Monday, July 27, 2015

guest article

Ok everyone has an opinion on what will start the apocalypse . For me it is a HEMP  EMP event . No I don't think it will be for a Red Dawn invasion . Its said history repeats its self unless we learn from it . First I acknowledge our enemies are not stupid. How has the U,S. been on the winning end of so many wars? LOGISTICS we have always been able supply our troops in the field . In WW2 before any troops landed in Europe we bombed the hell out of Germany. We destroyed its ability to resupply. After D day they had no choice but to withdraw from occupied territory's to defend the motherland. We had plenty of arms going to the war fronts but they had only what was stockpiled.
       This is basic history everyone knows it .Now here we are policing the world we are in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan . We are imposing our will on these by force of arms . then we have Russia ,China, North Korea, Iran that we are in a shouting pissing match with. We are still winning on all fronts because of resources and manufacturing keeps our military supplied . If any group or country wants their way they have to overcome our LOGISTIC  advantage. See where I am going?

      Any challenge to Americas interest will be meet militarily. An EMP Event can come from any source with the help of Russia China or 25 other nations. A nation wide EMP would destroy our military's greatest advantage LOGISTICS. Now I do believe we have Some protected ability but it would not be enough . All military would have to be recalled due to civil unrest. People would be dying in mass.  25 million in a month from just medical issues. Even with a working government and military but no intra structure we would see 200 million dead the first year. With out the military and our Allies aid estimates are close to 90% die off in 12 months. As a nation we would be down to about 100 million people. Yea sure we may EMP who we think did it remember we have had a MEASURED RESPONCE POLICY since the 50s. You me and aunt Cindy dying is icing on the cake. We as a nation would be a none issue in world affairs. The aid from our allies would be token at best . We have no hard currency to pay with . We could offer no protection like in the past . By the time we recovered the rest of the world would have realign and allied itself with other nations. All military history has proven destroy the opposing army supply structure you win.

   A lot of folks think other things are more likely than an EMP I have no problem with that. All wars are about growth and resources This is just a cheep way they can gain access to what we have controlled off shore at a minimal cost to them. A goat herder in the desert isn't going to die because his cell phone wont work our adversaries are not technology dependent . WE ARE.

   Think about it. STOCK CHEAP AND DEEP



  1. I agree that an EMP type event, man made or natural would be a game changer. If deliberate, you can be sure the USA would respond with nukes against against the causing nation(s) or a scapegoat. The US public would demand it.
    Nation blanketing EMP is actually very difficult though. It is Rocket science (placement), Weather science (timing), AND Nuclear science (maximizing effects), all rolled into one. Something little rogue nations are unlikely to do well.
    BUT a series of smaller REGIONAL EMP events could be done much easier - EMP a few key port, industrial, financial, and political cities and you would have 90% the effect for half the cost and much more likely to have at least SOME effect.
    Or better, hire good hackers and saboteurs to attack key infrastructure, get even better effects even cheaper - only with more chance of interception if the US had decent intelligence services.

    1. I agree with all your points but an EMP destroys our supply ability to police the world in one event .

    2. Yes, the US would be unable to police the world, but we could still target and use most of the Nukes. Why would we send troops abroad when we would need them at home? No, the US public would expect the scapegoat nation to be glowing glass. And any other nation too blatantly moving against the US after such an event would get the same.
      Places like the middle east, etc would likely get hit by nukes too - not necessarily US nukes either.
      The USA nukes would allow the USA to have some influence in world events in almost any scenario- BUT the US public would be far too involved in internal events to want to use much of that influence.
      Internal to the USA I don't think we would see the predicted 80+% die off, but it would still be massive and bad and would affect everyone negatively (globally).
      These consequences are why no one has used such a technique yet - they would have to take a big risk of being the scapegoat and/or destabilizing the whole global political structure in a manner that would be highly chaotic.

  2. I hadn't thought about the logistics before.

    Good article.

    Idaho Homesteader

    1. Thank you Idaho. My belief is they want us out of their countries and out of their affairs. The side affects worry me.

  3. Wait a minute! You are throwing around some incredibly high numbers for the 'die off'. Can you cite your sources on where you are getting those projected figures?

    Also - your math is pretty crummy:

    "With out the military and our Allies aid estimates are close to 90% die off in 12 months. As a nation we would be down to about 100 million people."

    If 90% of our population died off in 12 months we would be down to....around 33 million. Sorry - but your credibility is in question now due to the hyperbole of your content and lack of math skills.

    1. You are correct I didn't separate the numbers properly. It should have read 90% die off with out aid or 33 million . With aid and a military recall 100 million survivor's . Those are the numbers presented to congress by the EMP commissions study in 2007 or 8.Here is the old report a new one is due soon.

    2. Thanks for the reply, Gary. I understand the typo mistake you made, and do appreciate you sharing the link on how you got your figures.

  4. "The aid from our allies would be token at best."

    Very perceptive. That was, to me, the logical weakness, in the book, "One Second After"...that there was no foreign aid. Now though, on second thoughts, even with well meaning foreigners and the American diaspora, aid would not come soon enough, or in large enough amounts - good post!

    1. Every country would quickly be sending aid IMHO. not necessarily EFFECTIVE aid, or enough, but enough that every major community in the US would hear that country XYZ sent # tons of supplies.
      The PR value of that move could keep the wounded giant of the US from lashing out (probably with nukes) against their country.
      It wouldn't likely be enough for a US recovery. Or even to prevent a massive die off in the USA, but might be enough to mitigate how massive a die off it is.