[ RadSafe ] RE: Proliferation
BLHamrick at aol.com
BLHamrick at aol.com
Fri Jul 11 20:34:42 CDT 2008
I don't think the choices you outline below are the only choices. I think
that this generation perceives the suicide attacks of the last 10 or so years
to be something unique in the history of mankind. I think this is a
misperception. I think the Kamikaze pilots of World War II were regarded with similar
fear and disbelief. I expect one would find a repetition of these type of
attacks throughout history, if one were inclined to look.
I think we need to be more realistic in our threat assessment. Whoever has
an advantage in this world will always be a target. Whether it's the threat
of suicide bombers, or rogue nuclear weapons, and whether from a
predominantly Muslim community, or Japanese community, or the Communists, or the Timothy
McVeigh's of our own country, we will always be at risk, so long as we have
something of value. The question for us, in my opinion, is not how we ensure
we are all safe for all time (which is not possible), but how, in the face
of so many people's fears, do we maintain those things which made this country
great to begin with (our freedom, our rule of law, our checks and balances,
and our tolerance of difference).
To bring this back around to radiation safety, I think that this country has
spent a ridiculous amount of money looking for an ineffective weapon (i.e.,
an RDD), while failing to adequately address planning for the aftermath of a
potentially significant event (i.e., an IND). I believe we have done this,
because finding radioactive material in any form is easy, while finding an
actual IND or planning for it's potential detonation is difficult. One of the
reasons we keep chasing our tails in this manner is because it is politically
expedient to act as though one is protecting the public by "picking the
low-hanging fruit" (i.e., the RDDs). By doing this, in the end, we aren't really
adding anything to the public health and safety; in fact, we are diverting
resources from issues that do have a health and safety impact. We are hurting
ourselves in the name of protecting ourselves, and apparently hoping the
public never knows the difference. That's insulting to the profession of health
physics and insulting to the public, in my opinion.
I think this country is destroying its greatest value by succumbing to fear,
and I'm terribly sorry to see that happening.
Barbara L. Hamrick
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety,
deserve neither liberty." - Benjamin Franklin
"The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." - Franklin Roosevelt
In a message dated 7/11/2008 12:33:10 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
garyi at trinityphysics.com writes:
If you wish to rebut my post, allow me to suggest some ways to prove me
wrong. You could
show that with any of the following:
= non-muslims are just as likely to be suicide bombers.
= there are no muslim suicide bombers, its just an urban myth or a Dan
= suicide bombers are a genetic flaw that is quickly being removed from the
= strapping a bomb to your child is really an expression of international
= if we give money to terrorists, they will decide that they really like
infidels (maybe as pets).
= its ok for jihadists to kill us because OUR heaven is better than theirs.
**************Get the scoop on last night's hottest shows and the live music
scene in your area - Check out TourTracker.com!
More information about the RadSafe