Review: One Second After

it is a very real and clear danger.

Makes you wonder how humanity survived at all before its dependency on electronics, doesn't it? But no need to become overly paranoid. I am certain that essential systems could be repaired in time to prevent the complete breakdown of society and anarchy and restore order.

Unless you live in a place where everybody stocks up in guns to defend themselves and their property against the government and any criminals with knifes (just in case), builds a nuclear bombshelter on the frotnyard (just in case) and is suspicious of the government on general principle. Thank god the USA is nothing at all like that huh

But maybe one should stop polluting the environment so there will be drinking water around when worse comes to worst. There, be an environmentalist so you can survive an EMP attack.. that is a new way to promote being green and patriotic lol

BTW have you ever watched the little educational movie from the 50ies during the hight of fear of a nuclear war called "duck and cover"? It teaches kids what to do in case of a nuclear attack - duck and cover - and that the Bomb could come any day and anytime without warning. From our contemporary point of view it appears almost unwillingly comical and satirical to watch that movie, but it is a great historic document.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1528313029232126903&ei=diJCSuLnEdaI-Aa7rc3OBw&q=duck+and+cover&hl=en

It'll never happen.

I've said it before. Nobody that has the technology to do this would do it without some sort of follow up action (nuclear attack, invasion, whatever). Who would launch a missile with at least 1 MT nominal yield (yes, it must be a missile, because the explosion would have to be 250 km over the central US in order to be effective) and expect the US to sit and take it? A surface burst also has this effect... it extends approx. 8 miles from ground zero, bad if your there, but hardly a national disaster. If a missile comes from Russia (China, Iran, NK, the boogieman), it will pass the retaliatory strike from the US in mid air. So unless the attacker is prepared for world war III, the chances of this occurring are minuscule. Terrorists (including Iran and NK) don't have this technology. Great sci-fi but that's it. So don't worry about what to bring to the block party no electricity cookout, you'll have bigger worries with the impending war. Folks, I wouldn't lose any sleep over this one.

I agree that the plot is unrealistic paranoid science fiction, but it does raise interesting questions of what would happen if all electricity and technology would ceize to work from one moment to the next. It is a thought experiment and as such fun.

I also firmly believe that the threat of nuclear attack followed by invasion is very unlikely - who would poison the land one wanted to conquer with radiation? Scratch that, threat of invasion in the US is nonexistent. Who would want to invade the US? Mexico or Canada?! lol Even though, why doesn't the US invade Mexico? Wars these days are not fought over land and territory but for resources and/or ideology (war on terror) or still and sadly for ethnical reasons. Even if a war is waged in a country, all effort is made to leave the existing political boundaries intact.

*cough* Utah *cough*

Did you read it utemia?

That is mind boggling ignorant. A wealth of guns will actually PREVENT social collapse, as people will be too afraid to start robbing.

Look at katrina? gangs started taking over, shooting police, mass rapes, looting... you send in the national guard and suddenly it is all gone. Had every house had a gun, you would not need the national guard to keep order.

Why? a single small nuke at low orbit can take out all electronics in the entirety of NORTH AMERICA, the continent.

Farmers will be completely unaffected. But the problem is in areas of HIGH POPULATION DENSITY. like cities.

We got along without tech by living in SMALL groups, next to a source of water (river), and with plenty of food to be had (game, farms, undomesticated food plants, etc). A human dies in mere days without water, and weeks without food. Water facilities COULD be hardened to EMP, you can have teams of ready people with spare parts... but that costs MONEY. right now DFW for example has bad levies and is looking at another katrina situation... yet the government is mulling over spending the money to fix the damn levies. To assume you can just magically replace all the damaged hardware in water facilities without any working cars, communication, coordination, factories, or plan and preparation is absurd. New orleans got help from the OUTSIDE, there is not going to be an outside to send help in such a scenario.

so what do you do in a city? you drink all the water in the local supermart in a day. now you are thirsty, there is no water to be had, no food to be had... you could try fighting, or running to lower population density areas. but cars don't WORK... you are in a deep pickle.

No, Brad, I haven't read it. But it is a book that I would read if I had the opportunity, because it is interesting and a little bit frightening, like 28 days later without the rage but similiar situations. Basically, paranoid dystopia - and those are mostly a good read. And yes, Americans like being paranoid. It seems to be a way of living.

