Comments on: Nuke Missiles’ Coordinates Plotted

By: TrustButVerify

TrustButVerify — Sat, 17 Feb 2007 02:42:34 +0000

Uh, guys, both Russian and American ICBM coordinates are a matter of public record thanks to the various treaties. I don’t think it’s terribly irresponsible to talk about what is already public knowledge.

By: Bob Q

Bob Q — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 01:45:41 +0000

This page has a link to show all ICBM sites in the US: http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/showthreaded.php/Cat/0/Number/187519/page/
Here is the link itself: http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/download.php?Number=187519

By: Bill

Bill — Tue, 14 Nov 2006 18:57:55 +0000

I fail to see how this is irresponsible. The only way it could be is if it would provide precise targeting data for some sort of strike. There are two entities who have the capability to use that info: Russia and China (and China is a stretch). Russia already knows the precise locations. Even if they couldn’t get it from sat recon, they get it through START inspections. And China doesn’t have accurate enough targeting for it to be useful for a counterforce strike. Worried about terrorists? What are they going to do with an ICBM? They can’t detonate it nor can they launch the missile and that’s assuming they can even get in to a facility that is hardened against a nuclear attack.

By: elizzar

elizzar — Tue, 14 Nov 2006 18:36:27 +0000

Hi everyone.
The knowledge of the silo sites is surely known to anyone with an interest in it (ie. foreign powers etc) and I would expect, say a couple of decades ago, most had a nuke or two sited at them. That’s the main problem with having permananetly-sited ground launch sites, hence the advantage of submarine-borne missiles. If you are thinking of terrorist-types having this information, well surely each silo is guarded etc, has various safeguards to disable missiles in the unlikely event they were attacked / stolen, so I hardly think its a problem Noah posting the link. You might as well blame Google for making their software etc etc, or your government for having the weapons where they are. The British, for instance, only have submarine-based strategic nuclear weapons these days, not even air-launched ones or tactical ones.

By: pixels

pixels — Tue, 14 Nov 2006 17:57:53 +0000

And you’re posting this data because Might this not be a little irresponsible?

By: Noah (the other one)

Noah (the other one) — Tue, 14 Nov 2006 17:27:12 +0000

I suspect that this site will be shut down permanently now that DT has brought it to light …
GWB administration motto:
’what you don’t know can’t hurt you’