DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Nukes » So Where Are All The Dirty Bombs?

So Where Are All The Dirty Bombs?

I’ve never been one to fully under­stand the great fear that many state and fed­eral emer­gency response man­agers seem to have over dirty bombs, given the many train­ing exer­cises that seem to include the threat as the main haz­ard. This USA Today arti­cle talks about the issue of loose and stolen radioac­tive mate­r­ial.
radioactive.jpg

Annual inci­dents of traf­fick­ing and mis­han­dling of nuclear and other radioac­tive mate­r­ial reported to U.S. intel­li­gence offi­cials have more than dou­bled since the early 1990s, says the direc­tor of domes­tic nuclear detec­tion at the Department of Homeland Security.
Also up: scams in which fake or non-​​existent nuclear or radioac­tive mate­r­ial is offered for sale, often online, says Vayl Oxford, nuclear detec­tion direc­tor at the depart­ment.
“We sense that peo­ple have rec­og­nized the value of nuclear mate­r­ial as a use­ful way of mak­ing money,” Oxford said. “Nuclear mate­r­ial is becom­ing a mar­ketable com­mod­ity.“
The inci­dents tracked by the depart­ment, based on its report­ing and infor­ma­tion from for­eign diplo­matic and intel­li­gence sources, aver­age about twice the num­ber made pub­lic each year by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Oxford said reports of nuclear and radioac­tive mate­ri­als traf­fick­ing have ranged from 200 to 250 a year since 2000, up from about 100 a year in the 1990s.

But here’s the thing ‚Vayl. When you look at the amount of mate­ri­als stolen or lost (some data are shown in the article’s side­bar), we’re talk­ing about ounces and a few pounds at best of gamma emit­ters. No one’s track­ing the alpha/​beta radioac­tive mate­r­ial out there (polo­nium any­one?). Still, not exactly enough for an impro­vised nuclear weapon, maybe enough to scare unknowl­edgable peo­ple.
You might have seen the last season’s “Sleeper Cell” that only rein­forced some of these fears. I enjoyed watch­ing the ter­ror­ist cell use ameri­cium 241 to “test” their lead-​​lined cooler con­tainer for radi­a­tion leaks (except that ameri­cium isn’t a strong gamma emit­ter), talk about how explod­ing an air­craft hold­ing one nuclear fuel rod over Los Angeles would “cover the city in nuclear fall­out” (ah, not really), and how the author­i­ties “got a hit from the radioac­tive snif­fers” on the lead-​​lined cooler on its way to the last tar­get. Yeah, it’s only a drama, but I’ll bet peo­ple believe this stuff. Maybe it was just dis­in­for­ma­tion for the real ter­ror­ists… yeah, that’s the ticket.
– Jason Sigger, cross­posted at Armchair Generalist
UPDATE 12/​29/​06 11:36 AM: David Hambling writes in to say: “Also, the UK police are order­ing some 12,000 CBR [chemical-​​biological-​​radiological] suits — looks like they’re expect­ing those famous/​mythical dirty bombs too.“
UPDATE 12/​29/​06 12:05 PM: J here. Great con­ver­sa­tion in the com­ments, espe­cially the cool-​​headed plug­ger not­ing that “dirty bombs” are haz­ards, not life-​​threatening events. Many of the com­ments seem to go to the ques­tion of “what’s your point?” Without get­ting too aca­d­e­mic (hey, I’m not the ArmsControlWonk, after all), my point is sim­ply this. While there’s lots of radioac­tive haz­ards out there, the really bad ones aren’t being moved in great quan­ti­ties to cause a mass casu­alty inci­dent. Given that “dirty bombs” of what­ever fla­vor — alpha, beta, gamma — are largely more of a clean-​​up job, and while costly to clean up, gov­ern­ment goes on. The anthrax let­ters didn’t shut down the USPS, but it did slow things down on the east coast. The polo­nium poi­son­ing didn’t shut down Heathrow Airport for a minute.
They’re haz­ards, they are low-​​probability events, they’re not mass casu­alty events. Given that basis, what’s the appro­pri­ate fed­eral response? I sug­gest that it is not to put rad detec­tors in every port and every bor­der cross­ing into the United States and within every major met­ro­pol­i­tan area, as DHS’s DNDO has sug­gested (which would cost bil­lions of dol­lars to imple­ment plus annual sus­tain­ment and train­ing costs). The appro­pri­ate response is to lock down the bad rads (cesium, ura­nium, and plu­to­nium), get the ter­ror­ists before they attack, and be pre­pared (like our UK breth­ern) to clean it up if it hap­pens. Simple. Smart. Efficient. But not the course of action being imple­mented by the government.

Share |

December 28th, 2006 | Nukes | 2385327 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2006/12/28/so-where-are-all-the-dirty-bombs/So+Where+Are+All+The+Dirty+Bombs%3F2006-12-28+11%3A50%3A34sharon_weinberger You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Rapid Fire 12/​27/​06 | Noah’s 50 Favorite Posts of 2006 » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. thermopile says:
    December 28, 2006 at 8:07 am

    I’m not try­ing to be overly crit­i­cal, but what’s your point? While gram-​​quantity lev­els of traf­fick­ing are not an imme­di­ate con­cern for a fear-​​instigating weapon, are we sup­posed to just ignore those and not care? Take care of the pen­nies and the dol­lars take care of them­selves … the trad­ing of illicit nuclear mate­ri­als is some­thing that is impor­tant to watch at a very low level.
    And, just to be pedan­tic, most heavy met­als that are alpha and beta emit­ters are also gamma emit­ters, mak­ing them more eas­ily detectable. For exam­ple, the 16th edi­tion of the Chart of the Nuclides lists our friend Polonium-​​210 as a very weak gamma emit­ter at 803.1 KeV. Yes, you CAN detect micro­gram lev­els of Po-​​210. I’m sure some­one can pore through the whole list of iso­topes and find a few pure alpha or beta emit­ters, but those are the excep­tions, not the rule.

    Reply
  2. Nicholas weaver says:
    December 28, 2006 at 9:56 am

    Its that for most dirty bombs with enough radi­a­tion to cause radi­a­tion dam­age, this will prob­a­bly fry the ter­ror­ists first.
    Otherwise, it is the explo­sive in the bomb which is the biggest dan­ger, and the radi­a­tion is just an expen­sive clean-​​up task.

    Reply
  3. Robot.Economist says:
    December 28, 2006 at 10:24 am

    I wouldn’t com­pletely dis­miss the sig­nif­i­cance of ille­gal trade in even small amounts of radioac­tive mate­ri­als. Sure, they don’t actu­ally pose any harm in them­selves, but each instance can prob­a­bly teach us some­thing about hid­den weak­nesses in the non­pro­lif­er­a­tion sys­tem.
    I read an inter­est­ing arti­cle on asahi​.com about how a Chinese research sci­en­tist appar­ently ordered 3 grams of yel­low­cake from the U.S. over the inter­net. What was so com­pelling about the story was not the mate­ri­als involved, but how this absent-​​minded researcher man­aged to order the stuff with­out the nec­es­sary lis­censes and safe­guards required.

    Reply
  4. plugger says:
    December 29, 2006 at 1:53 am

    I’m just wait­ing for peo­ple to real­ize that dirty bombs aren’t threats. If it was a legit­i­mate weapon, don’t you think mil­i­taries all over the world would have devel­oped them for their arse­nals? They’re noth­ing more than movie ter­ror plot weapons that scare the masses into believ­ing they’re a threat.

    Reply
  5. Bill Dickerson says:
    December 29, 2006 at 2:04 am

    I think the amount of radi­a­tion is not the issue. Look at the Sarin gas attack in the Tokyo sub­way. Very few peo­ple were killed but the panic and fear caused a huge prob­lem.
    Take a lit­tle radioac­tive mate­r­ial dis­perse it on the top of a build­ing down­town with a small explo­sion. The dan­ger is very lit­tle except for peo­ple except in the imme­di­ate area. The panic that would ensue would be great.
    Imagine thou­sands of peo­ple descend­ing on the hos­pi­tals and tens of thou­sands flee­ing the city. The break down of civil­ian author­i­ties abil­ity to main­tain order will occur quickly. If order is not restored quickly riots and loot­ing on local busi­ness will begin as soon as it gets dark.
    That is the real dan­ger. Look at New Orleans where res­cue work­ers and heli­copters came under fire while attempt­ing to help the cities population.

    Reply
  6. Patrick says:
    December 29, 2006 at 7:09 am

    I thought the pur­pose of the “dirty bomb” was more to dis­rupt and cre­ate fear than actual casu­al­ties? From most people’s per­spec­tive (thouse who have no idea what a gamma or alpha/​beta emmit­ter is) radi­a­tion is radi­a­tion, and it’s scary. I think plug­ger is right and wrong, dirty bombs aren’t “real” threats in the mil­i­tary sense, but I think they are in a civil­ian sense. Bill hit the nail on the head ref­er­enc­ing the sarin attack in Tokyo. Create panic, it works as well as a ter­ror weapon as a lot of other things…

    Reply
  7. Joseph A. Belle-Isle says:
    December 29, 2006 at 10:03 am

    Dirty bombs are the ones that fell in mud puddles.

    Reply
  8. Doug Fingles says:
    December 29, 2006 at 10:29 am

    Having par­tic­i­pated in a num­ber of chem­i­cal and nuclear exer­cises over the years, I can tell you that these types of sce­nar­ios are by far the hard­est to con­tain and con­trol. Even the sim­plest sce­nar­ios (sin­gle build­ing, lim­ited per­son­nel and exits) require lots of man­power, coor­di­na­tion, and equip­ment. Anything with mul­ti­ple build­ings or heavy pedes­trian traf­fic instantly turns into a night­mare sce­nario. The nice thing about bombs is they don’t inflict harm fur­ther than their blast radius. Contaminants, chem­i­cal or nuclear, eas­ily migrate. Just look at how many peo­ple are affected by 1, count ‘em one, per­son dying from polo­nium poi­son­ing.
    That’s why emer­gency man­age­ment agen­cies fear chem­i­cal or nuclear contamination.

    Reply
  9. DavidMac says:
    December 29, 2006 at 10:52 am

    Most peo­ple are scared silly of nuclear radi­a­tion, yet they don’t have a prob­lem with lying on the beach all day in the sun.
    The sun is a huge nuclear fusion reac­tor, the pres­sure at the core (340 bil­lion times earth’s air pres­sure at sea level) cre­ates helium by fus­ing 4 hydro­gen nuclei together to form one helium nucleus. This releases heat (27 mil­lion degrees F.) and radi­a­tion.
    When you get a tan out­side, it’s the result of nuclear radi­a­tion. That’s why some peo­ple who love to get sun­tans also get skin can­cer.
    The sun will stop con­vert­ing hydro­gen to helium in about 5 bil­lion years, then start con­vert­ing (fus­ing) helium into heavy met­als. The sun will expand, becom­ing a red giant and destroy the earth.

    Reply
  10. TBird says:
    December 29, 2006 at 12:18 pm

    Once the Genie is out of the bot­tle it will be too late to go back and revise your out­look on this. I had rather be overly cau­tious than sorry…very sorry…while count­ing up the toll…especially if any of your (my) loved ones are included. Remember that the peo­ple believed the “Peace in our time” bit when Chamberlin made a deal with the devil.

    Reply
  11. Frank says:
    December 29, 2006 at 1:14 pm

    Nuclear bombs can be made by ter­ror­ist groups or map oth­er­wise be obtained. Keep the Radiation detec­tors up and run­ning. Suitcase nuclear bombs have been made and will in all like­ly­hood con­tinue to be made. I won­der, would we all like to learn some­day that Iran, or some other rogue nation has smug­gled a nuclear device into our country?

    Reply
  12. J C M says:
    December 29, 2006 at 1:43 pm

    Dirty Bombs, in the strictest sense as an actual weapon, are min­i­mum threat level weapons. On the psy­cho­log­i­cal side how­ever, they wield a heavy punch. Part of the prob­lem lies in the igno­rance if the gen­eral pop­u­lace. Most peo­ple have no clue as to the level of expo­sure, amount of rads absorbed, amount of shield­ing, etc.… all the things that go along with radioac­tive mate­ri­als and their pro­duc­tion, stor­age and use.
    And there’s the rub my friends. To most peo­ple, radioca­tiv­ity is an “unknown”. And being the pre­dictable ani­mals we are, we fear the unknown. The panic that can be caused by plac­ing these weapons in areas that large groups of peo­ple gather can be cat­a­strauphic. An exam­ple: take your aver­age ball­park, foot­ball sta­dium, etc. Hundreds could be tram­pled to death just try­ing to escape the area.
    The actual dam­age from a bomb set off in such a place would be min­i­mal, but the psych fac­tor would be through the roof. When one per­son pan­ics, it tends to spread to oth­ers, who feed the fear of oth­ers, until you have masses of peo­ple who will lit­er­ally try to climb over eachother to escape.
    We could start off by edu­cat­ing the pub­lic about nuclear safety. If it turns out that such edu­ca­tion saved even one life, it would be worth it. Better detec­tion meth­ods are another part of the answer “puz­zle”.
    At D.O.T. truck scale houses across the nation, rad detec­tors are being installed. The prob­lem? Only com­mer­cial class A trucks are required to pass through these. Smaller class B “Do-​​it-​​yourself” trucks like U-​​haul, are not required to go through them. Even motorhomes could be rigged to carry bombs, that’s why they are no longer allowed to cross Hoover Dam. These are the vehi­cles of choice to haul large explo­sive devices. It would not be dif­fi­cult to install these detec­tors in var­i­ous places on the roads. Any free­way sign that spans all lanes would make an ideal detec­tion point.
    Last, as said before, refuse to be ter­ror­ized. There are many things that can be con­trolled by oth­ers in our lives. Traffic pat­terns, food and other neces­si­ties costs, the time you have to be at work and how much they pay you, what you are taught in your early years at school…all these things are pretty much out of our hands. But one thing that we DO con­trol is our way of think­ing, and the way we want to live. I choose to life with­out fear.
    The so called ter­ror­ist is going to:
    Plant a bomb some­where…
    Place bio­log­i­cal agents some­where…
    Fire a mis­sile at an air­craft…
    A sniper is going to start shoot­ing at peo­ple…
    And some peo­ple are going to die. There isn’t much I can do to stop him from per­form­ing these actions. But I can pre­vent him from con­trol­ling me by refus­ing to fear him and his ran­dom attack. If attacked directly, I will fight back. If attacked indi­rectly, I may die. Again, there’s not much I can do to pre­vent the insane from doing the insane.
    BUT WE MUST STOP BEING CONTROLLED BY FEAR!

    Reply
  13. Bob Ehling says:
    December 29, 2006 at 3:27 pm

    The empha­sis on dirty bombs might also be a way of prepar­ing the pub­lic and first respon­ders for the advent of low yield devices, includ­ing sub­crit­i­cal or “fiz­zle” yield weapons.
    In the after­math of a ter­ror­ist radi­o­log­i­cal event, the per­pe­tra­tors may want to claim full nuclear capa­bil­ity; the author­i­ties would most likely seek to dis­pute it. The dirty bomb sce­nario pro­vides such plau­si­ble deni­a­bil­ity, as well as a rel­a­tively unthreat­en­ing, polit­i­cally accept­able ratio­nale for prepar­ing for ter­ror­ist nuclear attack.

    Reply
  14. Tom Pearson says:
    December 29, 2006 at 3:47 pm

    The Brits had a made for TV movie that was shown on HBO in the USA a cou­ple of years ago called “The Dirty War” which was about Muslim ter­ror­ists (many of whom lived in England)setting off a “dirty bomb” con­tain­ing large amounts of both Alpha and Gamma radi­a­tion mate­ri­als dis­persed by the explo­sion of a van con­tain­ing a large amount of ammo­nium nitrate based explo­sive in the London finan­cial dis­trict. Good movie that upset many of the “polit­i­cally cor­rect types” because it showed some rather tough inter­ro­ga­tion meth­ods used to try to force one of the ter­ror­ists to dis­close where the other vans con­tain­ing other bombs were. It also shows the fun­dal­men­tal­ist Muslim men­tal­ity of the ded­i­cated ter­ror­ist who is will­ing to sac­ri­fice every­thing includ­ing his fam­ily to carry out his ter­ror strike. I got my copy recently from Amazon​.com. Worth while watch­ing, espe­cially with lib­eral friends who have their heads up some place dark!
    Tom

    Reply
  15. TBird says:
    December 29, 2006 at 4:02 pm

    To read more about suit­case bombs see Fox News at:
    http://​www​.foxnews​.com/​s​t​o​r​y​/​0​,​2​9​3​3​,​7​6​9​9​0​,​0​0​.​h​tml

    Reply
  16. Daryl says:
    December 29, 2006 at 4:51 pm

    The Indian Government seems to be tak­ing the threat very seri­ously.
    We should too, con­sid­er­ing that irre­spon­si­ble, unsta­ble, nuclear pro­lif­er­a­tor, and ter­ror­ism spon­sor Pakistan is plan­ning to build a fast breeder reac­tor.
    See:
    First step in war on

    Reply
  17. Rick says:
    December 29, 2006 at 10:13 pm

    JCM hits it right on the head. Don’t let them con­trol you!

    Reply
  18. lee says:
    December 30, 2006 at 9:51 am

    The release of ANY radioac­tive mate­r­ial [even alpha emit­ters] in a place like the sub­way in NYC or DC would cause panic. This is after all what ter­ror mer­chants want.

    Reply
  19. James Berryhill says:
    December 30, 2006 at 4:38 pm

    A few days ago a patient reported that she had detained and intensly ques­tioned try­ing to leave a Tour Ship, She had a CT scan three weeks before and her sys­tem still had a trace of radioac­tive dye used in the exam. Nothing hap­pened other than being treated badly, at least they didn’t send her to Cuba, but it shows the extent of fear involved.

    Reply
  20. ROB says:
    December 31, 2006 at 8:20 am

    HAS OUR GOVERNMENT GONE MAD THAT THERE IS SO MUCH POLITICAL POSTURING THAT WE HAVE FORGOT HOW TO DO THE RIGHT THING TO PROTECT OUR CITIZENS AND OUR BORDERS

    Reply
  21. Bill says:
    January 2, 2007 at 11:07 am

    Something that you also must con­sider is that a dirty bomb doesn’t nec­es­sarly have to be some­thing that is trans­ported, there are places that if com­bined with enough explo­sives would cause a dirty bomb and may not cause mass death, but would defi­nately inflict mass panic, and get a lot of peo­ple very ill.

    Reply
  22. Sergeant Nemo says:
    January 2, 2007 at 9:45 pm

    Hey, folks:
    The IAEC says there are fis­sion­able nuclear deVICES–not merely material–missing from that criminally-​​inclined social septic-​​tank called Russia.
    Some are who knows where. Some, on the other hand, are here.
    Let’s not for­get our old friends the Pakis. Some of their devices are who knows where. Some are here.
    Is it believ­able? Gosh, I’m not sure. Look up some­thing called the One-​​Percent Doctrine in the mean­time.
    Or, watch what hap­pens if an American CiC does to Iran what should have been done thirty years ago.
    Has every­body got his meds, pure water and potas­sium iodide? Okay then.
    Good job, stand by, and love to you all.

    Reply
  23. J Ramos says:
    January 3, 2007 at 7:31 am

    I remem­ber sev­eral “fic­tion” writ­ers exploit­ing the “ter­ror­ist crashes a plane against build­ing X” plot sev­eral years before 9–11 (Ex. Tom Clancy).
    Dirty bombs are easy to make and require no more exper­tise than what the ter­ror­ists already have. Thus they are a cred­i­ble and plau­si­ble threat that can not be dis­counted. We must always pre­pare for what our enemy is capa­ble of doing, not what we “think” it is ratio­nal for them to do.
    All it takes is for one of those guys to get smart.

    Reply
  24. Tom Pearson says:
    January 3, 2007 at 1:49 pm

    Peter’s com­men­tary of January 2 about the bomb mak­ers putting them­selves at risk of death while assem­bling a dirty bomb is an impor­tant point. Unfortunately, the scary truth is that the Muslim Fundalmentalists who would be involved would have no fear of the mate­ri­als they were han­dling nor the death that would quickly come. They are pre­pared to die, either in the assem­bly or det­o­na­tion of the dirty bomb. For an illu­mi­nat­ing illus­tra­tion of this, get a copy of the DVD (HBO/BBC)called “The Dirty War”.
    Tom

    Reply
  25. Novak says:
    January 15, 2007 at 9:01 pm

    The point of ter­ror­ism is not to kill peo­ple, it is to ter­ror­ize them… to dis­rupt daily life, cost money, etc. Case in point, the snipers in the DC area. One rifle and ONE box of ammo totally ter­ror­ize the nation… it dis­rupted daily life, it cost busi­nesses in the area money. How many trips to that area were can­celed by fam­i­lies, schools, etc.… this costs the area money… mis­sion accom­plished. This was 2 peo­ple, one gun and one box of ammo, mil­lions of peo­ple in panic. Now immag­ing the news sta­tions scream­ing that a “nuclear device” device has been det­o­nated and there is radioac­tive fall­out… it doesn’t mat­ter what kind of radi­a­tion or how con­cen­trated it is, that will not be in the head­line. Result: mil­ions ter­ror­ized, our way of life dis­rupted, mil­lions (if not bil­lios) of dol­lars lost in com­merse, not to men­tion in cleanup. These dirty bombs may not be extremely lethal, but they will almost cer­tainly be suc­cess­ful in the ter­ror­ists eyes.

    Reply
  26. Miguel Salles says:
    January 17, 2007 at 11:22 am

    Comments to Where are the Dirty Bombs: Too much has been writ­ten about this sub­ject! Much to the point of cry­ing wolf. Instead of writ­ing and wor­ry­ing cit­i­zens half to death about it.…Why don

    Reply
  27. fffff says:
    December 16, 2007 at 8:35 pm

    fdfdfdfdf

    Reply
  28. Maegnor says:
    April 27, 2008 at 2:14 pm

    Modular Buildings & Portable Buildings Comark Modular Building
    Hi, Admin! Your site is very inter­est­ing. Keep work.
    http://​www​.mod​build​ing​.100freemb​.com/

    Reply
  29. Alex says:
    May 4, 2008 at 6:17 am

    Reverse mort­gage lead providers work untir­ingly to for­mu­late a data­base of prospec­tive reverse mort­gage cus­tomers.
    http://​www​.mortrev​.great​now​.com/
    http://​www​.steel​buil​.great​now​.com

    Reply
  30. Maegnor says:
    May 13, 2008 at 3:06 pm

    Apply for credit card
    While you start to read through this knowl­edge­able apply for credit card appli­ca­tions arti­cle, give each tip a chance to sink in before you con­tinue to the fol­low­ing.
    http://​aply​card​.cool​page​.biz/

    Reply
  31. Maegnor says:
    May 13, 2008 at 3:10 pm

    The build­ing stan­dards are pub­lished in the Code of Regulations, Title 24, known as the Building Standards Code.
    http://​www​.buil​code​.narod​.ru

    Reply
  32. McFly says:
    May 13, 2008 at 3:12 pm

    Reverse mort­gage lead providers work untir­ingly to for­mu­late a data­base of prospec­tive reverse mort­gage cus­tomers.
    http://​www​.mortrev​.great​now​.com/
    http://​www​.steel​buil​.great​now​.com

    Reply
  33. Maegnor says:
    June 2, 2008 at 2:10 pm

    Apply for credit card
    While you start to read through this knowl­edge­able apply for credit card appli­ca­tions arti­cle, give each tip a chance to sink in before you con­tinue to the fol­low­ing.
    http://​aply​card​.storm​.pro​host​ing​.com/

    Reply
  34. ????????? says:
    June 5, 2008 at 6:49 am

    ????????- ??????? ??????????? ??????? “FACTOR” ?????????? ???????, ????????????, ???????, ??????, ????????, ?????????????, ???????? ? ????????

    Reply
  35. ????????? says:
    June 5, 2008 at 6:52 am

    ????????- ??????? ??????????? ??????? “FACTOR” ?????????? ???????, ????????????, ???????, ??????, ????????, ?????????????, ???????? ? ????????

    Reply
  36. Scott says:
    July 21, 2008 at 6:28 am

    Hello, nice site look this:
    sex tip
    bath sex teen tub video
    pic sex teen tiffany
    black les­bian sex story
    See you. Thanks!

    Reply
  37. fenugreek extract says:
    July 30, 2008 at 4:17 am

    The prob­lem of radioac­tive mate­r­ial being stolen is a seri­ous one. The Bush admin­is­tra­tion should think about tome strate­gies to resolve this issue because it’s putting in dan­ger our lives.

    Reply
  38. joyous_monk says:
    January 19, 2009 at 3:35 pm

    AGGRESS AutoPost Test

    Reply
  39. anh nghi says:
    May 17, 2009 at 4:28 am

    Legend has ????? it that one day ??? ????after vic­tory ?????? over the ??? ????? Chinese Ming invaders ???? when King Le Thai To
    ?? was boat­ing ?? on the lake ?????? a golden tor­toise ?????? came up ??? out of the ???? water to
    ???? ?????? take back
    ?? ?????? the sacred sword ?? ?????? that had been
    ?? ?????? given to him ??? ?????? by the god
    ?? ?????? to save the home­land
    sod (15th C.) ??? Noteworthy ???? ??? the Huc Sunrise brige
    ?? ????? ????? Tower of the Pen Brush
    ???? Portico of the Ink ??????? — Slab ??? ?????? Ngoc Son (Jade hill) tem­ple… ??? ??? That

    Reply
  40. koolgirl92 says:
    August 21, 2009 at 8:07 am

    ??? ?????
    ??? ?????
    ??
    ??
    ??????
    ??????
    ???
    ???
    ????
    ???? ?????
    ?
    ?? ??????
    ?? ??????
    ?? ??????
    ??? ??????
    ?? ??????
    sod
    ???
    ???? ???
    ?? ????? ?????
    ????
    ???????
    ?? ??
    ?? ??
    ?? ??
    ?DVD
    ?DVD
    ?? ??
    ?? ??
    ???? ??
    ???? ??

    Reply
  41. hangcn says:
    September 24, 2009 at 5:12 am

    ??
    ????
    ??
    ???? ??
    ????
    ??????
    ?? ??????
    ???
    ???
    ????
    ???? ?????
    ?
    ?? ??????
    ?? ??????
    ?? ??????
    ??? ??????
    ?? ??????
    sod
    ???
    ???? ???
    ?? ????? ?????
    ????
    ?? ??
    ?? ??
    ?? ??
    ?DVD
    ?DVD
    ?? ??
    ?? ??
    ???? ??
    ???? ??
    ???? ????
    ??? ????
    ??? ????
    ??? ????

    Reply
  42. jake says:
    September 28, 2009 at 12:55 pm

    Classic UGG 5819 Cardy
    Classic UGG 5819 Cardy
    UGG 1760 Persephone Sandal

    Reply
  43. magingam says:
    October 1, 2009 at 3:11 am

    ??
    ????
    ??
    ???? ??
    ????
    ??????
    ?? ??????
    ???
    ???
    ????
    ???? ?????
    ?
    ?? ??????
    ?? ??????
    ?? ??????
    ??? ??????
    ?? ??????
    sod
    ???
    ???? ???
    ?? ????? ?????
    ????
    ?? ??
    ?? ??
    ?? ??
    ?DVD
    ?DVD
    ?? ??
    ?? ??
    ???? ??
    ???? ??
    ???? ????
    ??? ????
    ??? ????
    ??? ????

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

    Most Popular Posts
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • Starship Troopers Meets G.I. Joe
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
    • Dowd's Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Adapting Women to Subs
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Mystery Drone Revealed
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
    Recent Comments
    • Sexing up the Headline
      a href="http://www.game4pow er.com">Buy wow...
      buy wow  gold
    • New Army PEO on the way
      To get our AAA quality shoes at reasonable price, Your...
      nike air force ones
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      "And no, the Koran does not say anything about killing...
      bdwilcox
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are entering to...
      DualityOfMan
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      Fascism? Last time I heard, the fascists promoted christianity. Or,...
      DualityOfMan
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      I see an M16 firing, and I see a 40 mm grenade launcher...
      DualityOfMan
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      "I'd say go read some history on fascist ideology and then compare...
      Sam
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      No. I am not saying a grenade launcher on a rifle is a hoax. I...
      Zandor
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      For someone who trashes all the readers of the blog you sure do...
      a1189
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
      These devices vibrate tissue and bone not just...
      WJS
    Recent Articles
    • Semi-​​auto Grenade Thrower
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Airbag Defense
    • Dowd’s Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
    • Lockheed Says Sbirs Still on Track For 2010
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Adapting Women to Subs
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage