[ RadSafe ] Re: [DailyBrief] Re: DHS PLANNING SCENARIOS Executive Summaries

[Gerry Blackwood]

Tom, did not mean to point you out for anything.....guess it was just my frustration with these types of documents. However here are additions to your reply.....

Never skip a point.....and as far as Point One is concerned there are some additional comments I would Like to make. 
 
The noted extent of radiation at 3000 miles for a 10 kiloton nuke is rather slightly off.....yes its dependent on environmental conditions but unless detonation occurs during a Nor' East'er the extent of exposure as outlined is problematic..... 
 
A 10 kiloton nuke (ground blast lets not talk about an air burst) should have an effect starting at the epicenter of the blast up to a distance of approximately one third mile in which every structure will be destroyed with a 100% fatality rate. The second circle of destruction should extend up to three quarters of a mile from the epic center and would leave buildings partially destroyed with significant risk of a firestorm with a fatal radiation doses to anyone directly exposed to the blast. Most people will be left dead or seriously injured. A final circle reaching out 1 mile would be just ravaged by fires and radiation. Using NYC as an epic center the total dead on detonation should be estimated at 600,000 to 1 million and after the blast effect and fire storm another 100 to 300,000....3000 miles of radiation exposure? It should look more like a potential maybe for 20, 30, 40 miles dependent on the environmental conditions of that day. Effects on people will vary at this point. We
 are not talking about a thermonuclear weapon here...... 
 
Now as two other radiation specialist on another list pointed out. One, "The only other thought I had was that they confused 3000-meters (1.86 miles) with 3000-miles.  That would fit better, since the 3000-meter line is often used for these kind of evaluations." This is a valid point...which leads me to this conclusion if its true. This is a huge planning mistake. It not only wastes resources, time and money but adds more confusion than what reality mandates and what first responders need for training. 
 
The second point that was made and which I agree was "The USA has undertaken a full scale nuclear explosion of about 10 kiloton in 1945 in Hiroshima and a few days later another one (I do not remember the yield, but it must have been similar) at Nagasaki. The effects have been described in detail in the open literature, including not only the destruction, but also health effects."  Yes Little Boy and Fat Man are excellent examples of cause and effect of this type of devise. Yes we have tested devises of this yield in the desert of Nevada several times in the past....what 3000 miles? "SUPER SECRET NUKE TEST LINK! ALL BAD GUY'S DO NOT CLICK" http://nuclearfiles.org/revideos/filmindex2.html




Point Two..."They are vague concepts, not specific, what the public health system is will vary from place to place.  Part of the Target Capabilities analysis is to see what elements of the public health system a jurisdiction has in place or available via mutual aid."


The dirty little secret in the medical community is ...there is no such thing as a "Public Health System." Yes there are components of such in various parts of the Country but there is none when it comes to the entire Country. While vague concepts are not what is needed in any planning document. I know for a fact that we do threat assessments much differently than what is being projected here.  Each region of this Country faces varying degrees of threats to have one face plate or selected sets of threats does not serve any purpose. These threats need to be assessed by region and tailored to specific threats facing a region. We have had many natural disasters and drills whether they are terror related or haz-mat, and natural disasters so the individual regions know exactly where they stand already.

Point Three "Not sure that anyone has defined what we mean when we 
say "prevention" -- anyone who differs, please cite me the definition"

Prevention - (My definition) Seek out and locate enemy combatant(s) on both domestic and foreign shores and terminate their command with extreme prejudice. 

In the immortal words of General George S. Patton "Don't be a fool and die for your country. Let the other sonofabitch die for his." (In this case his Jihad).... 

Another definition from another counter-terrorism specialist...

"Prevention is what we do to avoid RESPONDING to terrorist incidents and picking up forensic pieces from 9/11 attacks.  It is not rocket-scientist and only a bureaucrat would think so. Any bureaucrat, or “first responder” who thinks the American people are going to be satisfied with more RESPONSE and no PREVENTION had better pull their heads out of their asses and start looking for a new line of work." 

Point Four.. "Not envisioned in the current versions.  In its original form, DHS was trying to assess how we as a "nation" would respond, e.g. how many bullhorns were needed for the chemical attack or how many tongue depressors were needed "as a nation" to respond to the scenarios.  So if California had enough tongue depressors, we as a nation would be considered prepared without regard to how those tongue depressors would get to Florida or Pennsylvania.  A related question to yours is whether the responders from Boston would leave their jurisdiction unprotected without assurance that there was no more threat...."

If DHS by now three years after 911 does not know how we as a Nation will respond to a WMD they either are not talking with the other USG Agencies or are not learning from the drills we have had over the past three years. If bull horns and tongue depressors are what we are after then we are all dead....And yes more than likely the response will be localized until the attack is assessed. 

Point Five.. "The scenarios are disproportionate towards terrorism.  There are 3 natural events, one cyber and 11 terror (going from memory).  Why South Dakota needs to be prepared for a hurricane....  The National Preparedness Goal and supporting measures are supposed to be all hazards, yet they are really only terrorism.  There have been over 200 federal disaster declarations since 9/11, not a single one for terrorism.  While we may be totally prepared to respond to a 10 ton nuclear blast, we will not be prepared for the 100 year flood.  Not a great strategy considering the likelihood of each."

Yes they are disproportionate but... "There have been over 200 federal disaster declarations since 9/11, not a single one for terrorism." Some of the natural disasters are still under investigation. Again I repeat each region of this country faces different threats and we need to be prepared for all of the threats on a regional basis. The US Military war games both human and non human events. Yes gang even invasions from Mars... (makes you wonder sometimes). They do this why? It's not because they are bored..... No one plan will ever cover the matrix for the threats we face and drilling on something like this is dangerous. Yes not a great strategy.

Point Six...."See prior point.  Plus, power outages don't kill or cripple like the terror scenarios do.... but are they more likely?"

"Plus, power outages don't kill or cripple like the terror scenarios do".... Start adding up all the deaths caused by power outages due to fire, storms, floods, etc and etc...The last one in the Northeast we were lucky....but does death need to be the only measurement for a terrorist attack? How about an economic attack... How much money was lost during the NE Blackout? How much money did we lose going to Code Orange because some screw-loose sitting in a Internet cafe in Lebanon wrote junk on some website? Let's see it costs the USG some $70 Billion a week to protect the major cities when we go to Code Orange. How many weeks were we at Code Orange? What was the total costs? Quarter Trillion? Yes we keep forgetting those silly economic attacks..... Just like the way to fight terrorism is to kill its "finances".... The way to cause it is attack the money...cause disruption. But we all know this right?

Point Seven...."From what I know of east coast and tsunamis, this isn't a realistic possibility due to the topography of the ocean bottom and distances involved."

This is as about as realistic as many of the scenarios that are in the current plan....BTW it is a actual scenario.....


Number Eight...(There is no mention of attacks on LNG/LPG carriers.  Or wildfires.) "See prior comments on the scenarios being limited to terrorism."

Yes indeed and see prior DHS/FBI/INTERPOL/USCG/DOD/MI6 Threat Analysis and warnings..... All of these are realistic scenarios......


Number Eight...."This is the funding model for the future, getting us ready to face these scenarios without regard to the actual risk...."

Without regard to actual risk? If this is true then what are people thinking here? How much we after? $87 Billion? If thats the case DHS would get the money faster if they just skewered the intelligence. Lets try doing a funding model that fits reality instead of some hollywood movie. Besides of all the drills we have had and of the after action reports I have seen they all show the same deficiencies basically. My problem with all of this is when the hell are we going to start "FUNDING" and fixing the deficiencies we all ready know about...... 

Its been over three years since 911. Yes there are many people in the USG and First Responder Community that place their lives on the line everyday. There are mid-level executives in local, state and federal agencies that could fix the problems we have with their eyes closed. The problem is they are not empowered to do so. While none of the drills or plans additionally take into consideration the private  emergency responder companies....ie... The Hulchers....AMPOL....NRC.....SWS....Westons.....Clean Harbors... OH Materials....etc..etc and etc..... They do this type of work everyday.......uh....who actually did the US Senate Anthrax Decontamination? The USEPA? 

We as a Country have some great hurdles in front of us. We are at war in Iraq... We are fighting the GWOT.. we have economic and trades problems, energy problems, health care problems....security problems.....etc..etc.. and etc...and this past weekend the US Congress met in an extraordinary weekend session and passed legislation over what? Terri Schiavo? Someone from that so-called Public Health System of ours please rush to Capitol Hill and see if the United States Congress is suffering from a pandemic of cranial rectal inversion!? 

I don't know about anyone else but this security theater stuff has to come to a halt. Air Port Security is something that really irks me. Whats next all passengers disrobe and put on Tyvek suits and booties before boarding? The NYPD Cornish says...1000 officers are trained in terrorism. What he does not say is that these officers received a one day course in terrorism. That is like sayings I spent the day in a F-14 flight simulator and was awarded the nickname "Bolter" and now I am ready for real carrier landings..... He continues and say that the department has overhauled the Intelligence section. This is true with former agency analysts....to the best of my knowledge there is not one agency operations officer in that group or anyone who has run agents or cases. He states that NYPD detectives are assigned to DIA. This could be a good thing the intel weenies at DIA would learn something from a NYPD street cop..... I have listened to a Deputy Cornish say he thinks that Atlas Drills
 prevent terrorism.....I have talked with some of the guy's on the Hercules Squad about their RDD Training.... Its all evidence collection..... Would someone please remind folk we are up against UBL and AQ not the Marx Brothers.....

Lastly.... Does anyone know what the term OPSEC means? These types of documents need to be done properly and then classed FOUO or Law Enforcement Sensitive. Placed on a secure site with access limited to those in the community. Not posted as open source whereas some chowder-head reporter who knows zip about this subject gets a hold of it and writes an article in the NY Times which causes more public skepticism and stupidity. Matter of fact we need to start having people go to jail for leaking classified material or taking documents off of secured sites and posting them onto the Internet. This includes telling the press about the deficiencies. We will not lose the GWOT because of lack of resources, money and or know-how.... We will lose it because of stupidity. 

We not only owe first responders a better plan of attack but we owe the American Public a Safer Country



Tom <tom31b at yahoo.com> wrote: 
Since you wrote to me... and I have some opinions on this stuff, see 
in line comments

--- In DailyBrief at yahoogroups.com, Gerry Blackwood <gpblackwood at s...> 
wrote:
> Tom...
>  
> There are a couple of additional points I would like to make here.
>  
Skipping point one

> Point two.... I am not a bio-warfare guy but one of the problems I 
see with these scenarios are they seem to rely on a "Public Health 
System" for counter-measures. The problem is I never knew we had a 
Public Health System in the first place. 

They are vague concepts, not specific, what the public health system 
is will vary from place to place.  Part of the Target Capabilities 
analysis is to see what elements of the public health system a 
jurisdiction has in place or available via mutual aid.
  
> Point Three. Why the concentration on response?  why 
isn't "prevention" a priority.

Not sure that anyone has defined what we mean when we 
say "prevention" -- anyone who differs, please cite me the definition

> Point Four.. If a nuke or WMD goes off, those training for response 
(first responders) are all dead…who will train? if a 10 Kiloton nuke 
goes off in NYC the first responders will be coming from Boston....

Not envisioned in the current versions.  In its orginal form, DHS was 
trying to assess how we as a "nation" would respond, e.g. how many 
bullhorns were needed for the chemical attack or how many tongue 
depressors were needed "as a nation" to respond to the scenarios.  So 
if California had enough tongue depressors, we as a nation would be 
considered prepared without regard to how those tongue depressors 
would get to Florida or Pennsylvania.  A related question to yours is 
whether the responders from Boston would leave their jurisdiction 
unprotected without assurance that there was no more threat....

> Point Five ..Makes one wonder why they list natural disasters like 
a quake and hurricanes but nothing about tornado's, floods.    Also, 
why do they not cite floods when it would be possible for terrorists 
to blow up dams or levees and flood vast tracts of land?  FEMA is 
part of DHS now but there should be some disconnect for natural 
disasters.  At most, have loose coordination and advise security if 
you see somebody trying to exploit vulnerabilities during such 
disasters.  

The scenarios are disproportionate towards terrorism.  There are 3 
natural events, one cyber and 11 terror (going from memory).  Why 
South Dakota needs to be prepared for a hurricane....  The National 
Preparedness Goal and supporting measures are supposed to be all 
hazards, yet they are really only terrorism.  There have been over 
200 federal disaster declarations since 9/11, not a single one for 
terrorism.  While we may be totally prepared to respond to a 10 ton 
nuclear blast, we will not be prepared for the 100 year flood.  Not a 
great strategy considering the likelyhood of each.

> Point Six.. There nothing mentioned about attacks on power systems 
that could result in mass blackouts? Like this has not happened 
before? BTW where are we standing with the power grid these days?

See prior point.  Plus, power outages don't kill or cripple like the 
terror scenarios do.... but are they more likely?

> Point Seven.... If you could get enough expertise and explosives 
together to pull it off, a nuke or other skillfully-placed charge 
could be placed inside a volcano in the Canary Islands, to cause a 
massive landslide.  The resulting tsunami is predicted to be capable 
of swamping the entire eastern seaboard of the US, from Florida to 
Maine.

>From what I know of east coast and tsunamis, this isn't a realistic 
possibility due to the topography of the ocean bottom and distances 
involved.

> Point Eight...There is no mention of attacks on LNG/LPG carriers.  
Or wildfires.  The wildfires in San Diego and LA a little over a year 
ago were no accident and they were not all set off by careless 
hunters.  The IR mapping of the initial points of the fire showed 
three distinct cells of fire in a straight line, each a mile apart.  
That is no accident.  And one fire in San Diego was put out, then re-
started in an area where no embers from the major fire could have 
sparked flames either time.  The ignition point was right over the 
fence from the Islamic center that catered to the San Diego cell of 
the 9/11 hijackers just months after al-Qaeda had posted messages 
saying that they intended to "burn you in your homes." And DHS does 
not even list wildfires as a major disaster.

See prior comments on the scenarios being limited to terrorism.

> It would be one thing if this was a graphic merely put together by 
the typical media nitwit but this information is credited to DHS.  
What are these people thinking? Lastly the military has an old 
saying... "No plan survives the initial contact in tact"....... We 
can do better than this.....
> 
> Just some of my humble opinions......

This is the funding model for the future, getting us ready to face 
these scenarios without regard to the actual risk....





Visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DailyBrief to create/modify your profile, adjust your delivery and other settings, and to view archived messages.



Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

   To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DailyBrief/
  
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
DailyBrief-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
  
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 





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