• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Underground Palaces?

LeetViet

Platinum Member
Mar 6, 2003
2,412
0
0
I've heard Saddam have a few underground palaces that were designed by Germans and have enough supplies to last a year without being touched by any bombs/weapons.

Is this true?
 

RossGr

Diamond Member
Jan 11, 2000
3,383
1
0
Even if we cannot destroy them with bunker busters, so what? Let Saddam and his cronies hide underground for the next year. How can he have any effect on what goes on outside the bunker? Also I am sure that some primary objectives will be the "palaces" which seem to dot the city. Undoubtably these are the entrances to his hiddy holes, we will capture those, then insteade of hiding I think the proper term is trapped.
 

rbV5

Lifer
Dec 10, 2000
12,632
0
0
without being touched by any bombs/weapons.
At the time they were built, that was true. That was then...this is now. Bunker Buster bombs were developed specifically for those bunkers
 

Marshallj

Platinum Member
Mar 26, 2003
2,326
0
0
Bunker busters can only go so far into the ground, about 50 feet of dirt or 20 feet of concrete. I've heard that some of Saddam's bunkers are over a hundred feet underground, well out of the range of bunker busters.

Of course this is just what I heard, there's not too much info available on secret bunkers.
 

HappyGamer2

Banned
Jun 12, 2000
1,441
0
0
what about air? seal them off.
saddam maybe gone, hiding somewhere, maybe in a different country even
here we go again? chase him all over just like bin laden
or is he dead????????????????
well now they say it doesn't matter if he is dead or alive, or running free...........................SURE
 

rbV5

Lifer
Dec 10, 2000
12,632
0
0
I've heard that some of Saddam's bunkers are over a hundred feet underground, well out of the range of bunker busters
Yea, saw that too now..300ft deep...20 second elevator rides to the bottom:Q. Maybe thats why they followed some of those with multiple bombs. Taking out the exits to 30'-50' is probably sufficient.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,531
3
0
Originally posted by: ncircle
just fill the damn things up with water.
Or seal them up with 20 ft of concrete for 2 years and then dig up the remains after 2 years.
 

NesuD

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,999
106
106
Hey I'm pretty sure there are some hardrock miners that would love to have a go at one of those bunkers. Kinda like the oil drillers in Armageddon.
 

Alistar7

Lifer
May 13, 2002
11,983
0
0
you could easily send sound waves through just about anything, just project one at a frequency range that will make their ears bleed and eventually pop.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
2
0
Originally posted by: Alistar7
you could easily send sound waves through just about anything, just project one at a frequency range that will make their ears bleed and eventually pop.
heh...reminds me of an old Star Trek episode. heh...scenes of William Shatner writhing in pain just came to mind ;)
 

Marshallj

Platinum Member
Mar 26, 2003
2,326
0
0
Originally posted by: zephyrprime


It's not frequency that does that, it's amplitude.

It's both. If it's not the right frequency it won't have the desired effect. People have survived the concussion of nuclear bombs detonated near them, but noise like nails on a chalkboard seems to really bother people.

On the Discovery channel they had a show about non-lethal weapons, and they mentioned that it's tuned for a certain frequency. It has to match the resonant frequency of the object that you're trying to affect, such as how kidney stones are broken up using high frequency sound.
 

MadRat

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
11,655
40
91
Actually frequency is misleading as you can be in sync with a frequency by being a either an exact multiple or division of it.
 

Marshallj

Platinum Member
Mar 26, 2003
2,326
0
0
Originally posted by: MadRat
Actually frequency is misleading as you can be in sync with a frequency by being a either an exact multiple or division of it.
What is the correct term would you use then if it's not the exact frequency, but a multiple or division of it?

EDIT- Frequency is in fact a valid term to use here. Since Frequency is a pretty general term you're nitpicking.
 

etech

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
10,597
0
0
harmonic

edit
Main Entry: harmonic
Function: noun
Date: 1777
1 a : OVERTONE; especially : one whose vibration frequency is an integral multiple of that of the fundamental b : a flutelike tone produced on a stringed instrument by touching a vibrating string at a nodal point
2 : a component frequency of a complex wave (as of electromagnetic energy) that is an integral multiple of the fundamental frequency
 

Marshallj

Platinum Member
Mar 26, 2003
2,326
0
0
Harmonic is still a frequency.

The cycles of the sound is still called a "frequency".

Don't try to erode the logical meaning of what we're talking about down into a semantical argument. The sound will still be measured as being a certain "frequency".
 

Marshallj

Platinum Member
Mar 26, 2003
2,326
0
0
Originally posted by: etech
harmonic
2 : a component frequency of a complex wave (as of electromagnetic energy) that is an integral multiple of the fundamental frequency
As I said, it's still a frequency. The word "frequency" is even used in the definition.


The poster did not rebut what I said in any way, he just chose a different word to describe it to nitpick.

It's almost as if I said I heard a noise, and someone said "no you didn't, you heard a 'sound'."

 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
0
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: LeetViet
I've heard Saddam have a few underground palaces that were designed by Germans and have enough supplies to last a year without being touched by any bombs/weapons.

Is this true?
You bet! from another thread
Originally posted by: apoppin
Saddam's Bunkers from the next Newsweek . . .

Beneath the ground, a realm of catacombs and secret passages, storehouses and hideouts
April 7 issue ? When one of the most secure and luxurious of his palace-and-bunker complexes was completed in 1984, at a cost of $70 million, Saddam Hussein moved in right away. But even protected by enormous layers of concrete, sand and steel, behind zigzag corridors and blast doors made to withstand a Hiroshima-size explosion, and guarded by men who knew they?d have to be ready to die for him, or be killed by him, Saddam apparently could not sleep.

?ALL NIGHT LONG he heard a sound like the cocking of a pistol,? remembers Wolfgang Wendler, the German engineer who supervised the project. Wendler was summoned by angry officials to find out what was wrong. He discovered a faulty thermostat.
Today the bunker beneath the ?305 Guest House? in Baghdad?s main palace compound is part of an underground world of tunnels, shelters and storage depots where Saddam may be hiding his most fearsome weapons, as well as himself. Iraqi scientist Hussein Shahristani and other exiles even talk of a phantom subway that was built but never opened in the 1980s. (?I?m still waiting to take a ride in it,? says a skeptical former U.N. inspector.) What is certain is that many underground bunkers and tunnels do exist, and they could be a subterranean nightmare for American and British forces. Day and night some of the most powerful ?bunker-busting? bombs in the U.S. arsenal are being brought to bear on the massively fortified infrastructure. Some of the bunkers are buried so far beneath the city that when British Member of Parliament George Galloway met with Saddam in one of them last August, he wrote about taking a high-speed elevator ?so deeply under ground my ears were popping.?

A WARREN OF SECRET PASSAGES
?We should assume that Saddam has created an underground network where he could potentially survive for months on end,? says a former U.S. official who worked on the issue. ?Let?s hope that we don?t find ourselves in a situation like we were when we chased the Viet Cong 30 years ago.? But the fearsome tunnels of Vietnam were tiny and primitive compared with these. And the Iraqi capital is not the only city in the country built above a warren of catacombs and secret passages?some of them centuries old?as well as other high-tech hiding places for troops, supplies and senior officials. Najaf and Karbala, currently on the front lines, and Samarra, near Saddam?s hometown of Tikrit, are cities famous for homes with multilevel basements linked by deep corridors that crisscross beneath the streets.
Some Egyptians who?ve worked on the capital?s underground fortifications talk fancifully about plans to build a ?mirror Baghdad? buried almost as deep as the skyline is high. U.N. weapons inspectors never found anything so imaginative, but not for want of trying. ?You get a tip which says there?s an underground facility below point X, and you go and scout point X and you don?t find anything,? says the inspectors? spokesman, Ewen Buchanan. ?It doesn?t mean that it doesn?t exist, but that it can?t be found.? In 1998, on a visit to eight ?presidential sites? in Iraq, U.N. inspectors used an array of underground sensing equipment, searching for bunkers the way they?d look for abandoned mineshafts. The single large bunker they came across was another in the vast Republican Palace compound, not far from 305 Guest House. They found no weapons, but were impressed with the construction techniques, which included massive concrete walls mounted ?on springs? to absorb the shock of both conventional and nuclear attacks.

TARGETED BY BUNKER-BUSTERS
Earlier this year teams under chief inspector Hans Blix visited ?a couple of dozen bunkers? all over the country, according to Buchanan, including military ones where empty chemical warheads were found. They also investigated the Sijood Palace in Baghdad, where they discovered no illicit armaments, but they did find what Buchanan calls ?whole layers of basements.? Last week the Sijood Palace was targeted by the bunker-busters. Other sites of underground complexes, such as the conference center and the main presidential palace itself, were hit repeatedly by American bombs in earlier attacks and have been targeted again now.
Before the last gulf war, U.S. intelligence was able to obtain details about many of the bunkers from people who designed them. On the eve of this battle, Washington put heavy pressure on the government in Belgrade to hand over plans to underground complexes built by the Yugoslav company Energoprojekt in the 1970s and ?80s. Wolfgang Wendler, who oversaw construction of the bunker complex under 305 Guest House, claims he turned over the plans to the CIA 12 years ago, just before the last gulf war. But he says it could still be serving as Saddam?s troglodyte hideaway.
?He had all kinds of palaces, but this was where he lived,? Wendler told NEWSWEEK, and he says he was shocked to see a satellite photograph of the palace grounds taken last September and published in NEWSWEEK. It showed the 305 Guest House standing exactly as it was the last time Wendler saw it in the 1980s, unscathed by any of the earlier attacks on Baghdad.
Even if the complex is targeted now, Wendler doubts it can be destroyed from the air. The ?guest house? aboveground is a substantial reinforced-concrete building, with three floors and about 40,000 square feet of floor space. Underneath is a 15,000-square-foot, 14-room bunker. Buried more than 30 feet beneath the ground, it has reinforced-concrete walls at least five feet thick. Wendler remembers most of the rooms in the 305 Guest House furnished sparsely with fake antiques; other rooms served as a command-and-control center and held enough supplies to survive at least two months underground. The ventilation system was designed to protect against both chemical and biological weapons.
In the end, if the dictator holes up in a place like this and the bunker-busting bombs don?t do the job, Coalition military sources say, the only way to get him out may be for American or British Special Forces to fight their way in, burning through the massive doors and blasting their way from room to room. The job could be extremely dangerous. But this time, if Saddam hears the click of a pistol cocking, it will probably be the real thing.
 

etech

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
10,597
0
0
Marshallj
There was a question posed.

Marshallj
What is the correct term would you use then if it's not the exact frequency, but a multiple or division of it?
I answered it, nothing more.


 

Marshallj

Platinum Member
Mar 26, 2003
2,326
0
0
Sorry, I wasn't targeting your reply to my question, I was targeting the guy who felt the need to "correct" me when the usage of the term as I used it in my post was in fact correct to begin with.
 

MadRat

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
11,655
40
91
Frequencies was a misleading term. Etech pointed out that the term you wanted was "harmonics". I don't understand your beef.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY