Chapter 1
Introduction
In a 1954 interview described in author Bob Considine’s biography of General
Douglas MacArthur [1] the General was describing his plans for winning the Korean
War. They included dropping “30–50 tactical atomic bombs” on North Korea’s military and then contaminating the land “…from the Sea of Japan to the Yellow Sea—a
belt of radioactive cobalt. It could have been spread from wagons, carts, trucks and
planes. It is not an expensive material. It has an active life of between 60 and 120 years.
For at least 60 years there could have been no land invasion of Korea from the North.
The enemy could not have marched across that radiated collar I proposed to put across
Korea’s neck.” While MacArthur obviously never implemented his plan, it certainly
captures some of the essentials of both nuclear and radiological weapons—using
the sheer destructive power of the former and the long-term “staying power” of the
latter to destroy an enemy and to deny them use of an area of land for an extended
period of time. Those considering using such weapons in radiological attacks are
likely making the same type of assessment.
Something else that can be inferred from this interview is that MacArthur lacked
a detailed understanding about the biological effects of radiation and the amount that
would be required to sow such a large area with enough radioactive cobalt to make the
area unsafe for several decades. This, too, reflects a mentality that has been carried
forward for more than a half-century—that radiation is uniquely dangerous and that
only a small amount is sufficient to cause grave danger. The fact that it is not—and
that so few actually understand this fact—could well be the most damaging aspect of
radiological terrorism, not to mention our response to radiological or nuclear accidents (e.g. Fukushima) and their aftermath. In fact, this lack of information—among
members of the public, the medical community, politicians, emergency responders,
public health officials, and many more—was among the factors prompting this book.
In Part I of Radiological and Nuclear Terrorism we will review some of the
fundamental science of radiation; it’s basic properties, how it affects our health,
and how we detect it. This fundamental information will inform the rest of the
book, helping the reader to understand the scientific context surrounding many of
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021
P. A. Karam, Radiological and Nuclear Terrorism,
Advanced Sciences and Technologies for Security Applications,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-69162-2_1
1
Introduction
In a 1954 interview described in author Bob Considine’s biography of General
Douglas MacArthur [1] the General was describing his plans for winning the Korean
War. They included dropping “30–50 tactical atomic bombs” on North Korea’s military and then contaminating the land “…from the Sea of Japan to the Yellow Sea—a
belt of radioactive cobalt. It could have been spread from wagons, carts, trucks and
planes. It is not an expensive material. It has an active life of between 60 and 120 years.
For at least 60 years there could have been no land invasion of Korea from the North.
The enemy could not have marched across that radiated collar I proposed to put across
Korea’s neck.” While MacArthur obviously never implemented his plan, it certainly
captures some of the essentials of both nuclear and radiological weapons—using
the sheer destructive power of the former and the long-term “staying power” of the
latter to destroy an enemy and to deny them use of an area of land for an extended
period of time. Those considering using such weapons in radiological attacks are
likely making the same type of assessment.
Something else that can be inferred from this interview is that MacArthur lacked
a detailed understanding about the biological effects of radiation and the amount that
would be required to sow such a large area with enough radioactive cobalt to make the
area unsafe for several decades. This, too, reflects a mentality that has been carried
forward for more than a half-century—that radiation is uniquely dangerous and that
only a small amount is sufficient to cause grave danger. The fact that it is not—and
that so few actually understand this fact—could well be the most damaging aspect of
radiological terrorism, not to mention our response to radiological or nuclear accidents (e.g. Fukushima) and their aftermath. In fact, this lack of information—among
members of the public, the medical community, politicians, emergency responders,
public health officials, and many more—was among the factors prompting this book.
In Part I of Radiological and Nuclear Terrorism we will review some of the
fundamental science of radiation; it’s basic properties, how it affects our health,
and how we detect it. This fundamental information will inform the rest of the
book, helping the reader to understand the scientific context surrounding many of
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021
P. A. Karam, Radiological and Nuclear Terrorism,
Advanced Sciences and Technologies for Security Applications,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-69162-2_1
1