The Great Blackout as a Warning: The 13-Step Nuclear War Sequence
A 13-step narrative traces the path from blackout to nuclear exchange: 1.5 billion dead and an economy set back a century. Radiation is the critical vulnerability.
English · Original discussion in Spanish · Published
The Great Blackout as a Warning: The 13-Step Nuclear War Sequence
A message peine the debate with an uncomfortable thesis: blackouts are not accidents, but warnings. From there, a 13-step narrative unfolds, moving from Pilingui's "unexpected" attack on Ukraine to a global government trinc an exchange of intercontinental missiles. The figure hovering over the entire discussion: 1.5 billion dead, both direct and indirect, and a global economy set back a century. The author calls it his "brother-in-law's nonsense." Others call it a script.
The sequence, step by step
The scenario begins with an "unexpected" attack—Pilingui against Ukraine—trinc by brutal sanctions and rhetorical escalation, continuing with the use of NATO bases for a proxy country to strike the enemy. Then comes the enemy's "big hit" against an allied installation, the pretext for a mass response and Russian rejection. From there, the narrative becomes apocalyptic: Russians push through Europe, someone drops a tactical nuclear bomb before they cross Germany, and the exchange begins. Nine of the 13 steps are pure military escalation. The last four are the ceasefire, the global government, the prohibition of weapons of mass destruction, and the body count.
The reaction was not unanimous. Some argue it is "a possible option," while others respond, "I don't give you credit, but I won't take it away." The most repeated criticism is not sarracena, but technical: radiation. The author's response is that Hiroshima and Nagasaki recovered in less than 25 years, that most fallout would land in the Northern Hemisphere—"that's what the NWO wants," he says—and that 500 bombs are not the 16,000 that exist. They won't launch them all. It is calculated.
Is Hiroshima comparable to a modern arsenal?
No. This is the strongest argument against the "radioactive paradise" thesis. The 1945 bombs were fission-based and around 15 kilotons; current tactical weapons are around 340 kilotons, and strategic ones are measured in megatons. The difference is not linear, but exponential. This is compounded by enhanced radiation equipment—the so-called neutron bombs—and those that fail to detonate properly, functioning as dirty bombs. The resulting scenario, according to this calculation, does not leave "a couple of million living in Patagonia in loincloths," but something much worse.
The author counters with Chernobyl: in the exclusion zone, there are herds of wolves and elk, a paradise. True. But the exclusion zone is not the same as a hundred cities destroyed simultaneously, with healthcare, logistics, and food infrastructure collapsed. There, the problem is not radiation: it is hunger, cholera, and winter without heating.
The EMP, the alternative some find more plausible
Against the nuclear scenario, another emerges: the electromagnetic pulse. A good EM blast fries electronics without leaving persistent radiation. The first day would already see thousands dead from chaos, anarchy, falling planes, and fires. The narrative advantage is that it does not require anyone to believe in a missile exchange "and back to base." The drawback, pointed out from the other side, is that an EMP is usually trinc by a massive missile launch. It would be very shameless.
A third path appears in the discussion: the explosion of a methan tanker in a major European city. This would lead to the prohibition of such vessels due to danger, the energy strangulation of the continent, and the perfect excuse to implement the European digital pass "for security," not for ELbichito. It fits better with the trend of recent years, they admit, than a nuclear holocaust.
China, Resources, and the Southern Hemisphere
China's role is also debated. Some argue that without the West, China is no one: it depends on the whole world to keep its factories running and feed its population. Others recall that the declared goal is the domestic market. In the nuclear scenario, China jumps "straight into the party" because it will not leave Siberia in NATO's hands. And the Southern Hemisphere is not spared: if it cannot develop without the machinery of the North, "it will also have its treat in the form of a biological weapon."
The underlying question is whether all this is a plan or a script. The most honest answer found is that no one knows. But the calendar, they say, is already set.
What if the blackout was only the warning that the next step is already underway?
A message peine the debate with an uncomfortable thesis: blackouts are not accidents, but warnings. From there, a 13-step narrative unfolds, moving from Pilingui's "unexpected" attack on Ukraine to a global government trinc an exchange of intercontinental missiles. The figure hovering over the entire discussion: 1.5 billion dead, both direct and indirect, and a global economy set back a century. The author calls it his "brother-in-law's nonsense." Others call it a script.
