It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

If N. Korea nukes Seattle? It's against the law to plan for attack.

page: 1
12
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 03:51 PM
link   
If N. Korea launches nukes, Washington's not allowed to have evacuation plan


Despite the constant threats and missile tests coming out of North Korea, emergency management officials in Washington state say they are prevented from forming an evacuation plan in the event of a nuclear attack. "State law does not allow any advanced planning," said Karina Shagren with the Washington State Emergency Management Division.

In 1984 lawmakers made it against the law to plan against a nuclear attack in Seattle.

Freaky right?

With Seattle considered a logical target if North Korea were to launch a nuclear strike on the U.S., a bipartisan group of Washington lawmakers wants to nix a 1984 provision disallowing state emergency planners from crafting a plan to specifically address such an attack.

State law requires emergency planners to prepare a comprehensive, all-hazard emergency plan, but under the 1984 law, that plan “may not include preparation for emergency evacuation or relocation of residents in anticipation of nuclear attack.”

Planning for nuclear attack: Lawmakers want to undo 1984 ban on ‘preparing for the worst’


...some lawmakers felt that people had little chance of surviving a nuclear attack and that the state was better off planning for other disasters.

Lawmakers in office now said they don’t fear a North Korean nuclear strike, but said they didn’t want the 1984 law to prevent preparation.

Wow. It's hard to believe in such a liberal city as Seattle - people would stand for being told it was against the law for the city to plan for the survival of it's own people. Oh wait, it does make sense.

peace




posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 03:57 PM
link   
It is simply an old forgotten law in the books that nobody paid attention to until now because it was irrelevant. Now that it may affect them, they seem to be wanting to change it. But, in the early to mid-80s, it was believed best to seek shelter in place in the event of nuclear attack and thus the 'reasoning' behind this absurd law.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 03:57 PM
link   
a reply to: silo13



Wow. It's hard to believe in such a liberal city as Seattle - people would stand for being told it was against the law for the city to plan for the survival of it's own people. Oh wait, it does make sense. 


But they aren't standing for it. That's what the article is about. Every city had weird laws nobody cares about until it's relevant.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 04:19 PM
link   
While I don't believe N. Korea is an immediate threat, not so far, the bill to turn this around may need to be rushed in as opposed to waiting a year. In general it should be signed anyway.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 04:22 PM
link   
The last one leaving Seattle, forgot to turn the lights out!!



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 04:28 PM
link   
Stupid question, but how would you evacuate a city that's just been nuked?

Wouldn't the nuke pretty.much do the evacuating for you?



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 04:34 PM
link   
They also have no plans for Volcanoes. Can you believe that?

There are five active volcanoes in Washington State, all located in the Cascade Range: Mount Saint Helens, Mount Adams, Mount Rainier, Glacier Peak, and Mount Baker

They really need to step up their game




We do not have a specific plan for a nuclear attack,” said Robert Ezelle, director of the Washington Military Department of Emergency Management. “Nor do we have a specific plan for a volcano or a number of types of hazards that you can name.

Fox news
edit on 23-7-2017 by violet because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-7-2017 by violet because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 04:34 PM
link   
a reply to: silo13

Crazy law. S+F.

Honestly I wouldn't put much faith in an evacuation plan orchestrated by the government, look at the New Orleans / Katrina thing.

I think I would take my bug out bag and take my chances on my own.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 04:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: uwontbelievethis
a reply to: silo13

Crazy law. S+F.

Honestly I wouldn't put much faith in an evacuation plan orchestrated by the government, look at the New Orleans / Katrina thing.

I think I would take my bug out bag and take my chances on my own.


Don't forget though you need to stay indoors, away from doors and Windows , underground preferably for 48 hrs . If it comes without warning there's no time to escape. The radiation fallout is bad, depending on wind currents. God knows it's windy here when a storm picks up.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 04:45 PM
link   
a reply to: silo13

To be honest, though the law is stupid, it really doesn't matter. Evacuation plans are already in place. They did a dry run exercise during a joint exercise called Cascadia Rising last year simulating a massive earthquake just off the coast. Local, state, and military were involved.

In the event of a nuclear strike warning emergency management agencies would issue the same evacuation plan. Unfortunately massive urban areas will not be able to evacuate fast enough.

The important thing to remember is that local emergency management planners can and will do whatever they need to in the event of any potential disaster.

Everybody involved in emergency planning knows that guidelines and rules go out the window when the # is really hitting the fan.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 04:46 PM
link   
I'm also not really that convinced the n Koreans haven't mastered it or really had such failures. Good act to put on then BOOM! Surprise Gotcha



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 04:56 PM
link   
"Wow. It's hard to believe in such a liberal city as Seattle - people would stand for being told it was against the law for the city to plan for the survival of it's own people. Oh wait, it does make sense."

