Return to Unfiction unforum
 a.r.g.b.b 
FAQ FAQ   Search Search 
 
Welcome!
New users, PLEASE read these forum guidelines. New posters, SEARCH before posting and read these rules before posting your killer new campaign. New players may also wish to peruse the ARG Player Tutorial.

All users must abide by the Terms of Service.
Website Restoration Project
This archiving project is a collaboration between Unfiction and Sean Stacey (SpaceBass), Brian Enigma (BrianEnigma), and Laura E. Hall (lehall) with
the Center for Immersive Arts.
Announcements
This is a static snapshot of the
Unfiction forums, as of
July 23, 2017.
This site is intended as an archive to chronicle the history of Alternate Reality Games.
 
The time now is Sun Nov 24, 2024 5:47 am
All times are UTC - 4 (DST in action)
View posts in this forum since last visit
View unanswered posts in this forum
Calendar
 Forum index » Archive » Archive: Cloverfield (1-18-08) » Cloverfield: General / Updates
[Spoilers] Military Oddities
View previous topicView next topic
Page 10 of 13 [184 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next
Author Message
jamman1
Decorated


Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Posts: 159
Location: Indiana

I see it as a matter of escalation. Even if the bomb dropped at the end of the film wasn't nuclear, you can bet that a nuke would be their next option if MGP is still alive. I think that a small tactical nuke would cause less collateral damage than MGP ultimately would if it were allowed to live (damage not just from him, but from the repeated, useless bombing).

Sometimes people in power have to make terrible decisions, which is why I will never be president.

NORAD: "Mr. President, we need those authorization codes!"

Random Official (picking up dropped phone): "Uhh…the president just shat himself, and then ran out of the room screaming that we're all going to die."

NORAD: "Sucks to be you. At least I'm underneath a mountain."

Random Official: "Shut up."

PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 7:36 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Zaggs
Boot

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Posts: 68

The Professor wrote:
There is absolutely no way they used a nuclear, not that they wouldn't but that they didn't. If it was a nuclear weapon there would just be a flash, not an explosion, the tunnel collapse and another explosion and for that matter there would have been no possibility of the camera or the SD card surviving. It would have just melted meaning there would have been no way for it to be found.


The camera or SD wouldn't melt so long as it was far enough away from the firewave. But I thought something can be beyond the range of the firewave but still within range of the shockwave as its going outwards (1st explosion) and then coming back (2nd explosion). But of course the camera wouldn't still be recording because even low yield low airburst weapons have EMP.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:28 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
kevrock
Unfettered


Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 320

Unless they were very close to ground zero, the heat most likely woudln't have affected it. I'd be more worried about the affects of the EMP on the memory card. Depending on the trajectory of the blast, the stone bridge would have protected them from most of the radiation, too. There's stories of Hiroshima survivors who ducked behind concrete walls and were sparred from the brunt of the blast.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_nuclear_explosions

PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:37 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
starshiptrooper
Entrenched


Joined: 06 Dec 2007
Posts: 792
Location: Shelbyville, TN

Houston had NOT already been destroyed in ID4 before they nuked the spacecraft. Not that it matters, just thought I'd clarify that, since that seems to be the one movie everybody is on to prove why we wouldn't nuke a city.

A small tactical nuke would be the way to go, in case their last assault failed. Another thing everybody keeps throwing out is the value of New York. "Everybody has a stake in NY, No way we'd bomb it."

Perhaps you guys were asleep during the movie, or maybe missed the dialogue by the Soldier helping Rob.

Soldier: "We're going to flatten this whole area."

Rob: "Midtown?"

Soldier: "No, Manhatten."

So, in the end, whether the city is flattened by carpet bombing, or a nuke, it's still most definitely gone.

"Area FORMERLY KNOWN as Central Park". Why isn't it still Central Park? Because it ain't there no more.

What were we talking about again?
_________________
http://www.whiskeyoutpost.net/forum/index.php

PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 7:20 pm
Last edited by starshiptrooper on Tue Feb 05, 2008 10:07 pm; edited 1 time in total
 View user's profile Visit poster's website
 Back to top 
The Stray
Veteran

Joined: 16 Jul 2007
Posts: 141

Ehem.

starshiptrooper wrote:
Houston had NOT already been destroyed in ID4 before they nuked the spacecraft. Not that it matters, just thought I'd clarify that, since that seems to be the one movie everybody is on to prove why we wouldn't nuke a city.

A small tactical nuke would be the way to go, in case their last assault failed. Another thing everybody keeps throwing out is the value of New York. "Everybody has a stake in NY, No way we'd bomb it."

Perhaps you guys were asleep during the movie, or maybe missed the dialogue by the Soldier helping Rob.

Soldier: "We're going to flatten this whole area."

Rob: "Midtown?"

Soldier: "No, Manhatten."

So, in the end, whether the city is flattened by carpet bombing, or a nuke, it's still most definitely gone.

"Area FORMALLY KNOWN as Central Park". Why isn't it still Central Park? Because it ain't there no more.

What were we talking about again?



Yeah, we were talking about the extreme unlikelyhood of the government dropping a nuclear warhead on New York City. I'm also pretty sure that the aliens had already attacked the city they nuked in ID4 but I haven't seen it in a long time. Either way, that city was going to be gone whether they nuked it or not and I think that's the point everyone was trying to make. I don't see how you can compare a deep sea monster to death beam though. The impact of the beam was enough to level entire cities in an instant. In the case of the monster it actually has to walk around and destroy things by hand. I maintane that it's more likely that the military would seek to isolate the monster to an area and bomb the crap out of it there (repeated concentrated assault). I don't think for a minute we'd nuke a city with a quarter of it's citizens hiding in it and with soldiers on the ground. As much as we'd all like to think all units got the memo and moved out immediately that's probably not the case. Whether they're holed up somewhere fighting parasites or risking thier necks in last minute search and rescue attempts...

But I suppose that's all hypothetical since we're led to believe through the limited military dialogue that everyone has already evacuated and the last of the choppers were heading out at a certain time. Although, they seemed to blatantly ignore the fact that there were still people trapped in the city in various places and seemed concerned with only the people they could immediately help.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 8:00 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
The Professor
Boot

Joined: 26 Jan 2008
Posts: 17

How much you people underestimate the power of a nuclear weapon, be it tactical or not, astonishes and disturbs me. Do honestly believe that the camera could be protected from the radiation by rubble? This is not an atomic bomb made in the 40s', this is a weapon of amazing power with a larger blast radius. Not to mention how close they would be to the epicenter of the nuclear weapon. If they used one, they would certainly fire it directly on the MGP, which might I add was still in the same FREAKING PARK!!!!!

Not to mention that a nuclear blast does not work like the one or should I say ones that we saw. It was one blast that collapsed the tunnel and setting fire and then a second which actually killed Rob and Beth. Should it have been a nuclear weapon, regardless of the yield, all we would have seen was a bright flash which would have destroyed everything and the camera would have still melted.

I'm not saying that there would be no will to use it, I'm saying that they didn't use it. But speaking from a tactical view point, it would be as efficient with less collateral if they let it out to sea and then unleash all the nuclear hellfire on it using nuclear submarines and whatever else, they have an entire nuclear bombardment of it's position. I'm not saying that they wouldn't use a nuclear weapon on it in NYC, but everything points to the fact that they didn't.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:26 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Nighthawk
I Have 100 Cats and Smell of Wee


Joined: 14 Jul 2007
Posts: 4751
Location: Miami, Florida, USA, Earth

starshiptrooper wrote:
Houston had NOT already been destroyed in ID4 before they nuked the spacecraft. Not that it matters, just thought I'd clarify that, since that seems to be the one movie everybody is on to prove why we wouldn't nuke a city.


See, you're just going to make me watch that movie again, 'cause I'm pretty sure it was leveled.

Also, it was HOUSTON of all places. You have to admit, there is a significant difference in value between NYC and Houston.

"Sir, what if we nuke Houston?"

"Uh... Go ahead. They don't even have a football team anymore. Who's gonna care?"

PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:51 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website
 Back to top 
starshiptrooper
Entrenched


Joined: 06 Dec 2007
Posts: 792
Location: Shelbyville, TN

I just watched it last night.

"Which City's up NEXT?"

"That'd be Houston, Texas"

"Oh... Houston."

Plenty of shots of the observation unit on the overpass into downtown.. it's still there. Shots of the city below the Destroyer before deployment.

And a comment of

"Most of the major cities have been deserted, civilian casualties should be at a minimum."

Shall we start an ID4 discussion thread? Very Happy I love that movie. Would've been a great ARG to play, but it came too soon.
_________________
http://www.whiskeyoutpost.net/forum/index.php

PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 10:45 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website
 Back to top 
Ghidra99
Veteran

Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 127

starshiptrooper wrote:
I just watched it last night.

"Which City's up NEXT?"

"That'd be Houston, Texas"

"Oh... Houston."

Plenty of shots of the observation unit on the overpass into downtown.. it's still there. Shots of the city below the Destroyer before deployment.

And a comment of

"Most of the major cities have been deserted, civilian casualties should be at a minimum."

Shall we start an ID4 discussion thread? Very Happy I love that movie. Would've been a great ARG to play, but it came too soon.


It seems like no one remembers the important details. Kudos.

Brownie

PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 2:34 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Master Shake
Boot

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Posts: 25

There was one shot that I was wondering about. In the scene where the four are running for the helicopters and MGP is walking alongside them, there is that part when a mobile artillery piece (pretty sure it's not a tank) gets stepped on and presumably squished by MGP. Would it be possible to squish a 70-ton hunk of armor? I mean, squishing a car or jeep is one thing, but I don't know about the armor. It would be like stepping on a Matchbox car. You would break the wheels off and maybe anything that was sticking out, but I doubt you would completely squish the car.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 2:13 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
skatehimrock
Unfettered


Joined: 23 Jan 2008
Posts: 375

did someone just ask why it said formally central park and not just central park.

wow. you must be more retarded than i thought.
Formally. as in the formal name for the place.
like the government name could be area 2424874 NY.
but they give them FORMAL names to make it easier.

i think you got Formal mixed with another word?

PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 4:20 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
lazarusHART
Unfettered


Joined: 29 Jul 2007
Posts: 664
Location: Puerto Rico

skatehimrock wrote:
did someone just ask why it said formally central park and not just central park.

wow. you must be more retarded than i thought.
Formally. as in the formal name for the place.
like the government name could be area 2424874 NY.
but they give them FORMAL names to make it easier.

i think you got Formal mixed with another word?


Dude, it's FORMERLY not FORMALLY
_________________
-......-
Clover Vet
MGP 4Ever
Coffee


PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 4:38 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
 Back to top 
guerra001
Unfettered

Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 420
Location: Burnaby, B.C.

lazarusHART wrote:
skatehimrock wrote:
did someone just ask why it said formally central park and not just central park.

wow. you must be more retarded than i thought.
Formally. as in the formal name for the place.
like the government name could be area 2424874 NY.
but they give them FORMAL names to make it easier.

i think you got Formal mixed with another word?


Dude, it's FORMERLY not FORMALLY



LOL the guy in the states cant spell but the guy in puerto rico can? irony...
_________________
"Im not gonna take the bus, You take the bus"

Best Avatars by Lambo_Diablo_Svtt


PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 4:58 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
konamouse
Official uF Dietitian


Joined: 02 Dec 2002
Posts: 8010
Location: My own alternate reality

Please be nice to eachother. No reason to call anyone a name.

Thanks! Cool
_________________
'squeek'
r u a Sammeeeee? I am Forever!


PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:28 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
suckaH
Unfettered

Joined: 25 Jul 2007
Posts: 672

skatehimrock wrote:
did someone just ask why it said formally central park and not just central park.

wow. you must be more retarded than i thought.
Formally. as in the formal name for the place.
like the government name could be area 2424874 NY.
but they give them FORMAL names to make it easier.

i think you got Formal mixed with another word?

Epic fail

PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 8:34 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 10 of 13 [184 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next
View previous topicView next topic
 Forum index » Archive » Archive: Cloverfield (1-18-08) » Cloverfield: General / Updates
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
You cannot post calendar events in this forum



Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group