Dear David,

Obviously any such concentration of forces is more vulnerable to attack by more powerful weapons.  The deterrent for such attack is the credible threat of a quite massive retaliation against the attacker.

Those nations having scalar EM weapons obviously can use them for defense also, in many ways.

A very real vulnerability is the highly likely response by Saddam Hussein to rocket Israel with his Scud missiles, using BW warheads and particularly smallpox, which he definitely possesses.  While Israel itself could probably survive the smallpox attack, the other Arab nations certainly could not.  So the disease would start spreading rapidly in the MidEast, and would wreck havoc in MidEast Arab nations, then would spread elsewhere.

That attack on Israel would immediately inject Israel pell-mell into the war, in self-defense.  Immediately, this changes the complexion of the war from a US-Iraqi war --- with the U.S. assisted by some of the Arab nations --- to an all-out Arab vs. Israel and the U.S. --- in short, tending toward a Muslim holy war in which our Arab allies would be hard-put to hang in there with us and support us.  This would impact those Arab nations assisting us, possibly very drastically, and would threaten our bases, etc. This appears to be Saddam Hussein's main tactic; to convert the war immediately into a full-fledged Mid-East explosion.  If successful, the impact on the availability of oil (and its price on the market) will be significant.  Saddam Hussein is hoping it will prove catastrophic, and that in fact it will prove such a blow to the U.S. economy as to engender an economic collapse in the U.S. itself.

Also, Turkey and Russia themselves have significant Muslim populations.  The effect on those nations of Saddam Hussein's tactic remains to be seen.  We have a significant Muslim population in the U.S.  While I believe that most will remain loyal Americans, some small percentage will be swayed by such a MidEast explosion, swelling the ranks of the terrorists in our nation.

Another question, of course, is how many terrorist assets Saddam Hussein has been able to introduce into the U.S.  Also, it is a question as to how much anthrax, smallpox, etc. the terrorist teams --- in country in the U.S. but reporting to Saddam Hussein --- may have in here already.  As an example, a much heavier use of the anthrax in the U.S. mail is a distinct probability, creating great disorder and havoc with much of our mail system.

Check the make-up of the hostile forces we fought in Afghanistan, in fighting the Taliban.  A large number were Saudis.  Some Pakistanis also, etc.  So one can perhaps expect a significant impact on Saudi Arabia, on Pakistan, and the generation of substantial unrest (and possibly even revolution) in that Saudi Arabia and possibly even in Pakistan.

The Al Qaeda has also recently (quietly) announced in the Arab world that it has seven nuclear weapons, hidden in U.S. cities.  They claim some of the weapons are 100 KT and the others are 10 KT.  This may be true, or it could be an exaggeration.  I suspect it may be true or close to the truth.  At least it illustrates the type of dangers we could be facing here in the U.S., in our cities.  Certainly the former Soviet Empire inserted nuclear weapons in our large cities in the U.S., along with Spetznaz teams to set them off on command. Those weapons and teams are still here, and one's concern depends on how one assesses those assets. It is definitely a vulnerability.

So the very high probability of the coming U.S./Iraq war being immediately converted to a full-bore Mid-East conflagration is worrisome.  The lack of definitive knowledge of the inserted nuclear weapons and their locations is also worrisome.

Also worrisome are the present difficulties with North Korea. If they cannot be resolved, the it may be necessary to place additional forces in that region or in support position, just in case.  This further splits our forces and our efforts.  If it were so bad that hostilities also should resume on the Korean peninsula, that becomes a substantial additional vulnerability of the U.S. because of fighting on another front.

So what bothers me personally are the multiple vulnerabilities.  When the "standard" or more conventional vulnerabilities get sufficient, then other nations possessing very powerful scalar weapons may be tempted to either move against us or to make additional moves that require U.S. intervention. E.g., China is very probably going to invade and take Taiwan by force one of these fine days.  Because of the U.S. vulnerabilities when hampered by (say) combat that grows and is  ongoing on two or three fronts (Afghanistan, Iraq/the MidEast, and Korea) simultaneously, the Chinese might possibly find the opportunity too lucrative and tempting to pass. This is particularly significant since China has two favored ports in the U.S. itself, controls the Panama Canal ends, and has injected some 200,000 Chinese into Panama so that Panama is slowly going to have a greater Chinese population than Panamanian population, possibly becoming a sort of possession of China. Further, China has scalar EM weapons (has had them for decades), negative energy EMP weapons, and quantum potential weapons --- as well as some long range rockets capable of reaching the U.S.  This is a worrisome vulnerability area, although there is certainly no guarantee that the Chinese will pick this time to move against Taiwan.  We can assess the capability, but not necessarily the intent.

We also have many other foreign-sponsored and controlled terrorist teams in nation here, with weapons of mass destruction.  And our Homeland Defense, finally passed, is not yet up and organized and fully functioning.  That's nearly a year away, though we may see a maximum effort in this area, born of necessity.

So the hostile assets and capabilities already inside our nation is another of those very bothersome vulnerabilities.  The range of this vulnerability is very great; from "a little bit" involving hit and run incidents to a full-up national calamity.

So yes, it's a very worrisome and dangerous time, because of the various vulnerabilities.  We'll just have to wait and see what happens.

I will say one thing.  When all the "worrisome" vulnerabilities are considered, President Bush is between a rock and a hard place.  He can move now, and we will pay a major price.  Or he can wait two years and then be forced to move, and we will pay a price that is ten times or even 20 times greater.

Best wishes,

Tom Bearden

Tuesday, December 31, 2002 2:37 PM
Subject: Question About U.S. Navy

Dear Col. Beardon:

Recent news reports say that we are going to place 4-6 full carrier groups in the small Persian Gulf at the beginning of the Iraqi war.

Would this concentration of naval assets endanger our naval forces to destruction by scalar weaponry?

Do we have a workable dome protection that would prevent someone with scalar weapons from taking our carriers out?

I have never heard of concentrating naval forces during an engagement; conventional wisdom has always called for dispersal.

Thanks so much,

David E.