Bob McCarty Writes

Two days before the election, I published ten reasons NOT to elect Barack Obama in 2008 with reason #3 being the fact that Obama wants to drastically cut defense spending, research and capabilities.  Among those defense cutbacks, a missile defense system that might protect the United States from an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack.

Not familiar with the concept of an EMP attack?  Two and a half months after broaching the subject of an EMP attack in an opinion piece, the Wall Street Journal Online reminds readers of the threat today — this time in a news story.

Under the headline, What a Single Nuclear Warhead Would Do, writer Brian T. Kennedy’s article offers a glimpse at the impact of such an attack:

Think about this scenario: An ordinary-looking freighter ship heading toward New York or Los Angeles launches a missile from its hull or from a canister lowered into the sea. It hits a densely populated area. A million people are incinerated. The ship is then sunk. No one claims responsibility. There is no firm evidence as to who sponsored the attack, and thus no one against whom to launch a counterstrike.

Further into the pieace, he adds:

…such an attack would effectively throw America back technologically into the early 19th century. It would require the Iranians to be able to produce a warhead as sophisticated as we expect the Russians or the Chinese to possess. But that is certainly attainable. Common sense would suggest that, absent food and water, the number of people who could die of deprivation and as a result of social breakdown might run well into the millions.

Need something to do in your spare time?  Contact your elected officials in Washington, D.C., and encourage the soon-to-be-inaugurated 44th president to drop his plans to cut missile defense.  If successful, the life you save might be your own.

See also:

Emergency Plan Fails to Consider EMP Threat

Oil Crisis Pales in Comparison to EMP Threat