Notices
Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Isreal vs Iran, Isreal using the "Rod from God".

  1. #1 Isreal vs Iran, Isreal using the "Rod from God". 
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    U.S.A
    Posts
    414
    Israel could have developed this weapon underground in secrecy, then with there space program simply launch a coms satellite. The world would simply think it was a space project.
    This would be a secret orbital to surface strike weapons platform.
    The Rod from God is a simple deadly weapon, and the world is capable of creating these weapons flawlessly.


    Launch the satellite in to space, the satellite will be a communication satellite to the world, but to Israel it is a deadly weapon. The satellite will have be carrying a deadly cargo of Rods from god, It will be a telephone sized poll with rocket thruster attached to the back of it like a rocket, the rod will be made of heavy metals like tungsten, The satellite will position it self to one of Irans nuclear facility's . The satellite will eject a single rod from its pod, the rocket will then engage the rockets and then propel itself very fast they will ram the atmosphere and then to the ground and will have the kinetic energy of a small nuke, and with zero radiation, also the rod doubles as a super bunker buster, the rod will bury itself deep in to the earth and create a crater like a giant meteor.

    If they did this after they blew up irans nuclear program expecting them to try again it would have been very smart for Israel.


    I am an American teenager I do not know anything going on over there, but I am still learning. this is a idea I dont favor isreal or iran I just thought it would be interesting and fun to speculate


    With bravery and recognition that we are harbingers of our destiny and with a paragon of virtue.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Northumbria UK
    Posts
    1,043
    Project Thor ?

    Kinetic bombardment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


    .
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    703
    ... and then China will start to develop their own Thor, and every country will start to develop their own Thor, and the world will be plagued by Thor-pocalypse!. This is just like Iran, India, Pakistan and North Korea developing Nuclear missile as detterent weapons, but now with Thor. And since Thor is safe, you could place million of Thor in orbit just to be sure... to be sure that it become a detterent...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    And still not penetrate deep enough to damage a well buried bunker.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    What worries me is if they modify the design and start trying to make artificial meteors like the natural meteor that hit Tunguska.

    Tunguska event - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    It fell from much higher than what we're discussion for project Thor, mind you, and probably it also had a lot of velocity before it even met with Earth's gravitational field. Still, it's an example that demonstrates how a meteor can explode in a way that's almost indistinguishable from an atom bomb, minus the radioactive isotopes. So you kill everyone and the land is still habitable.

    If all this tech ever becomes is bunker busters, I'll breathe a sigh of relief.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    It's not even certain the Tunguska event would have destroyed a bunker a hundred of meter deep, the crater is very shallow. Even our best lift technology couldn't come with a few orders of magnitude creating the same kinetic energy.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Yeah. Tunguska type events wouldn't be good for bunkers. I'm just thinking about if they decide to use meteor type attacks for different purposes, like to destroy a city. GW's administration talked about trying to justify using small nukes as bunker busters for a while early in the present war. I think bunker busting is kind of a way to get one's foot in the door for WMD tech. Realistically, there probably isn't any tech that can get at them very well.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Realistically, there probably isn't any tech that can get at them very well.
    Since this is politics, I'll say there is: uphold our end of the NPT by getting our scientists into those facilities; advising, promoting, managing, and from such vantage safeguarding Iranian nuclear technology. Iran's requested close cooperation, including international control of facilities on Iranian soil, for decades.
    A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Northumbria UK
    Posts
    1,043
    Quote Originally Posted by Pong View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Realistically, there probably isn't any tech that can get at them very well.
    Since this is politics, I'll say there is: uphold our end of the NPT by getting our scientists into those facilities; advising, promoting, managing, and from such vantage safeguarding Iranian nuclear technology. Iran's requested close cooperation, including international control of facilities on Iranian soil, for decades.


    Will you please provide a link, supporting your statement, about Iran requesting international control, of its nuclear facilities.


    .
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,150
    Imagine if the russians had launched a probe in the 90s that was in fact a program to deviate a large asteroid that would smash this year the state of Arizona, killing everyone in a 500 mile radius. Wouldnt that be just neat? It would be great if russian and chinese scientists could take scientific measurements to see just how exact their calculations were, what if it just killed everyone in a 450 mile radius instead? I thought it would be interesting to speculate. I dont know much about Arizona but it sounds like a great place for such an experiment
    It would be smart for Russia to do this especially if the US didnt know it was them, one of the last times an asteroid flew next to earth we knew about it after it had passed, so this asteroid could smash by surprise and no one would suspect. Technically it sure is challenging, it would be a great feat of technical achievement worthy of mathematical and trajectory calculation's admiration.

    (Demonizing Iran and singling it it out, is wanton abject and degenerate warmongering. Wars start with Lies, and War is a Racket)


    (the part about the asteroid is satirical, obviously)
    Last edited by icewendigo; March 2nd, 2012 at 02:43 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    If we're talking project Thor, the goal would not be mass destruction. If we're talking about a Tunguska event, that's just blind speculation, but represents one of the scarier possibilities if we start down this road.

    Personally what worries me most is that if space become weaponized, then there will be a public stigma against space exploration in general, which would well.... just plain be sad. I'd like to see humans visiting Mars, or colonizing the Moon. Why not focus on claiming natural resources in place where nobody has to die or be exploited in order for us to get them?
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Wilson View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Pong View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Realistically, there probably isn't any tech that can get at them very well.
    Since this is politics, I'll say there is: uphold our end of the NPT by getting our scientists into those facilities; advising, promoting, managing, and from such vantage safeguarding Iranian nuclear technology. Iran's requested close cooperation, including international control of facilities on Iranian soil, for decades.


