Showing posts with label wildfire. Show all posts
Showing posts with label wildfire. Show all posts

Monday, April 28, 2008

Sierra Madre Fire: It Could Be Worse

It isn't the usual start of the California fire season yet, and already we've got the Sierra Madre fire, in the San Gabriel Mountains. So far, it's burned the better part of a square mile of brush near this north Los Angeles suburb.

As of this afternoon, about 1,000 people have been evacuated from 400 structures. The good news is that so far only one small building got burned.

The bad news is that the Sierra Madre fire is gaining on the firefighters. And, even if no more buildings are damaged, it's going to be expensive to put out.

So There's another Los Angeles Area Brush Fire: So What?

This is "Another War-on-Terror Blog," not a "Brush Fire Blog."

The Sierra Madre fire caught my attention for several reasons. It's
  • Big
  • Manmade ("Authorities said the blaze was manmade but they did not know exactly what caused it.")
  • Directly affecting a Los Angeles suburb
  • Out of season
California's fire season is generally from around June to October or November. Although the start of the season varies, the Sierra Madre fire is over a month early, compared to most years.

"Manmade" doesn't mean arson. Arson caused about 7% of the fires handled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection from 2000 to 2005.

The Sierra Madre Fire as a Terrorist Plot?

I seriously doubt it. The area hadn't had a major fire for about three decades, and was due for a serious burn.

Why Californians don't clear brush, or have controlled burns, so that this sort of thing doesn't happen every year is beyond me: and beyond the scope of this blog.

If this had been a terrorist act, I'd have expected some sort of damage done to fire departments in the area, too: or a blaze started in so many places that it would be more uncontrollable than the Sierra Madre fire is.

The Malibu to San Diego string of fires in October last year looked more suspicious - but don't seem to have been more than a freak coincidence. ("Fires in California: a Reality Check" (October 22, 2007).)

"We Burned Los Angeles" - Now That'd be Bragging Rights

I think, though, that fire as a weapon of terror is still a possibility. Japan tried to set the western forests of America on fire in 1944. Someone could try again, albeit on a smaller scale.

As a weapon of terror, I believe that a wildfire spreading into an urban area would be very effective
  • Starting wildfires seems to be very easy in the undeveloped lands next to Californian cities and towns
  • Large fires guarantee a national audience - potentially international
  • A firestorm in, say, Los Angeles would be not only spectacular, but would do a great deal of economic damage
Then there's the possibility that an oil tanker could be set afire: but that's a topic for another post.

Monday, October 22, 2007

Fires in California: a Reality Check

As if we didn't have enough problems already: Wildfires are burning in California from Malibu to San Diego. About 226 square miles are involved. If the fires were all in one place, they'd cover a square about 15 miles on a side.

Arson seems to be the cause of one of the fires in Orange county. Make that all three in that county, I heard on televised news.

As for the rest, it's probably early days to say how they started.

It's certainly odd, even given the weather, that a series of fires broke out pretty much simultaneously all the way from Malibu to San Diego.

About a quarter of a million people have been evacuated in the San Diego area.

What I haven't heard, or read, in news is any connection with the War on Terror.

Except for a comment left on AOL News' "Raging Calif. Fires Burn Scores of Homes." I'm quoting the whole thing, exactly as it appeared, so you can get the full flavor of this pronouncement.

"jerdking 09:54:13 PM Oct 22 2007
Report This!

"IMPEACH TERRORIST BUSH, CHENEY, WHAT WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION? WHILE THE NORTH AND SOUTH POLES EVAPORATE, IMPERIALIST BUSH, CHENEY ARE PURSUING FRAUDULENT OIL WARS, WHEN THE WORLD SHOULD BE ON TRACK AND BURNING CLEAN VEGETABLE OILS IN DIESELS AND CLEAN BURNING ALCOHOL FUELS IN GAS ENGINES. DUMP CRIMINAL REPUBLICONS WHO ENABLE TERRORISTS BUSH, CHENEY TO DESTROY DEMOCRACY AROUND THE WORLD. IF INDY 500 CARS CAN TRAVEL 200 PLUS MPH ON ALCOHOL FUELS, SO CAN INDUSTRY AND AUTOMOBILES. IMPEACH TERRORIST BUSH, LOVE AMERICA."

(The same comment was posted in the same place 09:54:12 PM Oct 22 2007, and 09:54:10 PM Oct 22 2007.)

Of course, that's not news: it's someone's idea of a comment on a news item.

What's the Point of this Post?

Although I seriously doubt that the California fires are connected with the War on Terror, it isn't out of the question.

Attacking the western states of the United States with wildfires has been tried before. Around 1944, balloons from Japan started landing around the west coast of America. The balloons carried three types of bombs: explosive antipersonnel devices, and two kinds of incendiary devices.

All the effort the Japanese put into the balloon bomb program succeeded in some useful propaganda programming, and six American fatalities: five kids and a woman near Bly, Oregon. It looks like they were clustered around the balloon, and someone tugged at it the wrong way.

(There's a detailed, discussion of Japan's remarkable weapon system at "The Great Japanese Balloon Offensive.")

It Could Happen Again

The habit Islamic fanatics have of using human agents, like suicide bombers, makes arson a distinct possibility.

A handful of people with weapons no more complicated than a four-gallon backpack weed sprayer filled with alcohol or gasoline could, under the right conditions, send a nearly-unstoppable wildfire toward towns and cities in southern California.

Unique, innovative candles


Visit us online:
Spiral Light CandleFind a Retailer
Spiral Light Candle Store

Blogroll

Note! Although I believe that these websites and blogs are useful resources for understanding the War on Terror, I do not necessarily agree with their opinions. 1 1 Given a recent misunderstanding of the phrase "useful resources," a clarification: I do not limit my reading to resources which support my views, or even to those which appear to be accurate. Reading opinions contrary to what I believed has been very useful at times: sometimes verifying my previous assumptions, sometimes encouraging me to change them.

Even resources which, in my opinion, are simply inaccurate are sometimes useful: these can give valuable insights into why some people or groups believe what they do.

In short, It is my opinion that some of the resources in this blogroll are neither accurate, nor unbiased. I do, however, believe that they are useful in understanding the War on Terror, the many versions of Islam, terrorism, and related topics.