I was five years old when Gen. Douglas MacArthur made good his promise to return to the Philippines. I was, therefore, old enough to remember how my family and the residents of Tacloban coped with the Japanese occupation and the prospect of an American invasion.
I vividly remember the foxholes and the air raid shelters. The foxholes were pits dug along the streets of Tacloban, wide and deep enough for several people to dive into, in case of a bombing attack. The air raid shelters were reinforced bunkers under the houses.
I don’t recall ever having to duck into a foxhole, but I distinctly recall the first bombing raid by American P-38 fighter planes on the Tacloban airport and how my parents herded the entire family under the house and into the relative safety of our air raid shelter.
These recollections have been stirred by the exchange of incendiary language between President Donald Trump and North Korea’s Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un. The question that comes to mind is, what are the survival options in case of a nuclear attack on the San Francisco Bay Area, where my family and I live?
A study prepared by Michael Dillon, an atmospheric scientist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, suggests that it is possible to survive such an attack. First of all, it is imperative to find shelter, best of all, a place protected by layers of concrete, such as the underground parking facility of an office building.
We are told that a nuclear explosion will generate “a fireball roughly a third of a mile wide with temperatures equal to the surface of the sun,” most buildings within half a mile would be knocked down and a “flash of thermal energy would burn exposed people within a mile of the detonation… Then, there would be deadly radiation. Debris from the explosion would be sucked upwards into a giant mushroom cloud and then carried downwind… Falling particles the size of grains of sands sprinkling down across the Bay Area would emit gamma rays that could give people severe radiation poisoning. The most dangerous zone would be 10 to 20 miles downwind of the explosion, while some fallout could occur 100 miles away or farther, depending on the magnitude of the explosion. (Communities upwind and far enough away from the explosion would escape relatively unharmed.)”
According to a side comment on Dillon’s paper, “If you spend too much time outside in the fallout, you’re toast.”
But still, it’s good news that survival is possible, as long as there are adequate preparations. The bad news is that, as of now, I am not aware of any such preparations on the part of the US government — except the contingency plans to ensure the survival of the leaders of the country and the continued operations of government.
At the height of the Cold War, many American households actually built basement bunkers, in case of a nuclear attack. This was parodied in the film, Blast from the Past, starring Brendan Fraser and Christopher Walken. It was about a family so paranoid over a nuclear war that it prematurely retreated to a radiation-proof shelter with ample provisions, remaining in it for years and not realizing that the war never came.
In the Philippines, in the late ’50s, there was an office of Civil Defense, with quarters under the Luneta grandstand. At best, however, the office could only broadcast a warning to the general population in case of an emergency. The same warning system is also in place in the US, usually raising the red flag concerning impending natural disasters. But the country’s emergency response system could not even cope with the destruction wreaked by hurricane Katrina.
But to go back to the possibility that Kim Jong-un and Trump will exchange “fire and fury” with their “locked and loaded” weaponry: It is estimated that a missile fired from Pyongyang will hit Guam in 14 minutes. Guam is 2,131 miles away. That’s less than half the distance from North Korea to San Francisco, which is 5,626 miles. That means, we Bay Area residents will have a little over 30 minutes to find a basement parking facility.
But what are the chances of San Francisco becoming ground zero for a nuclear attack? According to the usual optimists, it’s not likely to happen. Even assuming that Kim Jong-un sends missiles flying in the direction of California, these would be shot down with the US military’s THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense) system, or with the Aegis ballistic missile defense system mounted on US destroyers, before the missiles re-enter the earth’s atmosphere. In fact, Guam is also equipped with its own THAAD system which is designed to intercept multiple missiles simultaneously.
What Pyongyang’s military has reportedly threatened to do, to quote it verbatim, is “the simultaneous fire of four Hwasong-12 (rockets)” at Guam to inflict “enveloping fire” on the island. But this may be in response to a preemptive strike by the US on North Korea. Otherwise, North Korea seems to be planning to just “miss” Guam by several miles and scare the wits off the islanders.
On the other hand, the Trump government has indicated that it will “seriously consider” shooting down any North Korean missiles tested in the vicinity of Guam, even if not necessarily targeting the island.
That could be construed by Kim Jong-un as a US preemptive strike and could trigger his counter-attack.
As cold-bloodied as it may seem, Trump and the US military command could be playing a numbers game. California, with a population of 39-plus million (the most populous US mainland territory closest to North Korea), and even Hawaii, with its 1.5 million islanders, will likely be defended more aggressively than Guam, which only has 175,000 inhabitants.
Guam could become the equivalent of a “loss leader” (to use a marketing term) — enabling the US to unleash its military might and destroy much of North Korea’s nuclear capability. But not all. It is assumed that the North Koreans have substantial striking power hidden in underground silos, much of it aimed at Seoul.
Although Seoul has its own THAAD missile defense system, that may not be enough to intercept what is expected to be a rain of rockets from the north. The bottom line is that Seoul, with a population of 24 million or nearly half of South Korea’s 51.25 million (along with 28,500 US troops), would be devastated.
Kim Jong-un, with his braggadocio, may be willing to sacrifice his people for his greater glory, and that of his father and grandfather. Pyongyang’s population of 2.5 million is just one-tenth of Seoul’s and North Korea’s total population of 25-plus million is just a million more than that of the South Korean capital.
And what about Donald Trump? Who knows what he will do in this deadly game of chess? After all the bluster about “fire and fury” and about being “locked and loaded,” he may decide to make Guam a pawn, in order to destroy North Korea. Trump might even consider Seoul a price worth paying, to wipe Kim Jong-un and his ilk off the face of the earth.
What about the Philippines? Any chance of Manila becoming a target of North Korea? It’s not likely. And for this, President Rodrigo Duterte may be patting himself on the back. He has acted belligerently towards the US, without cutting off ties, while cuddling up to China and welcoming both North and South Korea at the recent ASEAN conference in Manila.
At any rate, thank heavens for that. Metro Manila is only 1,820 miles from North Korea — or closer than Guam is — which means that a missile would reach the Luneta in less than 14 minutes. The buildings with basement parking are mainly in Makati City which is less than 10 miles away from my home in Parañaque — but from one to two hours by car, using South Expressway.
Theoretically, taking the Skyway would be faster, but getting onto it from either Sucat or Bicutan and getting off it at the Magallanes, Don Bosco, or Pasay Road exits could guarantee being barbecued in the car.
I think the best option for survival is to pray.
Greg B. Macabenta is an advertising and communications man shuttling between San Francisco and Manila and providing unique insights on issues from both perspectives.
gregmacabenta@hotmail.com
