THE TIMES: As world leaders debate sanctions to curb Iran’s nuclear programme, hundreds of Israeli families are already installing bunkers in their homes to protect against radioactive fallout from a possible attack.
Thousands of private homes have been equipped with nuclear-proof equipment ranging from air filters to water-decontamination systems. But builders and contractors say that the demand in the past few months for fully fledged atomic shelters has surged, fuelled by speculation that Iran is building a nuclear weapon that it would not hesitate to use against Israel.
Atomic shelters range in price from £70,000 to £500,000. They feature 70cm thick blast-proof doors, ballistic windows, water and air-decontamination systems, which promise to sustain life for up to six months. Bunker mentality as Israelis prepare for nuclear fallout
Mark Alexander
5 comments:
Mark, do you believe nuclear weapons or other WOMDs (of any sort) will be used in the next ten years?
I know no one can predict the future but what odds would you put on it?
Leelion:
That's a very difficult question to answer since none of us has a crystal ball. All I do know is this: Iran is sailing close to the wind. If nuclear weapons will be used, then it certainly looks as though Iran is going to be in the middle of the mess. But ultimately who can tell? So much depends on political action and political reaction in the coming years.
A dirty bomb is more probable.
However a nuclear attack on Israel should provoke an attack on Mecca, Damascus,Quom, Tehran for starters.
With the vote on retaining nukes deterrent for UK this week in Parliament, we must ask what future nukes have as weapons.
France is ahead of the field, having already said it has modernized it's missile fleet to allow limited use in special situations.
A full scale attack by any country with it's high yield weapons, would create the most unlivable conditions for large areas of the world, for friends or foes.
It remains infeasible and on those grounds to keep massive retaliation on a small scale is pointless.
What good is one Trident nuke-sub and it's high yield weapons?
What possible situation could be resolved by their use?
It is likely that the only time they could be used is when we had passed the point of no-return and by then a far larger country, say China, would have unleashed a massive force and by then, probably other Countries would be doing the same.
Time to kiss your a+se goodbye, then.
To follow Frances lead is the best option.
Smaller yield nukes are potentially a better deterrent because they do not have to be a weapon of last resort.
America and Russia will have secretly gone down this route, and if attacking and immobilizing the Iranian nuke-programme factories becomes an option soon, it is likely we will see these low-yield nukes used as "bunker-busters".
This will produce little nuke-radiation and most will be underground.
It's result will be mainly local and similar to the after effects of recent tests underground, by the emerging nuke-powers. Virtually unnoticed.
There is a possibility that any underground nuke-explosion in an earthquake zone such as Iran has, may induce later seismic events.
The main effect will be psychological and I cannot see America benefiting in P.R. terms.
There are the possibilities that an already prepared nuke-device located abroad by Al Quaeda or similar could be set off, based on the idea that somehow it would be justified by Americas actions.
Israel, USA and UK would be prime likely targets for this new level of terrorism. The stakes will be raised greatly and we will be in uncharted territory.
The modernization of the warhead capability of Britain should be priority.
We have examples of British air dropped weapons of homegrown design from the 50's and 60's.
We should perhaps be willing to contemplate collaboration with France as a near neighbor if we are to have a useful and possibly usable deterrent. To rely entirely on USA for the nuke deterrent could prove to be restrictive of our capability to use the deterrent in anything other than concerted last ditch massive scale use, should ever intercontinental war be a possibility again. In those circumstances we could not benefit from such a war, and would already be too far down the road to survive as a Nation.
I say modernize our fleet and let it be know we have the capability and will to respond to aggression in a measured and incremental way.
Having said that, I know our pea-brained Ministers will do what they are ordered and in that case, we will still have a monolithic deterrent that will be little more than symbolic.
PS, for those of us lucky enough to have the possibility of moving to Switzerland, that country has an emergency bunker under most homes and an overabundance of public shelters.
Anyone for Schnapps?
Post a Comment