Last month, the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology and Homeland Security chaired by Kyl, held a hearing on the electromagnetic pulse, or EMP, threat.
"An electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack on the American homeland, said one of the distinguished scientists who testified at the hearing, is one of only a few ways that the United States could be defeated by its enemies – terrorist or otherwise," wrote Kyl "And it is probably the easiest. A single Scud missile, carrying a single nuclear weapon, detonated at the appropriate altitude, would interact with the Earth's atmosphere, producing an electromagnetic pulse radiating down to the surface at the speed of light. Depending on the location and size of the blast, the effect would be to knock out already stressed power grids and other electrical systems across much or even all of the continental United States, for months if not years."
What would we do? With all of America's progress with emerging media and communications, could it all just be wiped away in one instant? Imagine America, blown back to the 19th Century. All of us are pampered by technology, and what do you suppose would happen if all of a sudden it was yanked out from under us? Total chaos, that's what. Also verbatim from the article:
"American society has grown so dependent on computer and other electrical systems that we have created our own Achilles' heel of vulnerability, ironically much greater than those of other, less developed nations," the senator wrote. "When deprived of power, we are in many ways helpless, as the New York City blackout made clear. In that case, power was restored quickly because adjacent areas could provide help. But a large-scale burnout caused by a broad EMP attack would create a much more difficult situation. Not only would there be nobody nearby to help, it could take years to replace destroyed equipment."
Again, as I was saying, total chaos. Could anyone even imagine an America without cell phones, printers, televisions, Xbox 360s and everything else electronic? It would be the apocalypse at best. Personally, if I couldn't find a horse to jump on and make way to the country, I'd make plans for the afterlife. My big question is, WHY DON'T WE DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS? Oh, that's right, because there is so much political correctness in the world that people can't even have enough common sense to do something about a country that could possibly ruin the whole world's infrastructure, not just America's. Does anyone see something wrong with that? I mean, honestly, technology triples every day, but it hasn't always been that way. America has been working long and hard on the advancement of technology and people are just beginning to see where emerging media will take us in the future. If you love anything media, and this doesn't get a rise out of you or make you a little uneasy, then you should consider a different course of study.
People, wake up! It doesn't matter what you do for a living, I can guarantee it involves technology somewhere. This is something that should seriously be thought about and considered by every American or our welcomed guests residing here. You know, I'm a little off my rocker sometimes, and I'll be the first to tell you I'm not politically correct, but I will tell you this, I bet you I am not alone in thinking Iran is a serious problem that needs to be taken care of. I'll just let everyone sit on this, verbatim from the article:
Kyl concluded in his report: "The Sept. 11 commission report stated that our biggest failure was one of 'imagination.' No one imagined that terrorists would do what they did on Sept. 11. Today few Americans can conceive of the possibility that terrorists could bring our society to its knees by destroying everything we rely on that runs on electricity. But this time we've been warned, and we'd better be prepared to respond."
Great post! I deal with that type of logic all the time when I ask teachers to embrace digital resources and explore online teaching support.
ReplyDeleteThey think their resistence to embrace something new comes across as if they're doing something out of principle -- for the good of the future of children by maintaining the past.
Here's an article written by an educational consultant who travels all over the world to talk to teachers about the benefits of technology in the schools. The logic and reasoning these teachers use to justify not teaching students with current technology is pretty shocking! The writer does a great job describing his frustration as well.
http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky-Backup_Education-EdTech-1-08.pdf
Thanks! :) I just think it is outrageous that the government doesn't do something about a country that wants to destroy our whole infrastructure! It's really disappointing.
ReplyDeleteHey Caleigh and DFW Dart Dude, great post as it raises some interesting thoughts. In the spirit of a true muckraker I have to ask is it the Government's job to legislate humanity. I'm not arguing against technological advancement - I'm sure you hear some pretty ridiculous arguments, Dart Dude! - what I'm arguing against is a populace that is so dependent on technology that it loses it's ability to function in it's absence. Humans have walked the earth for centuries. Smart phones, Twitter not so much. Check out my post on http://thoroughlymodernmeka.blogspot.com/2010/08/emerging-media-ecosystem.html
ReplyDeleteAnd Tameka proved my point.
ReplyDeleteHow crazy it would be if we had to go back to actually putting pen to paper and actually writing letters again.I agree though that the US needs to do something and do it quickly about this possible attack from Iran.
Its scary that they possibly have this technology that can wipe out our main sources of communication.
I have an idea...how about we start a Facebook event to see if people can go without using FB, Twitter, smartphones and everything else that may think for you for one whole day. And not just your friends but whole cities, states and etc. I honestly think it would be a day of mourning.
Haha Danelle I bet you are right! Tameka I completely get where you're coming from and I think it is sad we have become that dependent as well. However, the facts are that we can't go back from this now. Everyone is so dependent on electricity, cell phones, and energy itself. Part of the government's job is to ensure the safety of Americans and the infrastructure we use. If they can't lead, they shouldn't be where they are. If our infrastructure were to crumble, it would definitely be chaos.
ReplyDeleteMaybe I'm just an idealist that wants everyone to be happy, but is there a way to teach/learn/use both just in case something were to happen like this? I love new technology and media (as do we all, hence why we are all in this program), but I've always thought that there should be some sort of a backup in case of something like this (perhaps I've watched too many movies). Not sure what that backup would be, but I can, if the occasion calls for it, use a paper and pen. You tell me and I will start writing everything down right now, one web page at a time. :)
ReplyDeleteGreat discussion, everyone. Caleigh, you've clearly hit upon a hot button topic and raise some valid questions about our "dependence" on technology. This obviously has implications for the topic of our class, though I would like to point out that the infrastructural damage that the article addresses is less to do with our personal communications media and more to do with banking, commerce, etc. Are you suggesting that we revert to pre-electronic systems?
ReplyDelete(You also want to be careful about the choice of sources you cite in academic work. That article is over five years old, which significantly dampens the sense of urgency about impending attack. Additionally, WorldNetDaily has a pretty clear ideological bone to pick. You wouldn't want anything from the opposite side of the spectrum either, but as a source that clearly declares itself a "conservative" publication, you have to be more aware of potential bias and look more closely at their sources of information, etc. Where are the references to the actual studies cited, etc? They cite an opinion column (which is referred to as a "report") and the author of a book who happens to be one of their journalists and sold on their site. They include lots of other links that are supposed to give the impression of links to other sources, but instead link to advertisements. This is not to say that there is no valid information here, but that the poor quality of their citations undermines their credibility, which in turn undermines your credibility. Be sure to do a bit more work on the sources you choose to cite. It's always best to get right to the direct source. For example, go read the Kyl piece in full and then try to find copies of the reports to which he refers. Feel free to see my during office hours if you have questions about finding scholarly sources).
p.s. I like the aliens.
ReplyDeleteGreat point! I just mainly wanted to show information on what such a bomb could do. However, I will start using other sources if that is what is best. I just know it is becoming a big concern now that it actually could happen, so I wanted to bring it to light and see what everyone thinks.
ReplyDelete