2015 November 21 Saturday
Ban Many Activities To Enable Open Borders

A convenient starter list of activities we will need to ban in order to enable Open Borders.

WAASMUNSTER, Belgium The Belgian authorities halted public transit, canceled soccer games and warned citizens to avoid shopping centers, airports, train stations and concerts in the Brussels region early Saturday, warning that the capital was vulnerable in the wake of the

If people live out in the country, get home delivery rather than go to stores, and generally stay away from crowded places then the risk of terrorist attacks from Open Borders would go down substantially.

Perhaps it would be possible to retain team sports matches, just without audiences in stadiums. We could all watch them remotely. Ditto for rock concerts.

I am thinking virtual reality goggles will become more valuable with Open Borders. You will be able to escape into virtual reality to meet up in dense online communities without risk of getting blown up. Virtual rock concerts. Virtual clubs where virtual guys will pick up virtual girls. We could even have simulated air flights so that you could still have the feeling of air travel to distant exotic lands without the risk of getting our airplane blown out of the air by Islamic jihadists.

Since our elites want Open Borders and seem quite determined to make them happen no matter what our interests are in the matter I think we need to start thinking about a radical reordering of society to enable their insane new world order.

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2015 November 21 10:48 AM 


Comments
Wolf-Dog said at November 21, 2015 2:42 PM:

But the deliveries can still be contaminated with toxic materials. This is the key Achilles's heel of the decentralized population model. Also, densely populated cities cannot be dismantled very easily. Dirty radiation bombs would make NY, SF, and even Silicon Valley impossible to work. Within a few decades many weapons of mass destruction will be very compact and easily manufactured in decentralized terrorist facilities all over the world.

This is why the future wars can have a lot of casualties, and it will be more like George Bush's motto: "Either you are with us or you are against us." Personal freedom (at least privacy for sure) will be severely reduced, and in every apartment there will be a Big Brother Camera.

Engineer-Poet said at November 22, 2015 3:36 AM:
Dirty radiation bombs would make NY, SF, and even Silicon Valley impossible to work.

Nonsense.  Consider a typical spent BWR fuel element.  At 1 meter distance from the center, you'd get 100 Sv/hr.  If you distributed this evenly to achieve the human optimum of roughly 700 mSv/yr, what area could you cover?  By my calculations, less than 2 square kilometers... and that assumes that you couldn't detect and remove hot particles yielding greater exposures.

The problem with the "dirty bomb" scenario is that it assumes that the bomb can't be detected on the way to delivery.  This not not just mistaken, it's grossly false; strong radiation sources are easily detected at quite a distance.  Further, hot ceramic particles are easily found with gamma cameras and cleaned up.  The upshot is that dirty bombs are more or less worthless for causing casualties, and worthless for causing panic in an informed populace.  But if the public is composed of superstitious idiots.... nah, not in the USA!

Wolf-Dog said at November 22, 2015 6:53 AM:

True, but the generalized definition of a dirty bomb includes a crude nuclear bomb that is "salted" with a layer of other metals that turn radioactive after irradiation from the original nuke. The whole package would fit a van or a garage where it would be assembled. As I said, such treats are in a few decades, but it will get there once Jihad obtains enough revenue from its taxable population in the future.

Also, poisoning of water and food will be a serious threat, and it will be even more so in a few decades.

Wolf-Dog said at November 22, 2015 6:53 AM:

True, but the generalized definition of a dirty bomb includes a crude nuclear bomb that is "salted" with a layer of other metals that turn radioactive after irradiation from the original nuke. The whole package would fit a van or a garage where it would be assembled. As I said, such treats are in a few decades, but it will get there once Jihad obtains enough revenue from its taxable population in the future.

Also, poisoning of water and food will be a serious threat, and it will be even more so in a few decades.

Engineer-Poet said at November 22, 2015 11:24 AM:

The yield of fission products from a small fission bomb is trivial compared to the inventory of SNF.  A kiloton is 4.2e12 joules, or about 20 minutes of output of a 3400 MW(th) reactor like an AP1000; you get a couple Hiroshima's worth out of each one per day.  The intense radioactivity from short-lived FPs disappears in about a week; even the threat from I-131 disappears in a handful of months.  The radiation from longer-lived products is correspondingly less intense.

The physical damage from a kiloton-level bomb is going to be by far the worst part of it.  The chemical explosion in China earlier this year was rated at only a few tons; look at what it did.

Wolf-Dog said at November 22, 2015 3:42 PM:

I said salted bombs. And nobody said that in 20 years they will be 1kt. In the future they will be able to build thousands of nukes, an they will surround the bombs with cobalt etc., which get very radioactive after irradiation with leftover neutrons. Even if it is not a fusion bomb, there are enough neutrons to make that cobalt or gold shroud very toxic after detonation. Any such city would be evacuated for several years or even decades, making life collapse.


In any case, when so many religious immigrants become hostile and suicidal, if they scatter chemicals and bacteria all over the West, it would make life very uncomfortable for the rest of us.

Wolf-Dog said at November 22, 2015 3:50 PM:

The half-life of irradiated/radioactive cobalt is 5.7 years. And the half-life of irradiated/radioactive gold is 2.7 days. The gold bomb is for maximum casualties in the short run. At the beginning of the Cold War I, the cobalt bombs were the rage for a while.

In any case, if they are willing to assemble the smuggled nukes in safe houses, they can make these very big. By 2040 (almost tomorrow), technology will make many kinds of weapons of mass destruction easier and more decentralized to make.

Thus, the original argument remains the same, the world will require a lot of invasion of privacy, and it is possible that as some conservatives said, there will be registries to keep track of the ethnic background of each person.

Engineer-Poet said at November 22, 2015 9:10 PM:

There's no need to track ethnic backgrounds if you simply close borders and re-patriate hostile minority groups.  Even if you can't manage this 100%, the remaining threat can be minimized because carrying out such an attack is anything but simple.  There are many opportunities to screw up.

First, you have to be able to get the fissiles into position.  This is not a trivial exercise, as they "shine" from spontaneous fission.  These emissions can be detected at a considerable distance, IIUC.  If your smuggling or storage is detected, you just lost your plot and everything you put into it.

Second, you actually have to put together a bomb.  Gold being so expensive, cobalt would be the likely "salt".  The problem with cobalt is that the specific activity is hundreds of times less than gold, so you need to make hundreds of times as much to have the same effect.

Suppose the group manages to come up with a bomb with a 5 kt yield:  2.1e13 J.  At 200 MeV/fission and 1.6e-19 J/eV, this requires about 6.5e23 fissions:  just over a mole of U-235 (call it 250 grams).  At 2.5 neutrons per fission with 1.5 escaping and 50% capture in the "salt", you'd get about 0.8 moles of radio-whatever.  If that's Co-60, you get about 48 grams of it.

A gram of Co-60 is about 1100 Ci, so 48 grams is roughly 53,000 Ci.  If you spread this evenly over 100 square kilometers, you get 0.48 μg/m² and 5.3e-4 Ci/m².  Using the Wikipedia figures as a first cut, you'd get on the order of 8 μSv/hr at a distance of one meter on top of the 1 m² patch, with the contribution from more distant patches falling off with inverse-square loss plus scattering attenuation.  This appears to be on the order of the 53 μSv/hr measured by bionerd23 on the monazite-sand beach at Guarapari—which is absolutely nothing to be concerned about, as people go there for their health.

To make a serious "dirty bomb" you appear to need at least a two-stage nuclear device generating hundreds of grams of surplus neutrons.  At this point you are also into at least tens of kt of yield and will be blowing your target to smithereens.  At that scale of destruction, rebuilding elsewhere probably isn't a big issue.

My conclusion:  unless they involve vaporizing an entire nuclear spent-fuel storage site, "dirty bombs" are not really an issue.

Wolf-Dog said at November 23, 2015 8:39 PM:

If a few Hiroshima type bombs gets detonated in Silicon Valley, it will take at least a decade for people to return there. A few dozen cannon uranium bombs in major cities in the US and EU would severely damage the civilization. And gold is not too expensive if the Islamic State gains control of the Middle East: 100 kg of gold would cost only $4 million.

In any case, in a few decades, nukes will be only one of the many WMDs, once the rumor spreads that both food and water are unreliable, life will be difficult. This will force the West to do terrible things to survive, including using nukes abroad.

As I mentioned before, during the last 5,000 years there has been 14,000 wars in the world. As if this were not enough, during the last 3,000 years there has been only 250 years of relative peace on this planet. And it is estimated that an incredible 5 billion people perished in all these 14,000 wars, even though the world population was 250 million 2,000 years ago, which probably implies that a lot of civilians were also massacred too. In other words, the entire world is

Engineer-Poet said at November 24, 2015 10:53 AM:

Any nation on earth that made HEU for terrorists would be erased after the first bomb went off.  We wouldn't have to worry about repeats.  A gold-salted bomb would leave the area pristine after 2 months (22 half-lives).

Also, quit with the double-posting.  It is irritating and adds nothing.  If you can't figure out how to stop doing it, just GTFO.

Wolf-Dog said at November 24, 2015 1:49 PM:

" Any nation on earth that made HEU for terrorists would be erased after the first bomb went off. A gold-salted bomb would leave the area pristine after 2 months (22 half-lives)."

/////////----------------------------

My apologies: The double posting is not intentional. I get an error message and the message is not there for a while. In the future I will wait for a few hours until the smoke clears before attempting again, so that you don't get upset. If you cannot stop using abusive language, then this is a sign that for you, winning is more important than having a reasonable discussion.

Yes, the gold-salted nuke would certainly leave the area pristine after 2 months, but you forgot to acknowledge the fact that the gold-salted nuke is intended for maximum casualties, not long term deniability of the area. You don't seem to care about the loss of talented people in Silicon Valley, Boston and New York, high quality people are more difficult to replace than concrete buildings.

If many nations (over 1 billion muslims) diffusely make HEU scattered all around the world as a result of ISIS propaganda, your oversimplification of military solutions won't work. Actually they want us to nuke them, due to their nihilism, their psychological goal is to make us like them.

And HEU is not going to be the only thing as I said, since the millions of immigrants will also be capable of sabotaging and poisoning the environment. This is more like a global civil war. A political spiritual solution must also be found.

In any case, the main argument I am trying to emphasize is that privacy and personal freedoms are at risk.

WJ said at November 26, 2015 7:31 AM:

It's funny that multiculturalism is marketed as a plus ("our culture plus all the contributions of those other cultures!") but all I keep seeing are minuses - subtract all those things we now can't do because of terorrism, or because they would be offensive to minorities in our midst. What percentage of elementary schools will be giving Christmas concerts this year (REAL Christmas concerts) versus 20 or 30 years ago?

Wolf-Dog said at November 26, 2015 6:57 PM:


In this free Stratfor article it is anticipated that very soon there will be online Jihad and terrorism universities.

https://www.stratfor.com/weekly/online-university-terrorism

Randall Parker at Futurepundit has always been preaching the virtues of online universities that can undercut expensive private institutions, but he should be careful about what he wishes for because he might just get it. With encrypted videoconferencing, they will be able plan all their nefarious activities without any geographic restrictions.


Post a comment
Comments:
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
URL:
Remember info?

      
 
Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright