Speaker Newt Gingrich delivers a speech on national security and defense spending. The speech was the closing address to Protect America Month, The Heritage Foundation's month-long campaign to raise awareness about the current issues facing our men and women in uniform.
Newt Gingrich is former speaker of the US House of Representatives. Now a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, Gingrich continues to advocate for smaller government and what he terms "fundamental values." He is also the founder and General Chairman of the American Solutions for Winning the Future group. On May 11, 2011, Gingrich announced he will seek the Republican nomination to run against Barack Obama in the 2012 United States Presidential election.
Gingrich is the author of Rediscovering God in America and To Try Men's Souls: A Novel of George Washington and the Fight for American Freedom.
"i've been following newt for years... he's a super smart guy..."
He also, in 1978, served his first wife Jackie Battley divorce papers while she lay in a hospital bed recovering from cancer surgery. Gingrich divorced her because (so he said) "She wasn't pretty enough to be first lady." Gingrich then refused to pay alimony or child support for his two children forcing Battley's church to take up a collection for her and the Gingrich children.
This is not fearmongering. It is looking at hypothetical situations. It is important for our defense officials to be thinking ahead many years to what could be and to be prepared for them. I also believe China or anyone attacking the United States with an EMP weapon or other weapon is unlikely. Our capabilities are still well beyond those of China. We have second, third, fourth and fifth strike capabilities and I believe our strength and capabilities are a deterrent. I am much more concerned about asymmetrical attacks from Muslim nuckleheads with a bomb in their underwear, attempting to kill innocent civilians.
I think there's some validity to it. It's smarter to disable the defense systems prior to a mass attack/invasion. The public will be panicked and communications between military divisions would be lost.
i've been following newt for years... he's a super smart guy....
remember, he was a college professor... before... he became a politician
this guy really knows his stuff and i'm not a republican or democrat
i'm an independent voter
I used to work in a lab where we did electromagnetic interference testing for airplane electronics.
To disrupt a moderately hardened piece of electronics, you need a fairly high level of EMI (electromagnetic interference). The good news is that, thanks to the FCC, we do this sort of "hardening" pretty routinely.
It turns out that field strength decreases by the SQUARE of the distance from the source. So, an EMP pulse is, by it's nature, an extremely localized phenomena.
An EMP pulse that would knock out all the computers in a city would need to be generated by a TREMENDOUSLY huge energy source. Without throwing any numbers around, I doubt there's enough energy available to a determined terrorist to do it. (short of the nuclear idea, mentioned earlier on the thread, but if you've got nukes, why bother with ONLY taking out the computers?)
I'm gonna agree with the poster who dismissed this as fear tactics.
Of course, if somebody smarter than me knows more, feel free to correct me.
if you fear EMP then push for underground utilities, as for his comment about radiation, that is incorrect, an EMP device is basically a nuclear weapon detonated in the atmosphere, there is still radiation and fallout. It disgusts me that these fear mongers are elected to office. So listening more Knowledge is dangerous so we should nuke everyone to the stone age?
I love the fact that he thinks people in the 1880's were ignorant fools that would be incapable of understanding modern devices.