Re: Dirty Bomb, how bad?

On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 05:55:31 -0800, Winfield Hill wrote:

> keith wrote...
>> JosephKK wrote:
>>> Winfield Hill wrote:
>>>> Jim Thompson wrote...
>>>>>> Jim Thompson wrote...
>>>>>>> Winfield Hill wrote ...
>>>>>>>> Spehro Pefhany wrote...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> FEMA anticipated 9/11 and the New Orleans hurricane as two of their
>>>>>>>>> three top most likely major disasters. Still one to go (massive
>>>>>>>>> earthquake in San Francisco). They're batting .666, so to speak.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They didn't/don't anticipate a small dirty nuclear explosion?
>>>>>>> With the required semi-permanent evacuation of a large city?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Win, You need to read up on the real facts on "dirty" bombs.
>>>>>> The street talk is grossly exaggerated.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just surfing on "dirty bomb"...
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Jim, for the links. I've added a few comments on each,
>>>> or excerpted some relevant quotes from them.
>>>>
>>>>> http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/dirty-bombs.html
>>>> A more mild assessment than the others below, "quickly leave
>>>> the immediate area, or go inside until being further advised.
>>>> Subsequent decontamination of the affected area could involve
>>>> considerable time and expense."
>>>>
>>>>> http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,182637,00.html
>>>> "In the past eight years, 175 cases have been recorded worldwide
>>>> of nuclear materials (not bombs) being smuggled out of former
>>>> Soviet territories and other countries."
>>>>
>>>>> http://cfrterrorism.org/weapons/dirtybomb.html
>>>> "the area struck would be off-limits for at least several months
>>>> ? possibly years ? during cleanup efforts, which could paralyze
>>>> a local economy and reinforce public fears about being near a
>>>> radioactive area."
>>>>
>>>>> http://www.bt.cdc.gov/radiation/dirtybombs.asp
>>>> Message: get-the-hell-outta-there. They don't say for how long.
>>>>
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty_bomb
>>>> "A test explosion and subsequent calculations done by the DoE
>>>> found that assuming nothing is done to clean up the affected
>>>> area and everyone stays in the affected area for 1 year, the
>>>> radiation exposure would be "fairly high".
>>>>
>>>> "Because a terrorist dirty bomb is likely to cause few deaths,
>>>> many do not consider one to be a weapon of mass destruction. Its
>>>> purpose would presumably be to create psychological, not physical,
>>>> harm through mass panic and terror. Additionally, decontamination
>>>> of the affected area might require considerable time and expense,
>>>> rendering affected areas unusable, and causing extensive economic
>>>> damage."
>>>>
>>>> NOTE: "Rendering affected areas unusable." It would appear my
>>>> phrase "required semi-permanent evacuation of a large city" may
>>>> not be as exaggerated as Jim claims, but I'd be very happy to be
>>>> corrected with a more detailed analysis, provided it's believable.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe Jim objects to my term, "large city," but consider. If a
>>>> portion of the city is declared off limits, who wants to live or
>>>> work in the block immediately next to the off-limit line? And in
>>>> the block next to that? In fact, who would want to live in the
>>>> city at all, given a choice? Wouldn't that be a common reaction?
>>>>
>>>> Maybe I'd be tempted to go run my business there, because of the
>>>> cheap yet perhaps high-quality buildings, but wouldn't I have
>>>> more trouble getting and keeping good employees? We constantly
>>>> live now with new cases of cancer discovered in our friends and
>>>> neighbors, and a steady stream of cancer deaths. So, consider,
>>>> what would be my eventual psychological reaction and fear level to
>>>> a steady stream of new cases of cancer if I was living and working
>>>> near an off-limits contaminated area? What after several of my
>>>> employees get cancer? Wouldn't I eventually come down with a bad
>>>> case of the hebbie-jebbies and leave, taking my company with me?
>>>> Wouldn't I tell all my acquaintances of my choice? I'm sure we'd
>>>> see a stream of news reports of one case after another like that.
>>>> Being told we had statistically-normal cancer levels wouldn't work.
>>>>
>>>> The possibility of a dirty-bomb attack is not an issue to be taken
>>>> lightly; it could be very painful to us as a society. In addition
>>>> to the added fear, I'd expect to see a considerable further loss of
>>>> personal freedom and privacy in its aftermath. I'd also expect to
>>>> see further politicizing of various new issues and severe division
>>>> in the country. We'd just be better off skipping the whole mess.
>>>>
>>>> Of course, skipping the whole mess is only to a limited extent our
>>>> choice. But what we can choose is to be truly ready, with tested
>>>> plans that minimize the societal bad experience, and thus minimize
>>>> the damaging psychological reaction. That's why I was surprised
>>>> that FEMA's three top most likely major disasters were 9/11, the
>>>> New Orleans hurricane, and a massive California earthquake. I'd
>>>> be more comfortable if they had a top four list, and were trained
>>>> and ready to deal effectively with a small dirty nuclear explosion.
>>>
>>> All, we already have an example of a large dirty bomb. It is called
>>> Chernoble. Take a look at the current "no go" zones.
>>
>> Perhaps you might want to look at the facts, then go look at how
>> late you are to the party (month and a half, as I see the thread).
>
> That's all you can say?

