It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Flicking the shutdown switch takes milliseconds. The earthquake detectors automatically shut down the Fukushima reactors as soon as the earthquake was detected.
Originally posted by Silcone Synapse
How long would it take to shut down a large megawatt plutonium reactor,or a series of?
An hour or so I would guess,which may be too long if there are incoming missiles.
Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by xecoybh
Uhm.. PressTV refers to a lot of media outlets, which is not what im calling into question. Its the hatchet job they do on those media sources material to put their story together, which usually invovled leaving out any information that is pertinent and true.
As I said, the comment about the facility and it being a nuclear weapons producer does not fit.edit on 9-1-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by Patriotsrevenge
Those SM-3s will be exhausted trying to defend the CBG, not the THAAD systems, even these systems do not approach 99% kill probability in conjunction with the CIWS and EW suites. It is highly unlikely that they will all be shot down. Remember the inferior scuds that killed a lot of US troops in the 1991 Gulf war?
Military Alliances. Simulating World War III
A World War III scenario has been the object of numerous simulations and war games, going back to the Cold War era.
We have no details regarding the geopolitical assumptions underlying the TIRANNT war scenarios, --i.e. regarding analysis of major military actors, alliances, etc. From the available information, the simulations pertained to an all out war (bombing campaign and ground war) directed against Iran, without taking into account possible responses by Iran's allies, namely China and Russia.
In 2006, The Pentagon launched another set of war simulations entitled Vigilant Shield 07 (conducted from September through December 2006). These war simulations were not limited to a single Middle East war theater as in the case of TIRANNT (e.g. Iran), they also included Russia, China and North Korea.
The core assumption behind Vigilant Shield 07 is "Global Warfare". In the light of recent war preparations directed against Iran, the Road to Conflict in the Vigilant Shield 07 war games should be examined very carefully. They anticipate the "New Cold War". They reflect US foreign policy and military doctrine during both the Bush and Obama administrations. The declared enemies of America under Vigilant Shield are Irmingham [Iran], Nemazee [North Korea], Ruebek [Russia], Churya [China]
Vigilant Shield 07 is a World War III Scenario which also includes an active and aggressive role for North Korea.
The simulations are predicated on the assumption that Iran constitutes a nuclear threat and that Russia and North Korea --which are allies of Iran-- will attack America and that America and its allies will wage a pre-emptive (defensive) war.
While China is included in the simulations as a threat as well as an enemy of America, it is not directly involved, in the simulaitons, in attacking America.
The war simulations commence with Iran and Russia conducting joint air defense exercises, followed by nuclear testing by North Korea.
A terrorist attack on America is also contemplated in Vigilant Shield 07 based on the assumption that the "axis of evil" "rogue states" are supporting "non-State" terrorist organizations.
The diplomatic agenda is also envisaged as well as a media campaign to discredit Russia and Iran.
It should be understood that the conduct of these war scenarios with America under attack is also intended as an instrument of internal propaganda within the upper the echelons of Military, Intelligence and participating government agencies, with a view to developing a an unbending consensus pertaining to the preemptive war doctrine, --i.e that the threat against the "American Homeland" is "real" and that a pre-emptive attack --including the use of US nuclear weapons-- against rogue enemies is justified. And that premeptive warfare is an instrument of peacemaking which contributes to global security.
Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
Originally posted by buster2010
Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Woah, so they are actually shutting it down now.
this cant be good.
A terrorist nation shutting down their nuke weapons plant? Should we start cheering now or wait an appropriate amount of time.
You misread the biased story, Israel is the one shutting down the plant, not the terrorist nation Iran. You're welcome for the clarification.
Originally posted by crazydaisy
Even if the reactor is shut down
would it not still be a target and
dangerous? Does anyone know
what a safe amount of time it would
be for the reactor to be shut down.
So many questions but I feel things
are really heating up now.
Nuclear Power Generating Station as well?
Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by CALGARIAN
That would be a wise move on Israel's part. I'm sure any nation with a nuclear reactor would do likewise if they know a threat is coming.
Originally posted by Xcathdra
Originally posted by CALGARIAN
UPDATE:
IDF to hold military drills at Dimona Nuclear Site.
www.presstv.ir...
PressTV... such a reliable source.
Assuming the info is real, we could see something else going on.
With the uptick in instability, neutral countries will take extra precautions about allowing/assisting countries with manuevers / training. Shut the plant down to simulate a missile attack / earethquake? It also has the added benefeit of being able to simulate an attack on it without much scrutiny than if they left the plant open and didnt do any other drills. This way it can be explained away as part of the training if questions are asked.
Also a few observations -
#1 - PressTV - Enough said
#2 - Israel has never publicly acknowledged they have a nuclear weapons program (yes we know its the worst kept secret). I mention this because they arent going to announce / go on the record with a media source that a facility manufatures weapons, especially nuclear weapons.
edit on 9-1-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)edit on 9-1-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)edit on 9-1-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by CALGARIAN
Very interesting.
Pardon my ignorance, but is Dimona just a weapons facility or is also a Nuclear Power Generating Station as well? Either or, a complete shut down of a Nuclear Site isn't an easy task and not one to be executed unless the government fears it's going to be leveled.
IF a war does break out, I can see the Iranian military going tit-for-tat if the Iranian Nuclear Sites are hit.
www.theaustralian.com.au...
www.theaustralian.com.a u
(visit the link for the full news article)