How many of these little nuclear bombs do you think the USA has smuggled into cities across the world "just in case"?

How many of these little nuclear bombs do you think the USA has smuggled into cities across the world "just in case"? Buried in concrete foundations, in abandoned warehouses or sunk to the bottom of reservoirs... waiting for the signal.

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >How many of these little nuclear bombs do you think the USA has smuggled into cities across the world "just in case"?
    Likely every time tensions get very high, I wouldn't be surprised if there are a dozen deployed to key locations whenever an enemy state goes to a high ready state.
    >Buried in concrete foundations, in abandoned warehouses or sunk to the bottom of reservoirs... waiting for the signal
    None.

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >"just in case"?
    just in case of what? the frick does this even mean? be specific or shut the frick up and go to pol to ramble about "them"

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It would be irresponsible to risk an ICBM exchange when with a little planning we can make sure the nukes are already there ready to go.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      An angry little fella

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >the USA
      You mean Israel.

      >pol
      Rent free.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Israel
        Rent free

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Parasites always live rent free.

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    yeah i liked blops cold war too

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    fun fact:

    in a contest between Detection and Shielding(hiding), Shielding wins so bad it ain't funny.

    Why was it a big stink when USN refused to say if our ships docking in Japan and New Zealand did or didn't have any nukes?
    Because no matter what equip they could bring to dock a few feet from any nukes, a modest amount of lead would prevent any hint of presence.

    If you want to search for nukes you will end up not looking for radiation but for "dark spots" of lead shielding, but you'd find old car batts, boat keels, lead paint, ammo, fishing sinkers, etc.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >If you want to search for nukes you will end up not looking for radiation but for "dark spots" of lead shielding
      But what if I cover the lead shielding in a substance that mimics the background radiation to counter this strategy?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter-illumination?wprov=sfla1

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Why was it a big stink when USN refused to say if our ships docking in Japan and New Zealand did or didn't have any nukes?
      Because one of those nations (New Zealand) had an ideological problem with nukes in the first place, and they really disliked it when you were being a bunch of smug buttholes concerning a port visit?

      They weren't asking if all aircraft carriers had nukes or anything like that, they were asking if THOSE PARTICULAR SHIPS had nukes onboard, and the answer you gave them was "go frick yourself" and you were shocked that they denied you access. They weren't attempting to aggressively confirm or deny the presence of nuclear weapons, they were merely asking, politely, if the USN had them onboard as that was a known issue with docking at kiwi ports and the USN basically spat in their face for asking the question.

      It's like the hundreds of cases a year in the US where a cop merely goes "is there anything I need to know about" and you go for your wallet at 0.5c without a word and then cry when you get shot. Just answer the fricking question.

      I know you're going to now completely go off topic and boast about being a le epic American citizen or whatever, but really, learn to read a room.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        fun fact:

        in a contest between Detection and Shielding(hiding), Shielding wins so bad it ain't funny.

        Why was it a big stink when USN refused to say if our ships docking in Japan and New Zealand did or didn't have any nukes?
        Because no matter what equip they could bring to dock a few feet from any nukes, a modest amount of lead would prevent any hint of presence.

        If you want to search for nukes you will end up not looking for radiation but for "dark spots" of lead shielding, but you'd find old car batts, boat keels, lead paint, ammo, fishing sinkers, etc.

        Also the US hasn't had any issue dealing with these sorts of requests, you were in Saudi Arabia in 1991 for fricks sake. You are STILL in Qatar. Those countries are far more oppressive, violent and discriminatory than New Zealand and yet the US Armed Forces have absolutely no issue dealing with them. But you decided to stunt on the New Zealanders to "prove a point" (whatever that was) and cried when you got kicked out. Imagine causing a 3 decade+ diplomatic rift just because you're unwilling to be like "yeah, sorry, we'll go to Australia and come back next time without nukes". Did you think the presence of nuclear depth charges on a US warship in the cold war was a matter of national security? Everyone knew they were a thing.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          why is this anon so butthurt about this event in particular kek

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >reee ur butthurt
            I'm not butthurt, I'm correcting the record (tm) of an event which a lot of people take as fact.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              I didn’t even know that this happened. Why are you salty about kicking us out years afterwards when as a nation I’m pretty sure we forgot that your country kicked us out

