[ RadSafe ] Benefit/Harm from U.S.A Hot Pursuit

[HOWARD.LONG at comcast.net]

As personal physician to many LLivermore Nat.Lab scientists and engineers over the last 48 years, I am deeply grateful for their proven prevention of world-wide nuclear holcaust. They also prevented take-over of Europe by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. 

A USA Presidential candidate who was in a carrier aircraft cockpit, ready to respond with nuclear weapon during the Cuba Crisis, reminds us that those who know war best, want it least and will best avoid it.  Deterrance by USA Strategic Defense Initiative  and submarine, aircraft and ballistic nuclear weapons kept Franz from having to learn Russian (or worse). 

Shame on European freeloaders, who even now let the USA bear most costs of restraining extremists like the Taliban, alQaeda and Iranian dictators. The latter plan destruction of all Americans and Europeans who refuse Sharia, and seek nuclear weapons to do so.

 "Surveillance", "Ugly American" and "proposals to attack" would seem the opposite of my record, to those who know me, but not to Franz and Peter, who imagine much from my summation below of how the USA and Europe benefit from hot pursuit of bombers (as do the citizens of Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran). 

Howard Long
-------------- Original message -------------- 
From: Franz Schönhofer <franz.schoenhofer at chello.at> 

> RADSAFERs, 
> 
> I try to comment on Howard Longs political excursion from a context 
> including radioactivity and nuclear topics - they are involved indeed and I 
> hope that Marcel accepts this opinion. 
> 
> Reading Howard Longs bla-bla about "liberation, freedom, democracy, net gain 
> for the US, "prosperity" (for whom?)" is annoying and only shows that he has 
> not the slightest clue about the situation of states, their infrastructure, 
> the living conditions of their inhabitants, diseases, poverty, risk for life 
> etc. Etc. Howard Long is a typical species called "The Ugly American", a 
> term created to my knowledge by Graham Greene in one of his books, where he 
> gives an excellent characterisation of this type of American set against the 
> background of the French war in Indochina. Needless to say that I have 
> during my many visits in the USA not encountered any of these "ugly 
> americans" personally, but judging from the press and its description of US 
> politicians and of course Howard Long I know, that they exist. Needless to 
> say that people I meet are usually not of the lowest classes. But it was 
> amazing during my visit to my beloved South West last October, that most 
> people I met at the cultural and outstanding landscape sites started to 
> complain about the then and still present administration, without any 
> provocation from my side. Here on RADSAFE I read about proposals to attack 
> China, Iran, Cuba and North Korea. Unbelievable - shame on you! 
> 
> I am not going to react on the "benefits" for the USA, but I have noticed 
> that a so called "radiological threat" has been used extensively by the US 
> administration to spread fear among US citizens and to gain support for the 
> most suppressive actions. All those nonsensical actions and the waste of 
> money for "surveillance" (which actually has another purpose!!!!), which are 
> obviously there only to scare people and to put them into a state of 
> insecurity. Only today morning in Rabat, the capital of Marocco they took 
> away at the airport from me a very expensive tiny scissor for nails, about 
> three centimeters long without handle. 
> 
> The possible consequences of a "dirty bomb" have been discussed extensively 
> on RADSAFE and except some hardliners agreed that the damage of this would 
> be mostly the conventional explosive - but still we read on RADSAFE about 
> the terrible threat of dispersion of some radionuclides like Co-60 or 
> iridium. 
> 
> Using this irrational fear mongering with radionuclides or nuclear material, 
> combined with ultra-nationalistic ideas is deeply despicable. I hope I made 
> myself clear Mr. Howard Long. 
> 
> Best regards, 
> 
> Franz 
> 
> Franz Schoenhofer, PhD 
> MinRat i.R. 
> Habicherg. 31/7 
> A-1160 Wien/Vienna 
> AUSTRIA 
> 
> 
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- 
> Von: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] Im Auftrag 
> von HOWARD.LONG at comcast.net 
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. Oktober 2008 17:19 
> An: Peter Bossew; Radsafe Message 
> Betreff: Re: [ RadSafe ] Benefit/Harm from U.S. Army in Afghanistan 
> 
> Radsafe pertinence of this topic is risk of radioactive attack on USA, -  need for HP preparation.. 
> 
> I respond to Peter and Steven (and the U Tube sarcastic fiction) with  gratitude that threatened attacks on USA have not occurred following so far successful (incomplete) Afghan Liberation and Iraqi Freedom - wars designed primarily to destroy alQaeda operations, but also hoping that democracy there will give freedom, trade, prosperity - disincentive to attack us. 
> 
> Not yet as feasible are the liberation (and destruction of USA or Europe attack sources) in China, Iran, Cuba and N Korea. Hopefully, commerce self-interest in China (now dependent on USA prosperity) will effectively dampen imposition of failed Marxism-Maoism. 
> 
> USA carbon fuels are as plentiful as in the Middle east, but politically restricted by fears that should go away (glaciers now enlarge).  Big Oil (most monopolistic where government-owned) will have less influence  with the 45 nuclear plants encouraged by the more free-market Presidential  campaign. 
> 
> Howard Long 
> 
> 
> -------------- Original message -------------- 
> From: Peter Bossew 
> 
> > HOWARD.LONG at comcast.net wrote: 
> The losses of any war should be balanced by anyone knowledgable in risk  management against the gains. The Iraq and Afghan wars have very great net gain. 

> > Yes. Indeed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ptzml1qQvZE 
> > 
> > Also Iran would make quite a bit of "great net gain" wouldn't it. So  would Venezuela.- I am confident you will find compelling ideological  reasons for realizing those great net gains. Hopefully these nations are  more knowledgeable in risk management than these uneducated Iraqis, and  will be able to balance their losses against your gains. 

> > Peter Bossew 
> > 
> > European Commission (EC) 
> > Joint Research Centre (JRC) 
> > Institute for Environment and Sustainability (IES) 
> > 
> > TP 441, Via Fermi 1 
> > 21020 Ispra (VA) 
> > ITALY 
> > 
> > Tel. +39 0332 78 9109 
> > Fax. +39 0332 78 5466 
> > Email: peter.bossew at jrc.it 
> > 
> > http://rem.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ 
> > 
> > "The views expressed are purely those of the writer and may not in any  circumstances be regarded as stating an official position of the European  Commission."