Ashcroft's Warning: Dirty Bomb

[DrCarl]

Am I the only one who heard Sean Hannity, at about 5:40PM EST, stop while on the air and say: "So that's what Ashcroft's warning is. It's a dirty bomb."

[dhfnc]

Thanks for all the info - I have one question - If a "dirty bomb" was set off on the West coast or in middle America - would the radiation spread to the east coast? If I understand correctly, these type bombs are too small to have a long range effect.

[jpsb]

A real "dirty bomb" is a fission (atomic) bomb those outer case is made of fissional material (like enriched U). Dirty bombs (there is no clean fission or fussion bomb) are fission/fission bombs. The fisrt reaction (always dirty) is the core and then if fissionable material is used in the out case, a second reaction occurs when the outter cast starts to react. Now if the outter case is depleted U then the bomb is called a "clean bomb) (hahahaha) but if it is enreiched U it is called a dirty bomb. You get a bigger bang for your buck with a dirty bomb.

cheers

[Vauss]

I responded to your comment about the idea that thousands of people will die and that the place will be uninhabitable. You don't know what you are talking about. What is interesting is that during the 1970's and 1980's I used to have this conversation with anti-nuclear power people all the time. I remember this one guy in technology review, a PHD, he said, who had worked on the bomb back in the 40's. He made the idiotic claim that radiation levels 10 times normal background would result in millions of deaths and be a catastrophe. When I pointed out studies in journals such as Radiation Biology (name could be off, its been awhile) on places in Brazil with 10 times normal background (about 2 rem a year), which showed no increase in cancer deaths whatsoever, he wrote me a somewhat sputtering apology.

To reiterate: Anyone who thinks a radiological bomb, i.e., a bomb with explosives at its core and nuclear waste around it, is somehow going to cause massive casualties from radiation exposure and make an area uninhabitable, does not know what they are talking about. Do the research.

[Texaggie79]

Good 'ole Stone Cold has been known to drop the "dirty bomb" every now and then. Clears out restrooms for HOURS!

[DrCarl]

>I responded to your comment about the idea that thousands of people will die and that the place will be uninhabitable. You don't know what you are talking about.

Have you ever been to midtown Manhattan?

Once again, if it must be, I really do hope it's outside your door, unless you live near me.

[BearPaw1]

Yea, they do but it is small pellets that look like deer poop. Most people think goats are dirty but it's really only the males.The buck is yucky and smelly. Goats don't stand in the creek water, muddy it up, poop in it like cows do either.

[blam]

Thanks for the very informative input. I knew that someone who knew this 'stuff' would come along. So, we should start taking KI ahead of any expected radiation exposure? Also, if we're attacked with radiation weapons, wouldn't our allies supply us with their KI?

[Vauss]

radioactive iodine has a half-life of 8 days, which is what makes it deadly. So first they have to get a supply (how?), then they have to use it darn quick, because in 2 months, it is useless. I wouldn't worry too much about this one.

[jpsb]

Not to worry, if the dirty bomb is just nuke waste rapped around tnt then it is not much of a threat. You have to be real close to be affected. Now if it is a real "dirty bomb" a fission/fission nuke when the threat is much more serious. Even so you'd have to be in the general area. Rule of thum, if you can see or hear the explosion your in trouble.

[TejasRose]

Even a small nuke can contaminate a very large area.

How many miles do you consider a very large area?

[DrCarl]

"Dirty bomb" could contaminate whole cities in wake of US attack - IAEA AFP

Vienna, September 21

Terrorists may try to contaminate whole cities by making a "dirty bomb" out of a combination of radioactive materials and conventional weapons, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said on Friday. "It is entirely imaginable," David Kyd, the spokesman of the International Atomic Energy Agency. He spoke after the organisation adopted a resolution at its annual general assembly underlining the necessity of extra steps to protect nuclear plants.

The Vienna-based agency, which the United States sees as a bedrock of nuclear safety, adopted the resolution as Washington counted the cost of last week's terrorist attacks on New York and Washington which cost thousands of lives.

Kyd stressed that a so-called "dirty bomb" -- which incorporates radioactive material in a conventional explosive -- so far never been used by terrorists "or even by Saddam Hussein".

The IAEA pointed to the importance of "physical protection in preventing the unauthorised removal of nuclear material and the sabotage of nuclear facilities and nuclear marerials by individuals or groups."

Kyd said that if such a bomb were used the town affected would be uninhabitable.

"The bomb would contaminate with radioactivity the area in which it detonates. It could affect the ability of a population to live in the area until it is decontaminated."

Washington, which pooh-poohs many UN agencies, sees the IAEA as essential to its national security interests and had dispatched its Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham to the meeting.

The United States had sought adoption of a hard-hitting declaration against the terrorists suspected of carrying out last week's attacks, but realising that this would not receive the support of the 132 member organisation, which include many Arab states, agreed that its demands be watered down into a more general resolution on the necessity of protecting nuclear installations.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

"Where will it be and what will you do?"

It doesn't matter to me what anyone except George W. Bush does.
If an explosive device utilizing any type of nuclear material is detonated in this country, I expect...no, DEMAND a swift and severe nuclear response visited upon those responsible.

[blackbart.223]

Good point. Above ground tests were conducted in southern Nevada for years and although certain ground there isn't all that safe, there hasn't been much of a problem otherwise. The bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were dirty by todays standards, yet both cities are occupied to this day.

[Mr.E]

Our enemy will strike where there is the biggest Jewish popultion. And that is where I live.. NYC metro area... I'm not going to the Mall tomorrow...

[jpsb]

Yup, and daddy Bush lives here, too. I've always figure a nuke would someday go off in the Huston Ship channel. Too bad cause my house is water front on Galveston Bay. Oh well, but I think I am far enough away from the refineries and such, about five miles maybe more. I figure I've got about five seconds to get away from the glass and get into the center of the house.

[Osinski]

Large trucks should be prohibited from any route within ten miles of any major downtown, immediately.

Shuts off food supply.

[DrCarl]

Vienna, September 21

Terrorists may try to contaminate whole cities by making a "dirty bomb" out of a combination of radioactive materials and conventional weapons, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said on Friday. "It is entirely imaginable," David Kyd, the spokesman of the International Atomic Energy Agency. He spoke after the organisation adopted a resolution at its annual general assembly underlining the necessity of extra steps to protect nuclear plants.

The Vienna-based agency, which the United States sees as a bedrock of nuclear safety, adopted the resolution as Washington counted the cost of last week's terrorist attacks on New York and Washington which cost thousands of lives.

Kyd stressed that a so-called "dirty bomb" -- which incorporates radioactive material in a conventional explosive -- so far never been used by terrorists "or even by Saddam Hussein".

The IAEA pointed to the importance of "physical protection in preventing the unauthorised removal of nuclear material and the sabotage of nuclear facilities and nuclear marerials by individuals or groups."

Kyd said that if such a bomb were used the town affected would be uninhabitable.

"The bomb would contaminate with radioactivity the area in which it detonates. It could affect the ability of a population to live in the area until it is decontaminated."

Washington, which pooh-poohs many UN agencies, sees the IAEA as essential to its national security interests and had dispatched its Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham to the meeting.

The United States had sought adoption of a hard-hitting declaration against the terrorists suspected of carrying out last week's attacks, but realising that this would not receive the support of the 132 member organisation, which include many Arab states, agreed that its demands be watered down into a more general resolution on the necessity of protecting nuclear installations.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

"Anyone who thinks a radiological bomb...is somehow going to cause massive casualties from radiation exposure and make an area uninhabitable, does not know what they are talking about."

Maybe not. But would you want to inhabit an area that has been fouled by one of these devices?
Neither would I.

[Terriergal]

If they do this, they are toast. Like, yesterday. It would be unbelieveably stupid for them to do this (not that that means they wouldn't). I would think it would cause their enemies (us and everyone else) to coalesce into their worst nightmare.

[DrCarl]

Vienna, September 21

Terrorists may try to contaminate whole cities by making a "dirty bomb" out of a combination of radioactive materials and conventional weapons, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said on Friday. "It is entirely imaginable," David Kyd, the spokesman of the International Atomic Energy Agency. He spoke after the organisation adopted a resolution at its annual general assembly underlining the necessity of extra steps to protect nuclear plants.

The Vienna-based agency, which the United States sees as a bedrock of nuclear safety, adopted the resolution as Washington counted the cost of last week's terrorist attacks on New York and Washington which cost thousands of lives.

Kyd stressed that a so-called "dirty bomb" -- which incorporates radioactive material in a conventional explosive -- so far never been used by terrorists "or even by Saddam Hussein".

The IAEA pointed to the importance of "physical protection in preventing the unauthorised removal of nuclear material and the sabotage of nuclear facilities and nuclear marerials by individuals or groups."

Kyd said that if such a bomb were used the town affected would be uninhabitable.

"The bomb would contaminate with radioactivity the area in which it detonates. It could affect the ability of a population to live in the area until it is decontaminated."

Washington, which pooh-poohs many UN agencies, sees the IAEA as essential to its national security interests and had dispatched its Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham to the meeting.

The United States had sought adoption of a hard-hitting declaration against the terrorists suspected of carrying out last week's attacks, but realising that this would not receive the support of the 132 member organisation, which include many Arab states, agreed that its demands be watered down into a more general resolution on the necessity of protecting nuclear installations.