How the US Government would deal with a terrorist nuclear attack

[James G]

Aug 2, 2021 8:17:06 GMT gillan1220 said:

Aug 2, 2021 6:55:53 GMT James G said:

Are you sure about Iraq there? Libya, Cuba, North Korea, Iran etc yes, but Iraq?
I remember that murual in Iraq of the Twin Towers and Saddam with his cigar.

First America's enemies did celebrate but later offered their condolences and condemnation.

I remember celebrations in the West Bank for a few hours before Arafat wisely put a stop on that less the US went crazy.
That's been generally forgotten but not by me.

[1bigrich]

Aug 2, 2021 6:55:53 GMT James G said:

Are you sure about Iraq there? Libya, Cuba, North Korea, Iran etc yes, but Iraq?
I remember that murual in Iraq of the Twin Towers and Saddam with his cigar.

US troops found it in one of Saddam's palaces:

Thumbnail, click for full-size.

Regards,

[lordroel]

Aug 7, 2021 19:23:00 GMT 1bigrich said:

Aug 2, 2021 6:55:53 GMT James G said:

Are you sure about Iraq there? Libya, Cuba, North Korea, Iran etc yes, but Iraq?
I remember that murual in Iraq of the Twin Towers and Saddam with his cigar.

US troops found it in one of Saddam's palaces:

Thumbnail, click for full-size.

Regards,

And i found this on a wall in Denmark.

[gillan1220]

Aug 7, 2021 19:36:43 GMT lordroel said:

Aug 7, 2021 19:23:00 GMT 1bigrich said:

US troops found it in one of Saddam's palaces:

Thumbnail, click for full-size.

Regards,

And i found this on a wall in Denmark.

There are still those 9/11 truthers out there...

[sandyman]

The response would be interesting once the US found out who did it I would think that there would be several back pack NUCs one possibly in London and say Paris hitting two of America’s main Allies at the same time.

[SpaceOrbisHistory]

Jul 24, 2021 19:45:40 GMT James G said:

I was reading this earlier: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Response_Scenario_Number_One 
It is apparently the outline of how the US Government would deal with a nuclear terrorist attack against a city: most likely either DC or New York.
The scenario is a 10kt backpack, or van, bomb at ground level in the heart of a city. That is a favorite of fiction writers (I've even done one).
Tens of thousands dead either outright or soon afterwards.
300 square miles of ruined, poisoned land.
National economic upheaval, a shadow government, wartime footing etc.
It is pretty scary stuff.

Ok so I'll use New York due to an attack such as this would do alot to the US and becuase I feel to have it anywhere else would feel wrong. 
-
This is based on what is above as best as I could guess. A 10kt bomb such as this would have an estimated fatality rate of around 122,890 and an estimated injurie rate of around 238,950 persons. Looking at Nukemap it seems the fallout of such a bomb would move more or less as far north as the town of Monroe.

This would go without saying but we would be looking for blood much more then the 911 attacks of our world. 230,000+ lives lost would be many times worse then the 3000 lives lost on 9-01-2001. 

[halferking]

Aug 2, 2021 8:17:06 GMT gillan1220 said:

Aug 2, 2021 6:55:53 GMT James G said:

Are you sure about Iraq there? Libya, Cuba, North Korea, Iran etc yes, but Iraq?
I remember that murual in Iraq of the Twin Towers and Saddam with his cigar.

First America's enemies did celebrate but later offered their condolences and condemnation.

I remember the quick succession of terrorist organisations distancing themselves from the attacks. It was clear that they were sh*tting themselves over the repercussions and wanted to make it known that they had nothing to do with 9/11.

[sandyman]

It would b hard to get a Nuc into the states they have Detectors all over the place just for this type of thing. If I vanish do not worry the men in black coveralls will take care of me lol

[stevep]

   One problem, if the terrorist group is after damaging/weakening the US rather than publicity- or alternatively NOT mind-blowingly stupid they will seek to hide their involvement in the attack and preferably lay evidence pointing to some other group or nation.  Mind you given the mentality of some terrorist groups you could have multiple ones claiming responsibility because they think it gives them kudos.  Either way it may not be immediately clear who was responsible. 

[miletus12]

Jul 24, 2021 19:45:40 GMT James G said:

I was reading this earlier: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Response_Scenario_Number_One 
It is apparently the outline of how the US Government would deal with a nuclear terrorist attack against a city: most likely either DC or New York.
The scenario is a 10kt backpack, or van, bomb at ground level in the heart of a city. That is a favourite of fiction writers (I've even done one).
Tens of thousands dead either outright or soon afterwards.
300 square miles of ruined, poisoned land.
National economic upheaval, a shadow government, wartime footing etc.
It is pretty scary stuff.

Overestimate. The event of a 4.184 x 10^13  joules is about half the effect of a Little Boy. Maximum poisoned area depends on surface material raised and prevailing winds and cannot be predicted as each event is unique to the burst. 

Dead depends on the initial burst and radiation products in second ionizing effects. 

American reaction depends on the leadership surviving and the initiator of the act. 

I think the variables are too uncertain to make a definitive statement unless the opening post's author sets firmer parameters. Two real time examples of how reaction would vary with a 9-11 plot style attack which uses a crude "dirty bomb" set off on the Capitol Mall. Obama would strike with cold vengeance and a measured no-nonsense firmness at the host nation after an ultimatum. Biden was and is a weakling and of no measured judgment at all.  Bush the Elder was somewhat in the middle of those two extremes. In any event, after measured retaliation, the NGO actors would be hunted down and killed globally by an Obama or Bush style leadership response.    
 

[Zyobot]

Dec 9, 2021 2:27:28 GMT miletus12 said:

Jul 24, 2021 19:45:40 GMT James G said:

I was reading this earlier: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Response_Scenario_Number_One 
It is apparently the outline of how the US Government would deal with a nuclear terrorist attack against a city: most likely either DC or New York.
The scenario is a 10kt backpack, or van, bomb at ground level in the heart of a city. That is a favourite of fiction writers (I've even done one).
Tens of thousands dead either outright or soon afterwards.
300 square miles of ruined, poisoned land.
National economic upheaval, a shadow government, wartime footing etc.
It is pretty scary stuff.

Overestimate. The event of a 4.184 x 10^13  joules is about half the effect of a Little Boy. Maximum poisoned area depends on surface material raised and prevailing winds and cannot be predicted as each event is unique to the burst. 

Dead depends on the initial burst and radiation products in second ionizing effects. 

American reaction depends on the leadership surviving and the initiator of the act. 

I think the variables are too uncertain to make a definitive statement unless the opening post's author sets firmer parameters. Two real time examples of how reaction would vary with a 9-11 plot style attack which uses a crude "dirty bomb" set off on the Capitol Mall. Obama would strike with cold vengeance and a measured no-nonsense firmness at the host nation after an ultimatum. Biden was and is a weakling and of no measured judgment at all.  Bush the Elder was somewhat in the middle of those two extremes. In any event, after measured retaliation, the NGO actors would be hunted down and killed globally by an Obama or Bush style leadership response.    
 

How would Bush Jr. likely handle it, do you think? I don’t know enough about foreign affairs or military capabilities at the time to comment much here, but I imagine that Dubya would respond more strongly than Joe would.

[miletus12]

Dec 9, 2021 2:57:27 GMT Zyobot said:

Dec 9, 2021 2:27:28 GMT miletus12 said:

Overestimate. The event of a 4.184 x 10^13  joules is about half the effect of a Little Boy. Maximum poisoned area depends on surface material raised and prevailing winds and cannot be predicted as each event is unique to the burst. 

Dead depends on the initial burst and radiation products in second ionizing effects. 

American reaction depends on the leadership surviving and the initiator of the act. 

I think the variables are too uncertain to make a definitive statement unless the opening post's author sets firmer parameters. Two real time examples of how reaction would vary with a 9-11 plot style attack which uses a crude "dirty bomb" set off on the Capitol Mall. Obama would strike with cold vengeance and a measured no-nonsense firmness at the host nation after an ultimatum. Biden was and is a weakling and of no measured judgment at all.  Bush the Elder was somewhat in the middle of those two extremes. In any event, after measured retaliation, the NGO actors would be hunted down and killed globally by an Obama or Bush style leadership response.    
 

How would Bush Jr. likely handle it, do you think? I don’t know enough about foreign affairs or military capabilities at the time to comment much here, but I imagine that Dubya would respond more strongly than Joe would.

Interesting question.

One can use biographical data to make an estimate.

Example 1. Georgie Bush Senior. 

Example 2. Barack Obama.

Example 3. George Bush Junior.

Example 4. Bill Clinton. 

Example 5. Joe Biden.

Assessment.

1. Bush senior; college educated on his own merits, equivalent in masters in aeronautic as a naval aviator. Combat veteran in the most difficult of aviation specialties. By education and experience became a functioning businessman and capitalist on his own merits. Developed into an administrator and national security specialist. As a national leader developed a penchant for interventionism and was most aggressive in a colonial imperialist sense in defending the Brighton Woods System of international order. 

2. Obama; college educated and possibly one of the most astute exploiters of the Chicago school of politics since Mayor Daley. Equivalent to a doctorate of law and political science in education. Major medical care reform and prevention of another global economic catastrophe descending into effects very similar to the Great Depression as he accomplished; puts him, in my estimate among the greatest of American presidents.  He was a cold pragmatist. He repeatedly ignored the advice of his cowardly and ineffectual vice president and steered a course of cautious and doable economic and political reforms. Very conservative in the "preserving of the social order" sense of the word, he was surprisingly one of the most humanly cruel and yet morally courageous of American presidents reserving unto himself the final word and responsibility on who would be murdered by drone strikes or commando actions based on the best information available. This culminated in the decision to assassinate Osama bin Laden inside Pakistan. Might consider that event as an example of "measured response". Nobody sane messed with him domestically or internationally.     

3. Bush junior; college educated with special advantages and a lot of "tutoring". equivalent to a masters in aeronautics and perhaps a bachelors in business administration. Flew one of the most unstable and fault prone mechanically unreliable of the Century series of USAF fighters. Either he was a much better pilot, more courageous, or too lacking in self preservation to care to master the problem prone F-102. Nothing wrong with his spine of iron. Had help to become "successful" in business. Used family connections to become a part owner of a baseball team and to rise in state and national politics. Had excellent judgement in surrounding himself with enablers and assistants. Example; very powerful and adept vice president, Dick Cheney, was almost a duplicate father figure. Delegated too much and perhaps too trusting. Appeared to have great empathy and was "emotional". Made some fundamental international relations and domestic policy errors that led to the economic collapse at the end of his term. Wrong wars, wrong methods, and wrong goals about sums him up. He could have used Obama's sense of measured judgement and saved the world a lot of grief.

4. Clinton: an equivalent to a doctorate in political science. Rhodes Scholar. Highly intelligent and morally bankrupt. Worked a corrupt state political machine like an amateur saxaphonist. As insidious and self-serving and evil as they come as a human being, this man did "good" only when it served his own personal interests. One recognizes the Aesop's fable about the "birds of a feather"? Look at association and collective actions during his misrule and one can assess the results. Key example; instead of a Marshall plan to restructure the defunct remains of the collapsed soviet empire, the "friends of Bill" descended upon and looted Russia of human talent, and anything portable as IPs or resources not nailed down. He left a mess in the Balkans that persists to this day and failed to finish the job in Iraq that Bush senior never completed. In addition to these failings, he allowed 9-11 to germinate and flower as a conspiracy under his watch. All show and no go, sums up the assessment of this poltroon and buffoon.
       
5. Joe Biden. Fixer and enabler. Never held a real job or did anything on his own in his life. Is a liar and a sneak thief.. Rode other people's coattails up a corrupt state's political machine and "inherited" the presidency as the lesser of two evils. His education path was and is even more nuanced than Bush junior's.  Has a yellow streak that he masks with bombasts and boasts that reminds one of his immediate predecessor. And there is this.

link

It is a partisan American political document peculiar to the Congress, nuanced for strictly political reasons, but one cannot dispute the incidents in the public record and the "appearance" of corruption and conflict of interest. Under British law, there would be prosecutions based on Hunter Biden's laptop contents.

=============================================

So... to answer the question, how would Bush junior handle a nuclear terrorist level incident? I think judging from the matrix set above and the range of leadership indices; that are present as comparators; that he falls to the more negative outcome range. He would be "emotional" and not as cautious as his father or Barack Obama.  I expect that unless his advisors reigned him in and corralled his instinctive reactions (As they did in 9-11, which was bad enough to cause concern.), that he might over-react; subsequently go after the wrong objectives and mismanage the outcomes as badly as he historically did 9-11.)  

But then again, Clinton and the current American president would probably do much worse, as they did and do.