No, but it's pretty much all been said a month and a half ago. This
reserection of the thread is just so much more panty-waste lefty
sky-is-falling nonsense.
>
> IIRC, nobody in last month's thread addressed the point I made in my
> last paragraph above, which encapsulates my primary concern.

More "it's Bush's fault", eh?

> We learned in the New Orleans levee break that spending one billion now
> can save spending hundreds of billions later. Of course, choices have
> to be made about where to spend the preventative billion here and
> there. But with respect to a small terrorist dirty bomb, many experts
> say it's not if, but when, we'll suffer such an attack.

Many of these same experts believe that such an event is managable. It
won't be another Chernobyl, which isn't like the sky fell either.
Meanwhile your answer to the ones who would pull the trigger is to treat
them like misbehaving children.

> If we not only had plans and training exercises, but public drills,
> with rational discussion, etc., perhaps we could gain as a society a
> less emotional, more reasoned understanding, and much of our perhaps
> excessive fear of such an event might be dealt with in advance. The
> damaging effects of such an attack could be partially mitigated, so in
> the end its impact and our lasting loss would not be as great.

You want to induce panic? Perhaps you remember "duck and cover"? Maybe
you secretly liked it? Maybe we should have a dirty-bomb clock set at
23:59:59 on the toob-nooz every night, just to scare all the kiddies?

> So, yes, I do fault FEMA for dropping the ball on this issue. And the
> rest of Bush's increasingly-erratic government and his putative
> "homeland security" department as well. Maybe if this was presented as
> another private-enterprise effort... a multi-billion Halliburton
> no-bid-contract opportunity, Cheney and the others would champion it.

Yep, more "it's Bush's fault", as I suspected. It's (you're) getting old
Win.

--
Keith
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Understatement: These guys are pretty good.
    ... However, like you and I, Keith is a member of this community and I ... his guitars), without having even looked at it). ... I didn't attack you I simply stated that Keith writes better ... why do you feel the need to "poke fun at Adams" ...
    (alt.guitar)
  • Re: Sustainable Debt (Was Judging a cover by its book.)
    ... That Keith may have even a smidgen of fault has been ... cavalierly discarding my opinion. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.fandom)
  • Re: Sustainable Debt (Was Judging a cover by its book.)
    ... tiniest fault. ... That Keith may have even a smidgen of fault has been ... Ladies and gentleman, tonight, the World Internet Obstinacy ...
    (rec.arts.sf.fandom)
  • Re: Weather Home & Abroad outage again :-(
    ... Keith it could aslo be purely a fault keyboard-has anything been split ... Keith can find away to get in the bios and change the boot order to make ... said he replaced it but it must be a new battery or with plenty of life. ...
    (uk.sci.weather)
  • Re: Behind the Scenes: ASM Community
    ... Keith, you are losing it and you don't even know why. ... willing to turn around and attack me when I am known to be an ogre, ... what chance do normal members have when you have sh*t on them. ...
    (alt.lang.asm)