This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: raduate School, 2007
(Port Security Strategy 2012, edocs.nps.edu/npspubs/scholarly/TR/2007/NPS-97-07-003.pdf)
The second scenario considered localized damage to power sub -stations, fuel storage/distribution
location, or passenger cruise ship terminal by forceful by a vehicle-borne IED. The non redundant
power supply to the port’s cranes is located within the premises of the port, but only protected by
small mesh fencing and bollards. It is possible for a vehicle carrying an IED to penetrate the
port’s perimeter fencing, or refuse to stop at the gate, and proceed to drive through the
fencing protecting a power substation and detonate the IED. This action would result in
damaging the power substation which disrupts the power supplied to a substantial portion of
the port’s cranes. If the ports’ cranes lost power, the port would loose ship on-load and offload capabilities. This action would halt port operations in the affected portions of the port
until the power substation could be repaired. An attack on a fuel stora ge location would likely
causes severe pollution. If a terrorist was able to attack a cruse ship, they would likely kill
several people, and decimate the cruise industry by inducing fear in its customers. 15 | P a g e Port Security Affirmative BDL Answers to: Terrorism Not an Existential Threat
[___] [___] Retaliation means terror attack causes extinction
Greg Easterbrook, senior editor with The New Republic, 2001
(November, p. www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0111/01/gal.00.html)
Terrorists may not be held by this, especially suicidal terrorists, of the kind that al Qaeda is
attempting to cultivate. But I think, if I could leave you with one message, it would be this: that the
search for terrorist atomic weapons would be of great benefit to the Muslim peoples of the world in
addition to members, to people of the United States and Western Europe, because if an atomic
warhead goes off in Washington, say, in the current environment or anything like it, in the
24 hours that followed, a hundred million Muslims would die as U.S. nuclear bombs rained
down on every conceivable military target in a dozen Muslim countries.
[___] Even a small nuclear attack would instantly collapse the economy
John Kenneth Galbraith, Harvard Economics Prof, 2000
(“Economic Aspects,” http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/legal/nwc/mon1galb.html)
Such is the vulnerability of the American economy that in the form we know it; it could be brought
to an end by the most elementary of nuclear attacks. This could be accomplished by a tactical
nuclear weapon on downtown New York. With such an attack there would, of course, be
massive death and destruction. But additionally the American economy would be made nonfunctional. No longer in the economic world would it be known what was owned and what possessed
in the banks. That knowledge would be destroyed along with the people that convey the information.
The trading of securities would, of course, come to an end but, as seriously, so would the
knowledge throughout the country of what is owned. Those with ownership in and income
from the financial world — stocks, bonds and other financial instruments — would find a record of
their possessions eliminated. It would...
View Full Document
This document was uploaded on 02/06/2014.
- Spring '14