    Will you please provide a link, supporting your statement, about Iran requesting international control, of its nuclear facilities.


    ->History of Official Proposals on the Iranian Nuclear Issue<-


    The Bushehr plant is already multilateral in practice, since it's German/Russian built and operated.

    Iran only cautiously supports an international nuclear fuel bank, since fuel shipments to Iran have long history of political disruption or obscene overprice. They're concerned for nuclear fuel security much as Americans are for petroleum security.

    Iran's whining about other states' non-compliance with NPT also makes more sense when you understand a pillar of the treaty is international cooperation to develop full-cycle domestic nuclear production and power in signatory countries. Why is Iran a signatory when other members twist the treaty as a stick to beat it with?
    A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Northumbria UK
    Posts
    1,043
    Pong,
    this from the second paragraph in your link, says it all.

    " Tehran devised a number of these proposals between 2003 and 2005, some of which included provisions to initially limit operations at its key nuclear facilities and implement transparency measures for its nuclear activities. Iran's IAEA envoy Ali Asghar Soltanieh said during a September 2011 Arms Control Today interview however, that those proposals are "obsolete." Since that time, proposals offered by Iran have generally not addressed concerns that it is seeking a nuclear-weapons capability "
    Last edited by Dave Wilson; March 3rd, 2012 at 07:27 AM. Reason: missed out four words.
    .
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    It's not even certain the Tunguska event would have destroyed a bunker a hundred of meter deep, the crater is very shallow. Even our best lift technology couldn't come with a few orders of magnitude creating the same kinetic energy.
    Actually, no crater has ever been found, nor likely exists. It exploded many km (miles) above the surface.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo View Post
    It would be smart for Russia to do this especially if the US didnt know it was them, one of the last times an asteroid flew next to earth we knew about it after it had passed, so this asteroid could smash by surprise and no one would suspect. Technically it sure is challenging, it would be a great feat of technical achievement worthy of mathematical and trajectory calculation's admiration.
    In fact almost no asteroids larger than 10 meters in size sneak up on us. Only 13 newly discovered asteroids that came with 2X the distance to the moon out of 43 were found after close approach in the last 15 months. And they were all very small. Anything larger is found well in advance or doesn't come any closer than that distance. That's 768 million km (~500,000 miles away).

    As you might guess from my last two posts, this is a subject I know quite a bit about and actively research. You should see my excel workbook

    After all, I am...

    Meteor Wayne
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Wilson View Post
    "proposals between 2003 and 2005... are "obsolete."
    Unless they were extremely vague proposals, changing conditions must obsolete them. How do they shut down test equipment they don't use anymore? Or stop feeding a power grid that's grown to depend on a generator? Only North Korea is so stupid.
    A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Quote Originally Posted by MeteorWayne View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    It's not even certain the Tunguska event would have destroyed a bunker a hundred of meter deep, the crater is very shallow. Even our best lift technology couldn't come with a few orders of magnitude creating the same kinetic energy.
    Actually, no crater has ever been found, nor likely exists. It exploded many km (miles) above the surface.
    Yeah, exactly like a nuke would. Blowing up in the air above the target maximizes damage to a city.


    That's the part that's so chilling to me. In theory, a country could engineer a meteor event where instead of a ground impact, you get an areal explosion. Same death toll as a large nuke, but the surrounding areas are immediately habitable afterward. No messy scrubbing for isotopes.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    It must be frustrating for the upper brass. Here they have an opportunity to raid a foreign nation with oil reserves even (slightly) larger than Iraq's over a WMD program and... this time.... they probably would actually find something when they arrive!!!

    But no. Some self gratifying idiot (Donald Rumsfeld) already cried wolf. I guess they'll just have to let the Mullahs have a bomb. At least they're a little bit more level headed than Mr. Hussein was.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    The Mullahs don't want the bomb. I know that's really hard to believe when you guess a person's desires by what you would want. Reagan would want the bomb, so shouldn't Khamenei?

    The nation of Iran righteously believes WMD evil. The theocracy preaches this. Khamenei even named nuclear weapons specifically in a fatwa basically saying if you build them, keep them, or use them, you'll go to hell. That Iranians endured WMD bombardment by Saddam's secular Iraq, and did not stoop to answer in kind, is a matter of national honour. Iranian diplomats piss off their allies with this holier-than-thou position on WMD. Against all insights of character made by nuke lovers, Iranians vocally differ. I can't believe there is mass conspiracy running through all levels of Iranian society to fake this revulsion at weapons of mass destruction.
    A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    At least they're a little bit more level headed than Mr. Hussein was.
    They're not. Saddam's secular armies fought back human waves of religious fanatics: kids with rifles sent to overwhelm towns they knew saturated with nerve gas, sent again and again to exhaust the secularist's ammunition.

    Not level headed but predictable in their values.
    A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Review on "Divine Intuition: Cognitive Style Influences Belief in God"
    By peterk301 in forum Behavior and Psychology
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: October 4th, 2011, 12:29 PM
  2. question: if supposily "GOD" was to stand before.
    By Gods servant in forum Scientific Study of Religion
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: March 4th, 2009, 12:05 PM
  3. "God" this word start in which dynasty!
    By sumplayer in forum History
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: June 20th, 2008, 10:02 PM
  4. is "god" "open" for interpretation?
    By theQuestIsNotOver in forum Scientific Study of Religion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: March 31st, 2008, 01:05 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •