6 avril 2007

En avoir pour son argent Économie International Terrorisme

Combien il en coûterait à une organisation terroriste pour construire une arme nucléaire ?

Voici la réponse:

Bombe Nucléaire Terrorisme

Quand l'économie rencontre le terrorisme:

The Bomb in the Backyard


Would terrorists build a nuclear device? Presumably, some terrorist organizations want to kill as many people as possible at the lowest cost. Like any organization, sophisticated terrorist outfits are concerned with “cost effectiveness.” It is a gruesome business, but very similar attacks may result in widely different casualties depending on the target. For example, the bombing of the Marriott Hotel in Jakarta in 2003 killed a relatively small number of people compared to the 2002 Bali bombings, despite the use of relatively similar devices. But, if one considers the bulk of terrorist attacks, the relationship of cost to casualties follows a simple curve, with the cost per casualty increasing as the size of the terror attack increases—from the relatively inexpensive Madrid bombing (which cost less than $10,000, or around $50 per murder) to the September 11 attacks (which cost $400,000–$500,000, or about $170 per murder).

Some might claim that thinking about terrorist attacks in terms of cost-versus-casualty ratios fails to capture the essentially political ends of a terrorist group. Cost data from previous attacks suggest that al Qaeda is sometimes willing to pay a significant premium to attack high-profile, heavily protected targets that may produce fewer casualties, but have greater political implications, such as a U.S. embassy or Naval vessel. For example, the October 2000 bombing of the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen may have cost $10,000, but with 17 casualties, it added up to a pricey $590 per murder. Yet terrorists do not have to pay a premium for a nuclear attack; on a per murder basis, nuclear weapons are both cheap and can be used against high-profile targets. And a nuclear attack induces great fear. Its specter has hung over the world since the United States dropped Little Boy on Hiroshima.

To put it in strictly commercial terms, terrorists would likely find a nuclear attack cost effective. The simple appeal of nuclear terrorism can be illustrated with a hypothetical situation. A failed nuclear detonation, one that produced only a few tens of tons in yield, could kill 10,000 people in just a few hours if the device exploded in a crowded financial center. Not only would 10,000 persons represent the upward limit of a conventional terrorist attack, but that figure would also exceed the combined casualties in all of al Qaeda’s attacks over the entire history of the organization.

And that’s a “worst-case” scenario for the terrorists. A “successful” nuclear detonation would kill 10 times as many people. If terrorists could construct a successful device that killed 100,000 people for a cost of $10 million dollars—about $100 per murder—it would be a bargain, considering that most of al Qaeda’s attacks have been mounted in the $100 to $300 per murder range. A nuclear terrorist attack that cost $5 million would result in a cost per murder comparable to the Madrid bombings. So, just how difficult an enterprise would this be? What would a terrorist group have to do to build a bomb that would kill 100,000 people for less than $10 million?

6 avril 2007

Bilan électoral: Conflit générationel Élection 2007 En Chiffres Québec

Après avoir étudié la répartition du vote de la dernière élection en fonction de la densité des comtés et selon la richesse des circonscriptions, voici la répartition en fonction de l'âge.

Après avoir établi un classement de l'âge moyen dans chacun des comtés, j'ai divisé ces derniers en 5 groupes de 25 (125 total) pour déterminer combien de députés avaient obtenu les partis dans chacun de ces groupes. Le "groupe 1" ce sont les 25 circonscriptions les plus jeunes, le "groupe 5" les 25 circonscriptions les plus vielles.

Élection Québec 2007

Élection Québec 2007

Élection Québec 2007

PLQ: Une représentation relativement uniforme.

ADQ: Un vote très important chez les jeunes (groupe 1) et faibles chez les personnes âgées (groupe 5).

PQ: Plus les gens sont âgés, plus le vote péquiste devient fort.

Directeur Général des Élections du Québec
Renseignements sur les circonscriptions