How to Destroy the United States.....in a week or two

a reply to: tonyb1968

of course my drug reference is sarcastic, because how far fetched your limited view is. I live in Hawaii. How do we get every item here? yes, trucks are used once they arrive, but it is not the far fetched crisis you paint here. ever been in an 8.0+ earthquake that knocked out several bridges in a matter of minutes? sorry island life didn't collapse.

ah, it was a 6.7, [SNIP], but you can read about the effects and such here if interested, island life slowed down a little, but with in a week we had temporary bridges back up as the old ones were demolished and rebuilt en.wikipedia.org...

i thought this was gonna be about hillary becoming POTUS.

christie almost destroyed the east coast by closing 1 lane on 1 bridge!

so, 2500 bridges?

and 25 vans carrying enough explosives for 100 bridges each?

do you actually know how long it takes to wire a bridge to come down or how much explosive?

lol, good B- movie plot.

Oh no traffic jams....

a reply to: 3u40r15m



I dunno, huge bottleneck in fresno a few years back because a highway worker reported pipe bombs alongside the freeway,huge mess,it was pvc fallen off a contractors truck.

2500 bridges,yeah that would do it.

Wow, someone better light the bat signal because this OP needs to go back to Arkham right quick. This is quite a villainous plan and not even funny to entertain its ramifications.

Thanks for the post OP, I know the other posters are simply ignorant of how seriously dependent we are on not only quick and easy travel but also on massive scale trucking.

As a couple pointed out, we have plenty of examples of ONE such instance causing a huge issue. Now if it's THOUSANDS, all at the same time, all hell would break loose. Destroy the country? Probably not. Cause a serious long lasting wound? Absolutely.

Literally within days ALL supermarkets would be empty, the entire country. Their inventory is lean and most of their stock gets reupped every night. By trucks. A FLEET of trucks, actually.

Airdrop food? Seriously? Airdrop food to millions of people? Where are all those planes coming from, and as the OP mentions, fuel?

Anything not seen as absolutely necessary by the government won't be running. All alternative forms of transport will be commandeered for government shipments.

It's astounding how totally ignorant people are about how this country functions, on a nuts and bolt level. The OP is speaking fact, the start scenario may be far fetched, but if a thousand bridges go down overnight, so does normal life in America.

It's like saying cutting a few arteries isn't a big deal because there are plenty of other veins to carry blood. No, not that can take the load of arteries. Just like there is NOTHING that can take the load that trucking currently carries.

Not to mention, farmers aren't getting seed, aren't getting ferts, aren't trucking their goods. Not only is the delivery for food going down, the production as well.

This would be a problem on a scale the US hasn't seen... probably ever. People just do NOT understand that EVERY SINGLE thing you touch on a daily basis, everything you see, use, etc gets on a truck at some point.

It's not a matter of opinion, it's simple logistics. You can't make 3 out of 1 and 1 no matter what you do.

a reply to: tonyb1968
You got angry rather quickly.

Wouldn't this mass destruction create a mass of jobs? And we all know the aid isn't free. Money will still be flowing.

This would effect people stuck in cities more due to more highway driving, so this would not be a fun situation for most of us.

a reply to: tonyb1968

Whatever your mania, concerning lack of funds for bridgework in the US, is. As a scheme to ruin the US, it won't work.

Look at it, from this point ... any such effort, by anyone, is simply a "disaster". What do I mean by disaster, it's like a hurricane disaster, earthquake ... yes, it causes damage. But in reality, there is nothing that will HOLD a nation as much together, as pricesely what you describe.

So, I understand, your concerns is that ... hey, this is a dangerous sitation ... if Al Qaida knew.

911 is a false flag, because of precisely this. It's an operation, that actually unites the people ... does not disperse them. Osama Bin Ladin, is educated by the US ... he lived in Sweden, while he was a young teenager. Yes, he knew ... he probably worked to liberate the taliban from Russia, as a working order of the US. He probably got "fingered" because he didn't want to use his network, FOR the US after 9/11. Probably even before that.

What I'm saying is, your take on terrorism is that of a brainwashed moron ... the biggest "terrorists" in the world, was Britain, Israel ... that used "terrorism" as a weapon in the middle-east. Against a population, that was "united" only in name ... so to speak, with terrorism they dispersed and became multiple factions, that later evolved into "nations". It was a tool to divide the population.

9/11, at that time ... would not have worked in the US, as it did in prior history in the middle east. Because the state of the nation, was not that. Instead, it would have been known ... that an attack on US soil, would unite the people ... not divide them. The US government, has a history, of using conflicts to unite the people.

The only thing, in the world ... that could "divide" the US, and destroy it. Is a war, where US soldiers would be returned in body bags ... en masse. Only then, would the "doubt" of possible US failure fill the minds of the population. At this point, would an insurgency in the US ... actually pay off.

And you forget about the ports, the trains, air shipping, and the big kicker: the rest of the roads. What kind of plan is yours if they don't bother with the regular roads and just focus on the interstates? Do you know how many bridges I can bypass just here in FL alone by taking roads linking cities and staying off the highways? Do you know how many people take backwater roads to avoid interstate congestion?

If you're really a trucker, you should know that. Back in the day when we had a vehicle, we got great bypass route tips from truckers. At worst, the vehicle weight would stop large trucks where weight limits apply, but doesn't stop smaller ones by a long-shot. Therefore, a slower inconvenience but not a be all, end all crippling event.

I see the scenario going down a little differently.

1. At the first news of trouble I drive into town and fill 2 fuel barrels and 10 gas cans with gas at my wife's station.
2. Then I go home and head out to shoot an Elk maybe 2 and start the process of getting them in the freezer.
3. I take inventory of our dry goods and canned goods (around a years worth)
4. Wait for the rest of the family to show up. (my property is the meeting place)
5. Start plowing the ground for an 2 acre garden.
6. Live life pretty much as usual?
7. Between LP and gasoline I can run a generator for 8 months to keep meat, after that we dry it or smoke it.

It's called self sufficiency, more people should know how to be....

a reply to: tonyb1968

1. It wouldn't work. I'm not giving a tutorial in terrorism here but there is a military concept called friction that is very relevant to the idea of a handful of people trying to attack over a thousand targets in under two weeks all on the assumption that the enemy has no cards to play and that nothing will go wrong.

2. Why would you want it to work? or would you? Is the argument here that massive terrorism is easy, massive terrorism is not happening, therefore the security state is unnecessary? Is it that you're really smart and should be hired by the CIA and sent to Russia with a list of bridges that lead to Ukraine? Or is it just that you like to think about hurting people? I would actually understand any of the above personally and not necessarily think that made you dangerous or criminal, but it would be a sign that you need to direct yourself more towards personal happiness and less towards... well this. I rather doubt that bud gave you this idea... in fact I can tell you that in my case it was a big part of making ideas like this go away. If it's legal for you to have a smoke and a few hours of happy innocence with a favorite childhood cartoon, perhaps you should.

3. There are simpler and less dramatic things perhaps best not discussed here that actually would work to some significant degree, and the fact that they don't happen tells me that 1. The security of this nation is better than you give it credit for. 2. The heavy-handedness of said security is less necessary than we think. 3. It's an unusually evil idea to even have and again you should consider my advice about taking a little time out and thinking happy thoughts.

I'm starting to get worried, this post will bevome some mad man's plan.

The disaster you are describe might incite riots, rape and death of a great many innocent people, for what? No-one wants to see that, the issue is regime change, how to get true democracy and true freedom of press returned to what was a great country. If anything , passive resistance might be the key, if all refused pay their mortgage until all acts of world aggression was stopped, the leaders wouldn't be able to resist.

