Please (c)orrect me where I’ve gone off track.

CapedConservative on September 21, 2009 at 9:52 PM

1. Brzezinski is Polish

CapedConservative on September 21, 2009 at 11:57 AM

Regardless of any numbered element thereafter, you fell off the track on item 1, because you are about to manipulate a set whose elements are the entire Polish people.

It would help if you used Venn Diagrams to describe the various elements of your proof, along with their intersections. Then you can see the issue better — although you shift in later elements of your proof from the people of Poland to the territory of Poland, so the proof doesn’t hold water (that Brzezinski is anti-Semitic) very well anyway.

HOW THE HELL DID HE AND THAT GANG OF JACKASSES EVER GET ANYWHERE NEAR THE WHITEHOUSE!?!
They all would appear to be outta their damned minds!
SuperCool on September 21,

Drugs. Lots of drugs,

and booze.

Remember friends don’t let friends drink n vote!

journeyintothewhirlwind on September 21, 2009 at 2:39 PM

The Egyptians demarked a 14nm war exclusion zone, and the Liberty was outside that. The Israelis never specified an exclusion zone. Read their report.

Israeli law itself recognizes a territorial water claim of 12nm in the Mediterranean, so, if we are to hold the Israelis to their own law, they attacked a ship outside their territorial waters.

When you tar Poles the way you do, you dishonor the memory not only of Captain Pilecki, but also of other Poles such as Joseph and Victoria Ulma, who, along with their children, were executed by the Nazis for harboring Jews.

You are certainly welcome to find fault with Brzezinski, but don’t tar other Poles with the same brush.

unclesmrgol on September 21, 2009 at 1:18 PM

I fail to see where I tarred Poles…

The connection was made (jokingly… and not a Polish joke) between Brzezinski’s name and the name the GERMANS’s assigned to “a portion” of Auschwitz… Berkenau. The translation from German to Polish of Berkenau is brzezinka… some kind of elm tree, I think, and similar to Brzezinski.

The connection I intended (and I think I made) was between Brzezinski and the Germans and their desire to kill Jews.

Please orrect me where I’ve gone off track.

CC

Biblically speaking, though, I wouldn’t want to the pilot–or the president who gave such an order.

Subsunk on September 21, 2009 at 3:06 PM

I would like to add my thanks for your very informative post.

The HotAir community rocks!

Subsunk on September 21, 2009 at 3:06 PM

That’s pretty freak’in impressive…where you you when I needed a good physics term paper…
Thanks,

Why on earth do you keep voting in these creeps?

I can’t find a reason. Maybe you can tell me?

Chaz706 on September 21, 2009 at 12:32 AM

“Aliyah” means making immigration (comming home)to Israel for Jews around the world. Aliyah from the U.S. in 2009 will be a record year. I want to thank Barry O. for his contribution in awakening the Jewish communities in the U.S. You have shown us that we need to be in Israel.

Subsunk on September 21, 2009 at 3:06 PM

Great post.

……………

As nuclear reactor fuel is used, it turns into uranium 238, which has a half life of 4.5 billion years. These radioactive isotopes are dangerous to health because they emit alpha particles and because they are chemically toxic. When inhaled, they damage lung tissue. When ingested, they damage kidneys and cause cancer in bones and in liver tissues

According to a recent review of medical research, uranium exposure causes babies to be deformed or born dead.

Never in history has it happened that nuclear power plants and nuclear enrichment facilities have been deliberately bombed. Such facilities, everywhere in the world, operate under severe safety conditions because the release of radioactive materials is deadly, immediately and also long after exposure.

If Israel deliberately bomb a fully fueled nuclear power plant or nuclear fuel enrichment facilities, containment will be breached; radioactive elements will be released into the environment. There will be horrific deaths for families in the surrounding vicinity.

The Union of Concerned Scientists has estimated 3 million deaths would result in 3 weeks from bombing the nuclear enrichment facilities near Esfahan, and the contamination would cover Afghanistan, Pakistan, all the way to India.

Bombing such facilities will require powerful explosives, earth penetrator war heads, maybe nuclear warheads. The explosions will blow the contamination high into the atmosphere. Where will it go is a question that is difficult to predict.

………The planet is not large. What goes around, comes around. Smoke from the Gulf War oil fires went around the world and was detected in South America. Radioactive fallout from bombing a nuclear reactor will also go far, especially considering that it has millions of years to make the trip.

Military forces in the Persian Gulf, in Iraq, and infghanistan need to wonder how expendable they are.

mags on September 21, 2009 at 10:40 AM

1) When reactor fuels are consumed they form a series of what are called decay products, mostly centered around Iodine-135 and Krypton-88, but only because those are the largest numbers of decay products, statistically. U-238 is consumed by the fission process, not a product of it. Until a reactor has been operated at higher powers for some amount of time, the amount of long term radioactivity enclosed remains low. After several months at higher powers, many fission products and some neutron activated corrosion products (like Co-60 and other more highly susceptible substances to neutron activation) will be produced. Most of these fission and decay products have half lives on the order ofdays or months, and some have half lives around 60 yrs or so. So within twenty years, the vast majority of all contaminated material will have decayed away and has no effect on human life. Yes there will be areas hich remain high, but not dangerously so for your immediate health.

2) An explosion involving a breach of the containment building (which Bushehr most certainly has in the photos I’ve seen of it), and then a further breach of the vessel containing the core, and then some kind of damage and melting of the fuel, probably from the bomb or from the failure to remove what is called “decay heat” from the fuel after the bombing cuts off the power and breaches the vessel and lets the cooling water boil off, would allow SOME fission products to be released. Tests on expended cores show that approximately 40% of the fission products are gasses and can be expected to be released when the fuel, vessel, and containment building all three are breached. If the core has operated for a long time (years), then these fission products are very radioactive, but also diffuse relatively quickly in the atmosphere. Unless the levels of radiation a person is exposed to are relatively high, the chances of sickness from radiation exposure is only one addiditional death from cancer in a population of ten thousand or so people. Very Low!!!!

3) When Chernobyl melted down, a very large reactor delivered up most of its fission product gasses to the atmosphere and the radioactivity traveled on the prevailing winds for a long way. However, no one outside the 33 firefighters involved in fighting the fire died immediately, or even in the next couple of days. They died after a month based on high exposures to the fission product plume emanating from the still burning reactor. No one died immediately from exposure to fission products in the hundreds of miles around Chernobyl and Pinsk. However, the higher levels of exposure appear to have led to several hundred additional cases of cancer in the residents of the area and immeidately under the radioactive plume for several dozen miles. All of those deaths were treatable and could have been countered by early warnings and approppriate screening of the exposed personnel in Pinsk and Chernobyl.

4) The bombing of Bushehr would most likely NOT allow as many fission products into the atmosphere as Chernobyl (where there was NO containment building). While the chances certainly go way up when you deliberately bomb a reactor, remember that you can stop plutonium production merely by completely destroying the electrical supplies to the facilities and ensuring they never get built again, and you will eliminate plutonium production at Bushehr. I would assume you could eliminate uranium enrichment at Esfahan almost the same way. These plants do not make their own electricity in sufficient quantities to continue running if you eliminate their ability to receive and transmit electricity to the outside area. Their emergency generators are for just that, emergency use, to cool the reactor, not keep it running at full power. While they make electricity to supply themselves, that is through a switchboard. Destroy the electrical switchboards and everything stops.

5) Plutonium-239 comes from the activation by neutrons of U-238. So you start a fission process, then put laregly unfissionable U-238 around the core to absorb excess neutrons and become Pu-239. Then you take out the Pu and use it to make bombs. It still has to be separated, centrifuged, formed and machined into bomb parts after it is removed from the reactor. So kill the fission before it makes enough Pu-239 and that bomb route is eliminated.

6)The location and direction of the wind will tell you quite closely where the radiation will go. The Argonne National Laboratory in the US produces just these kinds of studies and assessments. The hazards to the local population can be identified within hours and evacuations effected. And the planet is VERY large. The solution to pollution is dilution. What is very hazardous in large quantities is ALWAYS rendered less hazardous by spreading it out into smaller concentrations and neutralizing it.

7) The Union of Concerned Scientists is a leftist group of tree huggers who wish they could uninvent nuclear weapons. They never met a lefty cause they couldn’t spin facts to support, despite the laws of physics. Their estimates of the dangers of radioactivity has ALWAYS been overblown and based on unscientific estimates. They always make worst case scenarios seem like the most likely cases. I never believe anything they say after seeing what the true studies they quoted said. Birth defects are possible, yes. Higher cancer rates are possible, yes. All from higher exposure rates than those charlatans ever saw in their studies. There is currently a wealth of information from over 60 yrs of reactor operations in the US, with an amazingly low accident and health risk rate from radioactive exposure.

Bottom Line: Bombing the Iranians’ reactors can be done without breaching the cores, and if they are breached, presents an acceptable risk of exposure to the surrounding countries. Those Iranians near the facilties MAY be exposed to dangerous levels in the long term. Too bad. They should have insisted their country stop trying to build nuclear weapons. And if their country did the right thing, they can still be protected, even after the bombings.

Don’t disagree with all your points, but some things need clarification.

Subsunk

unclesmrgol on September 21, 2009 at 3:07 AM

International waters hmmm. Was that the 3nm or 12nm rule? Has the US signed a International Waters Treaty? I just did some brief googling and it looks like there was a lot of room for misunderstanding in 67 (even now). How would our peace loving hippies of 67 reacted to the US being involved in a International Waters dispute with Israel after the Gulf of Tonkin deal?

HA just recently had a post on LBJ tapes in which he says that he has the black vote locked up for 200 years because of him signing the Civil Rights Act. The Dems already had the Jewish vote locked up. He just had to figure out how to win Vietnam…

Would he have thrown away those 2 voting groups due to a “misunderstanding” at sea? He probably thought the Dems would never lose another election….