over and take hundreds of images, have experts analyse them before the ship gets halfway there.

Conspicuous doesn't begin to cover it.

Have you seen the size of modern cargo ships?

A couple of hundred tons one way or the other won't make a bit of difference in how the ship rides in the water or how in handles.

And how hard is it to cover vehicles on the deck of a cargo ship with tarps? Not at all. In fact ships that transport cars from overseas do it all the time IIRC.

 

[Kemaiku]

People aren't automatons, they notice things, something that big and quite obviously a military vehicle will be noticed quite a lot. They also stand out on satellite photography, especially higher resolution ones today.

It cannot simply wander halfway around the world, take it's time coming up on deck, getting into position, raising, priming, targeting, firing without anyone taking notice.

About the only more obvious thing they could do is take there via a million-man conga line.

 

[Knight Templar]

People aren't automatons, they notice things, something that big and quite obviously a military vehicle will be noticed quite a lot. They also stand out on satellite photography, especially higher resolution ones today.

It cannot simply wander halfway around the world, take it's time coming up on deck, getting into position, raising, priming, targeting, firing without anyone taking notice.

About the only more obvious thing they could do is take there via a million-man conga line.

Satellites don't "scan the whole world" Star Trek style. They have to be told what to look for. Satellites also follow totally predictable paths that can be avoided. During the Cold War, the United States was able have entire carrier battle groups avoid satellite detection even when the Soviets knew what to look for.

And you're willing to risk the lives of millions of Americans on the chance that "people notice things"?