"Dirty Bombs: The Terror and the Truth"
Posted: Thu May 30, 2024 3:13 pm
https://www.ans.org/news/article-5976/d ... the-truth/
"The term “dirty bomb” surfaces occasionally, usually in the context of nuclear waste, which, while understandable, is incorrect.
Dirty bombs, or radiation dispersal devices (RDDs), use conventional methods like car bombs to disperse radioactive materials in populated economic districts, such as lower Manhattan. The point is to cause great economic and social disruption disproportionate to the actual radiological effects—and well beyond the physical destruction from the conventional bomb components.
Society’s irrational fear of radiation makes the dirty bomb an ultimate weapon of terror. But it is a psychological weapon, not a nuclear one. The public should not be any more afraid of a dirty bomb than they are of an ordinary car bomb."
-----------------------
Decent read on the subject. In the first half of the article, part of me believes the author is trying to "normalize" a dirty bomb deployment in the U.S. Where do we draw the draw the line between 'being prepared' and unnecessarily causing panic?
At the end, check out the author's punch list of what he believes needs to happen in order for us to be prepared. I'm not holding my breath...
"The term “dirty bomb” surfaces occasionally, usually in the context of nuclear waste, which, while understandable, is incorrect.
Dirty bombs, or radiation dispersal devices (RDDs), use conventional methods like car bombs to disperse radioactive materials in populated economic districts, such as lower Manhattan. The point is to cause great economic and social disruption disproportionate to the actual radiological effects—and well beyond the physical destruction from the conventional bomb components.
Society’s irrational fear of radiation makes the dirty bomb an ultimate weapon of terror. But it is a psychological weapon, not a nuclear one. The public should not be any more afraid of a dirty bomb than they are of an ordinary car bomb."
-----------------------
Decent read on the subject. In the first half of the article, part of me believes the author is trying to "normalize" a dirty bomb deployment in the U.S. Where do we draw the draw the line between 'being prepared' and unnecessarily causing panic?
At the end, check out the author's punch list of what he believes needs to happen in order for us to be prepared. I'm not holding my breath...