Is this a credible threat???

[Hoot]

The EMP Threat
August 9, 2008; Page A10, Wall Street Journal

Imagine you're a terrorist with a single nuclear weapon. You could wipe out the U.S. city of your choice, or you could decide to destroy the infrastructure of the entire U.S. economy and leave millions of Americans to die of starvation or want of medical care.

The latter scenario is the one envisioned by a long-running commission to assess the threat from electromagnetic pulse, or EMP. The subject of its latest, and little discussed, report to Congress is the effect an EMP attack could have on civilian infrastructure. If you're prone to nightmares, don't read it before bedtime.

An EMP attack occurs when a nuclear bomb explodes high in the Earth's atmosphere. The electromagnetic pulse generated by the blast destroys all the electronics in its line of sight. For a bomb detonated over the Midwest, that includes most of the continental U.S. Few, if any, people die in the blast. It's what comes next that has the potential to be catastrophic. Since an EMP surge wipes out electronics, virtually every aspect of modern American life would come to a standstill.

The commission's list of horribles is 181 pages long. The chapter on food, for instance, catalogs the disruptions up and down the production chain as food spoils or has no way to get to market. Many families have food supplies of several days or more. But after that, and without refrigeration, what? The U.S. also has 75,000 dams and reservoirs, 168,000 drinking water-treatment facilities, and 19,000 wastewater treatment centers -- all with pumps, valves and filters run by electricity.

Getting everything up and running again is not merely a matter of flipping a switch, and the commission estimates that many systems could be out of service for months or a year or more -- far longer than emergency stockpiles or batteries could cover. The large transformers used in electrical transmission are no longer built in the U.S. and delivery time is typically three years. "Lack of high voltage equipment manufacturing capacity represents a glaring weakness in our survival and recovery," the commission notes.

Many industries rely on automated control systems maintained by small work forces. In emergencies -- say, during a blackout -- companies often have arrangements in place to borrow workers from outside the affected area to augment the locals and help with manual repairs. After an EMP attack, those workers would be busy in their home regions -- or foraging for food and water for their families.

The commission offers extensive recommendations for how industry and government can protect against the effects of an EMP attack and ensure a quicker recovery. They include "hardening" more equipment to withstand an electromagnetic pulse; making sure replacement equipment is on hand; training recovery personnel; increasing federal food stockpiles; and many others.

If not, our vulnerability "can both invite and reward attack," the commission's chairman, William Graham, told Congress last month. Iran's military writings "explicitly discuss a nuclear EMP attack that would gravely harm the United States," he said. James Shinn, an assistant secretary of defense, has said that China is developing EMP weapons. The commission calls an EMP attack "one of a small number of threats that can hold our society at risk of catastrophic consequences." The threat is real. It's past time to address it.

[Alredneck]

It doesnt just have to be a terrorist group to iniate the attack either it can be anyone with access to nuclear weapon so if you piss off the wrong country it is all plausible.

[soberups]

Well, that terrorist needs more than a crude nuke to pull off an EMP attack, he needs a relatively sophisticated nuke and, more importantly, an intercontinental ballistic missile to launch it high into the atmosphere with.

I'm not saying its impossible, but the list of enemies with the technical ability to pull it off without detection is pretty small. Our friends in Iran and North Korea might have such abilities, but they lack any defense against our nuclear missile submarines that are almost certainly patrolling near their coastlines with enough firepower to cremate them in retaliation.

The scenario that worries me a lot more than EMP is a dirty bomb attack. Dirty bombs can be crude, cheap and easy to put together. A dirty bomb smuggled into New York harbor on a boat could make 9-11 look like childs play and would render one of the most crowded areas of our country uninhabitable for decades. A few hundred pounds of low-grade nuclear waste ( probably available for cheap at any impoverished former Soviet republic) combined with a ton or two of ammonium nitrate and diesel fuel would be a lot easier for a terrorist to cobble together than an ICBM and an EMP nuke.

[MOlivo]

EMP is a very credible threat. We frequently discuss it here. I think its probly in the top 5 of most likely threats.

[yugoshooter]

I don't consider it a personal threat because I have lived with out it already for months at a time.

[onebigelf]

Well, that terrorist needs more than a crude nuke to pull off an EMP attack, he needs a relatively sophisticated nuke and, more importantly, an intercontinental ballistic missile to launch it high into the atmosphere with.