a reply to: glend

I agree with you, if the US $ does look like its under stress when the BRICS lot leave then its time to ditch out rothschild and rockerfellar bankers and their yoke and seize their assets that we can and put them in jail for crimes against humanity by exploitation of their own banking system. That would wipe out the national debt, the supposed debt Western country's owe ultimately to the rothschilds and their ilk. We need then to get rid of the Central banks and put a government section in that can be easily scrutinised and totally accountable, to print only the money we need. No interest on the money they print so less tax for all of us. I prefer that to keeping the rothschild ogres their days are coming to a close and they are not above the law, despite the way they manipulate it and they owe the goy the exploit.

a reply to: Shiloh7

Rothschilds have bankrolled Chinese political parties for a long time, they might be aiming to destroy the US and its constitution so they can control the world from the east. If you look debt increase under Bush and Obama it definitely seems that they are trying hard to destroy the US economy as fast as they can. If this was really a war against terrorism, Rothschild, Obama and his kin would be sent Guantanamo.

Its estimated that over 85% of food is transported by trucks, when trucks are not moving it will cause panic real soon. The questions are, is there alternative ways to deliver food in such a scale and if there is another transportation, is it answering demands of getting food fast to the stores or is there any way to deliver it safety to the end users.. without fuel nothing moves. Take a city of millions people and few train tracks which would deliver the food, take away all vehichles which uses fuel in this scenario.. what would you have left ?
Early cities and towns formed around the trade, trade allowed other professions to form inside the cities like priests, guilds etc. The difference of modern cities and early ones is that now food is mostly produced more far away and farms are not around the cities and food delivery is on the shoulders of fuel dependant trasnportation.. no camels and horses to do the job. Even in early cities if trade ended people left the city.

a reply to: tonyb1968

I have always favoured the idea of taking four big jet airliners and ....

Wait, I think that's been done.


Well, I'll think on this some more..

originally posted by: tonyb1968
a reply to: creation7
I am NOT on drugs and would gladly consent to a drug test. I am a Professional driver with INTIMATE knowledge of the situation. I do this for a living. NOTHING works if you limit the trucks that deliver the goods. Trains and planes need fuel also.....40% reduction in fuel would also limit their activity. Fuel MUST get from refinery to the trains and planes. Name ONE item that does NOT spend some portion of its life on a truck...I dare you. Trains could NOT handle the increase in freight. Planes only haul a SMALL fraction of the freight. How do you get the stuff from the manufacturer to the plane or train? You people are LOST. It all depends upon trucks, you idiots

This is absolutely correct.

There is a reason we have truckers -- because we NEED truckers, not because it's "Cheaper" to use them.... It's the only way to move the volumes that are required to keep everything working.

This would collapse the stock market too.

originally posted by: SubTruth

originally posted by: tonyb1968
a reply to: SubTruth
Sub,
One would only need to create structural damage to the bridge to close the road....small charges would do this. one pound of c-4 may well bring a bridge down.

How are they going to get the 1000's of pounds of c-4 needed to pull this off. I am sorry it would make a interesting book plot but in real life I just do not think it is possible.

It's possible, just difficult. C4 is a made substance, you could be a chemist and make your own with black market matts.

It's absolutely possible, they don't have to be military smuggle pre-packed c4 shape charges......

First off, you are just begging for a visit from guys in suits with wraparound sunglasses.

Two days into this disaster, riots and looting begins to occur as stores cannot restock shelves and food supplies run short. The average Wal-Mart gets about 5 trucks every 24 hours…without these, the shelves begin to get bare food becomes scarce….smaller stores suffer worse.
36 hours into this crisis, gas supplies run short and the price of gas tops $10 a gallon. Food is hard to get. Waste water treatment plants shut down and hospitals begin turning away all but the most serious cases, trash is piling up and police and fire response times triple.

You'd be surprised how many locals know back ways to get just about everywhere. I live near a major interstate, I70, and I've seen it backed up after an accident blocked both East bound lanes, Traffic was piled up for 30 miles. You never realize how much traffic goes through a section till you see it shut down. Those of us who live here had no trouble at all getting where we wanted to go. In times like that, we would escort delivery trucks right to the stores.

Concerning the gas: If no one can go anywhere, why do we need gas?
Why would hospitals turn away patients?
Waste water plants shut down? Why? What do bridges being out have to do with that?