Really, How Bad Could It Be?

by **Gauntleted Fist** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:06 am

I know the article itself is old, but Sec. Gates said it would be "silly to promise that it wouldn't happen again".

Six nuclear warheads with ten times the power of the Hiroshima bomb were left unguarded on a runway (Albeit in a military base.) for nine hours.

So, what does NSG think about sloppiness when it comes to following procedure?

Edited because my reading comprehension fails.

by **LOL ANARCHY NUBZ** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:10 am

Relax, nothing happened did it?

by **South Lorenya** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:12 am

How bad could it be? What about New York, Washington, London, Paris, Rome, and Tokyo getting nuked by psychopaths?

Honestly, if there were no nukes, this sort of thing wouldn't happen.

by **Gauntleted Fist** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:12 am

LOL ANARCHY NUBZ wrote:Relax, nothing happened did it?

It's still scary.

by **LOL ANARCHY NUBZ** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:13 am

Not really.

by **LOL ANARCHY NUBZ** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:14 am

South Lorenya wrote:How bad could it be? What about New York, Washington, London, Paris, Rome, and Tokyo getting nuked by psychopaths?

Honestly, if there were no nukes, this sort of thing wouldn't happen.

Nothing happened anyway...

by **Soratsin** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:14 am

If our military can't defend it's own bases from terrorists then nuclear warhead security is the least of our concern, imho.

by **LOL ANARCHY NUBZ** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:16 am

Totally with Soratsin.

by **Gauntleted Fist** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:16 am

Soratsin wrote:If our military can't defend it's own bases from terrorists then nuclear warhead security is the least of our concern, imho.

It doesn't automatically have to be "terrorist".

It could be an enterprising civilian contractor.

by **Unchecked Expansion** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:20 am

I hear that missiles have a habit of dropping off wing pylons on jet fighters.
There was also the bomber that flew between air bases fully loaded with nukes, without any of the flight crew knowing.
The Forces have a shocking saftey record really. It's the air force that gets them publicised because they have nukes (so do the navy, but subs are kept more secret)

by **Soratsin** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:20 am

Gauntleted Fist wrote:
Soratsin wrote:If our military can't defend it's own bases from terrorists then nuclear warhead security is the least of our concern, imho.

It doesn't automatically have to be "terrorist".

It could be an enterprising civilian contractor.

True, I just used terrorists as a substitute for "various crazy murderous bastards".

by **JarVik** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:21 am

Gauntleted Fist wrote:
LOL ANARCHY NUBZ wrote:Relax, nothing happened did it?

It's still scary.

Its old news and was a result of the US disbanding stratigic Air command whom use to be in charge of all the nukes and were real hard ass about the job. The job was then given to the normal jokers whom Fcked up more than a bit. Last I heard SAC was being reformed as they did the job much better and this sort of shit shouldn't be allowed to happen.

Can't remember for sure, but I think they thought they could save money by cutting SAC and letting the specials be taken care of by regular air force ordinance personal. That proved not such a good idea I'd say.

by **Soratsin** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:22 am

Doesn't there have to be some authorization code entered into the nukes in order to arm them or something?

I have trouble believing you could just smack a nuke with a sledgehammer and set it off, if you can then the people in charge of our arsenal are idiots.

by **LOL ANARCHY NUBZ** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:31 am

Soratsin wrote:Doesn't there have to be some authorization code entered into the nukes in order to arm them or something?

I have trouble believing you could just smack a nuke with a sledgehammer and set it off, if you can then the people in charge of our arsenal are idiots.

Is true. Nothing could have happened, and nothing did happen. Therefore, this is a non issue.

by **Call to power** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:37 am

well thats just the air-force for you they were probabaly busy having a nap

Soratsin wrote:Doesn't there have to be some authorization code entered into the nukes in order to arm them or something?

I have trouble believing you could just smack a nuke with a sledgehammer and set it off, if you can then the people in charge of our arsenal are idiots.

this.

its a fucking bitch to set off a nuke but imagine if they thing had been discovered by a naive young officer *cue universe imploding*

by **Soratsin** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:38 am

LOL ANARCHY NUBZ wrote:
Soratsin wrote:Doesn't there have to be some authorization code entered into the nukes in order to arm them or something?

I have trouble believing you could just smack a nuke with a sledgehammer and set it off, if you can then the people in charge of our arsenal are idiots.

Is true. Nothing could have happened, and nothing did happen. Therefore, this is a non issue.

S'what I thought, but just to keep this nuclear weapon thread going, I present to you the M-388 Davy Crockett tactical nuclear bazooka:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crock ... _device%29

Makes flying over the us with nukes on board seem kinda "meh". :lol:

by **LOL ANARCHY NUBZ** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:41 am

I've seen that before, they remind me of the things on Fallout

by **Western Mercenary Unio** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:43 am

Soratsin wrote:Doesn't there have to be some authorization code entered into the nukes in order to arm them or something?

I have trouble believing you could just smack a nuke with a sledgehammer and set it off, if you can then the people in charge of our arsenal are idiots.

I read something which said that RN protected their nukes with only bikelocks.

by **JuNii** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:43 am

LOL ANARCHY NUBZ wrote:
Soratsin wrote:Doesn't there have to be some authorization code entered into the nukes in order to arm them or something?

I have trouble believing you could just smack a nuke with a sledgehammer and set it off, if you can then the people in charge of our arsenal are idiots.

Is true. Nothing could have happened, and nothing did happen. Therefore, this is a non issue.

while it's true that nothing DID happen, alot COULD'VE happened. that's why there were procedures in place, the worse that could've happened was the casing cracking open if the plane went down and leaked plutonium into a nearby watersupply for a town or city...

or the weapons destroyed (usually by blowing them up), who knows how the Plutonium would've reacted during that.

but yes, we are glad that nothing happened and that some sharp-eyed, on the ball airman caught the mistake before something DID happen.

by **Fson** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:48 am

Western Mercenary Unio wrote:
Soratsin wrote:Doesn't there have to be some authorization code entered into the nukes in order to arm them or something?

I have trouble believing you could just smack a nuke with a sledgehammer and set it off, if you can then the people in charge of our arsenal are idiots.

I read something which said that RN protected their nukes with only a bikelock.

HEY Bikelocks not Bikelock :lol:

by **LOL ANARCHY NUBZ** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:48 am

Doubt it.

by **JuNii** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:52 am

it is not the first time that Minot and Barksdale bases have been criticised for sloppy procedures. Minot is located in a freezing, treeless and remote patch of North Dakota where boredom quickly sets in.

So... when is the "War on Boredom" starting?

by **Fartsniffage** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:55 am

LOL ANARCHY NUBZ wrote:Doubt it.

Us Brits used to have shocking nuclear security.

I think it comes from the fact our entire defence industry consisting of men in sheds through the first half of the 20th century.

by **LOL ANARCHY NUBZ** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 12:00 pm

Fartsniffage wrote:
LOL ANARCHY NUBZ wrote:Doubt it.

Us Brits used to have shocking nuclear security.

I think it comes from the fact our entire defence industry consisting of men in sheds through the first half of the 20th century.

Who's talking about Brits, and why?

by **Fartsniffage** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 12:05 pm

LOL ANARCHY NUBZ wrote:
Fartsniffage wrote:
LOL ANARCHY NUBZ wrote:Doubt it.

Us Brits used to have shocking nuclear security.

I think it comes from the fact our entire defence industry consisting of men in sheds through the first half of the 20th century.

Who's talking about Brits, and why?

RN = Royal Navy.

I thought that was the post you were responding to.

Really, How Bad Could It Be?

Really, How Bad Could It Be?

Who is online