Are YOU Preparing for Biowar & Nuclear Events???

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Are YOU planning to prepare for biowar and nuclear events if terrorists attack us here in the U.S.?? (Ted Koppel seemed to think attacks are imminent in his recent 5 part series on Nightline.)

If you ARE planning to prepare, please share what avenues you will take.

If NOT, please explain the reason. This may be beneficial to others.

Any other thoughts on this??

-- NT gal (Whowants2no@myplace.com), October 11, 1999

Answers

I AM!!!

Im prepared to run toward the mushroom cloud and hope i get vaporized...trying to live on a planet that has been nuked in a large way is futile....id rather die fast and get it over with.

Bio war....

Ill run toward the nearest cop/military personel with my gun blazing into the air...dont want to live through that either...

-- Cory Hill (coryh@strategic-services.net), October 11, 1999.


NO on both accounts.

I'm either gonna die right away, or shortly there after. To try and prepare or mitigate your damages in those scenario's would make life crappy..why?

Then again I'm the type that, if diagnosed with a terminal illness, would rather live my life freely and die earlier than live longer in the confines of a hospital.

I don't want to "survive", I want to LIVE.

-- CygnusXI (noburnt@toast.net), October 11, 1999.


I will don my tin foil hat and stand under the lamp post waiting for the aliens to retrieve me.

-- they (are@out.there), October 11, 1999.

My family tried that back in the 60's. Not much you can really do (my opinion), though some will argue that one. Not only can one not predict where and when something like that might happen, the wind, possibly humidty, pressure, cloud cover, etc, etc, etc. would all be factors. Typically, any terror type of use (nuclear) would be a surface burst, which is especially nasty (even with a smaller yield) in terms of throwing large amounts of crap into the air. I guess information and mobility would be as good as anything, even KI and 'bunkering' would require the information portion to be effective. Bio attacks would likely be subject to an incubation period, travel to and from the target area, wind, etc, etc, etc. Again, info and mobility, however, the info on this would likely come to late for the ones in the immediate area....

-- BH (silentvoice@pobox.com), October 11, 1999.

I vote for going home, bilding a fire, and start sacrificing small animals.

MFU

-- Man From Uncle 1999 (mfu1999@hotmail.com), October 11, 1999.



I have a small three legged stool especially
for this contingincy. I will sit on the stool,
put my head between my knees and kiss my a**
goodbye.

-- spider (spider0@usa.net), October 11, 1999.

NT gal,

You raise some great questions. I didn't get to see all the Nightline report but to hear that Ted Koppel seems to think attacks are imminent is disturbing. Any links to transcripts?

I don't think I want to be around to witness the aftermath of such attacks but I'd love to get more information regarding what can be done.

Oh, and chemical facility failures could easily result in a toxic release of deadly poisons into the air. I think that industry may be responsible for killing more people soon that a bio/chem attack could.

So, if anyone can share what military surplus gas masks are good to get, etc. I would appreciate it.

Mike

===============================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), October 11, 1999.


Avoid the cheap NBC gear at all costs. If getting MOPP gear make sure that the packages aren't really torn up too badly. (If they are ripped water could've damaged the activated charcoal in the suit.)

Best thing is to spend $80 or so on a new M17A2 Mask. These were replaced by the current M40 series, (which civilians cannot leagally own, but you can always check the pawn shops around larger military bases) Make sure that it is new, and has the green aluminum rings on the filters, NOT light blue. Difference blue are training filters, not go to war filters. Also be aware that the internal filters are only good for 3-4 hours of heavy exersion in an NBC envioron. 6-8 hours in a not exerting mode. The filters on the M17 CANNOT be changed in the NBC environ. You need to leave the area ASAP!!! That is about as cheap as I would go. Avoid the Isreali Gulf war leftovers, as well as ANY former warsaw pact countries NBC gear. The isreali stuff is too old, and the warsaw stuff is crap. Shop around...It can't hurt

-- Billy Boy (Rakkasn@yahoo.com), October 11, 1999.


OK, say I've got this gas mask on. How long do I wear it??? Minutes, days, what?

Also, How am I to know WHEN the filter needs changing??

Any experts out there?

-- NT gal (Whowants2no@myplace.com), October 11, 1999.


I purchased masks for my family, not the military type just Israeli. Basically, my reasoning went something like this: I don't think we would survive the big stuff no matter what we did, period. But for fallout, purchased Thyroblock and for chemical spills the mask. When I asked the vendor about the length of time the filter would last the answer is, it depends. How much pollutant is in the air and your exertion/breathing level. In other words, when it becomes difficult to breathe, change filters. Other than designating a 'safe' room in your home for blocking outside air I don't know what else we could do. Any other ideas, and remember some of us are on a real tight budget.

-- Sammie Davis (sammie0x@hotmail.com), October 11, 1999.


I also purchased the Israli masks and thyroid block.What is interesting is that most people do not realize that you can survive a nuclear blast or leak from a reactor and be just fine if you understand,how to prepare.I am 200 miles from a large city,and in reading about nulclear and biowar ,I would be ok where i am,some fallout if the winds shifted much.If you want to look into it I suggest fiquring out if you even have a chance to survive first.I studied the history of nuclear attacks and www.y2ksurvival.com has almost all the info you need on survival. As for Biowar ,again I am not in a big target area,but if you are,that Nightline story was interesting,it was said many times in the story THIS IS GOING TO HAPPEN we do not know when or where,but it will.How do you protect yourself against something you can not see or know is happening?They mentioned antibiotics to extend your life,but thats all they will do if you have the bug.But if you did not get it,I would take antibiotics anyway .I looked it up and the best to have on hand for anthrax is pennicillin,erythromycin,tetracycline. As for the gas masks i purchased I was told 100 hours,before changing to filter. Heck I fiqure ,If I am going to prepare for y2k.I dont want to die from nuclear or Biowar if I can help it.I want to eat all my food ,I spent money on to store. PS,If you go to nightlines web sight you will find info on the Biowar ,links and etc. www.mapcruzin.com has waste info,nuclear and chemical maps //maps.epa.gov has more Radiation trainning at www.envirowin.com/14057.htm Nuclear simulator at //es.rice.edu/projects/poli378/Nuclear_simulator.html Ps,Cant find the link but look uo federal nuclear sights also these may differ from the epa maps.I found a few more nuclear sights I did not know about on the Fed maps. Good Luck.................

-- Y2KME1 (y2kme1@hotmail.com), October 11, 1999.

Nuclear, iodine, stay inside as long as you can. You'll make it. Your odds of being close enough to ground zero to die clean are very low. Unless of course you live downtown at a typical target city.

Biowar, if bacterial have antibiotics. How will you know? Try them if they work great if they don't it's probably a virus. A lot of people will still survive. Some of the worst still have a 50% survival rate. The really young and old fare the worst.

Chemwar is unlikely as it's generally ineffective except in enclosed spaces. Again big citys, but why are you still there. But being downwind of a burning chem plant is really almost the same thing. Again stay inside. Unless you can flee perpendicular to the prevailing wind and get out of the plume.

Conclusion: Even worst case scenarios are survivable if you just keep your head.

Remember, what the doormouse said....Keep your head....Keep your head.

-- LM (latemarch@usa.net), October 11, 1999.


What is a doormouse?

-- Me (me@me.me), October 11, 1999.

"Im prepared to run toward the mushroom cloud and hope i get vaporized...trying to live on a planet that has been nuked in a large way is futile....id rather die fast and get it over with."

So be it....you must be single and a non-parent. Even if I felt the way you do (which I don't) I have a young son. I don't have the option of "giving up" so I prepare as I can. Got masks, filters, suits, gloves, some decon supplies, working on a air processing system (UV light and multistage air filtration with HEPA as a last stage) to create positive pressure in my home. Fairly extensive prep for something that doesn't seem very likely to many.

