Posted on 11/09/2001 2:18:51 AM PST by MeekOneGOP
If New York Is Nuked This past week, former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said emphatically that if the terrorist groups get a nuclear bomb, they will detonate it in New York. So, let's suppose a suitcase nuke is detonated in Manhattan. What should the civilians living in and around New York do? Should they flee outside the city? Should they run to their basements? It's also evident that an ounce of preparation now will do much more than pounds of after-the-fact rescue efforts. For some strange reason, our government is very reluctant to prepare its citizens for such a calamity, though acknowledging that such a calamity is not only possible, it's probable. Certainly the best defense against the use of such weapons should take place in intelligence and with our spies infiltrating terrorist networks. We discovered on Sept. 11, however, that thanks to Bill Clinton, America no longer has any real intelligence about these groups. The next layer of defense against such an attack is to hold the governments behind these terrorists accountable – but it's not clear that will be the case. Consider how difficult it has been to find the responsible party for the anthrax attacks. With our "perimeter" defenses weak, it's even more critical that Americans prepare for adequate civil defense. Civil defense is just that: defense prepared by citizens. Recently I was out on the West Coast and had dinner with Nancy Greene. Nancy, the widow of the late actor Lorne Green, is president of The American Civil Defense Association (TACDA). TACDA is a great organization that has raised alarm bells about the need for civil defense for decades. Nancy, a smart lady who has a keen understanding of international affairs and national security, gave me a brief history of civil defense in America. She said that real interest in civil defense first started with President Kennedy. After his first summit with Khrushchev in 1961, Kennedy was convinced the Russians were planning a nuclear attack on the U.S. He returned from his summit in a funk and became a hermit for three days. He then emerged from his silence with a plan. If America was going to survive, and millions of lives were to be saved, we would need a civil defense program. But Kennedy decided the Pentagon should not be involved. Instead, Kennedy called upon a friend on Madison Avenue to launch an education effort on how citizens could protect themselves in case of such an attack. The campaign worked, and was prescient as the nuclear tensions rose during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Since those days, America has let down its guard. We felt protected during the Cold War under an umbrella of nuclear-tipped missiles and a powerful military. Our enemy was definable. But now, terrorists are not so easily definable and they are not so afraid of retaliation, as the Russians were. Once again, government and the private sector need to go into partnership to educate citizens on how to create emergency disaster plans for their families. Extra food and water is a foundation of any planning. But how many American families have more than a week's supply, if that, on hand? It's also critical for citizens to have access to potassium iodide, necessary to prevent an agonizing death if radioactive iodine gets into the thyroid. But how many people know this? Why doesn't the government have a stockpile of potassium iodide? Perhaps a start would be for us to to discard Hollywood myths. A nuclear detonation does not mean the end of the world. The worst effects will likely not be caused by a nuclear blast, but rather by citizens unprepared and unknowledgeable about how to survive such a calamity.
Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:Christopher Ruddy
With all of the talk, some very serious from President Bush, about terrorists getting and using weapons of mass destruction against Americans, one would think the public should be prepared in case such a weapon is used.
Friday, Nov. 9, 2001
Homeland/Civil Defense
Bioterrorism
War on Terrorism
What are you talking about?
Hillary gets voted out of the Senate 60-40 in 2006.
I guess all I can do is pray it never happens.
I vote we seperate from new york city right now!!!!!11
In the first place, it is unlikely that should all the known nukes be set off simultaneously, the resulting effect would NOT destroy the world population. (I am not sure of the source nor how this was calculated.) In any event, small tactical nukes would produce the desired effect w/o large amounts of radiation.
I've heard that answer before. It would seem that the technical difficulties in hijacking planes are not as complex as the technical difficulties of smuggling nuclear weapons into the US and detonating them, at least to me...
What are you talking about?
I believe he is refering with sarcasm to the propaganda that was put out by the peace movement. In order to advance their political agenda they promoted despair and a false sense of helplessness ('In case of attack, we're all gonna die! Give up, give up now!'). Their goal was to terrify people into supporting them.
But then confusion reigns. The city is on fire, there is no evacuation plan, the people are wandering the streets and becoming irradiated from the fallout. Over the next month, the death toll climbs over a million or more.
The President will assure us that life must go on. Tom Ridge will announce that everything is under control. Tommy Thompson will declare that it's an isolated incident. The FBI will investigate non-Muslims.
Then another nuke will go off, in another city.
In panic, every major city in America will be evacuated. The President will assure us that our cities are safe and that everyone should return and act as if nothing happened. Then he will retreat into an underground bunker at an undisclosed location.
Well, I did wonder. If it were true, the first nuclear test would have finished us.
If that befuddles you, just concider that he almost surely would have been re-elected if allowed to run last time. And if he was allowed to run in the future, he would have an excellent chance to win. It is truly frightening what the people of this country really think.
Hell, I'm afraid of what half the people on this forum would do if given the chance, can you imagine my horror if the liberals were given free reign?
After concidering your proposal I find it lacking in many respects. The main one is that you are trying to concider what effect the proclamation would have on a potential enemy but not taking into account the unanticipated response of them, and others.
In your senerio any person or small group of persons who wanted to effect worldwide chaos and perhaps almost total destruction of modern civilation could achieve that goal with one bomb. Something they could never achieve under any other circumstances.
Keep in mind that this kind of mind is unconcerned with it's own destruction. Further, a nation not on the list who wanted to vanquish an enemy who was on the list but who had no hope of victory over that enemy by other means would be encouraged to attack us to have us do their dirty work.
That is the reason wise leaders never box themselves into such corners.
Pictures?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.