Cargo Ship Nukes
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
How viable would a massive nuclear strike via cargo ships be? I was thinking of something along the lines of the Chinese filling 100-300 civilian cargo ships with nukes and then have them all reach American ports at the same time, then go kaboom. The best part would be that there would not be a quick counter attack on the American side, since no missiles were launched and therefore they wouldn't actually know who attacked them. The amount of nukes could always be increased for more effect.
>>30070269
Well, seeing as they aren't airburst munitions they wouldn't be as effective as missiles for one.
Two, the coast guard has equipment to monitor radiation levels of ships in port
Three why would China nuke the seaports of their largest trade partner ggnore Chinese economy
Fucking moron please kill yourself
>>30070297
I did not want to discuss the possibility of China nuking America, I wanted to discuss sneaky nukes, If you want replace China with Denmark for all I care.
I'm guessing there is no easy way to properly mask the radiation, but how wide spread is the use of these radiation detectors? Do smaller countries like England and Japan also use them?
ITT: discussion about terrorist attack in case of hurka durka militia getting their hands on a nuke
>>30070367
Denmark does not have a nuclear arsenal
>>30070269
Assuming everything worked as you lay it out, there would be a massive financial fallout. Import prices would increase, food shortages would occur, it would be bad.
>>30070367
>do first world countries with major seaports (Fucking Tokyo, Yokohama, London with port facilities running the length of the Thames) have measures in place to ensure they don't get nuked from a cargo ship
Yes
>>30070424
I doubt there would be food shortages.
I bet food diversity would go down a ton though.
pretty easily, the security is very poor
>>30070269
backpack nukes would be a better option so you can hit inland targets. method of infiltration would be cargo aircraft from beige rent country flies over remote area on whatever pretext & their SF guys jump in with the weapons before taking them to prepared places. once the weapons are in position there's nothing anyone can do.like with the small nuke in every Israeli embassy & major consulate.
>>30070850 beige rent...
fuck my phone.
>>30070269
You arent getting a cargo ship near the Port of Los Angeles/Long Beach with a nuclear device without setting off half a dozen alarms. Port Security is one of the few things DHS or rather the CBP is actually good at.
Thought exercise for /k/
You are in command of the PRC. You have built several islands in international waters. For the standpoint of the rest of the world, these islands are not your territory.
The US announces its intentions to carry out military exercises with is allies in the area. These exercises will culminate in a landing of a small party on one of the artificial islands. They will stay for 48 hours, and then withdraw.
What is your response?
http://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/unclos_e.pdf
>>30070967
...That's a really good response.
Could I strong-arm them economically? Probably not, actually.
I wonder if you could threaten using nukes to get the other nations to give a little ground. I'm not good on this whole thought experiment thing. Help me out /k/
What would you do?
>>30070269
Nobody with the sophistication and resources to do that would have any motive to do so.
>>30070269
This is retarded. You literally couldn't transport a dozen nukes without it sending up red flags with intelligence services around the world, much less 100-300.
Who handles security at the Panama Canal these days?
Would it be possible to slip a nuke past the Banana niggers on guard?
>>30070967
Declare that it is an ordnance testing site, establish warning signs and "safety" zones, "test" munitions on it. Maintain said area until it is really needed for the big picture push
>>30070795
There would be food shortages. International trade would slow to a trickle because nobody wants to risk letting a bomb ship into their ports.
Not every country is self sufficient (looking at you, China), so you would start seeing regional famines.
>>30070269
Great idea OP, You could easily take out NY, DC, LA and SFC all at the same time. Ridding the USA of all its weaknesses and strengthen it by the power of FREEDOM. The rest of us will pretend we cared and use that as an excuse to curv the global population problem a bit.
>>30071116
How long do you think you can keep up a constant barrage of weapons into an area?
Weeks?
>>30070967
If I have knowledge before hand I might mine the island. However I can have my force partake in the exercise for couple of reasons: 1)Gather better intelligence to construct better defenses, 2)Gives my troops more experience, and 3)Potential propaganda
>>30070967
Shitpost vigorously across the entire media spectrum about how they're endangering regional stability with their reckless and aggressive actions.
When they leave I'll claim that they're running away (USN BTFO!! CHINA STRONK!! CHINKPOSTER KEYBOARD HAS 4 CAPSLOCK KEYS AND 7 EXCLAMATION POINT KEYS!!!) in the face of superior Chinese military.
Afterward I'll spend months bitching about how they defiled a cultural heritage site.
>>30071144
Could just be a single ship rotating in performing gunnery practice. Expending old naval munitions? Practicing FO?
Also it would be pretty leery to send in ground forces though uxo. They just have to out last the USN. How bad does the US want to dump money on a task force doing nothing?