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >which a lot of people
              Literally no one who matters has ever even heard of this.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Because the Kiwis have been turning into bugshills and continue Reeeeeeeing over the US bolstering Australia's nuclear capabilities against their protest.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        [...]
        Also the US hasn't had any issue dealing with these sorts of requests, you were in Saudi Arabia in 1991 for fricks sake. You are STILL in Qatar. Those countries are far more oppressive, violent and discriminatory than New Zealand and yet the US Armed Forces have absolutely no issue dealing with them. But you decided to stunt on the New Zealanders to "prove a point" (whatever that was) and cried when you got kicked out. Imagine causing a 3 decade+ diplomatic rift just because you're unwilling to be like "yeah, sorry, we'll go to Australia and come back next time without nukes". Did you think the presence of nuclear depth charges on a US warship in the cold war was a matter of national security? Everyone knew they were a thing.

        heres a salty kiwi kek. Until now I hadn't even known this had occured or was an issue. 99% of Americans dont know or give a frick about it either, hellid say a little over half (the ones who know you even exist) think of The Lord of the Rings when thinking of new zealand. what an interesting thing to sperg out abouit

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          tfw new zealand is only known for a mass shooting and thats it.
          oh and i guess that weird flightless bird too.

          >waiting for the signal.
          muh nooks can't wait all that long and still work

          Tell me you do not understand nuclear weapons without telling me you don't understand nuclear weapons.
          You should research into neutron generating sources, their mean life time and maintenance intervals.

          for basicb***h fission bombs, isnt it the neutron initiator that needs constant replacement due to its half life being kinda short?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >but really, learn to read a room.
        kek maybe take your own advice before blogposting about how much sand is in your vegana

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >the USN basically spat in their face for asking the question.
        And rightly so. I would be ashamed if my country (UK) were this shameless.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Isnt that same pathological fear of being seen as impolite the reason your cops refuse to prosecute muslim rape gangs. Idk Arthur, seems like its more of a hindrance than a help.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        [...]
        Also the US hasn't had any issue dealing with these sorts of requests, you were in Saudi Arabia in 1991 for fricks sake. You are STILL in Qatar. Those countries are far more oppressive, violent and discriminatory than New Zealand and yet the US Armed Forces have absolutely no issue dealing with them. But you decided to stunt on the New Zealanders to "prove a point" (whatever that was) and cried when you got kicked out. Imagine causing a 3 decade+ diplomatic rift just because you're unwilling to be like "yeah, sorry, we'll go to Australia and come back next time without nukes". Did you think the presence of nuclear depth charges on a US warship in the cold war was a matter of national security? Everyone knew they were a thing.

        It was admittedly kinda pointless and arbitrary. Wouldnt matter so much nowadays where NZ either sides with us or gets raped by chinks, but you'd think the navy would take it a little more seriously back in the cold war. tbh I think it was just something that one O-6 expected to be able to bullshit away and then when it became clear that NZ wasn't going to budge they were in too deep to admit come back and then it just became policy.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        [...]
        Also the US hasn't had any issue dealing with these sorts of requests, you were in Saudi Arabia in 1991 for fricks sake. You are STILL in Qatar. Those countries are far more oppressive, violent and discriminatory than New Zealand and yet the US Armed Forces have absolutely no issue dealing with them. But you decided to stunt on the New Zealanders to "prove a point" (whatever that was) and cried when you got kicked out. Imagine causing a 3 decade+ diplomatic rift just because you're unwilling to be like "yeah, sorry, we'll go to Australia and come back next time without nukes". Did you think the presence of nuclear depth charges on a US warship in the cold war was a matter of national security? Everyone knew they were a thing.

        Lmao at the hordes of mutts you've triggered with these posts anon. Good job.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Chink is supplised that USN doesn't have to answer to them
        >Reee about lack of Naval Defense later

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        This has to be bait, no way an assblasted kiwi is this delusional as to bite the hand that keeps them gay and not a port for chinkland

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        your country is our slave
        almost every country on Earth is owned by us
        we own you
        you dont get to ask us questions
        you are beneath us

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >in a contest between Detection and Shielding(hiding), Shielding wins so bad it ain't funny.
      this is outdated info as sensitive neutrino detectors exist now
      before anyone replies to this post, neutrinos are not neutrons
      they CAN NOT be shielded

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Well good to know we finally managed to detect the undetectable particle that doesn't interact with matter.

        When's my warp drive coming along ???

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >what is weak interaction
          kys moron

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      come to think of it it would be so easy to hide a nuke in the keel of a yacht
      its literally just a gigantic block of lead
      literally anyone can just sail into any port and anchor and there are pretty much never any security checks or anything

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >implying WMDs are just left laying around
    you are the DUMBEST Black person on this board.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      That is quite an achievement.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >hmm, now where'd i leave my nuke?
      >guess I'll just make a thousand more and leave them lying around!

