Tuesday, September 19, 2006

Making nuclear war thinkable


What's wrong with this picture? To begin with, if it weren't a Hollywood special effects shot, the guy would probably be blind from looking right at the exploding nuke -- he clearly didn't duck and cover. Also, the whole detached observer quality of the photo subliminally says nuclear catastrophe is no big deal, something that can safely be survived at a distance. The biblical name and hint of a halo even hint at something transcendent.

In other words, CBS is helping make the use of nukes a little more thinkable.

I wonder how this thing ever got off the ground. Maybe it went something like this:
You guys have been in the doghouse for a couple years now, ever since the Janet Jackson costume malfunction and the Dan Rather mess. Getting Katie for the news was a start, but you need to do more. Here's a thought. How about a "high-concept" TV soap featuring a plucky red state small town with a biblical name surviving nuclear catastrophe while those sinners in the big cities apparently burn in hellfire and disappear? How cool is that?
CBS seemed to buy it. They signed for at least 13 episodes, and the new series "Jericho" will air weekly, starting this Wednesday.
A drama about what happens when a nuclear mushroom cloud suddenly appears on the horizon, plunging the residents of a small, peaceful Kansas town into chaos, leaving them completely isolated and wondering if they're the only Americans left alive. Fear of the unknown propels Jericho into social, psychological and physical mayhem when all communication and power is shut down. The town starts to come apart at the seams as terror, anger and confusion bring out the very worst in some residents. But in this time of crisis, as sensible people become paranoid, personal agendas take over and well-kept secrets threaten to be revealed, some people will find an inner strength they never knew they had and the most unlikely heroes will emerge.
Again, what's wrong with this picture?

More than 20 years ago, in the early years of the Reagan administration, loose talk about "survivable nuclear war" created a huge outcry, here and abroad. ABC produced a TV movie called "The Day After." While operating within the constraints of network TV, the show tried to communicate some of the true horror of a nuclear war. The Reaganites learned their lesson and shut up.

Now, little more than two decades later, CBS is about to show nuclear war as something that happens elsewhere, off-camera except for a mushroom cloud or two on the horizon, nothing that can't be survived by good people learning to work together in a small town far from Ground Zero. Yeah, right.

Call me a cynic, but I don't think it's any accident that this show is airing at the very time that the Bush administration is trying, through a disingenuous combination of leaks, diplomatic initiatives and gradually escalating threats, to build support for a preemptive strike -- possibly with nuclear "bunker busters" -- against Iran. And while they insist they haven't made up their minds to go to war yet, chances are -- based on past performance -- they've already made their decision. It's not a matter of "if," but "when" -- and how to sell it.

The neocon strategists know they don't have a snowball's chance in hell of selling another preemptive war to the public through rational argument. What they can do, without ever discussing the real issues, is make emotional appeals to their base, get them worked up, and then use them to bludgeon political opponents of preemptive war.

Who knows? "Jericho" might do the job. On the one hand, it stirs anxiety about nuclear war, and thus builds support for a "preventive war" against Iran. On the other hand, showing nuclear war safely going on in the background while people are fine and going about their lives in the foreground helps desensitize the audience to the horror of nuclear weapons and makes nuclear war less unthinkable. It helps erode taboos about a U.S. nuclear first strike -- should that become necessary to get rid of those underground labs in Iran.

It just might work.

Holy Shit! (Update): Here's executive producer Jon Turteltaub on Sci Fi Wire:
Jon Turteltaub, the executive producer of CBS' upcoming post-apocalyptic drama series Jericho, told SCI FI Wire that he did research about what might happen after a nuclear attack and was surprised by the answers he found. "This is going to sound odd, but a nuclear bomb is not as bad as everybody thinks," Turteltaub in an interview. "Without question on the scale of things in the world, it's on the bad scale of things that can happen. Puppies are on the really good side of things [laughs]. But sometimes we have this image that one nuclear bomb would take out all of New York City and Brooklyn and Queens and parts of New Jersey."

That wouldn't be the case with the initial blast, Turteltaub (National Treasure) added. "Part of the question is how much of the area is uninhabitable versus how much in our perception and our fears is uninhabitable," he said. "Coping with our own panic may be a greater enemy than the reality of these things."
Just in case there was any doubt about where these guys are coming from.

9/21/06 Update: "Jericho" is still standing the day after, but I don't think we're in Kansas anymore.

10/13/06 Update: Dr. Strangelove, please keep an eye on your toys. Your grandchildren are getting forgetful.

26 comments:

kelley b. said...

Thanks for your post.

I have no doubt that as a species the cockroaches will survive World War III if nukes are introduced.

Bu$hCo: making the unthinkable part of yur cable menu.

Billmon said...

I think you're right -- the essential message of the series is that nuclear war is something that happens somewhere else. While the after effects may be bad (or less good than puppies, as that moron Turteltaub would probably put it) good red-state Americans -- with their down-home, salt-of-the-earth values -- can and will cope just fine.

In other words, "Jericho" is America and that mountain being nuked in the promo pic is Iran. Frame the mushroom cloud in a TV screen, and there's the home-front propaganda plan for war with Iran.

But I don't actually think this is a deliberately concocted piece of propaganda ala Path to 9/11. I think it's just another example of what Jung called "synchronicity" and Hegel the Zeitgeist -- the mysterious tendency for unrelated events to appear to all be reading from the same script.

Or, to quote Flannery O'Connor: Everything that rises must converage -- including mushroom clouds.

bjacques said...

It probably is a zeitgeisty thing, or it could be just an old idea whose time has come around again, cycling less often than perennials like cops, doctors and lawyers, or even the mutant on the run.

Harlan Ellison, in "The Glass Teat," mentioned a crapfest from 1968 called "The New People," a yoof-oriented show about kids whose plane crashed onto a desert island, with no hope of rescue. Only one adult survives and together they have to create a new society. According to Ellison, it looks remarkably like official Nixonian 1960s teen culture, with coconuts; think "Gilligan's Island" without the laughs. He said each episode was worse than the last. Five minutes of such tripe and I'd be wanting to kill Piggy.

But if Jericho's got puppies in it, even mutant ones, I'd check it out.

Anonymous said...

And where in Kansas can you see mountains like that? I don't think the Rockies are visible until pretty far west into Colorado. Eastern Colorado is even flatter than Kansas.

fiat lux said...

As a native NYer whose family still lives there, the though that nuclear war is something that will happen to "other people" is just not a part of my worldview. I know damn well that NYC is a primary target.

This whole thought that "well, if a major US cty is nuked, the rest of us will just go on as before" is beyond pathetic.

tellybelly said...

Anyone with even a lick of common sense cannot see this as anything other than sci-fi fantasy. After all, unless Jericho just happens to have its own food processing plants for all the variety of groceries you would expect, stand alone electrical grid which doesn't require fuel brought in from outside the town, its own television and radio facilities and a small manufacturing plant for every item the spoiled American wants to have, then it ain't gonna be all that pleasant. Even the novel "Alas, Babylon," which told of a small Florida town and how it coped after a nuclear war, acknowledged that the vast majority of the supply of products that modern Americans expect to have handy would dry up almost within days and the novel was most interesting when it documented how substitutes for things were improvised or the items were done without.

I do agree that this does seem a product of the Zeitgeist, much as "The Day After" was a product of that era's sense of unease. However, with a lot of people either wigged out about depleted energy or a die-off from disease or welcoming Armaggedon with wild eyes and open arms, this does seem an odd product since apparently survival is attained with little sacrifice.

On the other hand, we have a President who has asked no sacrifice from Americans, other than the soldiers abroad, during his 'war', so this may just hit the spot with a country that thinks the yellow magnet is a true sacrifice.

Anonymous said...


But sometimes we have this image that one nuclear bomb would take out all of New York City and Brooklyn and Queens and parts of New Jersey."


I hate to have to waste words on correcting this idiot, but large modern thermonuclear weapons are capable of doing exactly that.

A Hiroshima-type fission weapon can yield up to a few hundred kilotons of explosive power. Beyond that, rude physical limits kick in which make the idea technically impossible to scale further.

A thermonuclear fusion weapon (technically fission-fusion-fission) has very few physical or engineering limits on its scaling. It's easy to build those to yield multiple megatons.

The ex-USSR apparently had multiple 10MT warheads programmed for New York City. That was for redundancy, assuming possible booster or guidance failures from the missiles. Assuming that the first one hit on target, everything else would have just made the rubble bounce.

And yes, a 10MT airburst over Manhattan would in fact "take out all of New York City and Brooklyn and Queens and parts of New Jersey." There would still be buildings standing in the outer boroughs, but they would be burning for all they were worth.

--

Dr Diablo said...

I worry about what will happen to Fantasy Football in the aftermath of a nuclear holocaust. Will there be computer simulations of NFL games which cannot be played due to the annihilation of stadiums or players? Does "Jericho" get into this at all?

You imply that the series is an actual "plant" by Bush and his minions. If so, you have broken the Big Story that the Blogosphere needs to legitimize itself as a news source. When you get a moment, please post a link to the documentation.

Anonymous said...

Since NJ is in between TWO major targets of a possible nuclear strike -- NYC and Philadelphia -- it's more accurate to say that ALL of New Jersey (and not just a part thereof) would be annihilated during a nuclear strike. But hey, us South Jersey folk are used to being ignored by North Jerseyans :-)

Just a quibble though -- good post!

Dave Bell said...

I've lived in the middle of a nest of targets all my Cold War life, including Thor IRBMs sitting on the launch pad during the Cuban Missile Crisis. I've done some digging into the effects.

And the Executive Producer is half right. The effects of nuclear weapons get exaggerated. Just one nuke on a city is going to cause horrific casualties, overwhelming a whole nation's hospital system, but some of the predictions are based on tests carried out in perfect weather; no cloud or smog.

As for one nuke on New York, just how big a bang is going to get used on that target? Just saying that it's possible to make huge nukes doesn't mean there's any reason to make them. For one thing, the damage doesn't double when you double the size of the warhead. It's not just reliability that makes multiple warheads a good idea. Three 10MT warheads will do more damage than one 30MT.

Anyway, if there are enough missiles being fired for there to be a target somewhere in sight of Kansas, there's only one plausible enemy: Russia. There's potentially a good story, but unless you do it as a period piece the setting doesn't make sense.

Except as something essentially political.

MediaBloodhound said...

Great post.

Though I'm not so sure if it was deliberate - I'd have to agree with Billmon on this, the Flannery O'Connor quote apt encapsulation - it most certainly adds to a mad atmosphere of nuclear war acceptance. Quite possibly the most insidious aspect is that many Americans, drawn to this show's wild premise alone, will not be consciously aware they are being desensitized to the prospect of nuclear war. Either on our soil or somebody else's.

Though you may very well be right. In a few days, or even hours, we may find out Turteltaub is heavily connected to the wingnuts. Whether he is or not, those quotes reveal him to be either utterly insane, monumentally stupid or gleefully irresponsible.

Anonymous said...

This is not correct. The initial flash would be blinding but the mushroom cloud certainly wouldn't. So this picture is certainly realistic.

Anonymous said...

I don't want to sound like a warmonger but I have to agree with Turtletaub: nuclear war isn't as bad as is believed. A war with the Soviet Union (or Russia) probably wouldn't have been survivable but most adversaries (China, N Korea, Iran) certainly don't have the capabillity of the Soviet Union, and hence only a few large U.S. cities would be destroyed before the other side either exhausted their arsenal or was blown into oblivion. Yes, the result would be millions of deaths but that could easily be overcome. The real bummer would be the destruction of the financial capital of the U.S., New York City but I hope they've already made arrangements for everything to be easily moved somehwere else, Chicago for example.

Anyways, I've always been frightened about the prospect of people 'finding out' that nuclear war isn't as horrible as most of us think, for fear that the threshold to start one is lowered.

Anonymous said...

The ex-USSR apparently had multiple 10MT warheads programmed for New York City.

Wrong Wrong Wrong. Perhaps in the early days of the 1960s when Soviet Missiles were very primitive and had huge CEPs. By the 1970s, Soviet technology had improved, allowing the feasible use of smaller warheads.

New York City would probably be targeted at several points:

1.) Wall Street gets several 200~ kiloton warheads to erase it.

2.) The New York City Docks get a couple of 200~ kiloton warheads to destroy them.

Anything surrounding those areas will be "bonus" collateral damage.

The Soviets contrary to what we thought during the Cold War, actually did design their attack patterns for minimal destruction as possible. The only exception was West Germany...but then the Russians don't like the Germans...with good reason.

WinterBear TrueHeart said...

Jon Turteltaub is a moron.

one nuclear bomb just about anywhere in the populated USA would be the the worst thing to happen in our history. You can argue about the physical effects of the damage... but the real problem would be the psychological damage.

This country has been driven mad by the deaths of a 3,000 people on 9-11. We invaded a country that had nothing to do with it, we have bent all our laws about human rights and we are now offically sanctioning torture. And it looks like, 6 years after the event, we are going to go to war with Iran.

Just imagine our response to a nuke.

Anonymous said...

In the second episode Hawkins tunes in some morse code on the ham radio and it appears 7 cities have been nuked.
Isn't 7 the number of cities Osama has planed to nuke by smuggling in bombs?

Also isn't there some biblical reference to the battle of Jericho and the number 7?

I agree it certinly seems they are trying to desensitize us to being nuked.
I was never this disturbed when the cold war was going on because of MAD (mutual assured destruction) which worked as a deterent.
I think the only way to prevent this is to let the Muslim world know that if any US city is nuked by a smuggled in bomb their major cities will be nuked in response. I think that if Iran knew Terhan would be a smoldering pile of crap, they would think twice about letting terrorists have nukes.

Anonymous said...

If somthing like this does happen it won't be from ICBMs, it will be by something smuggled in to the country.
for all we know the nukes could already be in country. They could also simply smuggle in the U232 and assemble the device with supplies they can easily get here.

This is scary shit people and we should all be on the look out for suspicious activity.

On another note, a nuke detonated in a large city with large concrete buildings will not have the same effect it had on Japanese cities. The large skyscrapers will take the brunt of the blast and shockwave.

The Truth Seeker said...

Just to clarify a few points.

1) No one is smuggling 7 nukes into major cities. The logistics of doing this and remaining undetected to the authorities is staggering. Argue about this if you want but I stand by this comment.

2) In regards to "a nuclear bomb is not as bad as everybody thinks" (makes me sick just writing such crap).

It is not the blast that is the real problem. The lucky ones are those who die in the blast. The problem is fallout. When you detonate a nuke, particulate matter gets sucked into the mushroom cloud due to the negative pressure created in the centre of the blast. This debris becomes highly irradiated and is swept along by the winds and can settle hundreds of kilometres away from the blast site. Where this debris lands will cause sickness and death to many people. Oh and if you think taping up your windows will do anything your kidding yourself. The alpha and gamma rays released by irradiated material will penetrate just about any modern home, and you have to leave your home eventually. Also most homes do not come with air purification systems, so the particles in the air you are breathing will most likely be irradiated as well.

This is just a basic overview. It would require a 10-page document to go over all the possibilities of who would survive and how you may survive.

One last thing, if you think that one nuclear bomb could not wipe out life on earth. Look into these two things. Number 1 is the Russian bomb they planned to make that was 100MT. they scaled it back to 50MT by removing the final fission stage and replacing it with lead because they feared that the fallout would be so massive that it would kill half of Europe. Number 2 is the Cobalt bomb. I won't ruin the surprise on this but again the killer is fallout.

Anonymous said...

NBC’s new show, Heroes, is also dramatizing a nuclear explosion on American soil. Their story involves the potential obliteration of Manhattan.

Oh well, I guess that is coincidence and not the work of screenwriters following the suggestions of our Ministers of Propaganda.

One could argue that this has the appearance of psychological warfare against a society that, on average, has a hard time separating reality from fiction, when it comes to what they see on the television.

Anonymous said...

Yiu are reading a lot of things into this TV show that were not there.

You claim that the show's message is that a nuclear war is no big deal, when in fact, the premise is exactly the opposite. It is about a town whose people witnessed a distant nuclear attack from an unknown source. Furthermore, you assume that the people of the town will simply go on as before; the show is clearly abpout their struggle to survive.

And claiming that President George W. Bush was behind this series is downright silly.


Michael Ejercito

vtccgolf said...

Hey folks,

I just wanted to chime in here as I see this new show Jericho has casued some of you to debate many things.

First of all, check out this site that I found...it shows the likely blast areas from a nuclear exchange with another major power (i.e. USSR). And yes, looks like Jersey will get the everloving shit kicked out of it...and damn, Rutgers is doing so good in football this year.

http://www.carolmoore.net/nuclearwar/

And you folks may laugh, but I actually have alittle experience with this whole issue (being a nuclear submarine guy and all)...anyone that thinks the Jericho shows we will survive a nuclear war...well, slap yourself silly. The Day After...thats what it will be like.

I caught the Jericho show on the second episode and was like "what the hell is going on?" Maybe I missed the reviews (since I quit watching CBS a long time ago), but I had to go back and see what I missed. Now, imagine the shock when I saw in the first episode that the EMP came when the President is giving a "State of the Union" type speech. All my big wig bosses sitting in the front row...definitely not in any hurry to open the football and issue some launch orders...humm...and some eight...maybe more cities getting nuked...yeah, going to keep watch this show to see how this is even possible (ironically, maybe only aliens could do this...those something tells me their killer ray beams would be much better than ancient nuclear bombs).

Now, I can see Jericho surviving all this mess if Denver were on the other side of the Rockies...if you check out the site above...there are few blasts in the area, and fallout patterns seem to miss the town. But, everything will run out, human nature unfortunately will kick in, and chaos will envelope the survivors.

Unless this attack in Jericho occured without any other nuclear exchanges and only eight or so blasts, then the US has a good chance of surviving (about eight clean nukes are cleaner than a Russian reactor melting itself down...and the entire of Russia/Ukraine haven't dropped dead yet).

But here's the rub...any nuclear exchange will only blow into full nuclear destruction. That's why Mutually Assured Destruction worked...you launch yours, I'll launch mine...and everyone dies. Kept the Cold War just that...cold. But with wackos wanting nukes (Iran)...and Israel keeping the Samson Option under wraps(i.e. one blast will destroy Israel...so we will launch all our nukes at all anti-semites)...you can see how MAD falls apart (terrorists want to die...by any means necessary). When people have nukes and aren't fearful...the whole world will just let those WMD's loose.

Some of you may like them, some may hate them. If you want to see humanity's ultimate failure happen, just keep talking up nukes. This is a issue that I fought within myself in my job, but with the MAD theory and Russia...it worked. Now, we need to get rid of them. Any member of the Armed Service will tell you that once a nukes cut loose, what the hell is the point anymore? The very thing we fight for (protecting our freedom) is going to be at about a few million Celsius in about 30 minutes.

War once was about resolving issues when diplomatic means failed...and you and the guy lined up across from you knew one of you was going to die for what you felt is right in defending (regardless of whether it was right or wrong in some moral context). It was on a battlefield in some field in the country far away, and you weren't putting your family in the mix of it.

Then come's along gureilla warfare...human shields...and nuclear war. So much for the gentleman's war. Some laugh at those old movies when men simply lined up and took their shots. Trust me, if those men saw innocents dying, mushrooms clouds, and horrors of modern warfare...they would not be able to sleep at night ever again.

I serve my country to defend freedom against those that would take that away from us...to fight to noble battle against forces that would hurt my family and friends. I personally am getting sick of having to be sent out to solve the world's problems for them (you think the world would learn after two world wars). But, our global society has now become one where we have no choice to get involved...for all it would take is one nuke...in one place...to cause this whole house of cards we have built for ourselve to come crashing down.

And if I can...when I see the missiles start flying...and knowing what is going to come...I will ask for forgiveness for what I have done in my life...say my last prayers...grab my family and have that one last dinner...watch my last episode of The Andy Griffith Show...and pray that a ground zero will be parked on top of my easy chair.

The blast will happen so fast, I won't even know it happened. For those of you that think you can survive this...I bid you God Speed.

Now I don't really want to die, and I am sure you don't want to either. So how about this...ya'll that haven't seen the Day After, go buy it (I got a copy for 5 bucks at Wal Mart...and don't pull what my wife does and say "I can't watch that horror"), educate yourself, and let's live to put these weapons in our past. We can process the warheads for fuel for power plant, use the boosters for space missions, and the silos for tornado shelters! Works out for everyone.

I don't know about you, but I want my kids to grow up in a world where the threat of nukes is a thing of the past...that will only happen when we all know the real effects of nuclear warfare.

As for Jericho, I just hope it makes it long enough to see how the heck this happened.

Anonymous said...

You Libs are pathetic. Pick up a book sometime. It depends on the yield, the altitude and weather conditions. You do know there has been over 2,000 nuclear detonations(not all atmospheric) worldwide don't you? That's an average of 1 every 10 days. If a 1 megaton nuke is detonated at surface level, you will be safe as close as 10-20 miles from impact depending on terrain. Broken windows maybe. Fallout is another story, depends on weather conditions and jet streams. Get back to talking about the wonders of Socialism.

Anonymous said...

Interesting show, but I don't think it was nuke ICBMs. Episode 1 shows the president addressing a joint session of congress and being cut off mid-stream. Thats not an ICBM, EW systems would have picked up the launches and that room would be empty in 2 minutes. Maybe a sub cruise missile from just off the east coast. More likely scenario is prepositioned bombs in cities, if you could smuggle and assemble several megaton sized bombs (not suitcase sized) into all the major cities. And hide them. And coordinate the attack.

vtccgolf said...

Here's some more reading material for those needing to read up:

http://www.geocities.com/survival_planning/survive_nuclear.html

http://www.oism.org/nwss/

http://www.worldwideschool.org/library/books/hst/northamerican/WorldwideEffectsofNuclearWar-SomePerspectives/chap1.html

http://www.thebulletin.org/article_nn.php?art_ofn=nd98norris

That last link will tell the story on nuclear testing as mentioned by the above post. However, only approx. 427 MT were detonanted total over the course between 1945-1998 in the air. Total...510 MT.

If there occurs a major nuclear exchange...and it will regardless of who fires what first...we are talking in the ballpark of 10000-12000 MT in the course of a couple days. Those saying that you could survive...sure, you may. I guarantee the majority of us will probably get 30 min notice and be caught in an area were the blast will kill us or the fallout is so bad that if we don't find cover in the couple of hours after the blast...death is certain.

Don't kid yourselves...nuclear weapsons are the Pandora's Box of our time. And those out there throwing around political name calling...libs or hawks (I am a Boortz style-Libetarian if ya'll must now), then politics will only further cloud your view of the issue. I don't want nukes cause we have no need for them...I am military and can tell you that with 100% absolute certainty. We are forced to have them as long as another major superpower has them (refer back to MAD theory).

Some may call me a lib...some a hawk (simply because I serve). Politics isn't in this decision for me...my two kids are! And know this...I have asked many a sailor on a sub after we have conducted a simulated nuke strike on our SSBN's how would you feel if we really had to do this...and most of them either didn't want to talk about it, almost cried about it, or simply said "I hope we never do, for we would have nothing to go home to."

To them, having these missiles were for conducting drills for something that would never happen and a pointed weapon that kept the other guys from launching theirs. The Soviets, I am sure, felt exactly the same way. And for all those NeoCons...know this...even Reagan cried after watching The Day After. That network TV series (the same known to bore people out of their minds) may have just saved the world in 1983.

Something tells me that OBL and company will not care about starting the end of the world...its their goal to see it all end. And that includes your families and kids dead.

Make petty politics out of the issue of nuclear war (when it should be clear to all what it will mean)...and realize you have polarized the nation about the end of the world (imagine me vomitting in disgust). This petty politics will destroy our nation if it keeps up, and it looks that nukes may just help the process along. I serve to protect the rights of those that refuse to compromise...and I can only pray and hope we can compromise and work it out (hence why I shifted from NeoCon to Libertarian).

Read up, learn, and know what you are talking about. Yes, we can survive a single blast...but only a single blast is kidding yourselves. I am going to keep watching this show to see how it happened. BUt, I have practiced assisting in ending the world many times...and I think about this each time those missiles leave the tube.

Being in the military...I have no choice but to carry out the orders issued to me. That means
"birds in the air" regardless of my personel feelings on the issue. Its the public that decide via our leaders and our actions on how we bought ourselves into the mess. If you don't want this kind of end, then work to prevent it.

Cause if that order comes to my boat, those birds will be in the air. That may shock some of you...but that's how my biz works. We can't afford that...and if you polarize this issue, then you make this issue clear as mud.

Its this simple...nukes are deterrents...work to remove the need for deterrent...then remove the nukes. There's nothing that a good ole' Mk 82 can't level (you may need a B-2 full of 'um).

If you want your kids to have a future...pull your heads out of your asses...quit pointing fingers (cause everyone has shit in their closets)...and do something about our country together. That should includes nukes at some point.


Good day...God Bless America...God Bless everyone!

cgeye said...

Good thing, then that SciFi finally got a clue and showed THE DAY AFTER, a few Sundays back. Nice showing Turtlelaub + Co. for the fools they are.

Of course, they showed ATOMIC TRAIN after it, but still -- good show, to point out that radiation poisoning, with the bombs of today, is damn near forever.

Jake said...

Riiiiggghhht. For those brainwashed by anti-nuclear fanatics, just have a peak at this here page: www.osim.org/nwss/s73p912.htm. These people dispel all the common myths about nuclear war, including the "nuclear winter" hypothesis.