Fate of Japan and the Whole World Depends on No. 4 Reactor

[Peace Patriot]

65. Where do you live, Sirveri?

"It then would need to cross the entirety of the Pacific Ocean without precipitating." --Sirveri

-----

So, some of it precipitates into the Pacific Ocean? That solves the problem for you, does it?

Live anywhere in or near the Pacific Ocean? Ever eat anything from the Pacific Ocean? Does anybody you care about live on islands in the Pacific or near coasts that the Pacific touches? In the Americas? In Asia? You think the problem of fires spewing deadly radiation into the atmosphere is taken care of by destruction of the food source for billions of people (not to mention whales, dolphins and other critters)?

The oceans of Planet Earth are NOT the waste disposal sites for the nuclear industry!

Plus...PLUS...some of that deadly radiation being breathed and rained down on millions, and maybe billions, of people, and soaking into soils and water tables, contaminating crops and farm animals! You think mass death and illness and mass starvation are regrettable but no reason for alarm as long as they don't reach YOU?

Believe me, if Fukushima blows, it WILL reach you--whether you are in the path of the radiation or not. Our world will end. Your world will end. The vast and horrible disruption of everything you know and count on will occur. But airborne nuclear radiation knows no borders and chances are you live right along its path. If you don't live on or near the Pacific coast, maybe you will get a lesser dose. Or maybe it will fall upon your children, relatives or friends. At what point are you going to say that the end of your world has occurred? What level of death and destruction is necessary for you to call it "the end"?

End of the whales and dolphins and other sea life in the northern Pacific? End of California? End of California, Oregon and Washington? Five years of cancer deaths for half your community? Ten years?

Before you call "the end" an exaggeration, please define what level of catastrophe you are willing to say isn't "the end"?

Where do you live, hm?

-----------------------

I can't help but think of the generals of the Joint Chiefs telling JFK that we could "win" a nuclear war with Soviet Russia with "only" several hundred thousand casualties on the east coast. (See James Douglass' book, "JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters.&quot "Win" WHAT? A dead zone in a third of the country? A fourth of the country? A tenth of the country? How do you define "win" in a horror of that scale? How do you define "the end" in a horror of the potential scale as Fukushima? And how stupid is it to discourage people from considering the worst consequences of a man-made, preventable catastrophe with nuclear weapons or nuclear power? We MUST consider the worst because there is no going back, once the MAN-MADE catastrophe is in motion. You cannot put the nuclear geni back in the bottle! It is not like any other catastrophe.