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I wouldn't be surprised if some American embassies in hostile nations have the ability to store a nuke in the basement to get the first shot off in case of nuclear escalation. Wouldn't shock me if Russia, England, France, and China also have such a scheme. Yeah it's dirty but it's not like nuclear war is supposed to be clean

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      but what tactical or strategic purpose does blowing up your own embassy with a nuke even serve?
      targeting civilians has always been a waste of valuable firepower and targeting civilians with nuclear weapons is perhaps the most extreme wastage of firepower that it is possible for a modern state to achieve

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >targeting civilians has always been a waste of valuable firepower
        This is not true.
        >targeting civilians with nuclear weapons is perhaps the most extreme wastage of firepower that it is possible for a modern state to achieve
        This was proven false not even a 100 years ago.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          If you are referring to the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki then you need to understand that both of those cities were targeted because they contained critical military infrastructure
          If you want proof that targeting civillians is a waste in the modern context you need look no further than Ukraine, where Russia has repeatedly expended huge amounts of very expensive firepower against Ukrainian cities like Odessa and Kyiv while achieving exactly nothing for their trouble

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >that both of those cities were targeted because they contained critical military infrastructure
            This is also false.
            One of the bombers missed their target and dropped their payload on a completely different city.
            >where Russia has repeatedly expended huge amounts of very expensive firepower against Ukrainian cities like Odessa and Kyiv while achieving exactly nothing for their trouble
            This is also false.
            A lot of critical civilian infrastructure was hit during the initial barrages, leading to electricity failures in certain areas of Ukraine during the first few days of the invasion.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >leading to electricity failures in certain areas of Ukraine during the first few days of the invasion.
              and what did Russia gain from these outages besides hundreds of millions of rubles in expended ordnance?

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              And what military advantage did these electricity failures convey to the Russians, exactly?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                It slowed the movement of any troops through those areas and drained government resources that could be spent at the front

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >missed their target and dropped their payload on a completely different city
              What a stupid and contrarian way to say "the original target city was occluded by clouds so they dropped the bomb on a pre selected secondary target."
              >this is also false
              Is that why Ukraine is currently without power and their civilian population is demoralized to the point of surrender?
              Actual dunning-kruger levels of moronation, go sit in a corner

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >the original target city was occluded by clouds so they dropped the bomb on a pre selected secondary target
                Whatever helps you sleep at night, sweetie.
                >Is that why Ukraine is currently without power and their civilian population is demoralized to the point of surrender?
                I think you forgot to read the rest of the post. Here's a hint; "first few days".
                But don't mind me, take all the time you need to read and re-read my post. I'm sure you'll understand what I'm talking about soon enough.

                I swear, this war unironically filled this board with mouth breathing morons from reddit.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            lol I bet you think the strategic bombing runs over germany were targeting military infrastructure

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Russia has repeatedly expended huge amounts of very expensive firepower against Ukrainian cities like Odessa and Kyiv while achieving exactly nothing for their trouble

            In some bizzaro world where Russian nukes actually worked, and the rest of the world wouldn't instantly respond to nuclear usage by glassing the entirety of Russia; if the Russians nuked the Ukrainians the war would be over with complete Ukrainian capitulation within 24 hours.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Hopefully taking out or at least severely damaging a major city of a enemy nation and with it, it's leadership

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Embassies are usually located in a country's political heart, so you would cripple their response time

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    This idea became kinda pointless after ICBM became widespread and improved their accuracy.

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Nuclear weapons aren't real.

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    meh besides what that one anon said about embassies possibly juggling around suitcase nukes in times of high tension i doubt it happens

    especially nukes being buried in concrete or sunk for decades just waiting
    the problem is nukes degrade pretty fast and need constant maintenance or they just wont work

    you literally couldnt bury a nuke in a foundation and hope for it to work in a decade unless it was sticking half out so it could be maintained

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >the problem is nukes degrade pretty fast and need constant maintenance or they just wont work

      I don't know enough about the intricacies of the SADM but a relatively 'simple' fission device could sit for years without any significant maintenance.

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    One of these were buried in your mom

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    During the 90s, it was claimed by KGB officials that they had already done this extensively. All that can be said with certainty is that the soviets had cached weapons in Switzerland and Belgium, no nukes were ever found there and the Clinton administration made no attempt to follow up on these claims about similar caches in CONUS.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The cold war really should've went hot.
      Imagine all the fricking moronic high jinks we would've witnessed from the western and eastern spooks.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I want the Cuban Missile Crisis game Timeline, It's so kino, Fun but hard

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Tell me you do not understand nuclear weapons without telling me you don't understand nuclear weapons.
    You should research into neutron generating sources, their mean life time and maintenance intervals.

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >waiting for the signal.
    muh nooks can't wait all that long and still work

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    homie this is literally the plot to Black Ops Cold War

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    This is a fricking stupid idea because we can literally drop them from satellites. Population centers aren't that much of a concern anyway, not worth the trouble of planting them and risking detection.