Personally I believe either nuclear or biological attacks are survivable (assuming you aren't hit on the head with a 50kt warhead). I've been studying virology and epidemiology as of late because this strikes me as the most likely WMD threat for the near term.

On masks. My research indicates that the M40 and MCU-2/P masks are likely the best choice...both use the same 40mm standard NATO filters as used by the Israeli masks. My info source tells me that there are no "in-date" filters available for the M-17 series masks in the U.S. inventory. The URL below is to an outfit that sells masks (including MCU-2P and M-40s) as well as other biogear. Kinda pricey but they buy stuff from the companies that make the masks for the U.S. military. I got 2 MCU-2P units at auction on ebay (one small, one medium size) that come with new canned filters (Israeli) for $89 delivered. I commonly see these late model masks there.

http://www.gasmasks.com/

As for MOPP gear, I'm also told they have a limited shelf life and that the older suits are pretty much for one-time use. The latest stuff is much better (am told they can be laundered) and also more expensive. Cheaper than dirt (www.cheaperthandirt.com) has new Desert Storm era suits for $30....The gas mask folks offer the newer Satatoga system suits but I think they're getting close to $400 per. Personally we're going with new coated tyvek hooded coveralls which should suffice for most situations (www.gemplers.com and www.graingers.com). The outfit listed below manufactures the Saratoga series suits and has some useful info on their site.

http://www.texshield.com/index.html

So, living where I do, 70 miles north of S.F. in the boonies I don't expect a direct biothreat. In that I work disaster services (primarily comms) I may have to intereact and help an infected populace or may need to go to town for supplies. Hence my reasons for preps. My approach may be overkill but I'm looking forward to raising my son and enjoying his company...and don't want to compromise this.

Best of luck....DCK

-- Don Kulha (dkulha@vom.com), October 11, 1999.


I don't have much, Potassiam iodine and cs generator. (And a lot of prayer) You can't stop someone who truely wants to destroy. But what logic would it be to make a place inhabitible through nulear or bio weapons? I know there are crazies...... ps, I heard about Nightline's reportz, but it was too late for my eyes to keep open to watch.

-- bb (b@bb.net), October 11, 1999.


75-80% of inhabitants will survive the next nuclear attack. No, it won't be fun but don't buy into the myths that it's the end. Yeah, stay inside, take thyro block, close windows, repent and pray. Give glory to the Lord.

sdb

-- S. David Bays (SDBAYS@prodigy.net), October 11, 1999.


no,we are not preparing for nuclear or biological warfare..I found it curious,to say the least,the many times during this week long broadcast,that Ted Koppel stated,this WILL happen,it's just a matter of time. I kept thinking,what in the world can anyone do about this,logically? You can't wear a biohazard suit,or a gas mask constantly,waiting for the day it COULD happen...so my take on this was slightly different..everytime Ted mentioned we must be prepared for the inevitable biowar event,I substituted the words,Y2K event..because I think that's what he was really trying to say...

-- Cynthia Yanicko (yanicko@infonline.net), October 11, 1999.

I am a little prepared for a nuclear war. I did what I could but was so buried alive in Y2K prep costs it is minimal. In short, I read material explaining the hazards and myths, options I have etc. I did make the recommended towel veil with plastic insert for vision.

I investigated what one can realistically do in the event of a bio/ chem, and found it so diverse and requiring such different actions it did not seem possible to prepare for. (Such as finding out gas masks require special filters per different threat.) All I can have is a generic plan of action that may offset one type but not the other, such as burning my clothing, scrubbing with a brush in a shower, and attempting to sanitize anything like a door knob that I touched. I then also have things in my Y2K prep such as over the counter medication for stopping the "runs" so possibly I can help myself in attempting to survive. I know not to arrive at a hospital but to keep myself isolated and let help, if any exists, come to me.

-- Paula (chowbabe@pacbell.net), October 11, 1999.


