• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Non-Advice from the Government in Case of a Nuclear Attack

    The latest campaign of the U.S. government focuses on what to do in case of a nuclear attack. The only problem is that, like many government programs, it does not offer much useful advice. According to government officials, the best thing one can do is stay put and find shelter. Sounds like the old “duck and cover” from the Cold War, doesn’t it?

    Finding shelter (e.g., in a car, basement, or hole in the ground) might spare an individual some effects from intense nuclear radiation, light, and pressure waves that are created by a precipitous rise in temperature in the blast zone, provided you have a good basement. However, this shelter will do scarce little to mitigate the massive fires that occur after a nuclear explosion.

    A high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack would have an even more devastating impact. According to national security experts James Carafano and Richard Weitz, “A nuclear device detonated high in the atmosphere above the American mainland can easily disable the country’s electrical grid.” It is important to note that an EMP is produced during any nuclear weapons detonation.

    Actually, the best defense against a nuclear detonation is to prevent its occurrence in the first place by building up robust missile defense capabilities. Currently, the United States does not have missile defenses that would protect it against a “scud in a bucket” scenario—a short-range missile with a nuclear warhead launched from an air or ship platform toward the U.S. coastland and detonated at a high altitude. On top of this, the Obama Administration has cut the size of missile defenses for protection of the U.S. homeland by 44 percent. Despite these shortsighted cuts, the United States has the capability to defend its homeland, institutions, and people if it decides to pursue a more robust missile defense capability.

    The United States should pursue a robust ballistic missile defense capability, especially in light of the threats from rogue states that are vigorously pursuing ballistic missile and nuclear weapon capability. Unfortunately, the Senate is now considering New START, a strategic nuclear arms reductions treaty with the Russian Federation that would limit U.S. missile defense capabilities.

    This happens amidst the Obama Administration’s pressure on the Senate to pass the treaty in the “lame duck” session of Congress, which does not offer the necessary time for the Senate to adequately evaluate the treaty, especially newly seated Senators who need time to become educated on the content of the treaty. This treaty will be implemented on their watch over the next 10 years.

    Within the first five of those years, Iran or North Korea could have capability to deliver a nuclear-armed intercontinental ballistic missile to the continental United States—not to mention a capability to conduct an EMP attack on the U.S. The U.S. government’s campaign ad should have closed with the following admonition: Now is not the time to be limiting missile defenses in the face of this nuclear threat.

    Co-authored by Michaela Bendikova.

    Posted in Security [slideshow_deploy]

    6 Responses to Non-Advice from the Government in Case of a Nuclear Attack

    1. George Colgrove, VA says:

      “The latest campaign of the U.S. government focuses on what to do in case of a nuclear attack. The only problem is that, like many government programs, it does not offer much useful advice. According to government officials, the best thing one can do is stay put and find shelter. Sounds like the old “duck and cover” from the Cold War, doesn’t it?”

      I think this has to do with as the truth starts to percolate on how pointless many of the thousands of federal programs are in the federal government are. These offices are probably being asked for the first time in decades to produce something quickly to make it look like they are busy. Therefore, they dig DEEP into the archives of WWII propaganda, scan it in the computer, and dress it up with neat new pretty pictures. Looks great I suppose.

      Again, if this government actually told the truth, it would say, if you see a mushroom cloud, simply bend over the best you can and kiss your derriere by-by. Common sense will rule pretty heavily upon an attack. There is no surviving a nuclear war if your community was hit. Moreover, for the rest of all humanity, it will be a factor of time before all perishes. The only survivors will be government employees and officials who go underground for over 20 to 50 years. I hope you feds enjoy that freeky life!

      This task is nothing more than one of tens of thousands of “keep busy” tasks to keep federal employees looking busy. This campaign is evidence that we need to start getting rid of waste and all those who work within that waste. We cannot afford this type of stuff – never could, but really-really can't now!.

      As far as I am concerned this country has already be economically nuked by the federal government, what pamplet do we read so we can learn how to survive that?

    2. Lee says:

      OB's New Start is going to get us all killed!

    3. James Carafano James Jay Carafano says:

      link to duck and cover civil defense film from the 1950s (blast from the part sort to speak) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixy5FBLnh7o

    4. Pingback: Non-Advice from the Government in Case of a Nuclear Attack | Just Piper

    5. Pingback: Tweets that mention The Foundry: Conservative Policy News. -- Topsy.com

    6. Shane Connor, Texas says:

      Regardless the administrations intent, Duck & Cover actually does work, for instance, even in a big military 500 kt nuke detonation, airburst at optimum height for maximum damage, the blast zone will go out to almost a 9 mile radius from ground zero, but total un-survivable destruction for any above ground is only 2.2 mile radius. If population was evenly distributed, there's over 15 times more people outside that 2.2 mile zone than gone inside it. Those outside it will all have eight seconds or more to duck & cover. Without that training, everybody at work, home, and your children at school, will impulsively rush to the nearest windows to see what that 'big flash' was across town, just-in-time to be shredded by the delayed blast wave slamming glass and debris into them.

      If you want to accuse any of making us less safe, look first at the disarmament movement, who for 60 years have ridiculed any alternatives to their 'ban the bomb' agenda, like civil defense. They've got everybody convinced that it is futile to ever try and learn how to survive a nuke. Regardless the noble intent of some of these activists, ironically, they have all rendered millions of Americans even more vulnerable to perishing from nukes in the future.

      More details here… http://www.ki4u.com/goodnews.htm

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×