I'm not saying its impossible, but the list of enemies with the technical ability to pull it off without detection is pretty small. Our friends in Iran and North Korea might have such abilities, but they lack any defense against our nuclear missile submarines that are almost certainly patrolling near their coastlines with enough firepower to cremate them in retaliation.



Actually they've been war gaming a scenario where a nuke is launched off a cargo ship with a theater ballistic missile (SCUD type) or an intermediate range BM like the ones that Iran just tested, off a ship, that is detonated at appogee, like Iran just did. Launched from a cargo ship in international waters makes it harder to figure out who just did us without a kiss.

John

[madmyk]

Not trying to be argumentative, just my POV..

Well, that terrorist needs more than a crude nuke to pull off an EMP attack, he needs a relatively sophisticated nuke and, more importantly, an intercontinental ballistic missile to launch it high into the atmosphere with. Like the ones they can buy from the former USSR, or build from the widely available info/materials out there?How high? Airliner high? Weather balloon high? Short range missle high? Or hell, the Russians will let civilians play tourist on there rockets for the right amount of cash, why not sell one...?






I'm not saying its impossible, but the list of enemies with the technical ability to pull it off without detection is pretty small. Our friends in Iran and North Korea might have such abilities, but they lack any defense against our nuclear missile submarines that are almost certainly patrolling near their coastlines with enough firepower to cremate them in retaliation.Do you think extremists that are willing to strap bombs to themselves, their women and children care much about US retaliation? On a side note....Do female islamofacist suicide/homicide bombers get 71 (what ever) virgins too?

The scenario that worries me a lot more than EMP is a dirty bomb attack. Dirty bombs can be crude, cheap and easy to put together. A dirty bomb smuggled into New York harbor on a boat could make 9-11 look like childs play and would render one of the most crowded areas of our country uninhabitable for decades. A few hundred pounds of low-grade nuclear waste ( probably available for cheap at any impoverished former Soviet republic) combined with a ton or two of ammonium nitrate and diesel fuel would be a lot easier for a terrorist to cobble together than an ICBM and an EMP nuke.
I still think the availability to "weapons grade" materials is more "widespread" than you. But, like you, I think the use of dirty bombs would be far more likely for your "run of the mill" terrorist. I think it would be easy for some well funded organized (al qaede) group to get several dirty bombs in to the country and cause massive widespread horror. I don't think they would focus on NYC specifically, I think several strikes where people feel safe would be the next likely group attack. Port cities all around, heartland America, other financial targets like our food and water....
Who knows. Maybe I am just paranoid and give credit where credit isn't due...

[soberups]

Like the ones they can buy from the former USSR, or build from the widely available info/materials out there?How high? Airliner high? Weather balloon high? Short range missle high? Or hell, the Russians will let civilians play tourist on there rockets for the right amount of cash, why not sell one...?
A nuke specifically designed to cause a massive, widespread EMP pulse is a sophisticated, expensive device. When you combine that with the need to detonate it at high altitude on a missile, it becomes even more sophisticated and expensive. While it is likely that nuclear waste and short-range rockets can be bought on the black market, I doubt that complete ICBM/EMP packages are for sale to the highest bidder.

Do you think extremists that are willing to strap bombs to themselves, their women and children care much about US retaliation?

No...but we arent talking about homemade strap-on explosives. The governments that would provide the EMP nukes and ICBM's may be crazy but they arent stupid. A nuke detonating at high altitude over CONUS would trigger a massive retaliatory response, and they know it. They arent going allow their entire nation to be cremated in exchange for knocking out our electronics. The goal of terrorist organizations is to cause the maximum amount of death at the minimum amount of expense. An EMP attack is expensive, risky, complicated and it isnt going to kill a lot of people. A dirty bomb attack is cheap, safe, simple, and has the potential to kill millions and turn huge areas of our country in to radioactive wastelands for decades to come. If I'm a terrorist with limited resources looking to get the most bang for my buck, I use dirty bombs on NYC, Chicago, Washington DC and LA.

[AlphaTea]

Ah guys, you dont need a nuke for an EMP attack.
Popular Science/Mechanics/Electronics (dont remember exacly which one) had an article a couple of years ago about how you could build a whopper of an EMP device (non Nuke) for a lot less than a million bucks, that would be very effective in the right place or altitude. The technology is not all that complicated and EMP is not just from nukes.

[yugoshooter]

Did anyone see the history channel yesterday when they were showing the worlds strangest weapons? In ww2 the Japs were working on a Microwave death ray and they said it could fry the electronics of the vehicles of that time. Their vehicles and ours from that time had very little electronics so to speak. So if they had a tested weapon that worked like that back then imagine what we have done with it with the tech we have now. It reminds me of our crowd control device the USA has to disperse large crowds. They claimed the one they had would kill you in 30 seconds.

[Rollnburn]

I believe emp attack is one of the most credible threats out there. To me it is a high risk threat partly because it would be immediate unlike economic collapse where there are warning signs for the aware and partly because i think many in CONUS would have a very hard time living without their gadgets and would become very vicious very fast.

There are various types of emp threat, Small low yield nuke or modified electronic "pinch" over a city like D.C. or N.Y. launched from a barge or other large vessel, large emp specific devices or high yield nuke from an icbm or orbital type launcher. These are the two i believe could be concievable if somewhat improbable in todays world.

Iran has recently tested medium range missles which they detonated near apex of trajectory and even more recently launched a rocket capable of launching satelites into orbit. They have been enriching fissile material with conflicting info about the level of enrichment they are capable of. As mentioned there are also other ways of creating emp specific devices which are not quite as difficult to make as a high yield nuke.

While i don't think there is a high chance of an emp attack happening in the near future i do think it is a real enough threat that i have a few specific items wrapped in cardboard in ammo cans which are stuffed into metal garbage cans packed with foam and a couple layers of cardboard. Better to be ready than in need. ;)


Rolln

[moonlit]

When a person thinks of all the different ways we could face a life changing event or even death the ways are so numerous. Trust in GOD & be prepared the best you can. I think almost anything could be possible. The question I have is have we left our borders open long enough that it is too late to stop situations from happening. I know Las Vegas was worried about a dirty bomb a few years ago.

[Shotgun693]

The problem with a dirty bomb is that it takes a lot of material to have enough to cover much area and to have a high enough concentration to cause a problem. Right now you are bombarded with radiation daily. It takes the right kind of radiation and the right amount.
The problem for the bomb maker is that if you get that much radioactive material together it will make you violently sick, or kill you, before you can move it or put it together with a bomb.

I do agree with moonlit. We have millons of invaders in this country right now with no loyalty to this country. And don't tell me about the small handful going into our Military. The vast number want money, food stamps, free medical care and a free school; that's it.

[soberups]

The problem with a dirty bomb is that it takes a lot of material to have enough to cover much area and to have a high enough concentration to cause a problem. Right now you are bombarded with radiation daily. It takes the right kind of radiation and the right amount.
The problem for the bomb maker is that if you get that much radioactive material together it will make you violently sick, or kill you, before you can move it or put it together with a bomb.

But the material it requires, unlike bomb-grade nuclear material, does not have to be refined, processed, or assembled into a complicated warhead. It also does not require a high-altitude ICBM to deliver. A few hundred pounds of low-grade nuclear waste packed into the back of a rental truck along with a couple of tons of fertilizer and diesel fuel, and you have yourself a dirty bomb that could kill tens of thousands of people if detonated in the heart of a large city. And as far as the bomb-makers getting sick...they are willing to die for Allah, and a few basic precautions will allow them to survive long enough to deliver the weapon.

[Shotgun693]

I've been to the seminars and schools on Terrorism, the amount of material needed is way more than you imagine. It's not like a person exposed to the dirty material will get a little stomach ache. You get violently sick. Unable to walk or perform routine functions. The object of a dirty bomb is to keep people out of an area. They don't kill thousands of people. Unless you have a very large amount of highly concentrated material it will be like you get exposed to radiation from a micro-wave oven. With a large amount of high grade radioactive material, it kills you before you can use it. Now there are ways of building a dirty bomb but not like you envision.

[althemean]

Dont you guys think that if they could finance such an operation that a few radiation suits and the required PPE would not be purchased as well?

[chicom]

Dont you guys think that if they could finance such an operation that a few radiation suits and the required PPE would not be purchased as well?

Possibly, but life is cheap in most societies.

PPE- Personal Protective Equipment, to the uninitiated.

[Shotgun693]

A few hundred pounds of low-grade nuclear waste packed into the back of a rental truck along with a couple of tons of fertilizer and diesel fuel, and you have yourself a dirty bomb that could kill tens of thousands of people if detonated in the heart of a large city.
It won't kill hundreds, maybe not even dozens. That kinda material can be sweep up or washed around with firehoses. Yes, this kind of an attack has recieved a lot of attention and we are prepared for it. EMP? Not so much prepared.