4 ms·

Just adding about the so-called "dirty bombs" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty_bomb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty_bomb). It's not dirty because it's l

Just adding about the so-called "dirty bombs" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty_bomb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty_bomb). It's not dirty because it's lethal but rather because the construction of these bombs are rather crude, which allows nearly everyone with some knowledge of bomb building to construct them. In some sense, this is more dangerous than a proper fission-type nuclear bomb.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
yakshaving_jgt 4y ago
The explanation you gave for why a dirty bomb is called as such doesn't seem to be supported by the link you provided. Rather, it's dirty because it contaminates the area around the explosion with radioactive material.
xadhominemx 4y ago
That is not correct
tsimionescu 4y ago
The vast majority of effects of a dirty bomb are foiled by such advanced technologies as windows and showers. The initial conventional explosion will kill and injure far more people than the radioactive dust. At worst, that dust will slightly increase cancer rates for people relatively close to the location of the bomb (say, upto a few hundred meters) over their lifetime.
- mLuby 4y ago
  Dirty bombs are weapons of terror, not weapons of mass destruction. The true damage is caused by societal and economic overreaction from the target: fear leads to expensive security theatre, a desire for vengeance leads to lashing out with expensive unnecessary wars, uncertainty and political instability destabilizes financial markets, etc. Some diseases are similar: immune system overreaction causes more harm than the actual invader.
Someone 4y ago
> It's not dirty because it's lethal but rather because the construction of these bombs are rather crude I don’t think that’s correct, and do not see that Wikipedia page say that. It says “The purpose of the weapon is to contaminate the area around the dispersal agent/conventional explosion with radioactive material, serving primarily as an area denial device against civilians.” I think that “serving primarily as an area denial device against civilians.” isn’t 100% correct. For use by terrorists, I think it’s more to instill fear than to make areas inaccessible to civilians (that still would happen, but isn’t the goal)
adastra22 4y ago
Dirty bombs are typically not nuclear. They are just regular bombs packed with radioactive materials like medical grade cesium sources.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

yakshaving_jgt 4y ago

The explanation you gave for why a dirty bomb is called as such doesn't seem to be supported by the link you provided. Rather, it's dirty because it contaminates the area around the explosion with radioactive material.

xadhominemx 4y ago

That is not correct

tsimionescu 4y ago

The vast majority of effects of a dirty bomb are foiled by such advanced technologies as windows and showers. The initial conventional explosion will kill and injure far more people than the radioactive dust. At worst, that dust will slightly increase cancer rates for people relatively close to the location of the bomb (say, upto a few hundred meters) over their lifetime.

mLuby 4y ago
Dirty bombs are weapons of terror, not weapons of mass destruction. The true damage is caused by societal and economic overreaction from the target: fear leads to expensive security theatre, a desire for vengeance leads to lashing out with expensive unnecessary wars, uncertainty and political instability destabilizes financial markets, etc. Some diseases are similar: immune system overreaction causes more harm than the actual invader.

Someone 4y ago

> It's not dirty because it's lethal but rather because the construction of these bombs are rather crude I don’t think that’s correct, and do not see that Wikipedia page say that. It says “The purpose of the weapon is to contaminate the area around the dispersal agent/conventional explosion with radioactive material, serving primarily as an area denial device against civilians.” I think that “serving primarily as an area denial device against civilians.” isn’t 100% correct. For use by terrorists, I think it’s more to instill fear than to make areas inaccessible to civilians (that still would happen, but isn’t the goal)

adastra22 4y ago

Dirty bombs are typically not nuclear. They are just regular bombs packed with radioactive materials like medical grade cesium sources.