>>30071136
There is not global population problem, there is a nigger and arab problem.
Whites have negative or very slightly positive birth rates
Asians grow sustainabley
>>30071144
Different anon here. It doesn't have to be constant. Just random. Nor does it have to be consistently 1 type of weapon. One day you have a patrol boat do a drive by with its deck gun, the next day you hit it with a pair of Silkworms.
>>30071188
The US announces that since the exercises were announced prior to the Chinese exercise, and this is international waters, the US expects the Chinese to cease activities that would endanger US forces.
The US announces that the US exercises will proceed, and that US forces will defend themselves as they participate in this international exercise in international waters.
>>30071171
>However I can have my force partake in the exercise
They can not interfere with the US and its allies, They can't unilaterally choose to participate in the exercises.
>>30071207
The US announces that since the exercises were announced prior to the Chinese exercise, and this is international waters, the US expects the Chinese to cease activities that would endanger US forces.
The US announces that the US exercises will proceed, and that US forces will defend themselves as they participate in this international exercise in international waters.
>>30071216
China announces that this island was built with chinese labor and money prior to US involvement. It will maintain its investment.
It will be up to the US to determine if attacking a single ship in international waters, firing on a uninhabited strip of land is acceptable
>>30071216
flood the island or perhaps make the island inaccessible, to the point that it would make landing on the island unfeasible or too costly to be worth while
>>30071278
Also, I have got other stuff to do. But I am just spitballing. I dont know much about the SCS sea laws and who owns what.
Honestly, it depends if china wants to use it as leverage for different concessions, or maintain it as a secret base, or even as a way to tie up US assets
Even if they managed to do it, damage would be limited to a lot of civilian casualties and ruined ports. Maybe some important ships lost. The problem is that detonating nukes so close to the ground greatly limits their effectiveness, and there are not many viable targets along the coast, nothing that would cripple the US enough to set a favourable starting point for say, an invasion.
So they'd have to launch a massive, nearly impossible operation, just to achieve maximum piss off status and retaliation on a scale never witnessed before.
Nah. It'd be more feasible to just build a massive space weapon and start blackmailing countries with it, it's equally impossible but more interesting.
>>30071278
>China announces that this island was built with chinese labor and money prior to US involvement. It will maintain its investment.
Artificial Islands in international waters are not part of your territory.
>>30071315
But then the Chinese will lose all their facilities built on the island.
And the US then moves onto the next island.
>>30071367
Kek
>>30071367
Oop, while you are here can you tell me how likely it is we will see a nuclear device used on a population center anywhere in the world in our lifetime? Terrorism or not. Just any use in aggressive context
>>30071367
dammit!
you didn't state that the islands were populated or developed.
what is this? zork?
i can't be expected to make a call given incomplete and inaccurate information.
>>30070394
Allegedly.
>inb4 Nordic Denmark activated their secret Reich mode and conquers and lebensraums the world with hawt danish chicks and superior genetically enhanced male supersoldiers.
>>30071201
We could reverse that trend though.
If all the leftists were purged, then the european population could grow exponentially ala industrial revolution mode with large families plus modern medicine, and proceed to move into all that resource rich and now empty space in Africa and Mid East.
>>30071411
I was assuming that you knew the islands we were talking about.
>>30071410
Unlikely.
>>30070967
Threaten with both political and economical measures that harm US interests in Asia. If not successful harass the landing party with water cannons and block the movement of US ships with own ships before they do the landing.
Same time do your own large military excersises.
Fun option: Release hundreds of aggressive geese on hapless Americans
>>30071439
Aren't there certain Scandinavian populations that are resistant to HIV/AIDS as well?
>the red guards biological counterattack is rendered useless
>yfw the dindus become dindonts
>>30071531
>If not successful harass the landing party with water cannons and block the movement of US ships with own ships before they do the landing.
You will have to shoot the helicopters landing the troops down.
>>30071592
Power lines everywhere, can't land in fear of entangling themselves.
Or shitton of flying geese.
This scenario is smart in way that China doesn't really have many legal ways to stop US. It only requires US President that has big enough balls to do that.
>>30071367
US is already set to invade, the issue of it being an island is moot.
Although I am curious if it can become a property of the prc, without the territorial extention.
Is it legal to establish a non sovergn land for the purpose of illegal acts? A pirate cove without pirates?
>>30070269
Have you considered using glider based infantry in post nuclear combat?
>>30071576
Reminds me of that pic where it shows the white guy getting stronger from Ebola.
>>30070967
What is your response?
Occupy all the Islands with various scientific groups, military vehicles and civilian personnel.
Have them do BS research for months on end and deny the USN from operating in the area for fear of accidentally a civilian research station.
If they ask us what we're looking for we'll say we're trying to find the source of the bloop.
