NFL Dirty Bomb Threat - Fantasy Baseball Cafe 2014 Fantasy Baseball Cafe
100% Deposit Bonus for Cafe Members!

Return to General Talk

NFL Dirty Bomb Threat

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Postby Simulacrum » Wed Oct 18, 2006 6:32 pm

Phatferd wrote:
Simulacrum wrote:I would not be the slightest bit surprised to see something like this go down.. these are scary times and we have terrible enemies. Terrorists have been threatening in videos lately that September 11th was nothing, and that our streets will soon run red with American blood. :-o


Hmmm, elections are coming up aren't they?


I'll admit I read a scary article in the USA Today over lunch about impending terrorist threats... :-b
Image
2008 Cafeholics Pond Scum Champion
Future Champion of 2009 Cafeholics Masters
Simulacrum
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Chief Pixel PusherCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeInnovative MemberWeb Supporter
Posts: 9875
Joined: 12 Apr 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: On a Mission

Postby Big Pimpin » Wed Oct 18, 2006 7:09 pm

8-o

Damn. :-/

I'm not at all surprised that we're talking dirty bombs now. I'm also not surprised that we're talking about sporting events. I knew it was going to come to this. :-/

I just hope precautions are in place and nothing happens.
Big Pimpin
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
EditorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerGraphics ExpertMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeWeb SupporterMatchup Meltdown ChampionPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 13710
(Past Year: 4)
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Building a metric. And being ignorable and stupid.

Postby JTWood » Wed Oct 18, 2006 7:33 pm

The U.S. response to a dirty bomb would not be to nuke any Islamic country. In fact, if was "only" a dirty bomb, as opposed to a full-out nuke, I dare to say that our response would be less than the one thrown out after 9/11.
Image
JTWood
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterEagle EyeWeb Supporter
Posts: 11508
Joined: 22 Jun 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Unincorporated Heaven

Postby j_d_mcnugent » Wed Oct 18, 2006 7:50 pm

acsguitar wrote:A couple reasons I DON'T see this happening or something like it:

1. Our fire power is so much more massive then theirs: Its easier for them to take out 3,000 people (a relatively small amount) compared to 100,000. That way we don't get too pissed off. Taking out 100,000 people would pretty much sign the death wish of every Muslim in the world. There would be no forgiveness of any of them. Now there are millions and millions of Good muslim people in this world. By killing off that many people you would basically see a slaughter of the Muslim faithful no matter if they were good or bad. Nukes are not a game and if one goes off attributed to Islam you can bet you arse that every Mosque is burned to the ground in the this country and most other civilized ones. You can also BYA that Islams/Muslims who show up in public will be killed on the spot. The Radicals have to be aware of this.

2. They want to see us scared: Its probably much more satisfying for them to take out small targets and mess with our minds then take out a huge target which would basically turn us all immediately. The country is 50/50 on the whole war etc...Nukes would make 100 pecent of us against the islamic world. Keeping us scared would probably be more satisfying.

3. Technology: I'm pretty sure dirty bombs aren't a light a fuse type thing. North Korea has been trying for years and years to create a real Nuke and it went wrong.

4. They would have already done it: If there goal is to terrify americans the best way to do it is to plan small attacks and claim bigger ones. 9/11 was big but not nuke big. Why even do 9/11 if you are planning bigger things. 9/11 made us step up our defense if you want to destroy someone you catch them with their guard down. Our Guard is way up.

5. The easiest targets are overseas: Targeting a Football stadium that has been alerted about an attack is a stupid thing to do. Getting bombs into this country is not an easy task especially in complete form. The best targets are unfortunately our military and overseas bases. I'd think a dirty bomb would have already gone off in Afghanistan/Iraq if they existed.

Anyways just some ideas. Still very scary not something you wanna see.


that doesnt make any sense at all. osama would love to get his hands a dirty bomb. would rather have a real nuke, but seeing as those are kind of hard to get...
back from the dead
j_d_mcnugent
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
CafeholicCafe Ranker
Posts: 3766
Joined: 1 May 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: bored at work

Postby JTWood » Wed Oct 18, 2006 8:01 pm

Quite possibly your most incorrect post ever.

acsguitar wrote:A couple reasons I DON'T see this happening or something like it:

1. Our fire power is so much more massive then theirs: Its easier for them to take out 3,000 people (a relatively small amount) compared to 100,000. That way we don't get too pissed off. Taking out 100,000 people would pretty much sign the death wish of every Muslim in the world. There would be no forgiveness of any of them. Now there are millions and millions of Good muslim people in this world. By killing off that many people you would basically see a slaughter of the Muslim faithful no matter if they were good or bad. Nukes are not a game and if one goes off attributed to Islam you can bet you arse that every Mosque is burned to the ground in the this country and most other civilized ones. You can also BYA that Islams/Muslims who show up in public will be killed on the spot. The Radicals have to be aware of this.

The "radicals" hate moderate and liberal Muslims just as much as they hate everyone else.

acsguitar wrote:2. They want to see us scared: Its probably much more satisfying for them to take out small targets and mess with our minds then take out a huge target which would basically turn us all immediately. The country is 50/50 on the whole war etc...Nukes would make 100 pecent of us against the islamic world. Keeping us scared would probably be more satisfying.

The situation is exactly the opposite. If they were really terrorists, you would think they'd start blowing up barns in Utah as well as apartment buildings in NY. Instead, they keep hammering and hammering after big, visible targets. Why? Because they're not out to terrorize America as much as they are out to recruit more extremists for their cause, and nothing inspires people half-a-world away like the destruction of highly-visible targets.

acsguitar wrote:3. Technology: I'm pretty sure dirty bombs aren't a light a fuse type thing. North Korea has been trying for years and years to create a real Nuke and it went wrong.

Dirty bombs are made with nuclear waste. There's plenty of that to go around.

acsguitar wrote:4. They would have already done it: If there goal is to terrify americans the best way to do it is to plan small attacks and claim bigger ones. 9/11 was big but not nuke big. Why even do 9/11 if you are planning bigger things. 9/11 made us step up our defense if you want to destroy someone you catch them with their guard down. Our Guard is way up.

See the reply about recruiting people. They will do this if they feel that it will further their cause in their own nation(s).

acsguitar wrote:5. The easiest targets are overseas: Targeting a Football stadium that has been alerted about an attack is a stupid thing to do. Getting bombs into this country is not an easy task especially in complete form. The best targets are unfortunately our military and overseas bases. I'd think a dirty bomb would have already gone off in Afghanistan/Iraq if they existed.

You completely miss that the point of a dirty bomb is not explicity to kill people. Sure, when used properly, nuclear waste can increase the power of a conventional explosive. The real damage, though, is not in the initial explosion as much as it is in the long-term damage the subsequant pollution brings to the area affected by the explosion.

A dirty bomb set up in a highly commercial area would kill dozens probably, but would result in the complete closure of blocks - if not more - of highly profitable real estate.

Trust me. They want to do this.
Image
JTWood
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterEagle EyeWeb Supporter
Posts: 11508
Joined: 22 Jun 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Unincorporated Heaven

Postby bronxxbomber » Wed Oct 18, 2006 9:07 pm

I always thought these extremists would go for the financial centers of the world. I mean that's where it would really hurt. The US lost billions on the exchange with that attack (nyse closed on a non holiday. scary). I can't imagine what kind of ripple effect if the exchanges were knocked out for more than a day.
Image
Who says I can't be a Yankees and Mets fan???
bronxxbomber
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
CafeholicMock(ing) DrafterSweet 16 SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 3552
Joined: 7 Jan 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Watching Over Everything

Postby Coppermine » Wed Oct 18, 2006 9:17 pm

This is an interesting discussion, and to be perfectly honest, I don't know a lot about dirty bombs or their potential for destruction; so I looked it up.... I'll share if you care to bear with me.

Basic Info:
The term dirty bomb is most often used to refer to a Radiological Dispersal Device (RDD), a radiological weapon which combines radioactive material with conventional explosives. Though an RDD is designed to disperse radioactive material over a large area, the conventional explosive would likely have more immediate lethal effect than the radioactive material. At levels created from most probable sources, not enough radiation would be present to cause severe illness or death. A test explosion and subsequent calculations done by the United States Department of Energy found that assuming nothing is done to clean up the affected area and everyone stays in the affected area for 1 year, the radiation exposure would be "fairly high". However, recent analysis of the Chernobyl fallout seems to show that many people are hardly affected over 5 years and more.

Because a terrorist dirty bomb is unlikely to cause many deaths, many do not consider this to be a weapon of mass destruction. Its purpose would presumably be to create psychological, not physical, harm through ignorance, mass panic, and terror (for this reason they are sometimes called "weapons of mass disruption"). Additionally, decontamination of the affected area might require considerable time and expense, rendering affected areas partly unusable and causing economic damage.


