Nuclear Attack?

[NJNetz]

Do you think one will happen in the near future? If so, by whom?

 

[isrus]

Don't know that much about this topic but if it happens, i'd say Iran or N. Korea. Maybe Russia

 

[Denny Crane]

Boy, I hope not. All the hot spots where it was likely during the cold war aren't so likely anymore. USA/USSR, USA/China, USSR/China, Greece/Turkey were those kinds of hot spots.

What scenarios are possible?

I'm not convinced N. Korea actually figured out nukes enough to build any.

Iran talks about causing a 2nd Holocaust for the Jews in Israel, which is scary.

Terrorist organization gains a nuke somehow? That's not an all-out war, but still a disaster.

Some nation with nukes goes rogue? Not sure which one might.

...

 

[isrus]

Boy, I hope not. All the hot spots where it was likely during the cold war aren't so likely anymore. USA/USSR, USA/China, USSR/China, Greece/Turkey were those kinds of hot spots.

What scenarios are possible?

I'm not convinced N. Korea actually figured out nukes enough to build any.

Iran talks about causing a 2nd Holocaust for the Jews in Israel, which is scary.

Terrorist organization gains a nuke somehow? That's not an all-out war, but still a disaster.

Some nation with nukes goes rogue? Not sure which one might.

...

Do you think that Government or the UN would be able to reverse this, such as the Iran thing you mentioned?

 

[Denny Crane]

Do you think that Government or the UN would be able to reverse this, such as the Iran thing you mentioned?

I don't get the sense that Iran (the govt.) wants to be reasonable. They intend to make the bomb and they'll resist any peaceful/diplomatic attempt to give up on it. The real judgment has to be whether they're all talk or whether they really do want to nuke Israel for what they perceive as some holy/religious purpose (can't reason with fanatics).

The wider threat is that through enough countries being nuclear powers, terrorists might acquire one from any of those sources. Or that terrorists somehow take over an unstable nuclear armed country like Pakistan.

There's lesser threats, too, such as dirty bombs which can be made out of nuclear waste, yellowcake (not made into bomb material yet), or even medical waste - whatever you can blow up into the winds to fall on people to make them sick.

In contrast to nukes, bio weapons are the really scary WMDs. A nuke in a city of 10M might kill 5M or even all 10M. A bio weapon can kill billions of people world wide (it's a disease, designed to spread and kill rapidly).

 

[porky88]

If it happens it won't be by a nation unless they are an extremely stupid nation. Iran attacks us we'd nuke them back to the stone age. Same with N. Korea in my opinion. I honestly think American would counter a nuke with a nuke of their own. It wouldn't be a simple invasion of a country. I think we'd show our true technological advantage.

The only way it'd happen is like actually in 24 and I'm not just saying that cause I'm a fan of Jack Bauer.

I think a terrorist would have to get a hold of a nuke and sneak into the country with it and then use it in a major city. My guess is D.C. or New York would be the big targets or at least that's what I heard on Foxnews once.

 

[Denny Crane]

If you have a nation that's run be religious fanatics, then they're going to care little about retribution and are going to be looking forward to whatever their heaven promises. Suicide bombers don't care that they're going to die by their own act as well. I don't think the Iranian masses are like that, but their leader is sounding like a total crackpot/nutcase.

 

[CelticKing]

I had a dream a couple of months ago about being under a nuke attack. Kind of strange but the dream started with me watching outside the window and looking out as far as I could see, then there was a big explosion and a wave of dust kept coming towards me, the dream went on for a few minutes like that (felt like hours to me in the dream), I was trying to protect myself but putting something on the window so nothing would get in, I had this scary feeling that I would die, etc.

Strangest dream I've had ever probably.


As for the question, it will probably happen in the future but it might take few years, or hundreds of years. No one will know.

 

[cpawfan]

I believe people blowing up nuclear power plants is far, far more likely

 

[Denny Crane]

I believe people blowing up nuclear power plants is far, far more likely

It would have to be an inside job. Those things are built to withstand an airplane crashing into them.

 

[cpawfan]

It would have to be an inside job. Those things are built to withstand an airplane crashing into them.

Where have I heard that before?

Anyhow, strategic ground assault of highly specialized troops could take over a facility or two or three

 

[AEM]

If (hopefully not when) Iran achieves nuclear capability, there is every indication that it won't attack Israel directly, despite the very public rhetoric. A very likely scenario would be giving weapons to Hizbullah and/or Hamas, with false information tying the weapons to either Pakistan or, more likely, North Korea, for purposes of plausible deniability.

 

[bbwMax]

Boy, I hope not. All the hot spots where it was likely during the cold war aren't so likely anymore. USA/USSR, USA/China, USSR/China, Greece/Turkey were those kinds of hot spots.

What scenarios are possible?

I'm not convinced N. Korea actually figured out nukes enough to build any.

Iran talks about causing a 2nd Holocaust for the Jews in Israel, which is scary.

Terrorist organization gains a nuke somehow? That's not an all-out war, but still a disaster.

Some nation with nukes goes rogue? Not sure which one might.

...

But Assuming Neither Britain nor America is the Rogue Country We're pretty safe I Guess. Obviously if say N.Korea were to launch Their Nuke (And they only have one Apparently) At the UK or USA then it would be a tragedy no doubt. But Both would retaliate. I know that Britain has that At the moment Britain has 16 Trident missiles, based on four nuclear submarines, and we also have a total of 200 warheads. and America Obviously has more then the UK. So if a war were to happen with one of these Token Countries I.E Korea, Iran etc then it shouldn't be that much of a problem. But if We were to go into war with Russia that could signal the end of the world as we know it.

 

[isrus]

But Assuming Neither Britain nor America is the Rogue Country We're pretty safe I Guess. Obviously if say N.Korea were to launch Their Nuke (And they only have one Apparently) At the UK or USA then it would be a tragedy no doubt. But Both would retaliate. I know that Britain has that At the moment Britain has 16 Trident missiles, based on four nuclear submarines, and we also have a total of 200 warheads. and America Obviously has more then the UK. So if a war were to happen with one of these Token Countries I.E Korea, Iran etc then it shouldn't be that much of a problem. But if We were to go into war with Russia that could signal the end of the world as we know it.

no one would attack Britain

I don't know if you guys know but Israel and i heard India are also working on nuclear weapons i guess for defensive purposes

 

[AEM]

^ Both Israel and India already have nuclear capability, although Israel has not publicly admitted its nuclear capability and India is not known to have 'ready' nuclear weapons, per RAND, though the Dep't of Defense believes that India could put together nuclear weapons within a week.

 

[DennisRodman]

It would have to be an inside job. Those things are built to withstand an airplane crashing into them.

I've heard that too as well. They have an incredibly thick wall of reinforced concrete to protect them.

Well there is nothing to say that an inside job with 1 employee isn`t impossible.
1. They would have to figure out a time with minimal security and staff.
2. They would have to be able to be able to be able to get the core to begin the `meltdown` process before police could be called, and reach them inside the compound and stop them from commencing it.
3. They would have to figure out if it possible and if possible how to override the failsafes the system may that prevent meltdowns.
4. They would have to be willing to be die in order to do so.

In contrast to nukes, bio weapons are the really scary WMDs. A nuke in a city of 10M might kill 5M or even all 10M. A bio weapon can kill billions of people world wide (it's a disease, designed to spread and kill rapidly).

I dunno if bioweapons would be threatening than nuclear ones. I mean I`m not familiar with the biological WMDs that have been tested. (Is there data that you can share about their impacts?) I know some about Nukes, and the initial destructive power of a nuke is tremendous, not to mention the large amounts of fallout.

Developed by the Soviet Union, the bomb was originally designed to have a yield of about 100 megatons of TNT; however that was reduced by half in order to limit the amount of nuclear fallout that would result.

Little Boy weighed a total of about four tons (of which 60 kg was nuclear fuel) and was 11 feet (3.4 m) long; it also yielded an explosion equivalent to about 15 kilotons of TNT, destroying a large part of the city of Hiroshima.

So we are looking at something about 8000 times more powerful. It`s fortunate that the Tsar Bomba was designed to have very minimal fallout even though mainland was a piece away.

The initial three stage design was capable of approximately 100 Mt (Megatons), but at a cost of too much radioactive fallout. To limit fallout, the third stage, and possibly the second stage, had a lead tamper instead of a uranium-238 fusion tamper (which greatly amplifies the reaction by fissioning uranium atoms with fast neutrons from the fusion reaction). This eliminated fast fission by the fusion-stage neutrons, so that approximately 97% of the total energy resulted from fusion alone (as such, it was one of the "cleanest" nuclear bombs ever created, generating a very low amount of fallout relative to its yield). There was a strong incentive for this modification since most of the fallout from a test of the bomb would fall on populated Soviet territory.[4] [5]

 

[Denny Crane]

Regarding bio-weapons. It's not rocket science or nuclear science to genetically alter an existing disease such as anthrax to make it into a weapon. To make things worse, the kinds of bugs you'd mix anthrax with to weaponize it are the ones that live in hospitals and over the course of generations (bug time), become resistant to the kinds of drugs we use to treat infection. Evolution at its finest - survival of the fittest and all that.

So you have a kind of anthrax that can't be treated, immune to antibiotics. All it would take is a test tube full (less, actually) and a suicide bomber type (willing to die for the cause). Inject him and put him on a plane to Hethro. The germination time for the disease is 5 to 15 days; he gets everyone on the plane sick, though they won't show it for a few days. They get on connecting flights to Paris, New York, Hong Kong, Tokyo, and other places. The disease would spread like wildfire, killing billions. A single nuke, as I said, would kill millions, but would be contained to a finite area.

If you want to read up on what an epidemic or pandemic of the sort I described can do, they've been really scared of the bird flu for a few years now, and you can google that and find all sorts of info.

 

[DennisRodman]

Regarding bio-weapons. It's not rocket science or nuclear science to genetically alter an existing disease such as anthrax to make it into a weapon. To make things worse, the kinds of bugs you'd mix anthrax with to weaponize it are the ones that live in hospitals and over the course of generations (bug time), become resistant to the kinds of drugs we use to treat infection. Evolution at its finest - survival of the fittest and all that.

So you have a kind of anthrax that can't be treated, immune to antibiotics. All it would take is a test tube full (less, actually) and a suicide bomber type (willing to die for the cause). Inject him and put him on a plane to Hethro. The germination time for the disease is 5 to 15 days; he gets everyone on the plane sick, though they won't show it for a few days. They get on connecting flights to Paris, New York, Hong Kong, Tokyo, and other places. The disease would spread like wildfire, killing billions. A single nuke, as I said, would kill millions, but would be contained to a finite area.

If you want to read up on what an epidemic or pandemic of the sort I described can do, they've been really scared of the bird flu for a few years now, and you can google that and find all sorts of info.

I think if this was really so devasting and possible that if a country like Iran hated another country, say Israel that they would just say capture a handful of Israelis without them knowing it and return them to their homes. Some of them would go to hospitals, to work, walk around people on the streets. I'm guessing it would be pretty difficult to trace. (or just do the suicide bomber type and he could come in contact with all sorts of people in market places, no one would be able to tell that he was the one that spread the disease)

Or a country with a guy like Hugo Chavez that hates the US, or South Korea.

Does anthrax spread from person to person as you imply?

Well I'm guessing that a person nukes would probably use more than one, and it would also pretty much guarantee that people can't really hide from it, due to fallout. While even a contagious disease could be quarantined, and people could wait 15 days in their houses, eating canned food until it passes.

 

[Denny Crane]

I think if this was really so devasting and possible that if a country like Iran hated another country, say Israel that they would just say capture a handful of Israelis without them knowing it and return them to their homes. Some of them would go to hospitals, to work, walk around people on the streets. I'm guessing it would be pretty difficult to trace. (or just do the suicide bomber type and he could come in contact with all sorts of people in market places, no one would be able to tell that he was the one that spread the disease)

Or a country with a guy like Hugo Chavez that hates the US, or South Korea.

Does anthrax spread from person to person as you imply?

Well I'm guessing that a person nukes would probably use more than one, and it would also pretty much guarantee that people can't really hide from it, due to fallout. While even a contagious disease could be quarantined, and people could wait 15 days in their houses, eating canned food until it passes.

I don't think you understand. It is highly contagious from person to person, even before someone realizes they have it. It wouldn't matter if Iran or someone sent a carrier to Israel, it'd spread worldwide no matter what - people do get on airplanes there, too. It wouldn't matter who was the carrier, you'd be looking at flight manifests from weeks ago trying to figure out which person was the carrier, and it'd be unlikely they'd use someone obvious.

If someone used 15 nukes in our biggest cities, it wouldn't have anywhere near the effect of a pandemic or epidemic. The math might be 15 x 10M = 150M for the nukes, and 2B to 4B for the bio weapons. I'm also deliberately overstating the deaths from the nukes by maybe 10x!

Think about the medieval plague and how it decimated a huge % of the population, if that makes sense. Something like 2 out of every 3 people on the planet died.

If you're interested in reading further:
http://www.cdc.gov/eid/content/13/9/1288.htm
http://www.fas.org/biosecurity/resource/agents.htm
http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecurity/WM104.cfm

http://www.slic2.wsu.edu:82/hurlbert/micro101/pages/101biologicalweapons.html

"If you took a gram of smallpox, which is highly contagious and lethal, and for which there’s no vaccine available globally now, and released it in the air and created about a hundred cases, the chances are excellent that the virus would go global in six weeks as people moved from city to city……the death toll could easily hit the hundreds of millions…..in scale, that’s like a nuclear war."

 

[Real]

Israel having nuclear capability is an understatement. They're packing quite a punch.

 

[Real]

It would have to be an inside job. Those things are built to withstand an airplane crashing into them.

That's why when McCain says build 30 more plants, I wonder where we're going to build them.

Forget the sentiment about the Three Mile thing. Building more nuclear power plants in the New York City area for example would send residents, environmentalists, and anyone else concerned about terrorism over the edge IMO, and take the NIMBY stance to a whole different level.

 

[Denny Crane]

That's why when McCain says build 30 more plants, I wonder where we're going to build them.

Forget the sentiment about the Three Mile thing. Building more nuclear power plants in the New York City area for example would send residents, environmentalists, and anyone else concerned about terrorism over the edge IMO, and take the NIMBY stance to a whole different level.

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/safety-security.html

 

[DennisRodman]

I don't think you understand. It is highly contagious from person to person, even before someone realizes they have it. It wouldn't matter if Iran or someone sent a carrier to Israel, it'd spread worldwide no matter what - people do get on airplanes there, too. It wouldn't matter who was the carrier, you'd be looking at flight manifests from weeks ago trying to figure out which person was the carrier, and it'd be unlikely they'd use someone obvious.

If someone used 15 nukes in our biggest cities, it wouldn't have anywhere near the effect of a pandemic or epidemic. The math might be 15 x 10M = 150M for the nukes, and 2B to 4B for the bio weapons. I'm also deliberately overstating the deaths from the nukes by maybe 10x!

Think about the medieval plague and how it decimated a huge % of the population, if that makes sense. Something like 2 out of every 3 people on the planet died.

If you're interested in reading further:
http://www.cdc.gov/eid/content/13/9/1288.htm
http://www.fas.org/biosecurity/resource/agents.htm
http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecurity/WM104.cfm

http://www.slic2.wsu.edu:82/hurlbert/micro101/pages/101biologicalweapons.html

"If you took a gram of smallpox, which is highly contagious and lethal, and for which there’s no vaccine available globally now, and released it in the air and created about a hundred cases, the chances are excellent that the virus would go global in six weeks as people moved from city to city……the death toll could easily hit the hundreds of millions…..in scale, that’s like a nuclear war."

I'm guessing it is overstated. As well the plague was carried on rats wasn't it? and conditions back then were filthy. People were more malnourished. I'm sure a lot of conditions affected it. Clearly certain people didn't die from it, and were in contact with people who had it.

The 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States, also known as Amerithrax from its Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) case name, occurred over the course of several weeks beginning on September 18, 2001. Letters containing anthrax spores were mailed to several news media offices and two Democratic U.S. Senators, killing five people and infecting 17 others. The primary suspect was not publicly identified until 2008.

I mean there was anthrax sent to some people and they wouldn't have known that they had it. and it didn't become global.

 

[Denny Crane]

The anthrax by mail thing was pretty well telegraphed. People did die who first opened the mail, but it was really obvious that when you see white powder in an envelope that it's an attack.

 

[DennisRodman]

The anthrax by mail thing was pretty well telegraphed. People did die who first opened the mail, but it was really obvious that when you see white powder in an envelope that it's an attack.

Well there were 22 people infected with it, and 17 of them survived. Also there are vaccines which apparently are 93% effective.

American military and British Army personnel are routinely vaccinated against anthrax prior to active service in places where biological attacks are considered a threat. The anthrax vaccine, produced by BioPort Corporation, contains non-living bacteria, and is approximately 93% effective in preventing infection.

Anyway, with the first outbreak in 2001, 22 people were infected in various areas, and it didn't to spread like wildfire all across the nation. I`m guessing if there was an outbreak in the US, they already have treatment available, and if it posed a threat it would be mass produced to sell to whoever would buy vaccines and treatment.

 

[Denny Crane]

Well there were 22 people infected with it, and 17 of them survived. Also there are vaccines which apparently are 93% effective.

Anyway, with the first outbreak in 2001, 22 people were infected in various areas, and it didn't to spread like wildfire all across the nation. I`m guessing if there was an outbreak in the US, they already have treatment available, and if it posed a threat it would be mass produced to sell to whoever would buy vaccines and treatment.

5 letters infected 22 people. And like I said, it was telegraphed. When the first guy died, they knew to look out for suspicious white powder coming to people in the mail and everyone alerted to how to deal with it.

There's also the fact that it was anthrax (which we do have cures for) and it wasn't weaponized. The bio weapon of choice would be smallpox. I used anthrax as an example of a bug that's readily available (for study) and that could be made so those 93% effective vaccines would be near 0% effective.

 

[DennisRodman]

5 letters infected 22 people. And like I said, it was telegraphed. When the first guy died, they knew to look out for suspicious white powder coming to people in the mail and everyone alerted to how to deal with it.

There's also the fact that it was anthrax (which we do have cures for) and it wasn't weaponized. The bio weapon of choice would be smallpox. I used anthrax as an example of a bug that's readily available (for study) and that could be made so those 93% effective vaccines would be near 0% effective.

Well even without vaccines, only looking at 30-35% death rate where it manages to spread to.

Smallpox localizes in small blood vessels of the skin and in the mouth and throat. In the skin, this results in a characteristic maculopapular rash, and later, raised fluid-filled blisters. V. major produces a more serious disease and has an overall mortality rate of 30–35%.

However small pox has vaccines.

The antibodies induced by vaccinia vaccine are cross-protective for other orthopoxviruses (such as monkeypox, cowpox, and variola (smallpox) viruses). Neutralizing antibodies are detectable 10 days after first-time vaccination, and seven days after revaccination. Historically, the vaccine has been effective in preventing smallpox infection in 95% of those vaccinated

As well even after being exposed by smallpox, they can be vaccinated and significantly lessen the severity.
QUOTE]Smallpox vaccination within three days of exposure will prevent or significantly lessen the severity of smallpox symptoms in the vast majority of people. Vaccination four to seven days after exposure likely offers some protection from disease or may modify the severity of disease.[/QUOTE]
It doesn't seem to have close to the threat that worldwide nuclear warfare would have. Even 3rd world nations can innoculate:

The earliest procedure used to prevent smallpox was inoculation (also known as variolation). Inoculation was allegedly first practiced in India as early as 1000 BC,[24] and involved either nasal insufflation of powdered smallpox scabs, or scratching material from a smallpox lesion into the skin. However, this idea has been challenged as none of the ancient Sanskrit medical texts of India described the process of inoculation.[25] Accounts of inoculation against smallpox in China can be found as early as the late 10th century, and the procedure was widely practiced by the 16th century, during the Ming Dynasty.[26] If successful, inoculation produced lasting immunity to smallpox. However, because the person was infected with variola virus, a severe infection could result, and the person could transmit smallpox to others. Variolation had a 0.5–2% mortality rate; considerably less than the 20–30% mortality rate of the disease itself.[13]

 

[Denny Crane]

30-35% of the world's population is the 2B figure I used.

You're not accounting for the genetic manipulation I described, mixing the bugs with those resistant to the vaccines.

More info here:

http://www.gulfweb.org/report/r_1_2.html

You might read the rest of the report... Saddam never used bio weapons that I know of, though there is no doubt he used chemical ones. You may note we sold him all kinds of biological items which he was apparently weaponizing, some of the details provided in the report. You may also note we didn't sell him any chemical weapons or precursors.

 

[DennisRodman]

30-35% of the world's population is the 2B figure I used.

You're not accounting for the genetic manipulation I described, mixing the bugs with those resistant to the vaccines.

More info here:

http://www.gulfweb.org/report/r_1_2.html

You might read the rest of the report... Saddam never used bio weapons that I know of, though there is no doubt he used chemical ones. You may note we sold him all kinds of biological items which he was apparently weaponizing, some of the details provided in the report. You may also note we didn't sell him any chemical weapons or precursors.

Well now we are into things that I won`t be able to get data on. Like genetic manipulated smallpox, we have how it would be affected by innoculation, or a vaccine.

So I guess if we get into hypotheticals, saying there is a gentically modified virus that is immune to all vaccines, and immune to all treatment, and is very contagious. Then yes it could kill everything on the planet. I just have no reason to believe that that exists, or may ever exist until I get some test results.

 

[Denny Crane]

I bring up the Riegle Report because it's one of the most exhaustive studies of the massive chemical and biological programs that Saddam had, and details the various components of the biological programs WHICH WE SOLD HIM. We have direct knowledge of that, receipts, order forms, you name it. The document describes how he was working on his biological weapons program. More importantly, some of the items we sold him, under the guise of medical research purposes in the Iraqi Universities. were those resistant bugs found in hospitals.

It also describes activities like these:

http://www.sunshine-project.org/publications/bk/bk12.html

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Bacillus anthracis, for example, essentially fulfills the military specification, although anthrax victims may be treated up to several days after exposure with antibiotics. Therefore, only a minority of the infected persons will die from an anthrax attack in circumstances where appropriate medical response is possible, as was shown by the anthrax attacks in 2001 in the USA.

[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]A very simple genetic intervention such as increased antibiotic resistance, however, could provoke much more deadly results by impairing timely and effective treatment. The technical possibilities for such manipulations are many, and are growing by the day. In many basic science research projects, methods to overcome current technical limitations in the military use of pathogenic agents have been demonstrated – sometimes unwittingly. Countless examples from the daily work of molecular biologists could be presented here, but one particularly interesting example is the transfer of “suntanning” genes: Many microorganisms are rapidly destroyed by bright sunshine (hence the Sunshine Project) and are thus only of limited use as a biowarfare agent. Many biological weapons are much more effectively used at night or dawn in order to avoid the destructive effect of the ultraviolet light. But “suntanning” genes may be introduced into microorganisms to confer UV resistance. In one experiment, genes coding for the synthesis of carotinoids have been transferred into harmless bacteria (Sandmann et al. 1998). Another possibility would be to engineer toxins into microorganisms that are naturally UV-protected (Manasherob et al. 2002). [/FONT]