In Germany, people do not have guns en masse and pretty much listen and trust the authorities. In fact, nobody I know owns a gun. No civilian can buy a gun and have a license one week later if he doesn't have a record. Even if you are a hunter, it is a lot more difficult to get a license. There are of course exceptions, but they are what the name says - rare and not widespread.

Guns to prevent widespread violence? Yeah, that is the american national fairy tale. But I know that I am pretty alone with that one so no discussion about it.

Hm, one might also say that Germans love following rules and they love order. There is nothing worse than chaos, so trust me that it would not happen that way over here.Can't tell you the same for any of the neighboring states though, the french are more prone to revolution and rioting.

I realize that Europe is alot smaller than the ConUS, but it is also more densly popoulated.The problems would the same happen over Europe would be well, more complex. But then again, Nitro had a point. You'd need a missile, and nobody in their right mind would risk a nuclear war. And since most of Europe is in the Nato, an attack in Europe would mean the US had to help. The same is true vice versa. An attack on the US would mean Nato memberstates had to help right away. So you are not alone if it happens, don't build a bunker underneath your house just yet.

Katrina is a good example, but not completely applicable. It was a horrible situation for the people and they went sort of Lord of the flies on each other because they were trapped, weren't they? It was an island situation. If all electronics would fail, people would not be trapped by filthy water, without enough supplies and no possible access to any, and be forced to let out the savage beast or die. I am really not sure the same would happen rapidly in cities - but lets hope that none of us finds out.

And since everybody believed that world war 3 would be fought out on german soil, and since world war 3 was mostly percieved as a nuclear attack  the military(nato) must have some plans on what to do about the emp fallout as well. You need communications and moving vehicles and airplanes for fighting a war after all - even if I don't have a clue about tactics otherwise.

I have a friend from Lübeck (in the northeast of Germany). He told me that in case of an attack on west germany, Nato's reaction would have been to bomb the hell out of Lübeck. Probably to stop advancing russians or whatever, that is a really scary thought, also because Lübeck was in West Germany. And to live like that during all of the cold war, knowing that if the bombs start falling, they fall on your head - I am glad I wasn't born to live during the hight of the cold war. I am also glad the americans took their nuclear aresenal back home, even if some of it is still bunkered here. As of today, 20 missiles remain in Germany, more are in Turkey, Netherlands, Belgium and Italy - a total of 240 warheads (if wikipedia is correct).

I think that part of American society stems from the Revolutionary War.  In a brief concise statement, the English colonists weren't going to put down their arms (guns) for anyone, including the government, and that laid the foundation to the way we Americans have the ability to buy and use weapons today.

Yes, true. But the question is wether that sentiment and interpretation, which are from the 18th century and the beginning of the idea of a national state, should still be valid for todays contemporary US society. You do have a standing army, and wasn't the whole reason for the 2nd amendment the fact that under British rule, the citizens were not able to have a standing militia so that law allowed them to form an militia if needed. Do you believe that you still need militias to defend yourself from the government?! Does that sentiment of mistrust not question anyones integrity that has ever served and swore an oath to defend the nation - you basically say that they can't be trusted and that every citizen has to have weapons just in case.

I had this debate with a friend from Florida, and I questioned the usefulness of the 2nd amendment because it was clearly from a different time and historic context which does not apply anymore. He called me a liberal and a communist lol He loves guns and has I don't know how many, wants to have a concealed carrying permit, his dad is a cop and he wants to join federal lawenforcement. I was not lobbying for any changes in the current law, but rather for having a public, academic, intellectual debate without polarizing and polemic rhetoric about the whole issue - hell would freeze over sooner. It is just not possible, people are not willing to talk neutrally about hot issues like the 2nd amendment. It is like trench war fare, 2 sides with their oppinions just trying to discredit each other.

Cause I SAID it won't. And I'm stomping my foot.

I've requested the book from the library . .thanks for the recommendation.

I have read some dystopian novels, and if you liked that book you might also like Oryx and Crake from Margaret Atwood. It is a brilliant book, very well written.

Didnt you ever watch James Bond: Golden Eye? The one with Peirce Brosnan and the driving the tank through Moscow and the EMP blasts etc etc?

Anyway, in case you didnt see it, the Russians had been experimenting with EMP blasts, and so put a bunch of nuclear warheads above what appeared to be communication satelites. Then they were detonated, the explosion didnt reach the ground but the EMP did and wiped out all sorts of tech in a remote part of Russia then it all became fantasy.

There was another movie... Space Cowboys i think it was called... the Russians built a 'communications satelite' filled it with 12 or so multi-warhead ICBM's and put it in space during the cold war. Then nuclear war didnt ensue and the Russian economy collapsed and everyone forgot about the satelite. Then, somehow, it was damaged and became active, so the russians went to the americans and asked for help repairing it. and thats how the americans found out.

Also, there have been a number of other books and things talking about EMP attacks. There was a weird micro series in Australia called Afterworld (im sure it aired in the US as well). it was basically 5 minute episodes that aired 3 times a day and you had to get all the info you could and try to guess the ending. what happened was one day all technology (on the planet, as far as we know) stops working, and like 90% of the earths population just diappears (im not sure if it was 90% of the people on earth or just the US we didnt find out before i stopped watching)

There is a really good book called Sunstorm by Stephen Baxter and Arthur C Clark. Its about a massive coronal ejection (solar flare) that shoots all kinds of nasty light, heat, radiation and whatever else right at us (Earth). It started with a massive EMP that shorted out most systems on the face of the earth (the face that was facing the sun at the time). then scientists learned it would happen again in 5 years but 100 times worse, and if they didnt do something to stop it the earth would be made uninhabitable. and the funny thing is that the flare was caused by an advanced race of aliens that believe that all energy in existence is finite, and will eventually run out at which point life and the universe will cease to be, so they are trying to stave off the inevitable by being super energy effecient, and policing other lifeforms to do the same. so when a race like humans come along and waste energy on weapons of war and space exploration and microwaveable popcorn, they try to eradicate us, using, funnily enough, the sun.

so this super energy conservative race tries to wipe out a reckless energy consuming species, by expelling enough energy to destroy a planet... ironic huh?

anyway, i wont go into the story more, because its too good a read to be ruined by explaining, but its DEFINITLY worth looking into.

Because of the variety of American views on this, you will get a variety of answers.  Many people do not trust the American government because America is extremely polarized, and one side will never trust the other, especially if the it is the other side that is office, or controls the majority of the House or Senate.

If you do not trust your government, then you are likely to believe that there may come a time that you need to defend yourself from the government.

In that line of thinking, removing the 2nd amendment is validation of those fears and mistrust.

Questioning the validity of the 2nd amendment and having an academic debate about it, which include all different positions there are - pro and con, does not automatically mean changing the constitution. It seems that even talking about it (having a neutral debate) is already a sacrilege to some - and that is just nuts. I have discovered this entrenchment in certain political oppinions on numerous occasions, and it is rather primitive if you ask me. You should always be able to have an argument about anything in a neutral and polite tone. Chanting paranoid slogans about corrupt governments and taking away freedom or paranoid militias and redneck uneducated republicans is seldom very productive.

I am assuming that you are referencing your Floridian friend here? 

Considering that he is an American, and evidently very emotionally involved in the debate, it's understandable why he couldn't argue the point from a nuetral standpoint.  Very few people can when they are emotionally involved.

Nope, have to disagree on that one. It should not be impossible to have a neutral debate about a political issue, no less. lol it is a wonder that your political system works at all if everybody that is emotionally involved is automatically excused from acting rationally.

And that worked so well to prevent the holocaust.

I would not say impossible, rather, it is very unlikely.

Well, in actually being in America, I wouldn't say it "works," it is simply what we have.  (That of course is my own opinion.)  In fact, I think it has been our downfall as Americans that we can't, or simply wont, think outside of our emotions.  That is how our political games are played, all candidates attempting to play on the emotions of voters, and that has been what has caused our extreme polarity.  For example, "The other side is EVIL because they believe in ABORTION, and abortion is MURDER of little INNOCENT BABIES!"  What part of that doesn't play on the emotions, for both sides?