|
Whats all the fuss about "dirty bombs" then?!
|
View this Thread in Original format
| George Smiley |
Apparently, unless you are injured by the initial blast, dirty bombs are harmless. To even just get sick you would have to stand in that same position where the bomb went off for one year!
So...if a dirty bomb goes off in your town...dont panic!...dont evacuate!...
Have a shower, wash your clothes and put the kettle on!
Washington Post |
|
|
| LiveTheDream |
Yea the goverment feeds us info that is not true, to give them reason to go to war with people who may try to do such a thing. There say Bush goverment planed the attack on the twin tower, to justefie a war on terrer, i think that would be insane if true, but it does exsplan Bushs reastions when he heard about the attack, he must of know about the possiblity of an attack by looking at his body langue, but to plan them himself?:nervous:
But yea, if you whant to keep contral of a large poplation, fear is the best way. |
|
|
| ::TranceVanDyk:: |
| actually, the hype is that the dirty bomb has the potential to cause illness. but thats not the main purpose of the bomb. its purpose is psychological. It would cause panic, because many people equate a dirty bomb to a nuclear bomb even though it doesnt have a nuclear explosion. its just uninformed people. |
|
|
| wolverine16 |
I'm glad it's not as bad as thought, I was worried after all of them went off to scare us into voting for Kerry...oh wait, that was just a lie from the Bush administration that there was going to be a certain attack to help Kerry. I love the "vote for us if no attacks happen because we keep you safer than the other guy, but vote for us too if something does happen because we think the terrorists want the other guy to win" plan. You can't lose!
Seriously though, has anything happened in the Jose Padilla case lately? He's been detained for a long time now for allegedly trying to build one of those, then they said he had other plans in addition to building a dirty bomb. Does he ever get a trial? |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| Smiley is right to question the validity of effectiveness, and the ones who are in the know, scientists and terror specialists have raised the same questions. it's just that terrorist don't fully understand this. their objective is just to do it. hence the concern. |
|
|
| drizzt81 |
| quote: | Originally posted by wolverine16
Does he ever get a trial? |
he is an 'enemy combatant' hence due process doesn't apply... or something like that. |
|
|
| wolverine16 |
| quote: | Originally posted by drizzt81
he is an 'enemy combatant' hence due process doesn't apply... or something like that. |
Yes, he was labeled that, but there was a court ruling that gave a lot of the prisoners at Guantanimo Bay the right to trial. Does the enemy combatant label still prevent him from trial in light of that? |
|
|
| St_Andrew |
| quote: | Originally posted by ::TranceVanDyk::
its just uninformed people. |
like your current government...? |
|
|
| ::TranceVanDyk:: |
| quote: | Originally posted by St_Andrew
like your current government...? |
actually, i think the beauracracy of the Department of Homeland Security headed by Tom Ridge keeps us very well informed through CNN.:rolleyes: |
|
|
| auujay |
| quote: | Originally posted by wolverine16
Yes, he was labeled that, but there was a court ruling that gave a lot of the prisoners at Guantanimo Bay the right to trial. Does the enemy combatant label still prevent him from trial in light of that? |
I thought the ruling gave the detainees the right to sue the government but I am not sure if it gave them the right to a trial for the crimes they are charged with. |
|
|
| Dervish |
| quote: | Originally posted by George Smiley
Apparently, unless you are injured by the initial blast, dirty bombs are harmless. To even just get sick you would have to stand in that same position where the bomb went off for one year!
So...if a dirty bomb goes off in your town...dont panic!...dont evacuate!...
Have a shower, wash your clothes and put the kettle on!
Washington Post |
1) It is a weapon of terror not war. I.e. the percived danger/damage is the reason it would be used.
2) Put it on a big pile of natural resourses, say oil (place it right say Iraq (Formally 2nd greatest oil producer in the world I belive), and make them unuseable for many many years. I.e. put up the price of oil and make the then president and most western (i.e. unholy infidel) rulers in a world of .
Not fun. :sadgreen: |
|
|
| George Smiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dervish
1) It is a weapon of terror not war. I.e. the percived danger/damage is the reason it would be used.
2) Put it on a big pile of natural resourses, say oil (place it right say Iraq (Formally 2nd greatest oil producer in the world I belive), and make them unuseable for many many years. I.e. put up the price of oil and make the then president and most western (i.e. unholy infidel) rulers in a world of .
Not fun. :sadgreen: |
I think you are confusing a "dirty bomb" with a Nuclear weapon!
The whole point is that these bombs are exactly the same as any other bomb (obviously that is a concern but not the concern they are leading us to believe) A "dirty bomb" is not radioactive enough to contaminate anything to a dangerous level! As the scientist in the article states, if a "dirty bomb" did go off, assuming you weren't killed in the explosion, all you would have to do is take a shower and wash your clothes to get rid of the radiation! To die as a result of said radiation, you would have to stand on that same spot for a year!
A "dirty bomb" is NOT a nuclear explosion... |
|
|
|
|