The sequence, step by step
The scenario begins with an "unexpected" attack—Pilingui against Ukraine—trinc by brutal sanctions and rhetorical escalation, continuing with the use of NATO bases for a proxy country to strike the enemy. Then comes the enemy's "big hit" against an allied installation, the pretext for a mass response and Russian rejection. From there, the narrative becomes apocalyptic: Russians push through Europe, someone drops a tactical nuclear bomb before they cross Germany, and the exchange begins. Nine of the 13 steps are pure military escalation. The last four are the ceasefire, the global government, the prohibition of weapons of mass destruction, and the body count.
The reaction was not unanimous. Some argue it is "a possible option," while others respond, "I don't give you credit, but I won't take it away." The most repeated criticism is not sarracena, but technical: radiation. The author's response is that Hiroshima and Nagasaki recovered in less than 25 years, that most fallout would land in the Northern Hemisphere—"that's what the NWO wants," he says—and that 500 bombs are not the 16,000 that exist. They won't launch them all. It is calculated.
Is Hiroshima comparable to a modern arsenal?
No. This is the strongest argument against the "radioactive paradise" thesis. The 1945 bombs were fission-based and around 15 kilotons; current tactical weapons are around 340 kilotons, and strategic ones are measured in megatons. The difference is not linear, but exponential. This is compounded by enhanced radiation equipment—the so-called neutron bombs—and those that fail to detonate properly, functioning as dirty bombs. The resulting scenario, according to this calculation, does not leave "a couple of million living in Patagonia in loincloths," but something much worse.
The author counters with Chernobyl: in the exclusion zone, there are herds of wolves and elk, a paradise. True. But the exclusion zone is not the same as a hundred cities destroyed simultaneously, with healthcare, logistics, and food infrastructure collapsed. There, the problem is not radiation: it is hunger, cholera, and winter without heating.
The EMP, the alternative some find more plausible
Against the nuclear scenario, another emerges: the electromagnetic pulse. A good EM blast fries electronics without leaving persistent radiation. The first day would already see thousands dead from chaos, anarchy, falling planes, and fires. The narrative advantage is that it does not require anyone to believe in a missile exchange "and back to base." The drawback, pointed out from the other side, is that an EMP is usually trinc by a massive missile launch. It would be very shameless.
A third path appears in the discussion: the explosion of a methan tanker in a major European city. This would lead to the prohibition of such vessels due to danger, the energy strangulation of the continent, and the perfect excuse to implement the European digital pass "for security," not for ELbichito. It fits better with the trend of recent years, they admit, than a nuclear holocaust.
China, Resources, and the Southern Hemisphere
China's role is also debated. Some argue that without the West, China is no one: it depends on the whole world to keep its factories running and feed its population. Others recall that the declared goal is the domestic market. In the nuclear scenario, China jumps "straight into the party" because it will not leave Siberia in NATO's hands. And the Southern Hemisphere is not spared: if it cannot develop without the machinery of the North, "it will also have its treat in the form of a biological weapon."
The underlying question is whether all this is a plan or a script. The most honest answer found is that no one knows. But the calendar, they say, is already set.
What if the blackout was only the warning that the next step is already underway?
Also available in: Deutsch
Summary of a discussion on Burbuja.info - Foro de economía, actualidad y política., translated from Spanish and reviewed before publication. Read the full discussion (164 replies).
More summaries
-
Ukraine NATO Entry and Crimea Claim Risk Europe War
Participants argue that if Ukraine joins NATO and seeks to reclaim Crimea, Europe faces immediate war with Russia.
-
Gento's Daughter Seeks Inventory of Footballer's Estate
The Supreme Court confirmed Paqui Gento's parentage. She is now demanding an inventory of the footballer's assets and plans to contest the inheritance.
-
Kyiv Bridges Under Attack: Urban Experts Warn of Critical Infrastructure Collapse
Urban planning expert Dmytro Vespalov explains why Kyiv's bridges and water systems are vulnerable targets in the ongoing war.
-
Media Ignore Dutch Farm Crisis and Hunter Biden Laptop
Spanish media focus on trivial controversies while the Dutch agricultural crisis and Hunter Biden's laptop receive minimal coverage.
-
Is the Russian military truly obsolete?
Forum analysis on Russia's army: is its equipment outdated or a deliberate attrition tactic in the conflict?
-
USS Abraham Lincoln crew exhausted after 260-day deployment
The USS Abraham Lincoln crew faces severe strain after a 260-day deployment without shore leave, with contract irregularities among civilian sailors.