Replies

Well, it wasn't ruled out. But, no, I don't think you believe it capable from the crew of a US Navy ship or sub.

Druggie subs are nasty, tiny, things barely capable of submerging. Forget about carrying weapons larger than rifles or maybe a Stinger.

I doubt that any submarine owned and operated by the CIA would be capable of carrying a weapon as shown in Q's photograph above. Decommissioned US Navy submarines have the reactors removed and they are then cut up to prevent post decommissioning technology transfer. We were lucky to obtain the sail of USS George Bancroft (SSN-643). It is on display outside the main gate to US Naval Submarine Base, Kings Bay here in Saint Marys.

Submarines are costly to build and maintain. They also draw a lot of attention on the surface. You would need quite the facility to operate out of. Again, more attention.

In addition, the crew for such a submarine would likely be recruited from retired or former US submariners raising the problems I listed above.

If I were going to shoot such a missile I would fit it into a shipping container with an opening top for the missile erector/launcher. This would be much cheaper to build and easier to conceal.

WWG1WGA

Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)

“If I were going to shoot such a missile I would fit it into a shipping container with an opening top for the missile erector/launcher. This would be much cheaper to build and easier to conceal.”

I have to agree with you on the container-based missile, LP. It would better fit Occam’s Razor.

However, I also wouldn’t discount the C_A with their trillion dollar piggy banks scattered around the world, purchasing and upgrading a foreign-built diesel-electric sub, or subs, and staffing it/them with ex- USSR or Pakistani submariners - or a fleet of them. Heck, boats could have been purchased from Allies as a head-fake. Make us think it’s just the Brits or the French in the area.

Diesel-electrics are almost as quiet as a nuc sub when on batteries, and who knows what kind of battery technology is out there that we don’t know about - yet. They also had WWII boats adapted for deck-mounted missile launches. Shouldn’t be hard, with all the stolen plans floating around out there, to come up with an underwater launch version.

The thing that makes me lean away from the sub, is the SOSUS bouys scattered around the oceans. Because of them, the Navy knows pretty much where every sub in the world - that has any screw-signature - is.

Apologies for the sub slide - again.

***If I were going to shoot such a missile I would fit it into a shipping container with an opening top for the missile erector/launcher. This would be much cheaper to build and easier to conceal***

This is more like what the thread needs to see - your more experienced theory as to what happened in the early morning of June 10, 2018 near Skunk Bay and Whidbey Island. I posted the weather cam time lapse video if it is helpful. The submarine picture that I posted is from Q's own post at close to that date if that is helpful; I have no idea if that sub was involved in this incident nor whether it is capable of launching a missile. Possibly Venezuela or N. Korea launched it... I have no idea.

Would the type of launch platform you suggest be able to launch a missile with, say, 500 mile range?

I did some research on this incident and compiled a fair amount of information. I lack the expertise to properly analyse it but being a compulsive archivist I can respond to questions with what I have - which I have done.

I also suspect that George S0r0s has the money and resources to build a missile submarine - not necessarily nuclear - because I suspect he has managed to steal at least a $trillion from the American taxpayer - with help.

LonePalm wrote:
“If I were going to shoot such a missile I would fit it into a shipping container with an opening top for the missile erector/launcher. This would be much cheaper to build and easier to conceal. “

Yes, my thoughts too. Maybe it was a Club-K. No sub required or crew, just a couple of disposable “technicians”...

SS1