Talk:Civil defense in the United States

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Kpddg (talk | contribs) at 05:04, 23 March 2022 (→‎Requested move 20 March 2022: +support). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Capitalization

I originally created this article with United States Civil Defense because the internal link I followed from the Civil defense article happened to have each word capitalized. But upon consideration, I'm not sure if that is appropriate given Wikipedia's naming conventions. Any thoughts on whether this article should be moved to United States civil defense instead?--Wikiwriter706 00:32, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article Outline

I now have the article organized by time period:

  • Pre-WW
  • WWI
  • WWII
  • Cold War (eventually this could be subdivided by Presidential administrations)
  • Post-Cold War (perhaps this should be subdived into pre-9/11 and post-9/11)

It is possible that the two World Wars could be combined into one section with subsections, and it is also possible that pre-9/11 post cold war and post-9/11 could be separate sections. Thoughts appreciated.


Please

do note this article:

< http://wonkette.com/politics/civil-defense/proud-symbol-of-fear-replaced-by-wuss-emblem-218733.php >;

< http://wonkette.com/images/thumbs/592a2c67eb34cd8061a5ea4d52286e29.jpg >.

Thank You.

[[ hopiakuta | [[ [[%c2%a1]] [[%c2%bf]] [[ %7e%7e%7e%7e ]] -]] 22:36, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cold War Civil Defense

Citation requested for the assertion that "duck and cover" would be effective. This is certainly not empirically proven, and the "weasel words" that it works if you are far enough way is probably true, but irrelevant. How far? Anything would work 500 miles away! There is no evidence that there is any actual nuclear threat from a terrorist. Duck and cover is an ineffective response to a theoretical, and possibly non-existent, threat from non-specified "terrorists". You are re-hashing the mistakes of the 1950's, and using the civil defense program as a propaganda machine to sell a political agenda, not as a realistic government response to actual dangers. Pustelnik (talk) 11:11, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


There were Hiroshima survivors who had ducked and covered under desks in concrete basements, who were very close to the ground zero site for the blast (as in 500 feet or so). Too lazy to find the reference but I did research on it a few years ago. In addition, my dad worked for the army and had lots of old information from nuclear testing - which showed how a nuclear blast could be survived (testing at the time had volunteers who were within the blast area in trenches). Most would die in such sheltering, but there would be some survivors, and that was the point. It was a slight chance of survival, rather than trying to flee and guaranteeing death. Most of the Civil Defense preparations dealt with fallout, which actually isn't all that hard to defeat. If you can survive the initial blast, you are probably going to survive as long as you have shelter. Plus many would be affected by fallout who were not in the blast area.

As far as the terrorist part, I have no clue what you are talking about, unless another post was deleted. 173.53.70.114 (talk) 05:34, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Current Usage

Despite what "The National Emergency Management Association" might say it is just not true that the name and logo have been "officially retired". The name and logo, continue to be used by Hawaii State Civil Defense [1] and Guam Homeland Security/Office of Civil Defense [2]. I have added this into the article but I think this needs to be addresses further. LCpl (talk) 18:54, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the logo was still used on some emergency management supplies and equipment.173.53.70.114 (talk) 05:35, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

all civil defance officer

sir my request you plz you train the pakistan civil defance volinteer my name is irfan chouhan i am civil defance (volinteer) i love tis depatment and my city name is dikhan(n.w.f_p)pakistan i am very poor man thanks irfan chouahn id [email protected] mobile no. 03339957764 home no. 0966716126 plez anser —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.71.217.98 (talk) 11:25, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Civil Evacuation

Civil Evacuation is a Arnocho/Street punk band from Covina,CA. East of Los Angeles in the San Gabriel Valley. The band originally formed in 2007 while lead singer Mike(Skunk) and Civil guitarist Angel(Lice) were in High School. The band dropped ther first demo on Myspace and eventually broke up due too the band going there separate paths to continue with work and School.Eventually the band got back together in the summer of 2013 and persued too drop another E.P. Smash the System Smash the Hate. The band still plays till this day and are still perusing with there music. (A)//(E)

Skunk-Vox Scruffy-Vox Lice-Guitar Rezist Lill Redd-Guitar Micky Mouse-Drums — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rezist lill redd243 (talk • contribs) 02:22, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on United States civil defense. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:28, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on United States civil defense. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:33, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on United States civil defense. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:08, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Where are the volunteers?

The article mentions and lists all kinds of offices for this and departments for thats.

But aside from the NYPD auxiliaries, where are the volunteers? Where is the large, standing, constantly trained nationwide comprehensive structure of local emergency volunteer teams that have the training and the material to be instantly activated in emergency situations? Are they with FEMA? Army Corps of Engineers? Do they even exist?? 79.206.240.43 (talk) 01:37, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 20 March 2022

United States civil defense → Civil defense in the United States – The purpose of this article is clearly to provide a broad overview of the concept of civil defense in the United States, and is not specifically about any specific time period or a specific organization. The current name is confusingly similar to the actual former government agency, the Office of Civil Defense, commonly shortened to just 'civil defense'. Further, similar articles follow this naming convention: Civil defense in Israel,Civil defense in Finland, as well as the general approach to naming articles like this (broad overviews of a topic as it relates to a specific location. Example: Rail transport in the United States. The Navigators (talk) 09:16, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support as it is better for searching and indexing purposes to have "Civil defense" come first. Rreagan007 (talk) 01:42, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as per nom Kpddg (talk • contribs) 05:04, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Civil_defense_in_the_United_States&oldid=1078759335"