15 January 2018

Cogito Ergo Non Serviam

Hawaii's False Alarm Should Bring Discussions

A little after 8 am on Saturday, the cellphones all over the Hawaiian Islands lit up with a rather terrifying warning. "BALLISTIC MISSILE THREAT INBOUND TO HAWAIIAN ISLANDS. SEEK IMMEDIATE SHELTER. THIS IS NOT A DRILL." The good news is that this was a mistake. Despite the anxiety and fear the warning engendered, 38 minutes later, everyone was told that there was no missile bringing nuclear death to the islands, a fairly happy ending. In the aftermath, a number of changes must come.

Full marks to the Government of the State of Hawaii. "I know firsthand that what happened today was totally unacceptable," Democratic Governor David Ige said Saturday, "and many in our community was deeply affected by this. And I'm sorry for that pain and confusion that anyone might have experienced."

The state's emergency management boss Vern Miyagi made himself an instant hero as far as this journal is concerned with these words. "It's my responsibility, so this would be my fault . . . . We'll take action to prevent this from ever happening again."

The message was sent in error by a man at the Hawaii Emergency Management Agency who hit the wrong button during a shift change. The template was one of many pre-loaded into the computer, and he could just as easily have announced an earthquake or tsunami. He is now being retrained and will be re-assigned, and the poor guy feels horrible about it. In future, though, such a message will require two people to push to different buttons. That's an excellent start.

Another easy but useful change is the addition of a false alarm notice as one of the templates the messaging center can use. The authorities knew in 3 minutes that there was no missile, but they had no way of quickly spreading that information. There is now a template that would allow almost immediate cancellation of a false alarm.

Much more difficult is the entire idea of civil defense. America simply isn't ready to deal with an attack, as the Al Qaeda murders of September 11, 2001, proved. People simply don't know what to do in an emergency, and they certainly don't know how to respond differently in different crises. Sheltering in place is appropriate for some situations (a mass shooting for instance) but quite wrong of others (the above mentioned tsunami or earthquake). A massive public education campaign is in order.

Moreover, the various levels of government need to settle on simple and effective methods of communication and on exactly what people should do in the event of a disaster or attack. Before the people can be told what they need to do, these matters need to be settled. Does it make sense to re-establish and re-invigorate America's network of fallout shelters? Or might money be spent more effectively by providing for other ways of protecting the populace?

Finally, a much more individualized discussion needs to happen. In the event of an earthquake or a hurricane or other natural disaster, does a family ride it out or flee? That seems to be a kitchen table discussion that needs to happen. More seriously, in the event of an incoming missile, does one want to flee, hide or stand and watch? This journal takes the view that in such a situation, the living will envy the dead, and therefore, getting a good, close view of the nuclear fireball might be the best move. Others are free to disagree, and to the best of human ability, the government should try to arrange for the best possible conditions if avoiding the whole damned mess doesn't work out.