338 DASA 2019-2 UPTON: Wouldn't people want some information first of all? You would want to know whether you're safe where you are or whether you need to go someplacc else, rAYLOR: The only people who can know that are people with some understanding of these things right with the people and I think that’s why I keep harking back to this bueiness of there not being a large number of individuals who are designated before an attack as being the persons to whom people will turn. When 18 people go into a room, if no such person is designated, probably someone will emerge as just sort of taking hold, the way people always do. That's why I say the leaders will just pop up; the real, on-the-spot leaders will just appear, FREMONT-SMITH: The information wouldn't be available Jocally. TAYLOR: They do the best they can. They'll make decisions of all kinds that they never imagined they would ever make before. HEMLER: And presently the information will get to them, TAYLOR: Part of the time they will tell people to do exactly the opposite of what they should do, and I think that's the difficulty. This shouldn't be the case. People should be designated and have some idea of what the right thing te do is and w' at's the wrong thing to do, but that situation doesn't exist. AYRES: You still have a credibility problem. son were designated, is he believed? TAYLOR: Evenif sucha per- If he's got an armband ane a tin hat or something. EISENBUD: Is the confusion in this discussion due to the fact that the experience of Hiroshima, the Marshall Islands, Hamburg, London, is simply notapplicable to what we're talking about and we have to agree with Kant that all knowledge has to stem from experience and we just haven't had the experience? Is that a fair assumption? Is this why we're beating around the bush? MILLET: I would back that one, yes, FREMONT-SMITH: I think it's semi- fair,