[ RadSafe ] Neutron Bomb used on Fallujah

John R Johnson idias at interchange.ubc.ca
Thu Nov 24 14:20:51 CST 2011


You should also mention that "naturally occurring " U contains U-235. 
Otherwise, how ccould we enrich it?


-----Original Message----- 
From: alstonchris at netscape.net
Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2011 4:12 PM
To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Neutron Bomb used on Fallujah


Thanks for your usual calm, well informed, and carefully considered 
discussion of the matter.  I might only add that the article is really 
baffling in that it refers to the U in question as being simultaneously 
"weapons-grade" and "slightly enriched".  These are mutually exclusive 


> It is sad that people who promote this kind of thing don't bother to> 
> google what they are talking about.  A "neutron bomb" isn't some magic> 
> people-killing-building-leaving device; it is a low yield nuclear> weapon, 
> optimized for neutron production.  If one had been set off in> Fallujah, 
> everyone who was interested would have known about it, and the> evidence 
> would be incontrovertible.>> The first clues would have been pretty 
> distinctive: the mushroom cloud,> really, REALLY loud explosion and flash 
> (even compared to the other> explosions and flashes) and an 
> electro-magnetic pulse that would have> fried most electronics for miles 
> around.  Given that almost every> American in the area was carrying some 
> personal electronics such as cell> phones, computers, GPS units, etc., if 
> there had been an EMP, it would> have been noticed.  Someone would have 
> talked.  In addition to the US, I> would guess there are at least four 
> countries with satellites that could> detect and identify t
he EMP from a nuke, and probably as many> corporations (and it may be as 
high as 10 countries).  There would also> be a fairly distinctive blast 
damage pattern at ground zero.>> Second, given the fairly short range of a 
neutron dose high enough to be> fatal in the short term (and if you are in 
the middle of a battle you> don't use thing with latency periods in years or 
decades, as you want to> kill your targets now, to make them stop shooting 
at you), the weapon> would have to be detonated fairly close to the ground. 
This means LOTS> of fallout.  Easily detectable levels of short lived 
isotopes would have> been seen probably a couple thousand miles downwind. 
No matter which> way the wind was blowing, there are countries that would be 
willing to> blow the whistle on the event.>> Third, one of the things about 
neutron bombs is high neutron flux in the> target area (that is the whole 
point, after all).  High neutron flux> means lots of activation of material 
in that area, wit
h characteristic> isotopes.  A lot of them are short lived, but there would 
be enough to> increase the gamma background, and detectable with a hand held 
gamma> spec device for quite some time after.>> No, the best explanation for 
finding U235 in samples is that it is> naturally occurring.>

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: 

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: 

More information about the RadSafe mailing list