[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: So, is reprocessing in America's future?
Ray, I failed to express myself clearly. My reference to ignorance and
destitution was an attempt at a humorous sarcasm.. Terrorists are just as bright
and as well funded as most who would oppose them. I am distressed by the
continuing elevation of nuclear problems over other human problems that are
different, but simply not so different that such special considerations are
warranted. Yes, nuclear proliferation is nuclear proliferation, but more now to
the point is that nuclear proliferation simply *is* ....
Value judgments of good or bad are beside the point; the point is that we want
to make the best (in our opinions) possible use of the resources and tools with
which we find ourselves at any point in time. I believe, in this context, that
many of our resources are being grossly wasted. Can you not remember how our
forebears sat in the monthly council meetings debating the appropriate level of
our store of bows, arrows, and knives? (big tongue-in-cheek grin) And debating
the adequacy of our guards around that store so that those renegades across the
river could not steal them and do us in? In an historical perspective, I am
intrigued by the extent to which our resources, tools, and circumstances have
changed since those council meetings in the caves while we have not changed one
whit. We are magnificent animals, but we sure can be mean and silly little
buggers sometimes.
Your reference to the SCUD missile potential is, of course, interesting. In
point of fact, recall the special flurry of activity it did cause throughout
Israel for protective measures against gas warfare! It is equally interesting
that Iraq apparently did not attempt some form of NBC warfare.
We have not and will not stop nuclear proliferation and we never will be
completely secure against abuses of ionizing radiation - or of ultraviolet or rf
radiation, not to mention against all potential applications of NBC weapons and
conventional high explosives. If anything, by devoting such inordinate attention
to things nuclear, we create a special attraction for terrorists and mischief
makers. (If that tribe is paying such special attention to that cave, then there
really must be something in there worth going after.) I hope we can get on with
constructive applications of things nuclear while exercising reasonable (as
contrasted with inordinate) care in how we do it.
Finally, please be assured that I intended no slight on the accomplishments or
the mistaken forecasts of such lights as Smyth, Wigner, and Thirring. As is true
for all of us, their humanity preceded their professionalism.
With sincere best regards,
Maury Siskel maury@webtexas.com
======================== reply separator ================
Raymond Shadis wrote:
> Count among those destitute terrorists nuclear pioneers, H.D Smyth and E.P.
> Wigner, who three days after Pearl Harbor wrote a report concluding that the
> fission products formed in only a single day of operating a nuclear reactor
> at a power of 100,000 kilowatts might be enough to render a large area
> uninhabitable. In 1948, the brilliant Hans Thirring published a paper
> describing the potential in the dispersal of short-lived fission products
> to force evacuation of enemy cities.
>
> Nuclear proliferation is nuclear proliferation.
>
> It is doubtful terrorists or terrorist nations are very much interested in a
> clean, high-yield bomb. Consider what might have followed by way of response
> if the SCUD missle that hit the US installation in Saudi Arabia during the
> Gulf War had a nuclear component to it, either a very poor bomb or just a
> load of mixed fission products.
> Ray
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: maury <maury@WEBTEXAS.COM>
> To: <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>
> Sent: Friday, July 06, 2001 12:28 PM
> Subject: Re: So, is reprocessing in America's future?
>
> >
> > Amen - well put. There is no real issue here, but the various interested
> > parties will keep it "alive" anyway. It is kind of amusing to note the
> > wide
> > range of imagination and creativity shown in the process. And it is
> > always
> > remarkable how ignorant these destitute terrorists are.
> > Cheers, Maury Siskel maury@webtexas.com
> > ====================================
> > PBarring@KDHE.STATE.KS.US wrote:
> >
> > > This is just my two cents, since everyone else is piping in. What needs
> to
> > > be said is that if somebody REALLY wants fissionable material, for a
> device
> > > or just to scatter isotopes all over the place, they WILL get it.
> You're
> > > not dealing with cretins. You are dealing with educated leaders,
> > > knowledgeable support personnel and LOTS of money. Reprocessing is not
> the
> > > problem, or at least not the problem the press makes it out to be.
> There
> > > is already plenty of material out there available for use, and for a lot
> > > less trouble and expense than stealing it from a reprocessing facility
> or
> > > fuel shipment. Heck, if I were a terrorist I could make plenty of
> people
> > > miserable and scared by touching-off a plain old chemical bomb with
> medical
> > > isotopes and source material strapped to it. People don't care how the
> > > radiation is spread around or even what the isotopes are, all they know
> is
> > > that radiation is evil stuff and that we all lie. Again, we need to
> > > educate people. Maybe we should start with the press corps.
> > >
> > > "Just my humble opinions. Nothing I say is endorsed by my employer. I
> > > also DO NOT endorse terrorism."
> > >
> > > Phil
> > >
> > > ************************************************************************
************************************************************************
You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.