| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| How Bad Would A Radiological Terror Attack Be? |
| 2016-04-05 |
| Something pleasant to start off your week. Design your own terror attack here. |
| Posted by:Vast Right Wing Conspiracy |
| #13 Mainstream Americans whom went through or grew up during the US-vs-USSR/Soviet Union Cold War will likely be most frightful of anything Nukulaar or Radiological - in reality BIOWAR would be the worst. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2016-04-05 21:06 |
| #12 Don't you mean "factor" rather than "order of magnitude" Rob? Cause 10 orders of magnitude 10^10. |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2016-04-05 16:01 |
| #11 No one has died from Fukushima -- the panic and fear-mongering was ten or twelve orders of magnitude worse than the reality. As for a solar event -- ain't nothing man-made that can match nature. |
| Posted by: Rob Crawford 2016-04-05 15:34 |
| #10 here...is not found. Fixed. Enjoy! |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2016-04-05 14:24 |
| #9 The most dangerous place on Earth Pakiwakiland has supplied tactical nukes to its captains on the border without secure controls back to the president. The captains have control. |
| Posted by: 3dc 2016-04-05 10:53 |
| #8 Does anybody think that terrorists could do a better job than TEPCO (Fukushima) has already done? Or than an EMP (attack or solar eruption, you pick) will do? (were those days are not shortend, no flesh would survive) |
| Posted by: skeezix4089 2016-04-05 10:30 |
| #7 Been there, seen it, done it. It's largely hysterics driven by (you know who) the MSM and Hollyweird. Fear sells. For those in need Google FM 3-05.70 Survival, for Chapter 23, SURVIVAL IN MAN-MADE HAZARDS. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2016-04-05 08:41 |
| #6 Personally, I'd introduce it into the air conditioning system during a UN General Assembly meeting. I don't know Phil - the radioactive isotopes will probably get pretty sick... |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2016-04-05 08:37 |
| #5 #3 and #4 - you'll be glad to know an article in Scientific American came to the same conclusion 15-20 years ago. The amount of unusable real estate would be pretty small and dependent on the wind. Some real estate is both very expensive and densely populated. |
| Posted by: Bobby 2016-04-05 08:14 |
| #4 More people will be killed in car crashes as panicked people flee than by a dirty bomb. Personally, I'd introduce it into the air conditioning system during a UN General Assembly meeting. Might as well do some good. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2016-04-05 06:39 |
| #3 feh. The worst damage from such a device would be the collateral damage from the panicky over-reaction of the "Civil Authorities" and the ignorant & gullible urbanites. If you do manage to get dusted by one, just walk away upwind, jettison your clothes before entering your house or other shelter and take a shower immediately. Do not attempt to retrieve your clothes. More detailed instructions on how to handle contamination can be quickly looked up on the inter-tubes. These things were looked at repeatedly ever since the early 1950's, and were determined to be "Of propaganda value only". |
| Posted by: Nguard 2016-04-05 02:24 |
| #2 http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/ |
| Posted by: Thing Angulet1502 2016-04-05 02:05 |
| #1 here...is not found. So many opportunities though: 1) Spread it where people will access it. Not a bomb, thats too local. 2) Maybe a watersupply? Again local, unless its the water used to deice airplanes. Then the plane and operators are out of commission, as will be the flight facility. That's a pretty big group. 3) Most any harbor with handling equipment for offloading container ships. Contaminate the equipment and force another destination, thereby destroying cost schedules, schedule lead times, consuming more fuel and impacting the arrival gates of the 2nd port of interest. 4) Tossed from the overpass onto the roof of any innercity people mover will get the equipment, the riders, the tracks and tunnels, and will also generate a plume for the neighborhood in which it travels. Though they can be the same, there are different benefits to targeting people or infrastructure. Dirty-nuke a bus station and and the facility is out of work with some people sick. Get it into the water supply of a small city and you bring near-term radiation illness to the locals and it gets some news, maybe. Make more bombs and change the batteries in the 'football' and we get the scenarios represented in 1950s science fiction. |
| Posted by: Skidmark 2016-04-05 00:52 |