• Military

• WMD Menu                           

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

Comments on House Republican Research Committee Paper "Iraq's 
Other Bomb"
Filename:0164pgv.90d
[   (b)(2)   ]
10 DEC 90 1530 [   (b)(6)   ] 
Subject:  Comments on House Republican Research Committee Paper 
"Iraq's Other Bomb"
     The statement that a Radiological Dispersion Device (RDD) is 
a genuine poor man's low technology atom bomb" is an extreme 
overstatement.  The military effectiveness is nowhere near the 
same.  It is impossible to get a material dispersion and 
radioactive concentration that is acutely incapacitating  U.S.
forces have tactics and training that allow them to fight in 
contaminated zones with minimal loss of effectiveness.  Effective 
contamination would require large amounts of highly active 
radioisotopes and a difficult and dangerous handling procedure for 
processing them into deliverable form.  An RDD's greatest effect 
would be psychological, especially against civilians who fear
anything possibly radioactive.
        Iraq does possess some radioisotopes and a small research 
reactor for making more.  It does have activated fuel from the 
reactor core which would provide a very small highly radioactive 
source, it decided to abrogate the safeguards on the fuel.  DIA 
has no indication that the reactor facility has a crash program to 
maximize isotope production.  The stockpile of natural or
slightly enriched uranium is so slightly radioactive that it is 
useless in an RDD.
        Iraq could conceivably use its isotope inventory and any 
of its delivery means to make and deliver an RDD although there 
are many complications.  The first is formulating the isotope into 
a form that will distribute well.  The loading and handling of the 
munition is dangerous to troops, unless a large part of its weight 
is dedicated to shielding.  DIA has no evidence of any work in 
this area.  
	   Physical, as opposed to psychological, effectiveness of 
RDD's against civilian economic targets is also questionable.  A 
contaminated target may shutdown or reduce operations for a while, 
but it can be decontaminated.  Although radiological contamination 
may not disappear as fast as chemical agents, its does degrade 
with time, is washed away or covered up by weather, and unlike 
some chemical contamination does not kill upon exposure except in
very high concentrations.  And, as is shown in the nuclear 
industry, workers can accept some dose safely.
[   (b)(6)   ]