Radiologic weapons

Bolton s opinion was bolstered in June 2005 by Senator Richard Lu-gar s survey of 85 non-proliferation and national security analysts from the United States and other nations. It was designed in part to characterize the risks related to the terrorist use of CBRN. The survey revealed that experts believe the probability of an attack somewhere in the world with a CBRN weapon was 50% over the next five years and 70% over the next ten. An attack with a radiological weapon was seen as the most probable with the likelihood of an attack with a nuclear or biological weapon considered about half as plausible [37]. The average probability of a nuclear attack in the next ten years was nearly 30%, with experts almost evenly divided between terrorist acquisitions of a working nuclear weapon versus self-construction [37]. The average risk estimate over ten years for major chemical and biological attacks was 20%. Senator Lu-gar concluded The bottom line is this for the foreseeable future, the United States and other nations will face an existential threat from the intersection of terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. ... 

This chapter summarizes the various types of radiation and warfare agents that emergency responders and the public may encounter as a result of a terrorist attack. It also discusses recent black market activities, to emphasize the real threat of terrorist actions involving radiological weapons. While the chemical and biological warfare agents presented in Sections 2.2 and 2.3 are the most likely to be encountered, new agents are continuously developed. 

Stochastic radiation effects are typically associated with those that occur over many months or years (i.e., are typically chronic instead of acute). Chronic doses are typically on the order of background doses (0.3 rem [0.003 Sv] or less) and are not necessarily associated with larger doses that could result from a terrorist attack with radiological weapons. However, stochastic health effects are defined here as effects that occur many years after chronic or acute exposure to radiological contaminants. Stochastic effects are categorized as cancers and hereditary effects. Because no case of hereditary effects (e.g., mutation of future generations) has been documented, this discussion focuses on cancer risk. 

Integrated response measures—to minimize loss of life and property. The challenges for chemical scientists include the development of detectors and information systems that can provide responses for chemical, biological, and radiological weapons to maximize the effectiveness of a diverse group of responders. 

Now there is growing realization of the possibility of the use of radiological weapons (dirty bombs) by terrorist organizations. With such weapons, radioactive material could be dispersed in populated areas. Such acts could lead to a variety of problematic health and environmental consequences. The National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement has recently published a valuable reference entitled Management of Terrorist Events Involving... 

Although contamination levels from a radiological weapon are likely to be quite low, the concern about the effects of long-term exposure may be great enough in some areas that authorities will ask you to leave your home or business for an extended period. 

E. Detection of Suspected NBC Agents. It is not always evident when biological, chemical, or radiological weapons have been used. For example, several days will pass between the release of anthrax and the appearance of the first symptom. One method to detect the use of NBC agents before the appearance of symptoms is to sample the environment and troops. Personnel monitoring using radiation survey instruments should be done if radioactive contamination is... 

From the military point of view, psychochemicals appeared immensely attractive. They seemed to offer all the advantages of chemical or radiological weapons, with none of the disadvantages no damage to property, no dead bodies, and no danger of infection. 

As Steve Bowman stated in his article "Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) The Terrorist Threat," the term weapons of mass destruction is a former Soviet military term which was euphemistically used to denote nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. It is now widely used despite debate over its appropriateness, and its definition has broadened to include radiological weapons. For some, particularly in the wake of the World Trade Center airliner attacks, the term WMD has come to include any means capable of inflicting mass casualties."... 

Although radiological weapons have little or no tactical importance on the battlefield, the fear of radiation has become so widespread and ingrained that if an opponent spreads even small, harmless but detectable amounts of radioactive material in rear echelon areas, the action may force troops to don full protective garb and attempt to operate under that handicap. 

The technologies needed to construct nuclear and radiological weapons and to employ both kinds of weapons either for military purposes or an act of terror are not new. Since their introduction in 1945, nuclear explosives have been the most feared of the weapons of mass destruction, in part because of their ability to cause enormous... 

The Evolution of Legal Approaches to Controlling Nuclear and Radiological Weapons and Combating the Threat... 

Keywords Nuclear security Non-proliferation Nuclear weapons Radiological weapons Nuclear terrorism fritemational oiganizations Dual-use Arms control law... 

Radiological weapons could come in many forms. The one most often discussed is a so-called dirty Iximb in which a conventional explosive is used to disperse radiation from a radioactive source. 

---