Peace through practical, proved civil defence for credible war deterrence
  • Credible nuclear deterrence of invasions and conventional wars reduce the risk of large nuclear wars occurring through escalation of conventional wars. Contrary to irrational, pseudo-scientific propaganda, the number of nuclear weapons is smaller than the millions of conventional weapons used in large wars and the correct scaling shows that the overall effects are similar, not massively different as often claimed for political propaganda by enemies of peace. Furthermore, the greater time delay of effects from nuclear weapons over the damaged area increases the efficiency of cheap civil defence countermeasures, as compared to conventional weapons. In conclusion, credible nuclear deterrence of conventional war offers a beautiful opportunity to create a peaceful world, free from fear peddling, ranting dictators. The only oppositions you will meet will come from authoritarian obsessed fear peddling myth makers. If they can't tell the truth and face the facts, why listen to them? Please see our post on the need to deter not only direct threats from nuclear attacks but also conventional wars and invasions that can escalate into nuclear wars (as proved by the use of nuclear weapons in WWII, for example, after they were developed during the war itself and did not trigger or provoke the war), linked here, here, here, and here, here, here, and the true scaling law equivalence between a few thousand nuclear weapons and the several million tons of small conventional weapons in a non-nuclear world war as proved by our post summarising key points in Herman Kahn's much-abused call for credible deterrence, On Thermonuclear War, linked here. Peace comes through tested, proved and practical declassified countermeasures against the effects of nuclear weapons, chemical weapons and conventional weapons. Credible deterrence to end invasions and wars comes through simple, effective protection against invasions like low yield tactical weapons and walls, and civil defence against collateral damage. Peace comes through discussions of the facts as opposed to inaccurate, misleading lies of the "disarm or be annihilated" political dogma variety, which are designed to exploit fear to close down criticisms of errors in mainstream orthodoxy. In particular, please see the post linked here on EMP results from an actual Russian 300 kt test at 290 km altitude over unwarned civilian infrastructure in Kazakhstan on 22 October 1962, which caused no injuries or deaths whatsoever (contrary to all of Jeremy Corbyn and CND style lying propaganda that any use of nuclear weapons on civilians would automatically kill millions), but shut down the communications and power supply lines! This is not secret, but does not make newspaper headlines to debunk CND style dogmas on the alleged incredibility of nuclear deterrence.

  • Hiroshima's air raid shelters were unoccupied because Japanese Army officers were having breakfast when B29s were detected far away, says Yoshie Oka, the operator of the Hiroshima air raid sirens on 6 August 1945...

  • In a sample of 1,881 burns cases in Hiroshima, only 17 (or 0.9 percent) were due to ignited clothing and 15 (or 0.7%) were due to the firestorm flames...

  • Dr Harold L. Brode’s new book, Nuclear Weapons in ...

  • 800 war migrants drowned on 22 April by EU policy:...

  • Photographed fireball shielding by cloud cover in ...

  • Nuclear weapons effects "firestorm" and "nuclear w...

  • Proved 97.5% survival in completely demolished houses ...

  • Friday, August 11, 2017

    The North Korean Missile Crisis (it's more of a hazard to London than mainland USA)

    Why London is an easier target for North Korean missiles than mainland American cities!  As for American soil at Guam, the fact is that Hiroshima in Japan is closer to North Korea.
    Guam's Office of Civil Defense advice to duck and cover against North Korean nuclear missile strike: page 1 of 2.

    Guam's Office of Civil Defense advice to duck and cover against North Korean nuclear missile strike: page 2 of 2.

    ABOVE: North Korean missiles crisis advice on protection against nuclear attack covers some key points, but ideally should also include the fact (as we blogged previously) that smartphones in camera mode with the lens covered by black tape/paper detect nuclear radiation as random flashes, so everybody normally does have the means to determine the relative intensity of fallout dangers.  The greater the saturation of the screen with white flashes (impacts of radiation on the CCD camera chip pixels), the greater the dose rate.  Thus, you can observe the relative intensity in different parts of a building, and choose the safest area to shelter, and you can tell when the fallout has decayed appreciably, permitting evacuation.  There is also a downloadable app which turns a smartphone into a radiation meter for a more accurate assessment of the fallout situation:

    With the North Korean Missiles Crisis looming, it's probably worth while pointing readers to our 6 January 2016 blog post (linked here) on the possible use of North Korean nuclear armed missiles: electromagnetic pulse.  In summary, the West has published declassified patents of practical warhead ejection systems for ICBMs and SLBMs, as well as designed for miniature implosion systems suitable for missile warheads, and in any case, if North Korea goes for an EMP attack at 100 km burst altitude (for which the fusing system is simply a timer and a deceleration switch in series, so that the warhead detonates immediately upon hitting the upper portion of the atmosphere when just beginning reentry), even a very poor guidance system will be adequate.  EMP covers such a large area than the missile could be hundreds of miles off target, and still produce major effects!

    What is not a problem, however, is the usual over-hyped claims about civilian mass casualties from nuclear weapons.  Simple countermeasures protect people from nuclear weapons far more efficiently than they do from conventional weapons, where there is less time to react to quickly arriving hazards over the smaller danger areas.

    Please see also the earlier blog post from 11 May 2015 on North Korean missiles.  It looks as if Kim Jong Un is producing nuclear missiles in trying to deter America from coercing it or invading it to topple the dictatorship.  The real problem here is not North Korea alone, but the risk of horizontal escalation in a war.  For example, China is the neighbour of North Korea, and could be sucked into a war, possibly being (reluctantly) pressed into supporting North Korea.  All the other anti-West countries, from Iran to possibly Russia, could end up supporting North Korea for propaganda reasons.

    Sanctions against North Korea look like a repeat of the mistake America made in placing sanctions on Japan in the 1930s when it was invading China: eventually Japan declared war on America with a strike on 7 December 1941.  Sanctions also failed and eventually led to war with Iraq under Saddam Hussein's dictatorship.  The smarter way to deal with dictatorships is the "deterrence to motivate peace" method Reagan used in the 1980s to end the expansion of the USSR's nuclear arsenal: Reagan simply re-armed to parley.  He included low-yield tactical nuclear weapons which (unlike the previous cold war mainstream dogma of the incredible threat of megatons on cities) proved to be a more credible deterrent, and a real motivator for peace talks.

    Some links to earlier posts on the North Korean missiles crisis:

    January 2016 test:

    May 2015:

    March 2013:

    October 2006:

    "The so-called War Powers Clause of the constitution says that only once war has been declared by Congress can the president lead the military into it. However, the president does have the authority to order a nuclear attack, not only in retaliation but also as a preemptive measure(pdf, p.1) to stop an attack on US territories. The system in place for deploying the US’s more than 7,000 nuclear warheads was developed during the cold war and rests on a core element: The president, and only the president, has the authority to authorize a strike, and nobody can legally veto him."

     -  This same site also lists the nuclear release procedure in detail:

    1. Get out the biscuit: The president holds the nuclear codes, called the “gold codes,” on a laminated card called “the biscuit” that he carries. New codes are provided daily by the National Security Agency (NSA). The biscuit includes a number of fake codes, so the president has to memorize where the right ones are located.
    2. Get the football: The “football” is the briefcase containing secure communications equipment as well as instructions on how to verify the president’s identity and transmit the command. The football is carried around by a military aide who is always near the president.
    3. Order an attack: Once his identity has been verified, the president can order an attack—though the details of how he does it are secret.
    4. Execution: The secretary of Defense is notified of the order, but isn’t legally required to give approval for the attack, and doesn’t have the power to veto it; nor does anyone else in the chain of command. The system is designed to launch within minutes of the president’s order. Still, officials might find ways to delay or impede what they thought were rash decisions, as two of president Richard Nixon’s (paywall) Defense secretaries did.
    Again, the key problem is that horizontal escalation may follow vertical escalation: several enemies of the West who are not normally very close allies (China and Russia, for instance) may feel comradeship and form an alliance in order to challenge what they perceive (through paranoia) as a threat from whoever stops North Korea.  (This also occurred when Churchill offered comradeship to Stalin in June 1941, in order to get rid of Hitler faster, despite being an enemy of communism.)

    "North Korea on Wednesday announced detailed new plans to fire four ballistic missiles at an area just 19 to 25 miles off Guam’s shore. ... Friday morning, Guam’s Office of Civil Defense issued official guidelines on how to survive a nuclear missile strike. Written as dryly as possible, the guidelines are still terrifying. “If caught outside,” the fact sheet notes, “do not look at the flash or fireball” of a nuclear strike, “as it can blind you.” It recommends taking cover, lying on the ground and covering your head if caught outside, and getting underground as quickly as possible. Guam’s Pacific Daily News didn’t help ease people’s fears any, either. In inch-high bold font, Friday’s front-page headline simply read “14 MINUTES” — the amount of time Guam residents would have to duck and cover before a North Korean missile would hit."

    Calling civil defense duck and cover advice "terrifying" is plain silly: as we proved in the previous post, detailed data on survival proved the validity of duck and cover in houses which were blown up by blast.