Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
#1. Storing four tanks with 7 gallons of water each. According to what they tell us to keep in LA in case of emergency, this is NOWHERE NEAR the amount of water you need to store. You need to keep two gallons of water per person per day or 14 gallons of water per person a week. 28 gallons of water would last two people for 1 week. That's not nearly enough to survive 90 days without help. You also need additional water for pets, etc.
#2. There is no nuclear weapon available that could really hurt the USA except in small specific areas. To get a real nuclear blast, a bomb would have to be dropped from a high altitude -- and it would have to be a really big bomb. Chances are, the USA would catch it on radar and blow up the plane before it ever got close enough to damage a big population center. These little suitcase bombs/dirty bombs are only good in a really limited area -- so it might take you out if you are standing on 7th and Main the day the terrorist decides to set one off on 7th and Main. Otherwise, the idea that this is a terror threat is a joke. (Everyone should go study up on nuclear weapons, etc. and then come back and post about them.)
Great post American Libertarian. We should all send this and more to our local newspapers. Ub 50 I agree with part 1 of your posts. As for part two rather than going political on us why don't you educate us you seem to know a lot about the subject.
This country needs to fire about 50 per cent of it's teachers and hire some good educators. Give us some of your good information as to why a tactical size nuke in Denver wouldn't: 1. Seriously damage or shut down transportation lines. 2. Establish Marshall law for weeks if not months. 3.Due to item 1, seriously impact food supplies. 4. Kill hundreds of thousands at impact zone. 5. Make thousands sick from radiation. 6. etc.
Personally, I'm not interested in hearing from a leftist that wants to shoosh us down the primrose path of social , political, & defense labotimization. I have Pelosi, Reid, & Clinton for that.
I don't know if this provides enough death and destruction for you Kaintuck...buy here you go.
According to Michael Levi, the physicist who managed a Federation of American Scientists' (FAS) study into the effects of a dirty bomb explosion, protecting yourself after such an attack is a matter of getting indoors, showering, and not eating contaminated food or breathing open air. As he put it: "It's really a matter of closing your windows and waiting for instructions." 6 Levi also cautioned that the much-hyped potassium iodine anti-radiation pills said to be selling so well in the wake of the attorney general's announcement, are likely to be of limited use against dirty bombs, as most studies predict the use of non-iodine radiation in any such device. 7
Moreover, Dr. John W. Poston Sr., professor of nuclear engineering at Texas A&M University, and chairman of a committee that produced a study on dirty bombs for the national Council on Radiation Protection, contends that the dispersal method used in such a device would so dilute the radioactive material involved as to make any radiation doses incurred non-fatal. Similarly, according to a report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, 1.5 pounds of radioactive cesium dispersed by detonating 4,000 pounds of TNT would only increase the amount of radiation that most of the affected people are normally exposed to by 25 percent. 8 As Mark Gwozdecky of the International Atomic Energy Agency put it: "It's hard to imagine any kind of dirty bomb producing the kinds of mass casualties that we saw on Sept. 11." Such a device would, he added, be a weapon of mass disruption rather than a weapon of mass destruction. 9
These conclusions were corroborated by the FAS study, which found that, while a dirty bomb would not inflict deaths on anything like the scale of even a crude nuclear device, widespread contamination exceeding Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) safety guidelines could result. If the risk of cancer deaths could not be curtailed to around 1-in-10,000, the EPA would probably recommend the long-term evacuation of the contaminated area. With urban areas especially difficult to decontaminate after a radiological attack, any abandonment could be permanent, potentially costing trillions of dollars. 10 In addition to this economic damage, a dirty bomb attack could also produce a psychological effect out of all proportion to the actual physical damage it would achieve on its own. The FAS report discusses a scenario wherein an americium source, such as the one used in oil well surveying, is detonated along with one pound of TNT in New York City, requiring the evacuation of 20 city blocks within 30 minutes. The panic such an evacuation would incite could lead to significant injuries in itself, as well as overload medical facilities, with people presenting themselves for treatment of real and imagined radiation sickness. 11 Such panic would be unlikely to remain localized but probably spread nationally, and would easily be fuelled by dirty and conventional bomb alerts - genuine or hoax.
obtaining the 'dirty' component of a dirty bomb may not be overly difficult.
Conversely, transporting and handling the materials needed for a dirty bomb safely and undetected may prove more problematic. Indeed, some sources, such as those used in food irradiation, weigh around 10,000 pounds (complete with shielding). Furthermore, with the shielding removed they would emit enough radiation to kill anyone attempting to combine the radioactive material with conventional explosives in a dirty bomb. 15 Such difficulties have led some commentators to suggest that the additional investment needed to construct a dirty bomb make it more likely that terrorists will restrict themselves to conventional improvised explosive devices. However the chances of a dirty bomb being deployed by al Qaeda cannot be discounted, as the BBC report indicates.
That is great for dirty bombs bily4. You need to reread the post. When I set the post, I wasn't talking about radioactive waste from a hospital unit or some such low level radiation. I was talking about a suitcase bomb. This, as I understand is a misnomer because there is no such thng actually as a suitcase bomb. The analogy I have seen is a conainment area about the size of a gym locker. Still not that big. I suppose you could cart one in on a donkey. No pun intended.
Tell us about that scenario bily 4 maybe you could consult with ub50.
Suggest you read American Libertarian though, because, what you believe won't mean squat if one actually goes off anywhere in the U.S. This will be one perspective when liberal jibber jabber wil fall on deaf ears.
Hmmmmm. Maybe we would do something like what the Japanese did when we zapped a couple of atomic bombs on two of their major cities.
They survived the best that the could. Some died in the blast, some quickly afterwards and some many years later.
However, no one hid their heads in the sand. They went on about their lives as best they could. I suspect that we would too.
No, I don't have any plan other than keep food and water on hand in case we get another hurricane. Through I have thought that the first thing I would do is my husband to dig a grave for himself just in case he went first, so I wouldn't have to worry about what to do with his body.
That is great for dirty bombs bily4. You need to reread the post. When I set the post, I wasn't talking about radioactive waste from a hospital unit or some such low level radiation. I was talking about a suitcase bomb. This, as I understand is a misnomer because there is no such thng actually as a suitcase bomb. The analogy I have seen is a conainment area about the size of a gym locker. Still not that big. I suppose you could cart one in on a donkey. No pun intended.
Tell us about that scenario bily 4 maybe you could consult with ub50.
Aaah, the suitcase bomb. Actually you are right Kaintuck...it is bigger than a suitcase. Actually the size is closer to 3 foot lockers, taking several people to manage and actually set off if it were to come to that... at least that is what the U.S. official that saw the only such bomb ever made in the Soviet Union testified. Also the radiation is such that the device would have to be set off within a few months before the radioactive mass decays. Nations with their labs and teams of physicists and engineers have not built these due to their impracticality and difficulty to manage.
But you are right, better to err on the side of caution, build a bomb shelter in the desert and be afraid. I still have mine from Y2K.
#1. Storing four tanks with 7 gallons of water each. According to what they tell us to keep in LA in case of emergency, this is NOWHERE NEAR the amount of water you need to store. You need to keep two gallons of water per person per day or 14 gallons of water per person a week. 28 gallons of water would last two people for 1 week. That's not nearly enough to survive 90 days without help. You also need additional water for pets, etc.
I'm single. No pets. The 28 gallons of water I have are enough extra storage. Remember, the hot water heater also has 40 gallons. Two toilets, with 5 gallon tanks on each. That's 78 gallons of good clean fresh water available to one person. I would think that would get me by until water can be brought in by National Guard or other sources. At least I hope it would.
I keep hearing this notion of being driven by fear in order to have this discussion. So, you are not responding to the legitimate concern you are again trying to politicize. Keep you comments to topic, we'll talk politics elsewhere.I can run with that as well. Actually you make some good comments about your knowledge of what is possible.
Is there anyone here able to lay out what would be required, the logistics, the possibilities, of assembeling a nuclear device and getting that device on our soil. If the uranium is available, how tough is it from there? How much would it have to weigh to wipe out a town the size of Denver, since that's where we started. (Not picking on Denver. My original thoughts were there from years of watching the weather map for prevailing winds.) I have watched for years the weather pattern develop in Alberta dip down to the southern states and back up to NEW YORK City! Could just as easily be Texas, which I'm sure the Muslims would like to hit George at home and it is closer to Mexico.
I have seen many posts acknowledging the need to be prepared but none really that says they are prepared and understands what preperation means. You won't get no groceries at the last minute!
One more thing bily4. What is a tactical nuke we hear the military speak about. Somebody describe that for me and why isn't that close to the type of weapon that could be used. Does that kind of weapon have to be dropped. What sets the damn thing off if you build one. Is it electronically detonated, impact detonated? Some of you geniuses might actually convince me it can't possibly happen. Though I must say some so called military experts I have heard seem to suggest otherwise.
Kaintuck I am not trying to politicize; I am trying to demonstrate the fear is in fact not legitimate. If the point of the post is we should all be ready for an imminent terrorist nuclear attack, I would simply say that fear is way overblown and is similar to Cherkoff's "gut feelings" about an increased terror threat. It plays into the Bush strategy of keeping everybody afraid so they do not ask too many questions about their ridiculous policies. As far as what can we do to be prepared?
A. We can build bunkers and live in the middle of nowhere, until we run out of money.
B. We can keep a limited amount of canned goods, water, first aid equipment, communications gear, personal protection in our houses and live our lives. Which is a good idea anyway in the much more likely scenario of a hurricane or earthquake.
If there is something else I am missing here I apologize, and I will not interfere politically with your disaster plans any more in this thread.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
