- Colorado school drops sexual harassment label on boy who kissed girl’s hand
- Australia court strikes down 5-day-old, gay-marriage law
- Fake interpreter at Mandela service: ‘Sorry,’ I have schizophrenia
- George Zimmerman will not be charged in domestic dispute
- Russian officials press bilateral U.S. trade deal
- Creator of ‘Selfies at Funerals’ blog retires after Obama flub: ‘Our work here is done’
- New Obama adviser Podesta is against Keystone but will steer clear of pipeline deliberations
- 40 Australian adults, children found in ‘one of the worst accounts of incest ever made public’
- Venezuela’s Maduro calls on student ‘price vigilantes’ to hit the streets, report businesses
- Atheists smug as Hindus join Satanists to demand display at Oklahoma Statehouse
FEMA: D.C. would survive nuclear blast past area hit
Question of the Day
Hollywood has often destroyed Washington — or New York or Los Angeles — with nuclear bombs detonated by terrorists. That turns out to be harder to do in real life.
It predicted terrible devastation for roughly one-half mile in every direction, with buildings reduced to rubble the way World War II bombing raids destroyed parts of Berlin. But outside that blast zone, the study concluded, even such a nuclear explosion would be pretty survivable.
The little-noticed, 120-page study by the Federal Emergency Management Agency was hardly a blockbuster.
Titled “Key Response Planning Factors for the Aftermath of Nuclear Terrorism,” it was produced in November by the Homeland Security Department and the National Nuclear Security Administration. Even though the government considers it “for official use only” and never published it online, it circulated months later on scientific and government watchdog websites.
The study did not examine the plausibility of terrorists building a nuclear bomb or smuggling one into Washington, which is protected with radiation sensors and other technology designed to thwart such an attack. It didn’t say why it chose the intersection of 16th and K streets Northwest as the epicenter for its fictional nuclear bomb.
The U.S. government report estimated the blast zone in Washington from its fictional attack would extend just past the South Lawn of the White House and as far east as the FBI headquarters. “Few, if any, above-ground buildings are expected to remain structurally sound or even standing, and few people would survive,” it predicted. It described the blast area as a “no-go zone” for days afterward because of radiation.
But the U.S. Capitol, the Supreme Court building, the Washington Monument, the Lincoln and Jefferson memorials, and the Pentagon across the Potomac River are all in areas described as “light damage,” with some broken windows and mostly minor injuries.
The government study predicted 323,000 injuries, with more than 45,000 dead. A 10-kiloton nuclear explosion would be roughly 5,000 times more powerful than the truck bomb that destroyed the federal building in Oklahoma City in 1995 but only about half the size of the atomic bombs dropped on Japan in World War II.
The flash from the explosion would be seen for hundreds of miles, but the mushroom cloud — up to five miles tall — would keep its shape for just a few minutes. The flash would be so bright it could temporarily blind people up to 12 miles away, including drivers on the Capital Beltway. At least four area hospitals would be heavily damaged or unable to function, and four others would experience dangerous radiation fallout.
The government said it expects to send warnings afterward by television, radio, email, text message and social-media services such as Twitter and Facebook.
It predicted the seriousness of radioactive fallout, which would drift with prevailing winds that vary depending on the season and expose victims closest to the explosion to 300 to 800 Roentgens in the first two hours, enough to kill nearly all of them.
In the spring, fallout would drift mostly to the north and west of downtown Washington. But in the summer, it would drift mostly southeast. After two hours, the radioactive cloud would move over Baltimore with far less exposure.
By Matt Kibbe
The short-term deal will assure long-term overspending
- Rand Paul: Budget deal 'shameful,' 'huge mistake'
- All-out war breaks out in GOP over budget pact
- Teen thugs in D.C. run wild -- even while wearing GPS ankle bracelets
- Obama takes 'selfie' at Mandela's funeral service
- Chinese man fed up with his girlfriend's shopping jumps to his death
- Biden guarantees victory on immigration reform
- Inside the Ring: China targets Global Hawk drone
- Obama's antics at Nelson Mandela tribute: Jovial conversation, handshake with Raul Castro
- KIBBE: Another Republican budget surrender
- American bourbon now better than Scottish whisky: U.K.-born expert
Independent voices from the The Washington Times Communities
Extraordinary day at Redskins Park
White House pets gone wild!
Let it snow