Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(USA Today)   Thank you for calling the Federal Nuclear Detonation Response Hotline. Your call is very important to us. Current wait time for the next operator: 24-72 hours. ♫ Tall and tan and dark and lovely, the girl from Ipanema goes walking ♫   (usatoday.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, nuclear detonation, Little Boy, nuclear device, International Studies, tall, nuclear attack, nuclear explosions, first responders  
•       •       •

10171 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Apr 2010 at 1:50 PM (11 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



134 Comments     (+0 »)


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2010-04-14 1:37:57 PM  
Would anybody really expect an on scene response any faster?
 
2010-04-14 1:41:43 PM  

jehovahs witness protection: Would anybody really expect an on scene response any faster?


media.comicvine.comView Full Size

 
2010-04-14 1:50:02 PM  
Just have someone in charge that's better than "Heck of a job" Brown.
 
2010-04-14 1:54:20 PM  
mcalcio.comView Full Size
 
2010-04-14 1:55:17 PM  
duckandcover.cxView Full Size


Remain calm!
 
2010-04-14 1:55:32 PM  
I made a pre-9/11 prediction that we'll see a nuclear detonation on US soil by 2050, so I'm really getting a kick out of this third leg I just grew.
 
2010-04-14 1:55:37 PM  
I came to make a Fallout reference, see I was beat to the punch...

/still leaves satisfied
 
2010-04-14 1:55:52 PM  
efferus X Goddammitsomuch...
 
2010-04-14 1:56:19 PM  

jehovahs witness protection: Would anybody really expect an on scene response any faster?


They would if a Republican was president. (see: Katrina)
 
2010-04-14 1:56:32 PM  
"dark?"
 
2010-04-14 1:56:35 PM  
Local governments should partner with other cities because no one will be capable of responding to a nuclear attack upon themselves. Every city should have a sister city in their region that will come help, on the assumption that only one of them would get blown up.
 
2010-04-14 1:56:46 PM  
Not to be a nit-picker Subby, and I get where you went with your headline, but in the case of a nuclear blast, wouldn't the resultant EMP kill all phone substations (along with most other outdoor electrical/electronic equipment) within a few dozen miles of the explosion?
 
2010-04-14 1:57:54 PM  
The Feds don't waste their time preparing for something that isn't past the point of inevitability, so I'm kinda glad the population of my new hometown is less than 50k.
 
2010-04-14 1:58:03 PM  
Yeah, and...? I mean, I'm no Obama fan, but this is about what I'd expect. If a nuke goes off in the middle of a major city, I'd actually be surprised by any real coordinated response coming together as fast as 72 hours.
 
2010-04-14 1:58:11 PM  
Mailmen or Mail people rather, are not my first choice for implementing public health policy.
 
2010-04-14 1:58:16 PM  
FTFA: The message for families is simple, he says: Stay put. Wait for instructions. If you've been outside, dust off, change, shower.

Yeah, great suggestion, because otherwise I wouldn't change out of the clothes I had so recently shiat in after surviving a nuclear blast.
 
2010-04-14 1:58:18 PM  

DoughyGuy: Not to be a nit-picker Subby, and I get where you went with your headline, but in the case of a nuclear blast, wouldn't the resultant EMP kill all phone substations (along with most other outdoor electrical/electronic equipment) within a few dozen miles of the explosion?


Maybe it's the guy who saw the mushroom cloud that's calling?

/not subby
 
2010-04-14 1:58:48 PM  

I_Hate_Iowa: I made a pre-9/11 prediction that we'll see a nuclear detonation on US soil by 2050, so I'm really getting a kick out of this third leg I just grew.


That's entirely true! It already happened several times. It's called Nevada.

/It will rain on earth before 2050
 
2010-04-14 1:59:59 PM  

pnome: They would if a Republican was president. (see: Katrina)


Hurricane that was both anticipated and NOT A NUCLEAR EXPLOSION is quite a different story. Post-Katrina first responders were not at risk for nuclear fallout radiation.
 
2010-04-14 2:00:08 PM  
I'm in midtown Manhattan so I'm not really concerned with how long it will take them to get to the scene of the smoldering pile of ash that used to be me.
 
2010-04-14 2:00:15 PM  
DoughyGuy Quote 2010-04-14 01:56:46 PM
Not to be a nit-picker Subby, and I get where you went with your headline, but in the case of a nuclear blast, wouldn't the resultant EMP kill all phone substations (along with most other outdoor electrical/electronic equipment) within a few dozen miles of the explosion


I could be wrong but I think it's just a theory. If it proves to be right according to what I read if one was big enough it could wipe out power all over the country. Another theory is we could never get it back.
 
2010-04-14 2:00:54 PM  
Nina_Hartley's_Ass
"dark?"

Charred.
 
2010-04-14 2:01:27 PM  

irgunner: The Feds don't waste their time preparing for something that isn't past the point of inevitability, so I'm kinda glad the population of my new hometown is less than 50k.


Scary to think they might be putting more effort into this, a man-caused event that doesn't have to happen, than into mitigating the threat of a dangerous comet or asteroid that is actually inevitable.
 
2010-04-14 2:01:33 PM  

Nem Wan: Local governments should partner with other cities because no one will be capable of responding to a nuclear attack upon themselves. Every city should have a sister city in their region that will come help, on the assumption that only one of them would get blown up.


Don't really need to, already structures for emergency responders in place. I belong to a small vol. fire dept, and this stuff is required.

http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nims/NIMSTrainingCourses.shtm
 
2010-04-14 2:02:08 PM  
"Nuclear agreement hailed as step forward " except the nations that would want to blow the world to all hell probably arent behind it. Maybe im just a naddering naybob of negativity but it just doesnt give me the warm and fuzzies.
 
2010-04-14 2:02:16 PM  

Jedekai: efferus X Goddammitsomuch...


:)
 
2010-04-14 2:02:55 PM  
Expect to wait much longer than 72 hours:

preparednesspro.files.wordpress.comView Full Size
 
2010-04-14 2:04:30 PM  
Yeah it's cool, man. I've played all the Fallout games. I bide my time, kill the vault leader and set out into the world.
 
2010-04-14 2:04:41 PM  
I love that song.
 
2010-04-14 2:06:02 PM  

funky monkey: "Nuclear agreement hailed as step forward " except the nations that would want to blow the world to all hell probably arent behind it. Maybe im just a naddering naybob of negativity but it just doesnt give me the warm and fuzzies.


Certainly doesn't hurt.

My impression is that the focus was on securing all of the world's nuculur materials, (at least the stuff that's bomb-ready), making it a bit less likely that someone can lump together a critical mass by bribing a couple of broke Ukranian guards.
 
2010-04-14 2:06:58 PM  
Yeah but imagine how cool the news would be

farm3.static.flickr.comView Full Size


/hot like a mushroom cloud
 
2010-04-14 2:07:19 PM  

jehovahs witness protection: Would anybody really expect an on scene response any faster?


It didn't take 3 days for Japanese officials to get to Hiroshima or Nagasaki.
 
2010-04-14 2:07:36 PM  
So they are focusing all their efforts on a nuclear blast caused by terrorists who at the moment don't actually seem to have any nukes. Has any thought been given at all at this summit at the possibility that the ones who detonate a nuke might be the same ones who are currently know to be in possession of them?

I guess is spent to much of my live worried that some idiot might escalate an ideological disagreement to the point where they might conclude that I would be 'better of dead than red', but somehow, if at all, I live more in fear of some current nuclear power doing something stupid with any of the weapons that they spend a a lot of time, money and effort acquiring than worrying about ones that have not yet.

Osama is probably dead in a cave somewhere. The American government currently has more nukes than anyone else, has used them in the past and its own population doesn't trust it with something as elementary as health-care. I don't think we should trust the British too much either, nobody trusts the Russians, the French shouldn't be trusted with anything let alone a nuke, I don't even want to think about Pakistan and India and the less said about Israel the better.
 
2010-04-14 2:09:34 PM  
Up and ATOM!
 
2010-04-14 2:09:38 PM  

jehovahs witness protection: Would anybody really expect an on scene response any faster?


I'm sure if it happened in DC the response would be faster.
 
2010-04-14 2:11:03 PM  
MrSteve007

Expect to wait much longer than 72 hours:

I really enjoyed reading that book. How much of the information he had was true I don't know. But it did make for a good read. Very believable and interesting characters.
 
2010-04-14 2:11:41 PM  

DoughyGuy: Not to be a nit-picker Subby, and I get where you went with your headline, but in the case of a nuclear blast, wouldn't the resultant EMP kill all phone substations (along with most other outdoor electrical/electronic equipment) within a few dozen miles of the explosion?


^Not to be a nit-picker...This statement lands right along the lines of 'With all due respect'
 
2010-04-14 2:12:15 PM  
Barack Obama doesn't care about glowing green people!!
 
2010-04-14 2:15:35 PM  
Well, Jack Bauer is retiring...
 
2010-04-14 2:16:10 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: "dark?"


you do it. heeeere subby subby subby....
 
2010-04-14 2:16:13 PM  

Dexter's Next Victim: I could be wrong but I think it's just a theory. If it proves to be right according to what I read if one was big enough it could wipe out power all over the country. Another theory is we could never get it back.


It's a very real threat:
EMP commission (new window) - created by Congress. Their report is very sobering. PDF Link (new window)

A recent article in TIME:
Link (new window)
 
2010-04-14 2:18:46 PM  
In my opinion, anybody who doesn't have enough food and water at home to last a week is a fool. In any disaster you should plan to be on your own for at least three days. And if you live in Louisiana, you should plan to be on your own for two weeks - the last time that state needed federal help the governor chose to whine about the feds not helping instead of asking for federal help.

A 30 gallon water drum and 60 cans of food will last a family of four an entire week, doesn't take a lot of room, and can be very cheap - buy on sale and you can get a week supply for a family of four spending less than $100. Most of the time you also have a supply of water in your water heater, but in the relatively common case of tap water contamination you may not find out about it until you have reason to doubt the quality of tank water.
 
2010-04-14 2:18:46 PM  

jehovahs witness protection: Would anybody really expect an on scene response any faster?


Accolade: pnome: They would if a Republican was president. (see: Katrina)

Hurricane that was both anticipated and NOT A NUCLEAR EXPLOSION is quite a different story. Post-Katrina first responders were not at risk for nuclear fallout radiation.


It's not radiation being cited as the deterring factor.

"Emergency response is principally a local function," the document says, though "federal assistance will be mobilized as rapidly as possible."
 
2010-04-14 2:19:39 PM  

Marshmallow Jones: Yeah but imagine how cool the news would be

/hot like a mushroom cloud


Reminds me of the music video for "Los Angeles is Burning"
 
2010-04-14 2:19:45 PM  
Wouldn't it vary by locale? I would Expect that 72 hours apply to Bumfarksville, Neb, population 750, 17 miles from the nearest stoplight. Anything in the BosWash corridor would probably be pretty damn quick.
 
2010-04-14 2:20:56 PM  
One challenge he says, will be to persuade survivors to stay indoors, shielded from dangerous radiation until they're given the all-clear or told to evacuate.

So my house is radiation proof too? Awesome! Amazing technology they had 110 years ago to foresee nuclear weapons!
 
2010-04-14 2:22:13 PM  
/came for the pictures of cute girls
leaving disappointed
 
2010-04-14 2:22:18 PM  

Mensan: In my opinion, anybody who doesn't have enough food and water at home to last a week is a fool. In any disaster you should plan to be on your own for at least three days. And if you live in Louisiana, you should plan to be on your own for two weeks - the last time that state needed federal help the governor chose to whine about the feds not helping instead of asking for federal help.

A 30 gallon water drum and 60 cans of food will last a family of four an entire week, doesn't take a lot of room, and can be very cheap - buy on sale and you can get a week supply for a family of four spending less than $100. Most of the time you also have a supply of water in your water heater, but in the relatively common case of tap water contamination you may not find out about it until you have reason to doubt the quality of tank water.


You are still angry they took Jericho off the air, right?
 
2010-04-14 2:22:28 PM  
Strange but true - the next city destroyed by nuclear explosion? Intercourse, PA.

/You could look it up
//If you had a 2024 World Almanac
///Go Cubs!
 
2010-04-14 2:23:15 PM  
I have a feeling that some people are going to complain about how Bush was treated unfairly for his response to Hurricane Katrina in light of this report. Allow me to explain how a nuclear detonation may warrant a different reaction than a hurricane making landfall.

1. Hurricanes typically have several days warning (strength, location of landfall, etc) as opposed to nuclear explosions which would probably detonate without a prior announcement

This means that you can prepare in advance for hurricanes and be ready to provide help almost immediately after landfall (give or take 1-6 hours). With a nuclear device you would have to set up the response after the detonation, not in anticipation of it. This means it takes significantly longer.

2. Hurricanes cause massive flooding and wind damage; nuclear detonations release an enormous fireball that levels buildings within a certain radius, dumps lethal irradiated debris into the atmosphere, etc. While the former would make terrain difficult to navigate initially, once the storm has passed (a few hours) rescue efforts become easier. Radiation does not pass nearly as quickly and is certainly just as a deadly, if not more so, than flooding. In other words, even if you do have an organized response group already deployed, radiation and fallout is still a major obstacle that will slow if not halt relief efforts in the most devastated areas.
 
Displayed 50 of 134 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.