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Nuclear mines are scary as frick

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You have been watching to many 60's/70's movies. Suit case nukes, Tac nukes, nuclear mines, nuclear artillery, nuclear static bombs, all are ancient obsolete history. None of this is practical anymore seeing how the US can strike any location on earth within hours with a myriad of options to choose from.

  18. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    How would you do any kind of maintenance on that sort of thing? Don't nuclear weapons require a frick ton of upkeep long term?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Pretty much
      All nukes start to lose yield from the moment they are made and eventually even if you detonate them you will only get a "fizzle"
      Wast majority have the "pit" or core from Plutonium-Gallium alloy and Plutonium 239 has a half-life of ~90years
      There are some speculations on how much the yield drops due to the alpha particles disrupting the lattice and what the relationship is between Volume/Amount of plutonium but for example US considers their "pits" to be unusable after about 90 years
      Bigger problem is neutron generation
      You need to shower the collapsing core with as much neutrons as possible to start the reaction
      Faster it is the bigger the yield
      First bombs used a device called the "urchin" a Plonium-Berrylium mix but Pllonium 210 has half life of ~180days so you pretty much had to use them right away
      "fission boosting" is used now where you inject Tritium gas. You can even dial in how big of a yield you want by injecting smaller/bigger amount
      Tritium has a half life of ~12 years so eventually even if the pit is fine you won't have enough neutrons to jump start the reaction
      US considers that after about 10 years you have to swap it for newer batch otherwise you will get a fizzle again
      Granted they could have used deuterium since it doesn't decay for long term nukes but the yield is way lower and they could use Uranium 235 since half life is 700million years but again way lower yield
      These had to be compact as hell so I doubt they would sacrifice that much yield for long term operation

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        You are confidently incorrect on a number of points anon.

  19. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Don't worry about it

  20. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Even if they did nobody has the balls to do it. Nothing ever happens.

  21. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Every american embassy have a few in their basements.
    Russians and Chinese do the same.
    We are surrounded of nuclear weapons waiting for a conflict.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This. If there's an embassy in your city, you're fricked.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      china knows the moment it even implies it will strike the west with anything more than harsh words is the moment it gets vaporized by literally every other country capable of doing so on God's Green Earth.
      Russia is such an ass backwards shithole they most likely have lost their own nuclear capabilities through sheer incompetence/lack of maintenance and black market thievery.
      Give no thought to paper tigers. They know they're weak, which is why their greatest strength is their propaganda arms.
      As usual, America always wins baby, even when we don't actually fight.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        bad cope
        you lost to china before
        what makes think that you will beat them at all??

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >you lost to china before
          General Ridgeway remembers otherwise.

  22. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Man I love seeing Kiwis spazz over the US military. Frick those hook-nosed, crooked teeth, English language butchers. I hope China sinks the whole of Middle Earth you homosexuals

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Touch gross and have six

  23. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >t. Germ that asked mourners to donate to refugee agencies at his daughter's funeral

  24. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    As somebody who's studied in both Europe and America, European education is miles behind the best American education.
    There's a reason you guys are second-in-line to everything in the world these days and it's mainly due to shit universities. Learn your place, trash.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      let me guess: gender science
      someone didn't use your pronoun correctly so you branded the entirety of european universities "trash".

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      America has literally elected petulant manchild Trump as their national highest representative and about half of them would do it again.

      You might have good education for people who can afford it, but education for the masses is intentionally cut by the grifters who get elected by uneducated morons.

      Calling white trash Black folk is an insult to Black folk. At least Black folk have decades of marginalization and don't actively support the people that hurt them the most, because muh imaginary sky friend, le gays are bad, every wigger having the powers to kill with guns is somehow based, abortions le evil but frick any help or healthcare for the child after it's born, that's communism.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Oh no it's a euroid """opinion"""
        Time to summarily disregard it

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Based and truthpilled. Thirdies can cope and sperg all they want but the opportunities granted in America far outweigh the rest of the world overall.

  25. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    And you seriously need to touch grass if you think otherwise

  26. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I’m more than reasonably certain we have a few of them ready to turn three gorges into Fukushima: Shanghai and Wuhan edition.

  27. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The W54 is only really suitable for building demolition. Only way you hit anything important is to put them REALLY close to that important thing, which gives it a massive chance of being discovered.

  28. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why the frick would they need to paradrop them in, like just put it in a truck and drive it you're already in the USA.

  29. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Wasn't the idea behind the SADM (which has a W54 warhead) was to use it for demolition and destruction of targets like bridges, dams, power plants, etc behind enemy lines?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *