Nuclear bomb EMP. So what?
so a lot of danger and very little is being done to limit the possable damage
in the 50's cold war class room we were taught to duck and cover other wise known as bend over and kiss your a$$ goodby
fallout shelters and rad meters were known ways to limit or control exposures
now in the terror filled new century we hear very little about real problems
like EMPs and are busy checking little old ladys for nail clippers at airports
we think inside our box about preventing repete attacks but very little about new forms of attack like EMPs
in fact that sums up the NEO-CONed agenda look backwards but do not look forwards
A lot of danger? I see no danger at all.
Remember blackout here on the east coast few years ago ? I was just finishing my grocery shoping at the store and cashier just gave me receipt the time was 16:14 hours.
sure was fun and unusual without electricity, but we knew it is just matter of days that they going to fix all the problems, but with EMP it is different all electric equipment is actually damaged beyond repair(melted), back to the stone age guys.
The idea of an EMP-only weapon has only very recently, and some think its still only a rumor, come to the technological forefront for the US military. An EMP bomb is much harder to create then the movies will tell you.
And in fact that sums up the NEO-CONed agenda look backwards but do not look forwards makes me think you know little about the actual problema nd simply pulled a lisa simpson and saw an article about something and assumed it had to be some political parties fault and that it was a major problem.
no man, after reading that article I simply realized how vurneable we are.
as to who might do such a trick on us after 9/11... who knows.
We're as vulnerable to it as we are to most any other weapon to tell you teh truth. What saves us is the fact that we have the largest military in the world. This means if a country ever decided to get the technology or give it to someone or help someone like a terrorist use a weapon like that, thats it, they'd be whiped off the face of teh earth. Or well, that or get a slap on the wrist... depending on whos in power in teh US
Absolutely! Even if the threat were real and imminent, how much fun would it be to live in a world after such an attack? I'm definitely up for some back-to-basics bushcraft
So what? A meteor the size of texas would wipe out life on earth. Should I care? Only if there is a reasonable chance of it happening - and there isn't a reasonable chance of either a meteor the size of Texas hitting us or someone setting off an emp bomb over Oaklahoma.
i'm not saying 9/11 was an inside job, but this EMP is excellent way to controll masses in case americans start to revolt against war mongers in Washington.
Shhh. Don't tell anyone about this: I made an EMP weapon in my garage. I plan on using my Pegause (the flying horse type) to drop my newly created weapon on Canada. Gosh darn Canadians with their French signs and open wildernesses!!!
Seriously, this is another example of the "run about, scream and shout" live in constant fear mentality. Heck, if you are afraid of an EMP weapon then you should 'really' be afraid of water supply sabotage!!! Or, you should really be afraid of simply crashing a car and killing yourself(this happens more often than people seem to realize).
Why live in fear of mythological weapons carried by whisper powered black helicopters when you are surrounded by real life objects and situations that are more dangerous than these pseudo dangers that present themselves at the whim of the internet?
I think what you have to take a critical look at here is the level of technology involved.
First, a 10-megaton warhead is going to be a hydrogen (aka fusion) bomb. This is a pellet of lithium/deuterium located within a spherical core of plutonium. The plutonium must be compressed symmetrically (using sophisticated explosives and detonators, and all sorts of other tricks) to first create a nuclear fission explosion, which will in turn ignite the deuterium triggering the second (and by far more powerful) stage of the explosion. This level of technology is light-years ahead of the simple single-stage gun-type devices we're worried N. Korea or Iran may be developing. Simply put, this is not something 2 guys build in a cave. This is a multi-billion dollar project that requires hundreds of workers and sophisticated technological facilities.
The second issue is rocket technology. The first thermonuclear bomb to reach or exceed a 10 MT yield was dubbed 'Castle Bravo' (link here.) The weight of the warhead was 23,500 pounds/10660 kg. To get something like this into Low Earth Orbit, you'd need something along the lines of a Titan III Rocket (link here.) This type of rocket is not cheap and not small. It's most certainly *not* something you can just put in an 18-wheeler and move around.
In short, there's a reason that the US, USSR, and China (to a lesser extent) spent billions upon billions of dollars to develop these technologies. They're not cheap and they require a significant amount of infrastructure to develop.
Navy physicist James Marusek believes there is a reasonable chance of a large Earth impactor and a reasonable chance that we could continue civilization if we prepared for it. He also says that one of the effects of Earth impactors is EMP.
So is every military in the world for their respective citizens. Dont you ever have anything to say that isnt directed at the Republicans in the white house?
hey common ! what's the difference between dem and rep ? none. Btw i'm not into politics i was just wondering what are your views on EMP weapons.
Therse a huge difference. Ones blue, ones red! how can you get more different then that. And ones a friggen elephant and anothers symbol is a donkey. You have so much to learn about american politics :-/ lol. But anyhow, yes, there is a huge difference unless these people who complain "ewww evil neocons!!' mean both parties. And why are you making statements about politics of a different nation if your not even into politics into the first place. And EMP weapons are as big of a problem as thermonuclear weapons. Case in point, what russ said i believe....
the fact is EMPs are a old problem the USA has refused to deal with
I first heard of the threat when a mig 25 was flown out of china
for a CIA million $ reward many years ago
our hi-teck boys were LOLROTFL at the old teck vac tube radio in the mig
intill it was pointed out to them EMPs would wipe out the new chiped
gear in our f-15's and the mig 25's vac tube unit would still work fine :rofl:
hopefully our new hi-teck fighters have better EMP protection today
but very little of our civilian stuff does :surprised
and it is not nessary to build a H-bomb just steal one
and that may not be very hard
or just steal the codes to set off a allready orbiting H-bomb
perhaps the eazyest way to do it :surprised
I don't see where he predicts the probability, but few people with knowledge of the subject really doubt that large impacts will happen again. The question is simply when, or, what are the odds for any particular year/century?
penguwino !! if you have anything interesting to say, say it.
I never havea nything interesting to say!
Except ray_b's response is rather confusing. When did they start putting Hydrogen bombs in orbit and when did they all of a sudden become so legal that their security is lax?
That's what the national guard is for. The best-known instance of a president using it against a citizenry that he thought might revolt (but was not at the time revolting) was Herbert Hoover and the Bonus Marchers.
The ubiquititous question of how much insurance expenditure is optimal
His case for preparation for NEO threat seems to me to be that discrete probablility of NEO impact is irrelevant given that the results would be catastrophic to human civilization and that preparation sufficient to save human civilization can be made at minimal expense.
The question of whether or not we should do anything would seem to hinge on the NEO insurance expenditure bang-for-the-buck curve and and how willing we are to invest in insurance. All human enterprises have to deal with the question of how much insurance expenditure is optimal. Marusek has submitted for our consideration the notion that optimal NEO insurance expenditure may be something greater than zero.
Separate names with a comma.