What SHOULD be done if terrorists nuke an American city?

[Silverhair]

Another poster started a good thread asking what would happen if an American city was nuked by terrorists. I would like to see what DUers think should be done. As usual, I will wait until I give my answer, because I don't want people responding to my answer, instead I want to see what DUers think.

Scenario: You are President of the United States, having been elected five months ago by a landslide and carrying a strong majority in both houses of congress into office with you. Two days ago NYC was nuked with a ground detonated nuke, about 40KT, in downtown Manhattan. You did all the appropriate first response emergency management things. Tests on the radioactivity, and excellent intelligence, (Your own and input from other countries too.) indicates a North Korean nuke, delivered by a middle eastern Islamic terrorist group like Al Quada.

Now what do you do?

[HEyHEY]

1. All smiles and sunshine aren't we?

I'd take defensive measures...then offensive.

[stepnw1f]

2. Hmmmm

I would get the UN and as many of the world's most prominent leaders to help in the aftermath, then initiate more inductees into the UN to counter present dangers.

[IronLionZion]

3. a very cheerful thread

I would build up a coalition and hopefully the nation(s) containing the terrorists would join. Then war! We'd cleanse the Middle East of Al Qaeda once and for all. I would certainly NOT nuke any city though.

[IronLionZion]

9. And definitely more trade and respectful communication

with the Middle Eastern countries to generate good will.

[lcordero]

4. Haul ass to Cheyenne mountain and erase all of the other

landmasses off of the face of the planet.

[Dogmudgeon]

5. First of all ...

... it would take a while to determine just who did the nuking. There would be plenty of gossip on the intelligence lines, so the response will have to wait until responsibility can be assessed.

I'd prefer to have it handled by a UN inquest, but most Americans have come to believe that the UN is some kind of Big-Brother operation, and would never go for it.

Then, once the public formed an idea of who did it, they (or we) would call for blood. But if a cell of, say, 200 terrorists coordinated the attack, would it serve justice to deliver a nuclear bomb to NK or some Moslem nation?

I think it's always OK to go after terrorists. But the call for a response to the nuclear bombing of an American city would not be based on rational thought for a long while.

--bkl

[Cat Atomic]

6. Arrest Bush.

[MattNC]

7. i'd unleash

tactical nukes and some of our larger conventional bombs against military and regime targets in N. Korea.

[flaminbats]

50. Wouldn't you be a little worried about China nuking us back?

Lets face it, if someone nukes us and our intelligence doesn't enable us to stop this attack...then what makes you think it would be reliable enough to nuke millions in a country which was indirectly or maybe not even remotely involved?

I don't see how nuking North Korea would solve the problem, but could instead trigger off a large scale nuclear war. :nuke:

[Cleita]

8. Can't go for the nuke scenario. It's just to difficult to

accomplish, even for a sovereign nation like N. Korea. We have to look for a fairly low tech but very easy to deliver devastating scenario like 9-11. Turning jet airplanes into bombs that destroy two of the tallest buildings in New York makes a spectacular hit, but if you examine it, it's very low tech.

The only way for our nation to beat these evil geniuses is to try to think like them. What can't they do? They can't deliver nukes, but what CAN they do. In here lies the germ of the next thing that they do. Poisoning our water would be low tech but effective, but is Homeland Security doing anything to prevent something like this? I dunno.

[lastknowngood]

10. bend over and kiss

your ass goodby.

[Silverhair]

14. They CAN deliver nukes. They just can't do it in the ordinary manner.

You are probably thinking of an air delivery of a nuke, but there or other ways, lots of them. It ain't that hard.

[Cleita]

19. If they try "other" ways, most likely they will be finished

off before they get to us. Dealing with radioactive materials takes some really high tech systems.

[maggrwaggr]

32. yeah, remember the Russian mobsters who tried to smuggle

radioactive stuff? They didn't last long. Got serious radiation poisoning.

[Cleita]

35. Anybody read Stephen King's "The Stand"?

Well, among the many subplots was one about the nutcase who pulls a nuke out of one of the silos around at that time. He manually drags it to Las Vegas across Nevada, because that's where the devil has set up his headquarters. King's description of what the man looks like when he reaches Las Vegas gives you a pretty good idea what happens to you when you come in contact with radioactive material. Of course he sets it off and blows everyone up. This is what it would take to bring a bomb in.

[MrSlayer]

37. Trashcan Man

"Digin' ya Trash! Why'd you burn up old lady Semple's pension check?"

One of my favorite King characters.

[Cleita]

39. Thanks, I couldn't remember the name. n/t

[Silverhair]

42. Your information is badly wrong.

When in the Navy, I attended a Nuclear Weapons School. There are ways to get them in. And they don't irradiate you to be near one.

[Cleita]

55. The Navy, huh? Whatever.

Isn't this Navy part of the same government who told me my peers way back when that if we pulled our jackets over our heads at first flash and dove under our desks in a frog position that we could not only survive a nuclear attack but the radiation that comes with it. Remember DUCK AND COVER?

[murielm99]

88. How could I ever forget

Duck and Cover?

Very awkward for little girls, too. We had to wear dresses to school in those days.

[mulethree]

64. coffee cans

If the russian mobsters incident he is referring to it was plutonium in coffee cans in georgia? Thats definitely asking for trouble.

[RapidCreek]

111. When I was in the Navy I attended Nuclear Reactor school

They told me there was no such thing as a meltdown...two years later my buddy lost a kidney while helping to clean up Chernobyl.

Even if you are correct...and there are ways to get them in....it would be cost prohibitive, unnecessarily risky and unnecessary. There are detectors in most large metropolitan cities that are capable of detecting a 40 kiloton Nuc. Why bother with nuclear weapons when the same effect may be had in other simpler ways? 9/11 is proof of what I say. For the price of a few box cutters....a few bottles of mace and a few airplane tickets terrorist succeeded in killing 3000 people.

Low tech works.....it always has. Less is more. The less complex a criminal venture is the less chance its perpetrates have of getting caught.



RC

[Throckmorton]

85. Hello,

Do you work with nuclear materials?

[LifeDuringWartime]

98. the only stephen king novel ive ever read

and damn was it good!

[ma4t]

92. High tech????? Definitely not.

"Dealing with radioactive materials takes some really high tech systems."

I beg to differ. Remember the first few nuclear weapons were the products of 1940s technology. Just how high tech do you consider anything that is 60 years old?

[Cleita]

99. Well, a lot of people died from mysterious cancers back then

who were involved. Everything was top secret though, so I don't know if the truth will ever be known. But, rather than argue about this, I have submitted a question to "Ask the experts" on the Scientific American website and I hope they chose to answer it. If they do, I will post it.

[Silverhair]

102. How about posting the question here?

There are a lot of knowledgable people on almost any subject here at DU, and some real good searchers that can find almost anything on the web.

Give us a shot at it.

[Cleita]

103. The question I wrote was:

There is a discussion going on at another website bulletin board about the possibility of terrorists bringing in nuclear bombs to destroy an American city. Some of us think they can't do this without proper tech facilities and others think there is no problem.

(Then I posted a link to your thread so the experts could see for themselves what was being said, pro and con.)

Who is right and who is wrong?

I have paraphrased here because I don't remember exactly how I worded it to them, but this was the jist. If any one of the knowledgable people you speak of want to weigh in with facts and more importantly links to scientific sources, I hope they do.

[Silverhair]

104. I have some personal experience in working with & around nukes.

And I have a minor in physics, and have kept up on the sciences since I graduated. However, I will do some looking around on the web and see what competent sources I can find.

Thanks for sharing the question.

And I have survived 28 years since I was last close to a nuke, and don't have a bad diseases except diabetes and since I am 5' 10" and weight 314lbs, and have loved sweets since I was young, I think you can see the cause of the diabetes.

BTW - Unrelated to the nukes but the diabetes is improving greatly. The doctor and my loving wife have finally got me to exercising and losing weight. From 314 I am now down to 290, and my bicep has increased by 3/4", and I have cut my insulin requirement to 1/3 of what it was. The doc thinks I can eventually get off insulin.

[Silverhair]

106. I found that at "The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists."

They are a peace organization of Atomic Scientists. They are the ones with the famous countdown clock that shows a few minutes to midnight. I hope you will accept them as authoritative. Here is the link to an article that I found, and the summary paragraph:

http://www.thebulletin.org/issues/2002/ma02/ma02richelson.html

"Of course, even advance warning is no guarantee of success, given the difficulty of locating a hidden nuclear device and the limited time that may be available. A comment in the Nevada Operations Office’s after-action report on Mirage Gold is chilling, not as a criticism of NEST members, with their diverse talents and dedication, but as an acknowledgment of a harsh reality. The report notes that it would be “a drastic mistake to assume that NEST technology and procedures will always succeed, resulting in zero nuclear yield.”"

The entire article is worth a read. It isn't long.

[Silverhair]

107. Here is something else from "The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists"

Link: http://www.thebulletin.org/issues/2003/ma03/ma03stober.html

"Hohenemser and his co-authors had concluded that designing the bomb was relatively easy. There was no secret. The hard part, they reported, would be getting the plutonium or enriched uranium."

and from the same article:

"But there was one last surprise for the boys of the Nth Country. “If you guys are up to it we want to do a little add-on,” an administrator told Selden. “We want you to do a thermonuclear.” They were given only six weeks to work on it, so their design was more theoretical than practical. They did not discover radiation implosion, the key to U.S. hydrogen bombs, but they came up with something that would have worked well enough for a terrorist. “We actually did come up with some thermonuclear yields,” Selden said."

That was in 1965, before personal computers, and the internet.

and this from the same article about modern times:

"From his experience, Dobson believes Al Qaeda, if it were not on the run, could attain the world’s worst terror weapon. “It seems to me that this Al Qaeda is enough of an organization, with enough people and enough funding that they probably could.” He worries about sea-going shipping containers, which are large enough to hold a heavy, conservatively designed weapon that would have a high chance of success.

“They could send it up Chesapeake Bay, San Francisco Bay, Puget Sound, or the Mississippi River. You could go any place, almost. Most large cities are either coastal or on a major river, where barge-type shipping goes,” Dobson said."

Remember, these guys ARE ATOMIC BOMB SCIENTISTS.

[Cleita]

17. I doubt it.

Governments have been trying to scare Americans with nukes as far back as Hiroshima. It's only a scare tactic. I'm not saying any nutcases like Osama or Saddam wouldn't try it if they could. It's just too difficult. The only way they could would be to detonate one of our nuke power plants and that would take some real engineering skills not to mention scientific knowledge. How many scientists of that caliber do you think want to kow tow to Osama?

[oostevo]

47. You can't

You can't "detonate" a power plant and create a nuclear explosion -- there (purposefully) isn't enough fissionable material inside a power plant. The best you could hope for is spreading radiation all over the area.

[Cleita]

56. And spreading radiation all over the place is okay?

eom

[MrSlayer]

24. I concur.

It would be nearly impossible. It's deadly to handle and easy to detect. Any nuke strike on the U.S. in any form is coming from within.

[sweetheart]

112. Think like a terrorist?

What kind of open borders are there theat are unpoliced and unthought about? Where they are surely sloppy, due to poor vigilance. How much dynamite could you pack in to 10 shipping containers with the components separated in to separate containers and using teh entire multi-container device to deliver an air-fuel explosive attack at a freight depot.

Do this at 10 freight depots simultaneously for flourish. New orleans, los angeles, san diego, oakland, san francisco, seattle portland, chicago, boston, new jersey, new york. Likely an attack on the freight infrastructure would seriously cripple and totally destroy american supply chains for the remainder of the bush presidency.

Every petrol station is a suicide bomber's heaven... lighters sold at the counter.

There is no end to underground warfare if we explore the bottom, and the only people who will get killed are our children. One must always presume one's opponent is wise, or rather, that there is no opponent in heart, rather only in mind; giving mind the fool on the hill's credence.

Fertilizer cargo's!!! Oil tankers would probably burn a charm whilst in port. Any ship can get to any part of the us coastline and a device can be shipped to a point inland as siply as picking up in a car... but why go so high tech.... a few brilliantly designed particle charges could devastate a port... geesh, a nuke could already be sitting in a lead-lined container as i speak with the fuses counting down, in every petroleum port... up the ass, just like in star wars. :)

[JailForBush]

11. Why do anything?

The President should probably emulate the average American and say, "just deal with it."

Seriousy, if this country couldn't handle 9/11 (and it couldn't), I think a nuclear attack would destroy us. Republicans would scream for blood, echoed by Vichy Democrats, while ordinary citizens flee for the hills or watched Baywatch.

If we can't handle the war in Iraq (and we can't), how are we going to take on the Middle East again, along with North Korea? A nuclear counter-assault will only further destabilize the global economy and political structure. And what if a second nuclear bomb was smuggled into the U.S. and is detonated a couple days later?

We'd need the greatest international cooperation, and George W. Bush has squandered that, aided by Democrats.

Frankly, I think this country would be crippled if a nuclear weapon was merely found in a cargo container in some port - not detonated, just discovered.

I would be tempted to attack North Korea, because it presents a relatively clear target, but what would China have to say about that? And who are we going to target in the Middle East, when the entire region hates our guts (and rightly so)?

[codegreen]

12. confound the terrorists by claiming responsibility

"oops, my bad" we could say

[KG]

13. suspend the constitution and bill of rights, declare martial law.

and start arresting RWers, repooks and other various and sundry conservatives for their role in pissing off the rest of the world so badly that they felt retaliation was their last recourse to stop the US from using the rest off the world as its chattel. :)

[sweetladybug]

18. I would find out who did it and go after them, not some other

people or country because I wanted their oil.

[oneighty]

15. Terrorists guys say

after initial BOOM. "We have similar nukes located in many other American cities, retaliation from America will lead to one BOOM after the other.

Speculation of course.

180

[Silverhair]

16. Game theory says that would be the correct think for them to say. n/t

[mulethree]

21. Well even if they didn't

Your "intelligence" could come up with credible and verifiable evidence that they did.

And due to their being 100,000,000 lives at stake and the future of the country, possibly the world ...

You must submit to their ransom demands within the next 23 hours :
<insert agenda here>

[F.Gordon]

20. Would never happen

At least in NYC. Maybe Fargo, North Dakota. NYC has sensors in place that can sniff a fly-fart. There is no way anyone can "sneak" a 40 Kilo-Ton nuclear bomb into Manhattan. Maybe denonate one offshore.

Your scenario has too many questions. Who produced the fission material? North Korea? Pakistan? Russia? United States? Israel?

My other question would be.....does this mean The Daily Show would be cancelled? If so, then I'd be pissed....very pissed.

[oneighty]

22. Please explain

"Sniffer" device?

Curious.

180

[F.Gordon]

26. Same devices they used in Iraq

Up until December of 2002 the UN was posting the data from these devices. Then they shut down the data reporting because they didn't pick up even excessive body odor. They weren't helping the case for "war". But that's a subject for another thread....

Anywhoo...sensors are in place in NYC that would definitely pickup residual radiation from something as large as a 40 kilo-ton. They also can "sniff" chemical nerve agents. Not sure about the biological stuff.

BTW: Good to "see" ya' 180. I don't make it around these parts much these days. Nice to see a familar "face". I hardly recognize this place anymore.

[mulethree]

66. Medical Isotopes?

Lots and lots of medical radioactive isotopes in Manhattan.
Different kind of radiation?

[NickB79]

83. If it's 40 kilotons, an offshore blast would still level most of the city

Remember, Hiroshima was only around 12-15 kilotons, and 100,000 people died. A 40 kiloton nuke, within a few hundred yards of shore, would level everything within a mile and not have to deal with sensors. I think a harbor blast is probably the most likely way in which the US will ever be terrorist-nuked.

[spanone]

23. Attack Cuba

[KG]

34. i was thinking the canary islands might be a proper target.

:eyes:

[number6]

25. this will probably happen because Bush, the CIA and FBI

are incompetent, the bomb will probably arrive in a
shipping container, (we import so much) we get 10's
of thousands of these coming into the country.
This will happen because they did all the wrong
things , create a police state, pis off the world
and start wars with the wrong countries (Iraq).

An Ounce of prevention is worth Pound of cure.
How do prevent a 911 or a nuke attack ?
Intelligence Agencies need people with Language skills
and agents to infiltrate foreign groups like Al-Queda.

An intelligent President, and Advisor's, would help
rather than a macho drunk cowboy, reciting macho drunk cowboy
movie lines, yee-haw bring em on.

After the fact, what would I do ?
I'd think carefully before I started flinging bombs
around the world.

[Sam Lowry]

27. WWIII

And nothing short of it. Man, that would suck. And I'd be dead.

[MikeG]

28. Why, go out and kill more people, right? (Sarcasm)

We should grieve for the dead, repair the damage, try to correct the mistakes that caused it to happen and work for a more peaceful world.

[MikeG]

30. This kind of attack is inevitable.

Its going to happen - we just have to prepare ourselves to survive it and make it as rare as possible.

[phrenzy]

29. Never Say...

Wow, I'm surprised to see so many people here saying "Could never happen"

I would tell you - if somebody told me about the prospect of 20 people coordinating a 4 plane simultaneous hijack with trained pilots who could navigate the planes to fly into the world trade center and cause them to collapse - Ummm, my response would be 'could never happen'

Nuclear weapons technology is not at a standstill.

On the contrary, I would bet that most 'enemies' of the U.S. realize that this is the ONLY card they would have to play in the event of a major conflict with the U.S.

In any case, what I would do:

- Count on the outpouring of sympath and cooperation from the rest of the world to be staggering. Do NOT speak in belligerent tones. Speak in tones of 'humanity is in peril' etc. Make everybody realize that this threat is everybody's problem. Get as many international leaders to give statements of support, etc.

- With that international cooperation investigate as fast as possible and get the answer as fast as possible.

- Once the perpetrator has been established:

- If it is a loose terrorist group - you can really only track them down and any support of them. This would be a campaign of intelligence and cooperation. It's funny, because after 9/11 - if Saddam had been proven to have anything to do with it - the whole world would have marched in there and crushed his ass so fast. Instead, it was Al Qaeda and the Taliban - and nobody in their right mind defended either of those groups. After 9/11 they even had a chance to STAY IN POWER (the taliban) and CHOSE to say "Osama is our guest". Buh bye Taliban.

- If it is a country. A complete, swift and overwhelming invasion, bombing campaign. The government would have to be removed and most asked to surrender. This, along with a CONCERTED education effort to the population of those countries regarding the reasons for this invasion and a honest presentation of the EVIDENCE to the population. Think Post WWII germany. Making germans confront the nazi atrocities.

[Silverhair]

43. Most of the hard left was against the invasion of Afganistan.

Would a nuking of a USA city change that many hard left minds? Look how many DUers that have responded with themes of: "We would be nice to them."

[maggrwaggr]

31. I'd attack the country that tried to kill my Daddy

it would be the perfect excuse, now, wouldn't it?

Seriously, if that happened, I would start a major offensive to rid the world of nuclear weapons. Bounties for them, military actions to secure them, whatever it took.

I think there would be 100% support around the world for it.

[LWolf]

33. Scenario:

An unpopular, unelected president uses "terror" to push his agenda forward and keep people fearful enough to accept the loss of their civil liberties.

This fear becomes so accepted as part of the norm that it becomes accepted to speculate about possible nuclear attacks on US soil, without any evidence of terrorists groups having nuclear capability.

The more people talk about it, the more real it becomes. The more they focus on hypothetical responses to unrealistic scenarios. The more easily they are distracted from focusing on current events and issues currently decimating their nation for real.

Weapons of Mass Distraction.

[Silverhair]

48. This kind of speculation isn't new. It goes back long before

Bush, or even Clinton. I remember an article in a magazine speculating on something similar back in the early 60's. It is reasonable to ask, "What if:<Insert disaster>" Hell, this month's Discover magazine talks about what might happen if the ocean made a methane burp. That would be an extinction level event.

[Beam Me Up]

82. Whether it is "new" or not is irrelevant. . .

the point is, exercises like this are not only distractions from the need to create strategies for dealing with what is ACTUALLY going on around us, such notions LEGITIMIZES the "official" view that the so called "war on terrorism" is justified. We need a critical analysis, perhaps even a radical analysis, of what actually took place on 9/11. We need to apply that analysis to what is going on around us today. It is not external "terrorists" who are a threat to our society; rather it is the SPONSORS of state terrorism as it has unfolded since after the last world war.

BMU

[LWolf]

87. Thank you.

You "got" it!

:hi:

[DrWeird]

36. I'd have every country fire their missles at Orlando, Fl.

You know, for calibration.

[Robb]

38. For an interesting read, check out

...the CSIS http://www.csis.org/tnt/wildatom.pdf">"Wild Atom" exercise from 1998 (PDF file). Here's the blurb:

Nuclear explosives are no longer beyond the reach of terrorists. The Wild Atom simulation demonstrated that, because interdiction is difficult, governments must combat illicit possession of nuclear weapons, improve working relationships among domestic agencies, and curb rivalries among national and international counterproliferation and counterrorism officials. If a nuclear incident occurs, officials must be trained for consequence management; the national security community and the national disaster medical community should be well practiced in working together and with experts in other countries.

[ConsAreLiars]

40. The same things that a sane admin should done Sept/01

Develop actionable target info and a specific plan.
Build a world coalition.
Build anti-fundie alliances with appropriate forces in Islamic nations (Do same re: other denominations)

Demand that host countries take action, while concretizing plans for direct coalition actions against guerrilla centers of power (military, political, economic ...).

When useful, military force targeted as narrowly as possible would be a small component.


(The goal is to make the bad guys more isolated and exposed, not more popular.)

As for NK, arrest and try the PNAC cabal for treason.

[flaminbats]

41. elected five months ago?

step 1) Have all CIA and NSA members arrested and shot in the back for treason.
step 2) Reallocate money from the defense budget for a brand new intelligence network and to fully fund Nunn-Lugar.
step 3) Bring home all troops in Iraq and Afghanistan to help with the immediate evacuation of all living civilians wounded, or suffering from radiation sickness.
step 4) Seize all medical resources and food available from private corporations, along with other necessary commodities to help those in need.
step 5) Begin to seal off the contaminated area once people are evacuated.
step 6) Introduce a constitutional amendment requiring the Secretary of Defense, the President, and all other administration officials to act only under the strict supervision of the elected Congress.
step 7) Introduce another amendment stating that all administration officials and the President would be elected directly by the people, not by an electoral college.
step 8) ask all administration officials to testify before Congress, and release all classified info to them during judicial hearings.
step 9) ask for emergency assistance from the U.N. and members of NATO.
step 10) take responsibility for the disaster, ask for the resignation of every cabinet member, and then resign for not honoring the oath of office.

These measures may sound harsh, but people must not allow failed leaders to go unpunished, nor failed classified routines to go unnoticed. Allowing faith in a corrupt government is more dangerous than allowing corruption to destroy the people's security.

[Cocoa]

46. good answer

very good. You're right, it does sound drastic, but a nuclear attack calls for drastic steps.

I'd add a truth and reconciliation commission, we must air everything if we want to save our country.

[Muddleoftheroad]

72. Very good?

Are you kidding?

His first item: "Have all CIA and NSA members arrested and shot in the back for treason."

[flaminbats]

76. at least nobody will withhold necessary information again...

and remember, this intelligence is paid for with our tax money!

[stevedeshazer]

54. nuts

step 1 ) Stalin had all his military and intelligence officers killed. Look what happened...totally unprepared for Hitler.

step 6) Who would do this in such a crisis?

step 7) Unconstitutional.

step 10) you couldn't resign unless you were obviously to blame. Who would step in?

[flaminbats]

65. you comparing me to Stalin?

step 1) Stalin killed them for a reason....they played politics with intelligence, not that the replacements were any better! If the CIA knew, but didn't tell the President...then by definition they are traitors to their country. Treason is defined as "levying War against the United States, adhering to their enemies, or in giving aid and comfort to the enemy."
step 6) Unless the Congress knows what went wrong and all the facts, how will they better allocate money in the future, how will they know who to hold responsible for the disaster, and how will the President and other officials know what future actions Congress wants them to take?
step 7) How would holding a special session of Congress to embrace some Constitutional amendments be unconstitutional?
step 10) Any President who commands a military larger than all others on Earth combined would be at directly fault for not stopping a terrorist attack. Leadership not only means correcting serious mistakes, it also requires accepting responsibility for such failures when they do happen.

Again, I would actively shake things up before such an attack occurred. But terrible times may require some terrible responses. The objective is not to impose vengeance, but to destroy government secrecy before this secrecy destroys us!

[mulethree]

68. 10

Well having 55+% of the worlds military, and only having a wee little fraction of that set up for defense, is an inherited problem. Not exactly your fault. It does take time to make us a less irresistible target, or to convert the Defense Department from Power Projection and Empire Expansion over to actual defense.

[flaminbats]

70. true...

but all of us in this forum would respond in a more qualified and human fashion than shrub would.

One thing that occurred to me...how would one go about making sure there was no second bomb, while using flawed intelligence and not infringing on basic civil liberties?

If marshal law was declared, shouldn't Congress be in charge of insuring this power has tightly followed limits?

[Tinoire]

59. Excellent except for number 1 & 10

Would amend that to read the high command of the CIA, NSA, FBI and even possibly the military. Wouldn't shoot them though- just lock them up.

Number 10 is uneccessary- a man good enough to have done 1-9 needs to stick around. That's the kind of leadership we need.

[flaminbats]

69. I'm flattered...

but such a man must resign in order for his government to earn back the trust of the people.

I had mixed feelings on step 10 and step 1. With step 10 it would certainly hurt the nation's morale to see the President step down due to a national security failure. But as Truman says..when there is a crisis in government, the answer is always more democracy.

On locking up people in the NSA or CIA...it wouldn't be right without a fair trial, but of course the same is true if they were executed. My logic is flawed, but this is why I hoped to get input...to see how it could be changed and judge what my flaws would be likely be.

[Tinoire]

77. Lol-

but shooting them in the back is ok? ;)

That was really a great post. But I still quibble over 10. I would not want such a man to resign- they only come around once in a lifetime- if we're that lucky!

[ermoore]

73. Worst Answer Ever.

Wow, I'm stunned. Good job.

[Tinoire]

78. I know. Me too.

Downright envious of someone who can think and lay it out like that!
Flaminbats for office immediately!

[LeahMira]

105. Some good ideas there...

These are the good ones:
step 3) Bring home all troops in Iraq and Afghanistan to help with the immediate evacuation of all living civilians wounded, or suffering from radiation sickness.
step 4) Seize all medical resources and food available from private corporations, along with other necessary commodities to help those in need.
step 5) Begin to seal off the contaminated area once people are evacuated.
step 9) ask for emergency assistance from the U.N. and members of NATO.

I would do absollutely anything possible to assist the people who survived and call on the rest of the nation to help. No one is so poor that they can't spare a dollar, and most can spare a whole lot more.

Then, one by one, over time, certain Al Qaeda members would start turning up dead in seedy hotels and alleys around the world. It would be a particularly nasty death. Maybe something involving pigs if the instigators are Islamic fundamentalists.

That's assuming, of course, that this country has had agents in place all along who are in a position to find out exactly who did the deed. We do have these people and some assassains in the CIA don't we? Or at least we do know where to find them.

IOW, I would make sure that there wouldn't be very many Al Qaeda folks ready to volunteer their services to plan such a thing against the U.S. again. I think it's one thing to die in a flash for some cause, but it's not the same to die in some really gruesome, bloody, painful way.

But I certainly would not send in the troops, no matter how bloodthirsty the country felt.

[Tinoire]

44. Which terrorists? Enemy? Allied? Or Domestic? n/t

[KG]

45. the CIA springs to mind.

:eyes:

[Silverhair]

49. I believe I specified that in the scenario. n/t

[Tinoire]

51. Yeah but you said indicated... To me that's a key word

Bush's tests indicated a lot of things too & plenty of corroboration from helpful allies... Point taken however for the purpose of your exercise.

[Silverhair]

52. Yes, I said indicated because I wanted to leave some doubt.

The question of how you deal with the doubt is part of the exercise.

[Tinoire]

57. Lol... Just for that I'm going to give this one some thought

;) but this is a hard one!

[Tinoire]

61. What Flaminbats in #41 said with my notes in #59 but also, additionally

(Thanks for a great head-start Flaminbats!)

- Would have our allies send in crack intel teams to help analyze the intelligence. As an ex-intel officer, let me just say that the state of US intel has been deplorable for over 15 years.

- Would pay a bit more than lip-service to the question "Why do they hate us?" and convene a UN Plenary Session to discuss the problem and the solution because if your cities are getting nuked, chances are someone feels really wronged and you are probably responsible. At that point I would re-examine my country's policies and accomplish in reverse everything Kucinich is trying to do in advance to ward off such an eventuality- become a true citizen country of the civilized world that treats other countries with the respect it expects for itself.

"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one..." :)

[flaminbats]

81. Why do they hate us?

This is the question that nobody wants to answer. The neocons would have us believe it is because, they are Muslims and most of us are Christains...so bingo!

Well...why do we not see this kind of hatred being directed at Canada, Australia, or France? Again...neocons say those nations are in bed with the more radical factions. This response strikes me as somewhat ironic considering that we have done more over the decades to arm al Qaeda, protect Bin Laden, and to deploy our forces in the middle-east than any other nation including Russia or North Korea.

Religious extremists love playing the revenge card...whether it be Bin Laden or our wonderful preSident. Too bad peace and security are considered to be opposites by many.

[Djinn]

53. my pov

excellent intelligence, (Your own and input from other countries too.) indicates a North Korean nuke, delivered by a middle eastern Islamic terrorist group like Al Quada.

Dont know about anyone else but personally unless it's coming from the mouth of an actual analyst (see Andrew Wilkie) and not the mouth of an agenda pushing lying scum sucking piece of shit (which pretty much covers all politicians) I would'nt be paying too much attention to the "intelligence"

[Silverhair]

58. How much you trust your intelligence is part of the exercise.

How do you deal with the "fog of war"? It is rarely possible to be absolutely certain.

The info that NK made the nuke would be based on tests of the radioactive isotopes. I am under the impression that we can tell from such tests, who made the bomb with extreme precision. Others may correct me on that.

That it was an Al Quada type of organization I intentionally left a bit vague.

[Djinn]

60. a twist

what if they found that it was made in the USA and delivered by the multinational stateless Al Qaeda - who do you bomb?

[leesa]

62. Investigate and arrest the culprits and put them on trial like we have

done with the other terrorists. It's the only method that has worked and the only one that is rational. You don't carpet bomb countries and murder their citizenry to catch a handful of alleged terrorists. Would you like to be treated that way if some US terrorist got it into his head to nuke Paris?

[Beaker]

63. Pyongyang would become Pyong-gone...

then an investigation into the group that delivered it, and determination as to where they were funded through(i.e. pakistan, saudi arabia, etc..) and then an assault on that country.

would be my gut reaction.

[Generic Other]

67. Utterly destroy religious and cultural centers

I don't suppose the Islamic world wants to see Mecca destroyed anymore than any of us would like to see NYC attacked again.

Mutual Assured Destruction while it sucks as a policy, it has been effective so far.

[GreyV]

71. Nuke Mecca!!!! Kill em all!

Sorry about that. I just had a little Daniel Pipes moment there.

---Brought to you by:---

[Tinoire]

75. Oh sheesh. What an evil man. Now I'm going to have nightmares

Him and Steve Emerson- what vile filth.

[ermoore]

74. I'm afraid it might be more like . . .

. . . glow-in-the-dark Medina and Pyongyang (or really just lots of North Korea). Probably Tehran thrown in too. Spare Mecca just in case it happens again. Don't think this would be that helpful, but someone would have to pay.

[mike1963]

79. Race home tearfully, leap into bed, assume the pre-natal position and

turn the electric blanket up to 9.

(That will be meaningless to folks under ~50 probably), but seriously -
There really are not any useful options in this improbable scenario.
Obviously some sort of retaliation would be demanded, but it would be difficult if not impossible to identify a legitimate target. But to respond to your question, if *I* were that President, I have to confess I would have absolutely no clue what to "do."

I did say it is improbable, but recognize that it certainly is possible.

What I would -not- do is bomb the shit out of some country right away.
But isn't a decision I personally would ever want to have to make.

There probably is no good solution, any choice falls in either 'bad', 'awful', or 'cataclysmic.'

[LibertyorDeath]

80. Terrorists will only take out an American city incidentally

Think about it I was watching a show recently about how hard it is now to take out the Presidential motorcade the phenomenal security afforded the President by these extremely heavily armored cars.

It struck me that what they have done is raised the stakes because now there is only one weapon that can defeat this level of security

A small tactical nuke.

[rman]

84. expose the whole thing as a scam by the global elite. n/t

-

[Seldona]

86. North Korea nuke delivered by a terrorist group?

Push for an immediate UN resolution condemning the attack, and North Korea for it's sale of the weapon. I would also demand all information of said sale at pain of war.

Also would include in said resolution demands for all countries to hand over those responsible or supporting them.

I would also ask that an immediate disarmament/inspection force be sent to NK, at pain of war.

This is providing North Korea had no direct knowledge of how it was going to be used.

If it did I would immediately ask for a resolution to invade and use whatever force is necessary to eliminate the threat that they would sell more nukes.

If nuking their facilities is necessary to avoid more loss of life on our part, then so be it.

Unleash an intelligence force unheard of even in the cold war.

It would be open season on anyone tied to the attack in any way, shape, or form.

In short, I would expend every amount of effort to exterminate those responsible with the most extreme prejudice.

Updated for clarity.

[Silverhair]

89. Silverhair's response

I am amazed at how many DUers would want us to basically do nothing except apologize to the world for making them want to nuke us. Do that, and no Democrats will ever be elected to anything, anywhere, ever again.

I am going to try for real world ideas. One of the things I hated in Tom Clancy's, "The Sum of All Fears", (Aside from the fact it was waaaaay too long and got off track too much.)was that the American public was going to be happy with only one terrorist executed after a nuke attack on Denver during the Superbowl. (Yeah. Right. - NOT)

The American people will be demanding a blood response, and having a UN meeting to get a resolution condemning the attack won't make them happy. A weak response will ensure the PERMANENT removal of all Democrats nationwide from all offices forever.

I stipulated the nuke came from NK. I was postulating the possibility of NK selling the nuke. I am under the impression that it is possible to tell the plant that made the fissionable material from isotope samples after an explosion. (If I am wrong on that I welcome being corrected by those more knowledgeable than I.)

However, on second thought, I am going to change the scenario to make it more realistic. Change is: We can't tell who made the fissionable material, or it came from a country that we can't nuke.

I am going to stay with the Islamic terrorists for now, as that is where most of the terrorism is coming from these days, but will expand the thought a bit later.

1. After the initial first response and disaster assistance stuff, an ultimatum would be delivered the the list of known state sponsors of terrorism. Clean house in one week or you will be nuked. Since all of them are dictatorships they have the ability to comply. The threat would be public and would not be a bluff. I would demand that the terrorist be handed over to the USA, dead or alive. If I could see that the country was engaged in a good faith effort to clean house, but was engaged in difficult fighting, I would extend the time as needed. I would not be bluffing.

That only addresses the short term problem.

2. For the long term. I would start a NEW UN. I would call it something else. I would tell the old UN to kiss off, and would get out of it and kick it out of the USA. The current UN is hopelessly corrupt, and about 2/3 of the nations in it are dictatorships. To be a voting member of the Cooperating Nations your nation would have to be:
a) A genuine democracy of some sort.
b) Cooperative and presenting a united front to terrorists. That would mean total cooperation of police and military efforts. There would be a CN capital and a CN court, and a CN military, and a CN police - limited to CN matters.
c) Total Free Trade among CN members. (Like the USA is composted of total free trade among member states.)

If your country was not a democracy, you could get an associate membership that would not include a vote, but would include some of the benefits and responsibilities. You would have to give total cooperation to the anti-terrorist effort.

3. Free speech would suffer some. Groups that preach hate and violence would have their leaders removed and executed - quietly. The leader just wouldn't be there anymore. If that is impossible to do quietly, then publicly if you have to do.

4. Freedom from spying would suffer also. Sorry, but you have to get good intel on the terrorist groups, and with a city having been nuked, the stakes are too high not to get good info.

5. A declaration by the CN that no other nation would be allowed to develop nukes. Any effort in that direction would be seen as the first step in a nuclear war, and would be treated as such.

6. Strong CN effort to develop alternative energy to reduce world dependence on fossil fuels and nuclear fuels. Such technology would be freely shared with the rest of the world.

7. Worldwide effort to promote democracy.

[GreyV]

90. Hate Groups...

"3. Free speech would suffer some. Groups that preach hate and violence would have their leaders removed and executed - quietly. The leader just wouldn't be there anymore. If that is impossible to do quietly, then publicly if you have to do."


Does that mean our domestic hate groups as well? You know, skinheads, various militants, extreme religious right, etc? Or does it just mean killing all the brown folks in far away lands?

[Silverhair]

91. Domestic too. Remember, this is as part of the CN, and under

the watch and coordination of the CN. The USA would be part of the CN as a state is part of the USA.

[GreyV]

94. "NEW UN"?

"NEW UN"?.... you mean something like our recent "Iraqi Alliance"? You know, Israel, Marshal Island, Micronesia, and whatever other poor eastern European nations we can bribe? Why is it that the fact every nation on Earth has a voice in UN seems to enrage the right-wing wackos? Isn't that what Democracy is all about? Oh, yeah, Democracy is abhorrent to Republicans and their affiliates. You might not like what other nations have to say, but they do have a right to say it. It seems you preach Democracy, but not practice. I know, I know .."its in Americas best Interests"... Well I hate to break it to you, but there are other people on this planet of OURS. Gasp! I know! It is a very complicated concept to grasp, but please do try.

[Nihil]

93. And some people call Bush a cowboy ...?

> 1. Clean house in one week or you will be nuked.

Really good message there. "We don't know who the fuck just blew up
our city but we're going to nuke everyone in sight anyway, just in
case they were guilty."

> 2. For the long term. I would start a NEW UN. ...
Why re-invent the wheel? If the UN is broken, fix it or you'll just
end up wasting more time & money producing exactly the same thing a
few years down the line.

> a) A genuine democracy of some sort.
<chuckle>
I guess that which particular sort depends on whether "your guy" wins
the election in the other country?

Hello? We're talking about other sovereign nations here that really
don't give a stuff for America's insular view of the world.

> b) Cooperative and presenting a united front to terrorists.

Is that a united front against all terrorists or just the ones that
the USA deems "important" at any one time?

> c) Total Free Trade among CN members. (Like the USA is composted of
> total free trade among member states.)

"Composted" is inadvertently right. How long will "Total Free Trade"
last once the domestic lobby groups meet?

Hell, I'm just feeling cynical at the moment and shouldn't take it
out on you but there are only two ways you'd get any of your points
through:
1) Global totalitarian domination (US-led NWO).
2) Deus ex machina change to the basic nature of humanity.

Sadly, I think that the chance of a US city glowing in the dark is
far more likely than either of the above.

Nihil

[GreyV]

95. Well...

I don't think he cares or understands.


"America is the world, the number one, or didn't ya know!" /sarcasm off

[mulethree]

96. At what point ...

Do you acknowledge that the US can't join your CN?

Owing to complicity, sponsorship and participation in too much terrorism?

Having an election system that favors the wealthy and connected in all but the most local races?

Having a senate where the 600,000 Alaskans have as much representation/vote as the 33,000,000 californians?

Having ignored so many international court rulings, UN resolutions and such in the past?

Having an executive branch that operates in secrecy?

Having engineered the overthrow of democracies and the emplacement of dictatorships?

[YNGW]

101. Exactly What I was Thinking.

>I am amazed at how many DUers would want us to basically do nothing except apologize to the world for making them want to nuke us. Do that, and no Democrats will ever be elected to anything, anywhere, ever again.

Exactly. It constantly amazes me how many actually believe if we're just nice to terrorists and those who would kill us, they'll just leave us alone, forgive us, etc.... It's those type of child-like beliefs that will get more Americans killed. Quite frankly, if that's the kind of nation we've become, we deserve to be obliterated.

[jpak]

97. This is stupid

There are no connections between NK and any ME terra organizations.

The only way a NK nuke would fall into terra-ist hands would be for NK to sell it to them.

What would be the selling price for NK's hard won nukes????

More than any terra-ist or nuke-wannabee state could pay.

Now how would a nuke slip out of NK and into the US without detection and interdiction????

Like the DoD and the CIA and the DIA haven't thought about this, and like they aren't monitoring every aircraft and vessel entering or departing NK territorial waters or airspace.

And like US Customs and the Coast Guard don't ask any questions of vessels departing from NK waters and approaching US ports.

And like Osama is going carry a NK nuke in on his back from Canada, or in his carry-on stuff on an Air France flight.

Need to nuke NK in retaliation??? Nope - unless there was a direct threat of a follow-up strike from their nonexistent ICBM force.

We could bomb them back into the stoneage with conventional munitions and they know it.

PS Tom Clancy is a moran and anyone harboring his idiot RW fantasies is a fool.

[Hippo_Tron]

100. First thing, get as many nations on our side as possible...

Afterwords hunt down the terrorists and be prepared to respond with military force to governments that don't allow us to do so. Given our responses in recent history there would probably not be any option besides war with North Korea.

[Lisa]

108. biggest criminal investigation in human history ...

If the intelligence is as good as all that, it shouldn't be too hard to tie up all the loose ends. A combination of a) fear re: who's next, and b) a wave of global sympathy for the victims of NYC (who, like the earlier attacks, will be a sampling of hundreds of nations), should guarantee a large alliance of concerned nations. Unlike a certain leader, I'd have no intention of squandering goodwill, and instead would take every opportunity to build on it.

If it WAS the North Koreans, there would be UN-backed "regime change".

[sweetheart]

109. Arrange a press conference and say to the public:

Our country has taken 5 million dead and 8 million wounded in a nuclear strike on New York city 2 days ago. This was a grevious act, a despicable act, perpetrated by heinous agents. We are taking all actions to care for those affected and to evacuate the wounded as i speak. As well, we are appearing to take no immediate military action.
The state of the nation is absolute total and intense alertness of the most vigilant nature. Behind me is the camera on the delivery vehicle. <Behind the president appears a photograph from space of the persian gulf, with the coast of pakistan highlighted.> The circles of light you see blossoming in this real-time satellite photograph are of 100 50 megatonnes nuclear weapons detonating 500 miles off of the coast of pakistan.
All our allies understand that this is only a test and that no further action is planned for the moment. We have forewarned all of our good friends and loved ones in this world that we are making a test of force, to demonstration of determination on behalf of those who were just killed. These detonations cannot begin to remotely symbollize the grief and anger we as a people are experiencing of this attack at our loved city.
<circles of light start to blossom on the screen behind the president, nuclear air blasts.. IN a grid pattern behind the president appear flashes unfolding in a 10 x 10 grid, all spaced at 100 miles apart.>
All shipping has been cleared from this area in the past 2 days.
Nobody is being harmed by this test.
The weapons are low radiation yeild, and are denonated as a symbol of the love of the 15 million dead people.

I WILL not kill 15 million people in reply, though the agents who attacked new york do indeed have state sponsorship, and those folks each know that were I taking advise from the generals behind me, this would be no test.

Many of you are only able to hear my voice by radio. <Scene is: All watching a live video image from a satellite over indian ocean.> A grid 1000 miles by 1000 miles is detonaating of nuclear bombs over empty ocean.

My telephone number, which works from anywhere in the world, is 08393 66666 77777 33333 191 8399. This would be the time, for all the people who want peace to come forward. This is the time to end a military fantasy of oppressing our brothers with Arms.

God would never forgive me for killing 15 million. Jesus says to me to reach out to you today in the advise of my god to end the suffering of all people together, by total nuclear disarmament. It is not a civilized deterrent.

We have just reached a formal accord with France, Russia, China, India, Brazil, Canada, Great Britain, Germany, Japan, Korea, Italy, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Israel, Pakistan and Ethiopia, amongst 100 more i cannot list, all countries in the world have just now, , you can see them all on video link behind me, <massive video screen with 200 boxes like hollywood squares.> All world countries have removed all triggers from nuclear weapons permanently, and the triggers are to be totally disarmed. The uranium we will take care of as an environmental problem. The accord also regulates all projectile research, creating instead an international cooperative of projectile manufacturers.

Today is the first national holiday for the great people of new york who died that we might finally end nuclear terror in our time. All nations have agreed to stop making firearms, and in this accord is a universal stand down, for firearms of all calibres.

Regarding the telephone number, use it only if you must, to report an issue, you will be switched to a cia analyst, and if necessary, directly to me on the phone behind me right there.

Here inside america, we are cutting the arms budget by 2/3rds, and will be investing that money in to the school systems, lifetime medical and pension rights for all americans, as well as fair justice in living wages and good relations will all people. We are also standing down on criminalization as a solution to the drugs problem. The stand down, includes privacy rights and human rights for all citizens of this earth.

Obviously a lot is changing very quickly, and i'll be keeping you informed as we get on. The short message is, "Peace, the situation is in control, great success"

Lastly, for the perpetrators.

The people who did this are going on trial at the International Criminal Court. Part of the accord is that the nations who harbour the detainees, are to take them to the hague, where they will be publically tried on war crimes charges.

[TexasPatriot]

110. i'll play

Immediately and in no particular order:

get as much international aid as possible in dealing with the casualties - radiological and other.

come to an agreement with global currency markets to freeze currency levels and gold prices for 6 months, close the markets for the forseeable future, and make sure the banks were solvent.

nationalize the airlines, the utility companies, the larger transport and construction firms (halliburton etc) - they just became federal employees.

press blackout in the blast zone. single government authorized feed only.

now, in the longer but still near term, put every effort into identifying the terrorist group. Dont tweak the intel... find the culprits. Follow the money - and seize assets internationally (no one will dispute you...)

identify the delivery mechanism. shipping containers... all shipping containers must go through 100% laiding searches. So much for those low cost imports... Transport just got expensive. Trucks crossing the border? same thing. Canada will just have to deal. Oil tankers coming near US ports with nukes in their belly? No more. Only US flagged ships are allowed at US ports - and all of them must have their cargo sealed with high tech shipping containers which are searched thoroughly in the country of origin.

How do i pay for all of this? I immediately default on all US debt owed to middle eastern nations, and sieze all assets. Those assets will be returned, and the debt paid, on a case by case basis - depending on their levels of cooperation in rooting out this problem.

Use every intelligence asset available from every cooperating country(i'm going out on a limb and assuming the big boys will want to play) - and identify every known source of fissionable material. At that point - go to the UN security council and pass a resolution that has every NON permanent UN security council nation that has a raw material source of fissionable material to lose jurisdiction over that source perminently - with that territory now under the control of the UN itself. (might add a few permanent members)

All nuclear material outside the immediate control of those nations will lose it. Nuclear plants can be run in the short term - but they are operated by UN employees.

Nuclear plants are no longer sanctioned by the global community. international funding for dismantling of nuclear weapons etc...

i could go on... but i think you get the gist of where i'd go.

At the end - I schedule an emergency election to be held in 8 weeks. 4 weeks for primarys, 4 weeks for an election cycle, and I resign. If my successor gets elected on a 'i'm gonna shoot people' policy - then so be it. If i'm one of those people... well... i cant really blame you.