|
Eco-Terrorism
|
View this Thread in Original format
| occrider |
There seems to be a rise in the number of organized vandalisms and acts of eco-terrorism as of late. There have been several cases in the past where vandals have set fire to car parks, apartment buildings, etc.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/artic...1954EDT0158.DTL
Anyway recentely 2 protestors were arrested trying to "dismantle" a british nuclear submarine
http://www.thisisdevon.co.uk/displa...ntentPK=7149166
That blatant lack of understanding of the dangers involved with screwing around with dangerous substances is somewaht unnerving. Does anyone think that this could lead to a situation of virulent viruses or diseases being released to the public? What are all of your opinions on the issue?
:nervous: |
|
|
| fuct4less |
| hahaha elf seems to be only worsesning situations. what ever happened to the peaceful protesters? |
|
|
| occrider |
| quote: | Originally posted by fuct4less
hahaha elf seems to be only worsesning situations. what ever happened to the peaceful protesters? |
Yea really, they preach for a clean environment and then they go and burn down a car park of hummers and release toxins into the air. Wtf ... not like them putting one dealer out of the business is going to effect consumer demand for the product. |
|
|
| MrSquirrel |
No time to read the srticles right now (I have a dentist appointment in 15 minutes) but I will say that I do agree that the whole idea of "Eco-Terrorism" makes no sense to me. The whole concept of deliberately doing damage to the environment as a "proof" that someone else is doing damage is illogical and counter-intuitive.
Of course, some of these idiots (I call them idiots because a true environmentalist knows better) have no clue that they can cause exponentially higher amounts of damage by tampering with the safeguards (however few they may be) around these "ecologically dangerous" substances.
Makes me think they have been watching 12 Monkeys a few too many times :crazy:
MrS |
|
|
| LiquidX |
| - Funny, I just got home, and was listening to the news in my car, and heard about the ELF's burning this luxury homes been built in San Diego, CA, and vandelizing the Hummers and such.. that was funny.. they got it with the hummers. |
|
|
| occrider |
| quote: | Originally posted by LiquidX
- Funny, I just got home, and was listening to the news in my car, and heard about the ELF's burning this luxury homes been built in San Diego, CA, and vandelizing the Hummers and such.. that was funny.. they got it with the hummers. |
The truly sad part is that the brunt of the impact of eco-terrorism is borne by the community ... not the indivual they are trying to punish. For every home they burn down or automobile they vandalize insurance rates go up. But I think they primarily committ such acts for media attention. |
|
|
| MrSquirrel |
Ok...read the two articles.
All I can say is I am creeped out.
The ELF one was not as creepy as the "Trident Ploughshares" one. I actually chuckled when I read abotu the dude stealing cats....made me think of C.L.I.T. from Jay& Silent Bob Striek Back :toothless
The anti-nuclear people are totally off their rockers if they think they can actually "disarm" a Trident sub. Just for "grins" I did a little refreshing on what the nuclear payload is on a typical Trident.
| quote: | Trident II (D5) - General Characteristics
Primary Function: Strategic Nuclear Deterrence
Contractor: Lockheed Missiles and Space Co., Inc., Sunnyvale, Calif.
Unit Cost: $30.9 million
Power Plant: Three-stage solid-propellant rocket
Length: 44 feet (13.41 meters)
Weight: 130,000 pounds (58,500 kg)
Diameter: 83 inches (2.11 meters)
Range: Greater than 7400 kilometers (4,600 statute miles)
Guidance System: Inertial
Warhead: Nuclear MIRV. Up to eight W88 (475 kt) warheads (Mark 5).
Date Deployed: 1990 |
Let's see....2 people (who obviously have never even seen a movie set on a missle sub or they would know how dumb they are) are going to somehow get into the launch tube, remove the nose cone, and then somehow finaggle 8 "warheads" (which are roughly the size of a midget and weigh considerably more :D) out of the missle compartment. They are then going to do this 15 more times (the Vanguard class is equipped with 16 launch tubes) and somehow get all of this rather heavy and bulky hardware past security.
Now just for the sake of argument (because anyone short of superman would never be able to accomplish this) let us say hypothetically that they did get one of the MIRVs out of the sub. What are they going to do with it now? Probably try to dismantle it...in their flat in central london no doubt. Knowing that the US Department of Energy technicians who take apart nuclear weapons do it in a hardened bunker 1000 ft. below the earth in case something "goes awry" (these are experts in nuclear weapon deismantling) we should do a little math to see what would happen if these "environmentalists" were to cut the proverbial "blue wire" instead of the "red wire":
1 W88 warhead has a theorectial yield of 475 kT.
The London Metropolitan area is approximately 607 sq miles in size.
London has roughly 12 million people.
Comparative analysis to the largest Atomic event (of two) in history: Nagasaki, Japan - 9 Aug. 1945 11:01 AM.
"Fat Man" had theoretical yield of 22 kT.
The blast destroyed EVERYTHING within 3 square miles.
Nagasaki had 174,000 inhabitants at the time....40,000 of which were instantly killed (another 100,000 died within 5 years as a direct result). So 23% died instantly and 80% died within 5 years.
So if this hypothetical warhead were to "go off" in central London we could expect damage along these lines:
475 ÷ 22 = 21.6 times as powerful a blast.
21.6 x 3 sq miles = 64.77 sq miles destroyed by the blast. (11% of London)
.23 (23%) x 12,000,000 inhabitants = 2,758,621 instantly dead.
.80 (80%) x 12,000,000 inhabitants = 9,600,000 dead within 5 years.
Now, to be fair, Fat Man was detonated 1,650 ft. above the ground in 1945. An aerial event is more destructive than one would be on land so let's say the blast causes 1/3 the damage (though it will make a nice hole in the ground).
1/3 of my rough figues would still be 21 square miles devastated and almost 1 million people instantly dead.
I think my picture is clear, no?
Maybe I should send this math to those retards who want to disarm nuclear subs. A modern thermonuclear device is exponentially safer if it is left where it is (i.e. in the launch tube) rather than in the hands of unknowledgable civilians.
I am all for the dismantling of nuclear arsenals, but that does not mean I can conciously support the idea of disarming the world in a vigilante fashion.
So yeah occrider, these buffoons do risk doing infinitely more damage to the environment than the things they are trying to stop.
Sigh, that was "fun" :D
MrS |
|
|
| PhloTron |
| They've been doing this stuff in the northwest for years and years....so they are either spreading...or finding new stomping grounds because we beat the crap out of too many of them...ok so i don't really know...but maybe it's a good thing that other areas are seeing first hand what morons these people are. They just don't get nat'l coverage out here where no one lives...welcome to the world of the incredibly dumb. :/ |
|
|
|
|