Government "Fact Sheet":
Background

In order to better inform the public on what a dirty bomb is and what terrorists might intend to try to accomplish in setting off such a weapon, the following information is provided. Given the scores of exercises–federal, state and local–being staged to assure that all emergency response organizations are properly equipped, trained and exercised to respond to terrorist chemical, biological or radiological attack, we believe members of the public, as well as news organizations, will value some concise, straightforward information.

Basically, the principal type of dirty bomb, or Radiological Dispersal Device (RDD), combines a conventional explosive, such as dynamite, with radioactive material. In most instances, the conventional explosive itself would have more immediate lethality than the radioactive material. At the levels created by most probable sources, not enough radiation would be present in a dirty bomb to kill people or cause severe illness. For example, most radioactive material employed in hospitals for diagnosis or treatment of cancer is sufficiently benign that about 100,000 patients a day are released with this material in their bodies.

However, certain other radioactive materials, dispersed in the air, could contaminate up to several city blocks, creating fear and possibly panic and requiring potentially costly cleanup. Prompt, accurate, non-emotional public information might prevent the panic sought by terrorists.

A second type of RDD might involve a powerful radioactive source hidden in a public place, such as a trash receptacle in a busy train or subway station, where people passing close to the source might get a significant dose of radiation.

A dirty bomb is in no way similar to a nuclear weapon. The presumed purpose of its use would be therefore not as a Weapon of Mass Destruction but rather as a Weapon of Mass Disruption.
Impact of a Dirty Bomb

The extent of local contamination would depend on a number of factors, including the size of the explosive, the amount and type of radioactive material used, and weather conditions. Prompt detectability of the kind of radioactive material employed would greatly assist local authorities in advising the community on protective measures, such as quickly leaving the immediate area, or going inside until being further advised. Subsequent decontamination of the affected area could involve considerable time and expense.
Sources of Radioactive Material

Past experience suggests there has not been a pattern of collecting such sources for the purpose of assembling a dirty bomb. Only one high-risk radioactive source has not been recovered in the last five years in the United States. However, this source (Iridium-192) would no longer be considered a high-risk source because much of the radioactivity has decayed away since it was reported stolen in 1999. In fact, the combined total of all unrecovered sources over a 5-year time span would barely reach the threshold for one high-risk radioactive source. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said world-wide. The U.S. Government is working to strengthen controls on high-risk radioactive sources both at home and abroad.
What People Should Do Following an Explosion

* Move away from the immediate area--at least several blocks from the explosion--and go inside. This will reduce exposure to any radioactive airborne dust.

* Turn on local radio or TV channels for advisories from emergency response and health authorities.

* If facilities are available, remove clothes and place them in a sealed plastic bag. Saving contaminated clothing will allow testing for radiation exposure.

* Take a shower to wash off dust and dirt. This will reduce total radiation exposure, if the explosive device contained radioactive material.

* If radioactive material was released, local news broadcasts will advise people where to report for radiation monitoring and blood and other tests to determine whether they were in fact exposed and what steps to take to protect their health.


Federation of American Scientists:

Significant amounts of radioactive materials are stored in laboratories, food irradiation plants, oil drilling facilities, medical centers, and many other sites. Cobalt-60 and cesium-137 are used in food disinfection, medical equipment sterilization, and cancer treatments. During the 1960s and 1970s the federal government encouraged the use of plutonium in university facilities studying nuclear engineering and nuclear physics. Americium is used in smoke detectors and in devices that find oil sources.

With the exception of nuclear power reactors, commercial facilities do not have the types or volumes of materials usable for making nuclear weapons. Facility owners provide adequate security when they have a vested interest in protecting commercially valuable material. However, once radioactive materials are no longer needed and costs of appropriate disposal are high, security measures become lax, and the likelihood of abandonment or theft increases.

We must wrestle with the possibility that sophisticated terrorist groups may be interested in obtaining these materials and with the enormous danger to society that such thefts might present. Significant quantities of radioactive material have been lost or stolen from US facilities during the past few years and thefts of foreign sources have led to fatalities. In the US, sources have been found abandoned in scrap yards, vehicles, and residential buildings.

If these materials were dispersed in an urban area, they would pose a serious health hazard. Intense sources of gamma rays can cause acute radiation poisoning, or even fatalities at high doses. Long-term exposure to low levels of gamma rays can cause cancer. If alpha emitters, such as plutonium, americium or other elements, are present in the environment in particles small enough to be inhaled, these particles can become lodged in the lungs and damage tissue, leading to long-term cancers.

Radiological attacks constitute a credible threat. Radioactive materials that could be used for such attacks are stored in thousands of facilities around the US, many of which may not be adequately protected against theft by determined terrorists. Some of this material could be easily dispersed in urban areas by using conventional explosives or by other methods.

Radiological attacks would not result in the hundreds of thousands of fatalities that could be caused by a crude nuclear weapon, though they could contaminate large urban areas.

Materials that could easily be lost or stolen could contaminate tens of city blocks at a level that would require prompt evacuation and create terror in large communities even if radiation casualties were low. But, since there are often no effective ways to decontaminate buildings that have been exposed at these levels, demolition may be the only practical solution.


It's the chaos, not the chemicals, that likely would cause the most harm should a "dirty bomb" explode, experts say. Heart attacks, not radiation poisoning, might claim more victims.

People within a half-mile radius of even a particularly potent dirty bomb would be exposed to less than the average dose of radiation a person receives naturally within a year, according to the American Institute of Physics' Web site. Most people who work in radiation environments annually receive 10 times the exposure of a person within a half-mile of a dirty bomb, the site states.

Stress and fear-induced heart attacks are more likely to cause deaths after a dirty bomb explosion than the radioactive material.

It's the ignorance of the actual threat that produces the most harm. People may mistakenly envision a small-scale version of the nuclear devastation experienced at Hiroshima, Japan. But the radioactive material in dirty bombs would not likely cause any more harm than that of the explosion itself, according to the Council on Foreign Relations. The size of the explosive device would dictate the extent of any death toll.

Information is the best way to combat the terror a dirty bomb would create, according to the American Institute of Physics. The site advises using radiation officers to quickly measure radiation levels, provide a realistic risk assessment and curtail public panic.
If you're a battery, you're either working or you're dead....
Coppermine
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar

Posts: 8840
Joined: 6 Sep 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Pennsyltucky

Postby thedude » Wed Oct 18, 2006 11:55 pm

I am sure (despite the being convinced that nothing will occur) College and pro teams will take extra efforts, probably increasing security checks and actually search women.
"I do not think baseball of today is any better than it was 30 years ago... I still think Radbourne is the greatest of the pitchers." John Sullivan 1914-Old athletes never change.
thedude
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicPick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 8413
(Past Year: 2)
Joined: 18 Dec 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: The Good Life

Postby Melo255 » Thu Oct 19, 2006 12:41 am

bronxxbomber wrote:I always thought these extremists would go for the financial centers of the world. I mean that's where it would really hurt. The US lost billions on the exchange with that attack (nyse closed on a non holiday. scary). I can't imagine what kind of ripple effect if the exchanges were knocked out for more than a day.



I've been saying this since 9/11. I can't think of a single potential target that would devastate this country more than if the New York Stock Exchange were destroyed. Our country would be severely crippled. Scary thought.
Melo255
Major League Manager
Major League Manager

User avatar

Posts: 1411
Joined: 5 Mar 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: PAO Thira 13

Postby thedude » Thu Oct 19, 2006 12:49 am

Melo255 wrote:
bronxxbomber wrote:I always thought these extremists would go for the financial centers of the world. I mean that's where it would really hurt. The US lost billions on the exchange with that attack (nyse closed on a non holiday. scary). I can't imagine what kind of ripple effect if the exchanges were knocked out for more than a day.



I've been saying this since 9/11. I can't think of a single potential target that would devastate this country more than if the New York Stock Exchange were destroyed. Our country would be severely crippled. Scary thought.



Isn't the NYSE closed on weekends? Lets face it, if they thought it would be necessary, they could move the brokers to another location while the the building is rebuilt. Remember there is a stock exchange in every major city (Boston, Chicago, ect) so having one or two closed for a couple of days isn't the worst thing. And besides many trades are now made online. Destroying anyone building won't do any major impact on the country besides the psychological impact on the American mind.
"I do not think baseball of today is any better than it was 30 years ago... I still think Radbourne is the greatest of the pitchers." John Sullivan 1914-Old athletes never change.
thedude
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicPick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 8413
(Past Year: 2)
Joined: 18 Dec 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: The Good Life

PreviousNext

Return to General Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: assiquate and 4 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Today's Games
Thursday, Oct. 2
(All times are EST, weather icons show forecast for game time)

Detroit at Baltimore
(5:37 pm)
Kansas City at LA Angels
(9:07 pm)

  • Fantasy Baseball
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact