[ RadSafe ] Dirty Bomb Material Crosses Border

Gerry Blackwood gpblackwood at yahoo.com
Sat Apr 1 07:30:32 CST 2006

 " I have proposed this idea on Radsafe in the past - the use of a "dirty
 bomb" would be require a significant change of personality for
 terrorists here in the early 21st century.  "
 History defines your logic.... It would not be a turn around in tactics for terrorists to go after economic targets only. UBL, AQ and its member groups have proved this time and time again... I will note the subway bombing at the G8 Summit, July 7th, 2005 and the Egyptian resort attacks on July 23, 2005,  just to name a couple. These attacks were economic terrorism and nothing other than that. Of one the key goals of the 9/11 attacks was economics. Yes body count does matter to terrorists so does chaos and a RDD would cause that.  I suggest you read the State Departments Patterns of Global Terrorism 2001. You will see that the bulk of attacks were against businesses. Economic terrorism in many cases does more damage than any body count. Worldwide its all about economics.... Also for your reading pleasure I suggest "Charlemagne and Muhammad’ (1943).... I think it say's it all.....
 As far as the assessment and cleanup goes? That remains to be seen. Yes our folk can do the job with their eyes closed. But its not about the science its about the publics perception on radiation.... Its all about perception...... And perception can be a real killer...............

"Flood, John" <FloodJR at nv.doe.gov> wrote: I have proposed this idea on Radsafe in the past - the use of a "dirty
bomb" would be require a significant change of personality for
terrorists here in the early 21st century.  A terrorist attack is
primarily a publicity stunt to focus attention on the cause to which the
terrorist is devoted.  The standard means of getting that publicity has
been the body count -  the attack needs to succeed at killing people
and, if the group responsible isn't obvious at that time, they "claim
responsibility" to ensure the desired kind of attention.

To switch to causing economic harm or the threat of a slow death instead
of immediate would be a complete turnabout.  And use of radioactive
material to contaminate an area could backfire.  The aftermath -
assessment of the immediate impact and the cleanup - may be a very good
demonstration to the public that their fears of radiation never were
necessary.  I suggest that no terrorist group cares to risk such a
colossal flop.

Given the kinds of attacks in recent years - 911, the train systems in
Europe - terrorist organizations have adequate technical expertise and
organizational skills to understand the danger to themselves if they try
to assemble and deliver a large enough dirty bomb to be spectacular, and
that the likelihood of delivering it undetected is too low to make such
an attack an attractive prospect.  They should also have enough
expertise to understand attach with a small dirty bomb could ultimately
be viewed as laughable by the population they attacked.

One man's opinion.

Bob Flood
Nevada Test Site

You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/

"Dante once said that the hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in a period of moral crisis maintain their neutrality."

More information about the RadSafe mailing list