Suchergebnisse

If a small (ten-kiloton) nuclear bomb exploded in Times Square, it would "destroy instantaneously the theater district, the New York Times building, Grand Central Terminal, and every other structure within a third of a mile. . . . The ensuing firestorm would engulf Rockefeller Center, Carnegie Hall, the Empire State Building, and Madison Square Garden. . . . On a normal workday, more than half a million people crowd the area within a half-mile radius of Times Square. A noon detonation in midtown Manhattan would kill them all. Hundreds of thousands of others would die from collapsing buildings, fire, and fallout in the ensuing hours," says Graham Allison in his book Nuclear Terrorism.

Even though international forces failed to uncover weapons of mass destruction in Iraq during the Second Gulf War, it is asserted that weapons of mass destruction remain a real & dangerous threat to many countries' national security. Rather than establish a comprehensive approach to dealing with the threats posed by weapons of mass destruction, it is suggested that different approaches to different actors be developed to reduce their future use against the US. Whereas the establishment of confidence-building measures is recommended to diminish mid-ranking states development & deployment of weapons of mass destruction, it is asserted that the reduction of US military innovation combined with the adoption of new approaches to regional & international security could deter hostile countries from pursuing weapons of mass destruction. Rather than utilize emotional & religious rhetoric to characterize terrorists, it is stressed that relations with Islamic nations must be normalized & that the policy of winning the war against international terrorism be replaced with one that acknowledges differences between Western & Islamic countries. It is concluded that the George W. Bush administrations unilateral approach to reducing weapons of mass destruction is creating, not reducing, future threats to US security. J. W. Parker