Slashdot Mirror


Surprise Nuclear Strike? Here's How We'll Figure Out Who Did It (sciencemag.org)

sciencehabit writes: Many experts believe that a nuclear attack on U.S. soil is more likely than ever; a bomb set off in a city street is seen as the most likely scenario. The conceivable need to unmask a perpetrator, and mount an effective response, is propelling the emerging area of post-detonation forensics. Scientists are devising new sensors, manufacturing artificial fallout to hone analytical techniques, and studying how the glass formed in the furnace of an atomic blast would vary depending on the nature of the bomb and the city where it detonated. Discreet Oculus, a sensor array that would collect data during a nuclear attack on a U.S. city, was tested in the first exercise of its kind last summer.

28 of 174 comments (clear)

  1. We've always been at war with... by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    >> Many experts believe that a nuclear attack on U.S. soil is more likely than ever

    No, that's just the vendor speaking. Time to Google something called the "Cold War" I think...

    1. Re:We've always been at war with... by The+Real+Dr+John · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And now the "vendors" want to upgrade the arsenal to the tune of at least a trillion tax dollars. Not to "make us safer", but to make them richer. Your tax dollars, not at work.

      --
      A brain is a terrible thing to waste... Mind? That's debatable.
    2. Re:We've always been at war with... by I4ko · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And the real story is... Where is the biannual training on reaching and living to your closes 3 fallout shelters? I happen to grew up in a country where this was a regular drill in school years - know your way to the shelter, know how to don a gasmask properly sealing around your face and how to attach your filter properly, try running with that gas mask on, so you are not that much confused, know how to do a primitive decontamination with iodine, water, and I don't remember what else. Get to know what is where in the shelters, etc.. Those are not everyday things, you push them out of your mind in about a year or so. And no, first responders numbers (declining die to budget cuts in the recent years) are woefully inadequate to direct the panicked masses to the shelters. Or do they plan to deploy FEMA and the national guard right away?

    3. Re:We've always been at war with... by Obfuscant · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Time to Google something called the "Cold War" I think...

      As someone who was alive when the cold war was going on, I can tell you that the Cold War did not include small independent states, it was a stand-off between the major nuclear powers and the use of missile and bomber delivered weapons. It involved two large countries who knew they had everything to lose by starting a nuclear war. A nuclear attack would garner a nuclear response.

      The modern environment includes dirty weapons delivered in a suitcase, by groups that know a nuclear response is impossible. They have little to lose in such an attack, and much to gain. So yes, the chances of a nuclear attack on US soil are greater now.

    4. Re:We've always been at war with... by Plus1Entropy · · Score: 2

      ...she will use US Navy SEAL Team Six to do bin Laden jobs on selected Republican leaders.

      It's not fair for you to get my hopes up like that. Be still by beating heart.

      --
      Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
    5. Re:We've always been at war with... by cayenne8 · · Score: 2

      The modern environment includes dirty weapons delivered in a suitcase, by groups that know a nuclear response is impossible.

      Why would a nuke response be impossible?

      If we traced it back to ISIS in Syria, I can pretty much guarantee most of Syria will be a big sheet of glass in a short time period.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    6. Re:We've always been at war with... by rubycodez · · Score: 2

      not seeing the logistics of a bad guys making your scary "dirty bomb". They are going to get something nasty like say spent nuclear fuel or cesium-137 or strontium-90 ( very traceable as to origin, by the way), then somehow powder that stuff without dying from five or more times lethal dose exposure, then put it in suitcase sufficiently shielded so they don't die transporting it somewhere yet somehow still having enough room for bomb....and then even after detonation it's a very local problem for a very small area. This is why serious studies pooh-pooh the whole concept, like

      http://www.sciencedirect.com/s...

    7. Re:We've always been at war with... by Time_Ngler · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So the solution to a terrorist blowing up a bunch of innocents is to blow up more innocents? Why don't we respond that way to the terrorist attacks today, then? Should we have blown up the tower of Dubai in response to 9/11?

    8. Re:We've always been at war with... by murdocj · · Score: 2

      Right... because terrorists who are happy to fly planes into buildings and kill thousands wouldn't consider setting off a small nuke in a major US city and killing hundreds of thousands.

    9. Re:We've always been at war with... by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 2

      " somehow powder that stuff without dying from five or more times lethal dose exposure,"

      The likely suspects don't care about sacrificing large numbers of their own to build something like this.

    10. Re:We've always been at war with... by swb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A dirty bomb may lack widespread damage, but think of the terror side of it. It would be major news.

      Even if the real toxic range was only a Manhattan city street, you just know that they would end up cordoning off 20+ square blocks, evacuating everyone and make it an exclusion zone for weeks. The economic clusterfuckery would be enormous. There would be lawsuits forever. Entire blocks would get razed due to fears of long term contamination.

    11. Re:We've always been at war with... by rtb61 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There is a catch in all that talk. Fire off enough nukes, no matter where on the planet and the radioactive dust will come back to haunt and mutate your DNA. Russia could nuke itself out of existence and still kill the rest of us over the following decades. First strike, second strike, neither alters the outcome. They stopped above ground nuclear testing for a reason, that they still pretend does not exist, they had managed to raise the background radiation of the entire planet with a corresponding increase in cancers, with just those tests and a couple of mass murdering strikes. So nuclear wars just a big old lie to generate more profits for the military industrial complex. Now the rich and greedy might be safe in the nuclear bunkers but who the fuck wants to live in a self made prison. So if the US nukes Syria and Russia is poisoned by nuclear fall out, is Russia not entitled to counter strike the US. Easiest completely unstoppable WMD guaranteed to take out humanity on the entire planet. Simply tip nuclear material into the nearest active volcano, for it to spew out into the atmosphere from there on in and poison the entire planet, once done, can not be undone.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    12. Re:We've always been at war with... by Noah+Haders · · Score: 2

      do you have any reason to think the statement is even "mostly" true? to my understanding they kept turning back the doomsday clock, and in a bid to stay relevant they made it the nuclear/climate change doomsday clock.

  2. Uh. by tnk1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm guessing that anyone who surprises us with a nuclear detonation, or more probably a radiological attack like a dirty bomb, is going to *tell us that they did it*, because you don't just set off nuclear bombs or dirty bombs and run away and go "tee hee".

    It's not like someone had to figure out who flew the planes into the WTC towers, right?

    1. Re:Uh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The Sou-dies flew the planes into the WTC. Right? They got away scott free!!!

    2. Re:Uh. by rasmusbr · · Score: 2

      I'm guessing that anyone who surprises us with a nuclear detonation, or more probably a radiological attack like a dirty bomb, is going to *tell us that they did it*, because you don't just set off nuclear bombs or dirty bombs and run away and go "tee hee".

      It's not like someone had to figure out who flew the planes into the WTC towers, right?

      The public is prone to believing all sorts of implausible things, like for instance that the WTC towers were destroyed by the president, who is a space lizard...

      So the government did have to come up with evidence, even though it was obvious from the start that the perpetrators were Saudi Arabian Islamic radicals.

    3. Re:Uh. by dunkindave · · Score: 2

      Another problem is multiple groups claiming responsibility so they can be feared. Unless one of them is actually credible (if any of them can be), then it is a problem of figuring out which, if any, did it. It could still be a group whose goal is to cause harm to the US to create a result they desire, such as by throwing blame on another group/nation and having the US shift focus, or financially cripple the US by taking out a city like New York so they can become more competitive, but a group who would prefer not having their homes turned into glass and so do not publicly claim responsibility.

      For example, if a nuke went off somewhere, I would expect ISIS/ISIL/IS/Daesh/Satan-encarnate to make such a claim, as probably would al-Qaeda, since it makes them seem bigger and more powerful, which they want. Hell, a bomb goes off in a plane out of Egypt and the groups were lining up to take credit.

  3. Re:Too serious a story for a Friday afternoon by BeauHD · · Score: 2

    Too interesting to save it for Monday. We posted it today.

  4. New and improved! by ErikTheRed · · Score: 5, Informative

    Now the US government can retaliate against the wrong country with more precision than ever before!!!

    --

    Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
  5. Meanwhile.... by sugarmatic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Autonomous vehicles turned into car bombs...Guy with a home wet lab and a lot of savvy creates a serious disease and releases it, someone poisons an an entire metro areas water system....

    These things are several orders of magnitude easier, more damaging, and likely than a nuke. I'm not worried about those things, so how am I going to find the time and motivation to be worried about rogue nukes? Anything can happen, but I can also stub my toe.

  6. You're missing the point by Cornwallis · · Score: 2

    It is important because it has the word "Oculus" in it.

  7. Re:Except now the bad guys will know what not to d by khallow · · Score: 2

    It will no doubt be a zero cost operation to do all that crap. The simpler solution is to not be there when the US figures out where you were.

  8. The probability of a surprise nuclear attack is... by jd · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...zero. There is absolutely no possibility of such an attack, on US soil or anywhere else.

    A dirty bomb? Those have bugger all effectiveness, except against the emotions of the weak. The amount of radioactive material required to build a dirty bomb that actually did something would exceed the amount needed to build a real bomb. It would be utterly stupid.

    By far the most effective weapon is the human imagination. Tell enough people that a dirty bomb, or a biological weapon, has been released, in some location where there is strong mistrust of any kind of official source, and you wouldn't even need a bomb or to go there. The viral nature of the message, the paranoia of the citizens and the psychology of mass hysteria will guarantee that symptoms will be felt. If those people believe firmly enough that they will die, then - as is well known from studies in shamanism - those people will will themselves to die. There needn't be a single thing wrong with any of them, aside from their own credulity.

    The US is reasonably well guarded. Certainly, it's enough to stop any serious physical weapon from getting through. A psychological bomb, where the "explosive" is the insanity demonstrated on a daily basis, that you can't stop, you can't trace and you can't respond. There is only one way to stop a psychological bomb and that's to have a rational, sane, well-educated nation. And nobody wants one of those.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  9. Re:Most likely by fustakrakich · · Score: 4, Funny

    Well, it was successful. Nobody died from nuclear attack during that time.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  10. Re:Easy by blackpaw · · Score: 2

    Just the way you support your scum bag government which bombs civilians at will round the world and destabilises legitimate governments. Which makes *you* a legitimate target.

  11. Re:Most likely by Plus1Entropy · · Score: 2

    "Not a bear in site. The bear patrol must be working like a charm."

    --
    Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
  12. Re:traceable by FrozenGeek · · Score: 2

    Yep. But that doesn't mean it won't happen. there are at least a couple of really messed up countries with nukes. I'm assuming you live in the US. Keep in mind that many countries are an order of magnitude or more screwed up than most western countries. Things that would never enter our minds as being possible are the norm in many other countries. If you ever have the chance, travel in the non-tourist areas of some third world countries and get to know some of the locals. You'll find that many of their assumptions are completely alien to you, and many of your assumptions are completely alien to them.

    --
    linquendum tondere
  13. The US and Europe would go crazy. by pjv936 · · Score: 2

    All terrorists would be hunted down and killed. Any nation that make the slightest attempt to protected them would be severely punished. This action would go on for decades. And you can forget about privacy.