I am sticking to supply chain disruptions, not chain reactions. If they drop the big ones, I hope one lands right on top of my head.

-- Bill (y2khippo@yahoo.com), October 11, 1999.

Surviving nuclear fallout (not the blast) is somewhat simple & straight-forward. Not very expensive.

THE MANUAL on this is: "Nuclear War Survival Skills" by Cresson H Kearny with forward DR Edward Teller Order from Oregon Institute of Science & Medicine, 2251 Dick George Road, Cave Junction, OR 97523. Enclose a check for $19.50. They also accept donations which is how they keep the price low. I estimate this manual is worth at least $500. Can be read onling at: www.oism.org/nwss/

Potassium Iodide. No prescription needed for this. This is dry chemical reagent grade at 1 LB for about $55 including tax & shipping. They take credit cards over the phone.

The Al-Chymist 17130 Mesa St Hesperia, CA 92345 760-948-4150

This is enough to take care of the neighborhood. Easy instructions are in the manual.

joetsr

-- Joe Tietjens (joetsr@excite.com), October 11, 1999.


Even miniscule amounts of radioactive isotopes can be concentrated by plants and animals until the dose is large enough to damage one's thyroid. Light fallout from a nuke elsewhere shouldn't be a death sentence. As long as the thyroid is saturated with iodine beforehand, a person would be fine. People around Chernobyl had trouble because they had inadequate iodine saturation to protect them, and those in Japan where the bomb was dropped had little thyroid trouble due to their diet that was high in iodine.

So we have a small supply of iodine pills (easier to administer than the liquid stuff). I don't worry about the longer term increase in cancer risk so much, because by comparison with the short-term risk it would be negligible. It is a risk-management kind of thing.

We also have sandbags we can fill and lay out on the floor above part of our basement, and with which we can block the small part of the basement wall that is above ground level. Gravel is plentiful, as is sand and dirt, and it doesn't take that long to fill the bags. Because we have to also live our lives in the meantime, we arbitrarily assume we would have some kind of warning or notice that a nuke had gone off, for planning purposes.

Dense material is what blocks radiation, because then there is a higher number of molecules between you and the radiation. It is the opposite, in a way, of how you conserve heat by interspersing air pockets. That's what the sandbags would be for--providing a radiation absorbing layer of sufficient density.

We always have a water supply indoors anyway, and a 70 gallon fishtank in the basement as well. And our pantry's down there. Heat would be more difficult if it were winter, but I think hiding out would only be neccesary a couple weeks or so, if our exposure was survivable in the first place. We wouldn't need the woodstove for that time, but could use camping supplies.

As for biological problems--family members would be exposed because of their jobs, probably before we knew there was a problem. But we'd die because of helping others in that case--not a bad exit, in the final analysis.

It is more a matter of being good stewards of the gift of life than fear of dying that motivates us, in the end.

-- S. Kohl (kohl@hcpd.com), October 11, 1999.


A few items of note: "Even miniscule amounts of radioactive isotopes can be concentrated by plants and animals until the dose is large enough to damage one's thyroid." - I'm not sure what this person is refering to, so I'll make a few guesses. Thyroid damage is due to Iodine 131 which is a gas. Isotopes of cesium and stronium are not very soluable in regular water. For there to be any plant uptake, the mineral has to be soluable. Cs and St ARE soluable in water whose pH is so low that most plants won't grow in it. Therefore, only cranberry bogs are at risk and then only if deficient of calcium and phosphorus.

"75-80% of inhabitants will survive the next nuclear attack. No, it won't be fun but don't buy into the myths that it's the end." Let's clarify that. The capabilities of nuclear weapons have been over dramatized. Their power is large but fininte. That 70-80% refers to direct effects. Many! more would die afterward from ignorance and stupidity. A huge portion of people could survive with just a little knowledge ( http://home.earthlink.net/~kenseger/surv/surv.htm ) and a little bit of preparation.

There is a nuclear war preparations book whose title says it all, "The Reluctant Survivors". Ie., IF there is a nuke war, there are going to be a LOT of people surprised that they aren't dead, but soon will be due to their lack of simple preparations.

-- Ken Seger (kenseger@earthlink.net), October 12, 1999.


If you see this equipment, put on your gas mask.

M93A1 Fox NBCRS

fox2.gif (26058 bytes)

Joint Services Lightweight NBC Recon
System

jlnbcrs2.gif (26100 bytes)

The M21 Alarm is the first standoff
chemical agent detector approved for
fielding to the soldier.

m21b.gif (42598 bytes)

The M22 is an "off-the-shelf" automatic
chemical agent alarm system capable of
detecting and identifying standard blister
and nerve agents.

acada2.gif (31081 bytes)

The Chemically and Biologically Protected
Shelter (CBPS) is designed to provide a
contamination free, environmentally
controlled work area for a Battalion Aid Station
(BAS)

cbps.gif (46366 bytes)

Chemically Protected Deployable Medical
Systems (CP DEPMEDS)

cpdepmed.gif (61848 bytes)



-- Achoo (better@gesund.heit), October 12, 1999.

Ken Seger wrote:

"A few items of note: "Even miniscule amounts of radioactive isotopes can be concentrated by plants and animals until the dose is large enough to damage one's thyroid." - I'm not sure what this person is refering to, so I'll make a few guesses. Thyroid damage is due to Iodine 131 which is a gas. Isotopes of cesium and stronium are not very soluable in regular water. For there to be any plant uptake, the mineral has to be soluable. Cs and St ARE soluable in water whose pH is so low that most plants won't grow in it. Therefore, only cranberry bogs are at risk and then only if deficient of calcium and phosphorus."

This is not my area of expertise--but here's some explanation:

"The dangers from radioactive iodine in milk produced by cows that ate fallout-contaminated feeds or drank fallout-contaminated water would be minimized if Americans did not consume dairy products for several weeks after the arrival of war fallout. Safe milk and other baby foods would be the only essential foods that soon would be in very short supply. THe parents of babies and young children who had stored potassium iodide would be especially thankful they had made this very inexpensive preparation, that can give 99% effective protection to the thyroid. All members of families with a supply of potassium iodide could safely eat a normal diet long before those without it could do so." (taken from "Nuclear War Survival Skills" by Cresson H. Kearny, author of the original 1979 Oak Ridge National Laboratory Edition, foreword by Dr. Edward Tellar)

A scientist (soils physics--studies groundwater contamination by pesticides and fertilizers, for example) who has researched this stuff personally on the side for years also told me that when we tested some nukes (in Utah? can't remember) that the fallout a certain distance away was indetectable on the ground, so they thought it was safe for the people living at that range from the nuclear test.

But they got into trouble. Children in the area starting losing thyroid function. They discovered that the undetectable radioactive iodine, so little it didn't even register on their instruments, was nevertheless concentrated by plants and animals, and this resulted in medical trouble for people. Perhaps the plants were merely contaminated by the addition of contaminated dust, as opposed to incorporating the contaminated iodine metabolically. But the cows put the iodine into their milk. So might human mothers.

-- S. Kohl (kohl@hcpd.com), October 13, 1999.


Oops. Page number for quote in above post was "page 113".

-- S. Kohl (kohl@hcpd.com), October 13, 1999.

No. I live on Kaua'i, and don't expect biowar or nuclear war events here. But we do have a WW II bunker...

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), October 13, 1999.

Don't rub it in Monk man. But if there is a landing on your island where will you run to?

Nyquist projects that 60-80 million Americans would survive a full scale Russian NBC attack. There would be many who didn't prepare in that group. But there will be many who did, and who will be in areas that will be healthy. Eg. N. Cal.

What I am addressing is the fatalist approach to a NBC attack. That seems to be the going argument. 'Well, nothing anybody can do.....don't want to live in a world after a NBC attack blah, blah, blah.' What a bunch of cowards. What if you don't die after an attack? Are you just going to sit around and wish you were dead?

There are going to be a lot of stray children around. There will be a lot to do. There will be an immediate response to gather what remains and fight back. If by the grace of God I am alive I will help the children and kick some butt. Psalm 91&37.

For more info on how to prepare go to: Skousen's homepage

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), October 13, 1999.


Is nuclear war survivable?

) 1999 WorldNetDaily.com

As I write about Russia's nuclear war preparations, I get some interesting mail in response. Some correspondents imagine I am totally ignorant. They point out that nuclear war would cause "nuclear winter," and everyone would die. Since nobody wants to die, nobody would ever start a nuclear war (and nobody would ever seriously prepare for one). Other correspondents suggest I am ignorant of the world-destroying effects of nuclear radiation.

I patiently reply to these correspondents that nuclear war would not be the end of the world. I then point to studies showing that "nuclear winter" has no scientific basis, that fallout from a nuclear war would not kill all life on earth. Surprisingly, few of my correspondents are convinced. They prefer apocalyptic myths created by pop scientists, movie producers and journalists. If Dr. Carl Sagan once said "nuclear winter" would follow a nuclear war, then it must be true. If radiation wipes out mankind in a movie, then that's what we can expect in real life.

But Carl Sagan was wrong about nuclear winter. And the movie "On the Beach" misled American filmgoers about the effects of fallout. It is time, once and for all, to lay these myths to rest. Nuclear war would not bring about the end of the world, though it would be horribly destructive.

The truth is, many prominent physicists have condemned the nuclear winter hypothesis. Nobel laureate Freeman Dyson once said of nuclear winter research, "It's an absolutely atrocious piece of science, but I quite despair of setting the public record straight."

Professor Michael McElroy, a Harvard physics professor, also criticized the nuclear winter hypothesis. McElroy said that nuclear winter researchers "stacked the deck" in their study, which was titled "Nuclear Winter: Global Consequences of Multiple Nuclear Explosions" (Science, December 1983).

Nuclear winter is the theory that the mass use of nuclear weapons would create enough smoke and dust to blot out the sun, causing a catastrophic drop in global temperatures. According to Carl Sagan, in this situation the earth would freeze. No crops could be grown. Humanity would die of cold and starvation.

In truth, natural disasters have frequently produced smoke and dust far greater than those expected from a nuclear war. In 1883 Krakatoa exploded with a blast equivalent to 10,000 one-megaton bombs, a detonation greater than the combined nuclear arsenals of planet earth. The Krakatoa explosion had negligible weather effects. Even more disastrous, going back many thousands of years, a meteor struck Quebec with the force of 17.5 million one-megaton bombs, creating a crater 63 kilometers in diameter. But the world did not freeze. Life on earth was not extinguished.

Consider the views of Professor George Rathjens of MIT, a known antinuclear activist, who said, "Nuclear winter is the worst example of misrepresentation of science to the public in my memory." Also consider Professor Russell Seitz, at Harvard University's Center for International Affairs, who says that the nuclear winter hypothesis has been discredited.

Two researchers, Starley Thompson and Stephen Schneider, debunked the nuclear winter hypothesis in the summer 1986 issue of Foreign Affairs. Thompson and Schneider stated: "the global apocalyptic conclusions of the initial nuclear winter hypothesis can now be relegated to a vanishingly low level of probability."

OK, so nuclear winter isn't going to happen. What about nuclear fallout? Wouldn't the radiation from a nuclear war contaminate the whole earth, killing everyone?

The short answer is: absolutely not. Nuclear fallout is a problem, but we should not exaggerate its effects. As it happens, there are two types of fallout produced by nuclear detonations. These are: 1) delayed fallout; and 2) short-term fallout.

According to researcher Peter V. Pry, "Delayed fallout will not, contrary to popular belief, gradually kill billions of people everywhere in the world." Of course, delayed fallout would increase the number of people dying of lymphatic cancer, leukemia, and cancer of the thyroid. "However," says Pry, "these deaths would probably be far fewer than deaths now resulting from ... smoking, or from automobile accidents."

The real hazard in a nuclear war is the short-term fallout. This is a type of fallout created when a nuclear weapon is detonated at ground level. This type of fallout could kill millions of people, depending on the targeting strategy of the attacking country. But short-term fallout rapidly subsides to safe levels in 13 to 18 days. It is not permanent. People who live outside of the affected areas will be fine. Those in affected areas can survive if they have access to underground shelters. In some areas, staying indoors may even suffice.

Contrary to popular misconception, there were no documented deaths from short-term or delayed fallout at either Hiroshima or Nagasaki. These blasts were low airbursts, which produced minimal fallout effects. Today's thermonuclear weapons are even "cleaner." If used in airburst mode, these weapons would produce few (if any) fallout casualties.

On their side, Russian military experts believe that the next world war will be a nuclear missile war. They know that nuclear weapons cannot cause the end of the world. According to the Russian military writer, A. S. Milovidov, "There is profound error and harm in the disoriented claims of bourgeois ideologues that there will be no victor in a thermonuclear world war." Milovidov explains that Western objections to the mass use of nuclear weapons are based on "a subjective judgment. It expresses mere protest against nuclear war."

Another Russian theorist, Captain First Rank V. Kulakov, believes that a mass nuclear strike may not be enough to defeat "a strong enemy, with extensive territory enabling him to use space and time for the organizations of active and passive defense. ..."

Russian military theory regards nuclear war as highly destructive, but nonetheless winnable. Russian generals do not exaggerate the effects of mass destruction weapons. Although nuclear war would be unprecedented in its death-dealing potential, Russian strategists believe that a well-prepared system of tunnels and underground bunkers could save many millions of lives. That is why Russia has built a comprehensive shelter system for its urban populace.

On the American side as well, there have been studies which suggest that nuclear war is survivable. The famous 1960 Rand Corporation study, "On Thermonuclear War," says, "Even if 100 metropolitan areas [in the USA] are destroyed, there would be more wealth in this country than there is in all of Russia today and more skills than were available to that country in the forties. The United States is a very wealthy and well-educated country."

The Rand study states that even if half the U.S. population were killed, "the survivors would not just lie down and die. Nor would they necessarily suffer a disastrous social disorganization."

Despite so many scholarly works and scientific studies, myths about nuclear war persist. These myths serve to confuse and misinform the American public. Because of these myths the United States government did not bother to build fallout shelters for its people. Because of these myths we do not take seriously the nuclear war preparations of Russia and China.

Last February I was with the Russian military defector, Col. Stanislav Lunev. We were about to go into a meeting with a group of retired military and CIA officials. I told Col. Lunev that the people we were about to meet did not believe nuclear weapons were usable.

"Why not?" he asked, surprised.

"Because they believe the little fishies and whales would all be killed if there were a nuclear exchange," I replied, sarcastically.

"So what?" replied Lunev. "The Russian general staff doesn't care."

The objective in war is victory. As every good general knows, there are many paths to victory. One of these paths might be a thermonuclear path. If this determination has been arrived at in Moscow and Beijing, it could explain a great deal of what we're seeing today. Hopefully, the situation is not so serious. Nonetheless, we must be vigilant and we must be better informed.

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), October 13, 1999.


Here's what I think - the attack is not from outside. It is from within. The biowarfare has been going on in the form of the chemtrails in the sky for over one year. See: www.contrailconnection.com And destruction of the Earth habitat in general has been going on for longer than that. See:www.geocities.com/RainForest/Wetlands/1456 If some TV show is pointing the finger to look outside this is a diversion. Americans need to wake up! See: www.geocities.com/mothersalert and read the articles.

-- Sara (sara3636@aol.com), October 14, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