And Cali is full of fruit, while Florida is full of nuts. Oregon....... their just too stoned to care.

Frankly, I think this will be changing soon enough. As the threat becomes real, we will have to respond.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 04:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: silo13

Lawmakers in office now said they don’t fear a North Korean nuclear strike, but said they didn’t want the 1984 law to prevent preparation.
Wow. It's hard to believe in such a liberal city as Seattle - people would stand for being told it was against the law for the city to plan for the survival of it's own people. Oh wait, it does make sense.

peace


Just think of this as radiation treatments and then they can smoke their pot to reduce the nausea.
edit on 23-7-2017 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 05:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: violet
I'm also not really that convinced the n Koreans haven't mastered it or really had such failures. Good act to put on then BOOM! Surprise Gotcha


Agreed. Anything is possible at this point. Esp. since they are preparing for another SLBM test/launch/whatever AND all US nationals are being urged to leave NK pronto.

I understand why some here have said this is to make sure everyone gets out before the travel ban. But the suspicious side of me says there's more to it.

It would make sense for the gov't to not tell us everything it knows so people won't panic. On a related note, here's a snippet from a May report about DHS Chief claiming that if we knew what he did re. terrorism, we'd never leave the house:


Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly said Friday that the threat of terrorism is so worrisome that most Americans would “never leave the house” if they knew what he knows about the issue. “I was telling [Fox News host] Steve [Doocy] on the way in here: If he knew what I knew about terrorism, he’d never leave the house in the morning,” Kelly said during an appearance on Fox News’ “Fox & Friends.”


Source

Granted, he was talking about terrorism but this makes me wonder how much does the government know about NK's capabilities and how much of that have they revealed to the public? I'd be willing to bet not much at all.

There's the unspoken gov't policy of the need to know, then there's the public's RIGHT to know.

If I lived in the area, I would have a bug out plan in place. To heck with the law......the gov't can't be trusted to protect us anyway once the stuff hits the proverbial fan.

Hawaii is preparing for a possible attack as well. Good.

I still say a pre-emptive strike is in order. And I can't get over how the US has not yet retaliated against Kim for the murder of Otto Warmbier. I never thought that President Trump would be the type to take such crap from an enemy.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 06:05 PM
link   
Its Washington State . Part of the Left Coast. Go figure.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 06:24 PM
link   
a reply to: dianajune
I agree that we're never going to find out a big catastrophe is coming our way because of mass panic. The only thing you can do is stay alert and be ready. Hard to be ready all day long though. Not very practical. Can't live in fear either. Yet in some ways a bit of fear is essential to survival. Failure to plan is a plan to fail.

Good video
Disregard the fearmongering title

edit on 23-7-2017 by violet because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-7-2017 by violet because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 07:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kukri
Stupid question, but how would you evacuate a city that's just been nuked?

Wouldn't the nuke pretty.much do the evacuating for you?


I presume if an evacuation order is given in the event of an incoming attack it can at least save a few lives - those who have appropriate bunkers or who can at least attempt to make an escape, no matter how slim survival chances may be. The US has a small window of time to know whether an ICBM is making it's way over (about 20 mins from NK to Seattle).

I'm guessing having the the law overturned would allow for residents to have access to greater education on the effects of nuclear radiation, relevant first aid, and which areas would be deemed suitable to relocate to within and without the city limits.

As a side note: Seattle would be a pretty solid target for NK - being a technology hub and all.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 08:03 PM
link   
Not should what planning can do vs any modern nuke. Rescue the survivors with 3rd degree burns. Search the rubble. It would be limiting collateral damage unless it's bunker planning. Without underground shelters network there isn't much that can be done.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 10:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: KiwiNite
Not should what planning can do vs any modern nuke. Rescue the survivors with 3rd degree burns. Search the rubble. It would be limiting collateral damage unless it's bunker planning. Without underground shelters network there isn't much that can be done.


Nyet. You're talking about direct hit I presume? That's an entirely different matter.

There is hope for the wider Seattle area or the area not directly hit, to evacuate.



posted on Jul, 24 2017 @ 12:07 AM
link   
I remember seeing several fallout shelter signs around the neighborhood in Seattle where a grew up (Queen Anne Hill) during the late 70's early 80's along my paper-route, and have wondered why they disappeared. Was it because the threat of Nuclear war had diminished, was it considered pointless that close to Gound Zero, or was it because of this "law"? Nowadays, the population is so large that fallout shelters probably would be pointless... better to get out a lawn-chair and watch the fireworks!
Nuclear Target Map for Washington State:

edit on 7242017 by seattlerat because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
12
<<   2 >>

log in

join