[Douglas De Bono / DouglasDeBono.Com]
Welcome to DouglasDeBono.Com, the Cyberspace Home of
author Douglas De Bono.

Mr. DeBono seamlessly blends history and fiction with the deft precision of a literary surgeon. His knowledge of special forces, intelligence agencies, political corruption and the tradecraft of espionage are unrivaled in the literary world.
--Jim Clonts, Author Of MIG Drivers

I was glued to my cozy chair during the entire story! I enjoyed the characters and found both the dialogue and the plot of this fantastic story a real edge of your seat kind of read from cover-to-cover! (A Highly Recommended Novel!)
--Victoria Taylor Murray, Author Of Friendly Enemies/Le Fin

Douglas De Bono's Frequently Asked Questions

  • Do you know the ending of a book when you start?
  • Where do you get your ideas?
  • How do you do your research?
  • Does the VX gas described in POINT OF HONOR exist?
  • Is Doctor Rihab Rashida al-Awazi a real person?
  • Do the backpack nukes described in BLOOD COVENT exist?
  • Do the Chinese really control the Panama Canal as described in REAP THE WHIRLWIND?
  • How accurate is your description of KURSK sinking in ROGUE STATE?
  • Why are the Chinese always the bad guys in your books?

    • Q: Do you know the ending of a book when you start?

    A: I know the broad outlines of a novel. Writing books is akin to herding cats—they tend to go in unexpected directions. I knew the good guys were supposed to win at the end of POINT OF HONOR, I just didn’t know how I was going to get there.

    One thing I have attempted to do in all of my books is to allow the characters to drive the action. This accomplishes a couple of things:

  • 1. It prevents me from forcing certain conclusions and actions on my characters. I think this makes for a better read.
  • 2. It tends to spawn subplots that I never knew existed. In BLOOD COVENANT an entire relationship develops between the MOSSAD and a Lebanese arms dealer. I had no idea that was going to happen.
  • 3. It brings to light minor characters and tends to develop them further. In REAP THE WHIRLWIND, I decided to write Harvey Randall out of the books. I faced universal scorn over the idea. Harvey is still kicking as I work on SCORCHED EARTH.

    • Q: Where do you get your ideas?

    A: Let me see. In the past week we have nuclear belligerence out of North Korea, empty chemical warheads in Iraq and al Qaeda targeting civilian airliners transporting American troops. That is enough to keep me busy for 3 or 4 years. There is a vast amount of material available for people like me to use.

    I try to blur the line between fact and fiction. I don’t want you (the reader) to know exactly where that line is. I was doing a book signing and an older lady came up the table and checked out BLOOD COVENNANT. Finally after a couple of minutes, she asked, “Is this fact or fiction?”

    “It’s still fiction,” I replied.

    The point is that my ideas are relevant to what we as a nation and a society face vis-à-vis the countries that would like to bury America. As I am fond of telling one of my readers, “I don’t have to make it up.”

    Q: How do you do your research?

    A: The Internet is tremendous resource for technical and news/historical related issues. For technical details related to weapon systems, hardware and unit designation the Internet simply cannot be beat for currency and clarity. I also have a bookcase full of reference books on guns, planes, ships and Special Forces units.

    During my research for REAP THE WHIRLWIND, I had the opportunity for a private tour of the HARRY TRUMAN (CVN-75). It was great. I believe those three hours helped me make my descriptions of the JOHN C. STENNIS (CVN-74) and the KITTY HAWK (CV-63) more accurate.

    I have worked through different fight sequences with my sparring partner. Brian is a very street-smart fellow and he’ll tell me if he thinks something won’t work or is impractical. We’ve worked through more than one fight sequence to discover the flaws and figure out how it would really happen.

    I have been to machine gun school at Front Sight in Nevada. I write about the weapons I know, and the only way to know those weapons is handle and use them. That’s why I favor Glocks and Browning Hi Powers. I try to shoot twice a month and at something other than paper targets. I also reload most of my ammunition. If I talk about a Gold Dot or Winchester Silver Tip, it is because I have a batch downstairs on the reloading bench.

    Q: Does the VX gas described in POINT OF HONOR exist?

    A: VX gas is a recognized weapon of mass destruction. In 1952, the British developed VX at the Porton Down chemical warfare labs. Basically, there are two categories of chemical weapons: persistent and non-persistent.

    A persistent agent is more of a strategic weapon since the effects of the CW or BW lingers beyond any immediate tactical advantage. However, even persistent agents lose their potency over time.

    A non-persistent agent provides immediate effects against the target and then quickly disperses so that friendly troops can exploit the tactical advantage. Tear gas is considered a non-persistent agent.

    In POINT OF HONOR, I suggested a third category: permanent. The idea suggests that there is no deterioration over time. The idea behind the weapon is total denial of a wide area. So I dubbed it CITY KILLER.

    Q: Is Doctor Rihab Rashida al-Awazi a real person?

    A: Yes. She is also known as Toxic Taha, Doctor Germ and Doctor Death. She has been connected to weapons development at Salman Pak and al-Hakam. She graduated from the University of Baghdad in 1979, and completed a doctoral program in microbiology. Western intelligence believes she is responsible for producing thousands of gallons of anthrax and Botulinum toxin. It is suspected she has worked with ricin, camel pox and hemorrhagic conjunctivitis—all of which are weapons designed to melt the human body from the inside out.

    Recently, there have been rumors that a Russian scientist connected to the Moscow’s Research Institute for Viral Preparations may have passed a weaponized small pox strain (Aralsk) to Iraq. Allegedly, this strain could be loaded into a missile warhead (previously believed to be unworkable) and launched at a civilian population center. This exchange allegedly took place in 1991.

    Q: Do the backpack nukes described in BLOOD COVENT exist?

    A: Packback or suitcase nukes do exist. They were originally developed by both the United States and Soviet Russia. It is quite likely these designs have been compromised to China as well. The numbers quoted in BLOOD COVENANT related to 84 missing weapons out of a known 132 were taken directly from congressional testimony on the issue. Most of these weapons are sub-kiloton yields. I increased the yield for dramatic purposes in BLOOD COVENANT—the Russians claim to have developed weapons with yields as high as 10 kilotons (but that would be too heavy a weapon to be carried in a backpack).

    Most likely the weapons were designed and developed at Arzamas-16. Much of what is described in BLOOD COVENANT regarding Arzamas-16 is an accurate portrayal.

    Q: Do the Chinese really control the Panama Canal as described in REAP THE WHIRLWIND?

    A: The Chinese government through an arrangement between COSCO (China’s maritime shipping conglomerate), Hutchinson-Whampoa and the Panama Ports Company controls the Panama Canal. The relationship described in REAP THE WHIRLWIND is based on congressional testimony.

    It should be noted that President Carter negotiated the Panama Canal deal and the 1994 framework agreement with North Korea. Considering the strategic and geo-political problems of these two agreements, I am not sure we can tolerate further assistance from our former presidents.

    In REAP THE WHIRLWIND, I took a page out of history and suggested that Chinese DF-21 missiles could reach southeastern United States if launched from the Canal Zone. This is the Cuban missile crisis all over again except the bad guys are better armed. The only reason this would be possible is if China decided to militarize the Canal Zone. There have been rumors that a certain amount of this is taking place. Since SOUTHCOM has moved from the Canal to Miami, American influence has been minimized in Panama.

    It seems a travesty that the canal, which was built with American blood and treasure, was simply handed over to a government that lacked any sort of democratic tradition, and control of the most strategic water way in the western hemisphere was surrendered to a belligerent power without firing a shot.

    Q: How accurate is your description of KURSK sinking in ROGUE STATE?

    A: A few months after the KURSK went down, I received a declassified memo suggesting I was 95% right. I am quite certain we had 2 LOS ANGELES class submarines observing the Russian war games. The seismic recorded by Norway clearly shows two detonations. A small pop followed by massive explosion. This was the largest seismic event ever recorded in the Barents Sea off the Kola Peninsula.

    I believe the rocket fuel for the VA-111 Shkval torpedo exploded and immediately opened 6 of the 10 watertight compartments to the sea. If it was not the rocket fuel then it was a conventional warhead, but I think most experts agree the explosion happened on the inside of the KURSK.

    Q: Why are the Chinese always the bad guys in your books?

    A: China is a belligerent, nuclear power that seeks to assert hegemony over the Pacific Rim and the South China Sea. I don’t think there is any coincidence that Pakistan has acquired significant missile technology or the North Koreans have developed atomic weapons. In my view, it is in China’s interest to permit these events.

    In 2002, we faced the specter of an imminent nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan. This problem coincided with our efforts to dismantle the Taliban and al Qaeda bases in Afghanistan. It consumed western diplomatic and military resources to ensure no one pressed the button in Islamabad.

    In 2003, we face a similar problem on the Korean Peninsula in the form of nuclear blackmail. Again American diplomatic and military resources are being consumed at a time when we are preparing to invade Iraq. This forces America to send the George Washington battle group back to Iraq with less than 30 days down time. It forces America to deploy additional battle groups to Korea and the South China Sea when those resources are needed in the Arabian Sea.

    I ask myself who benefits from this problem and who has the ability to handle both issues.

    In the case of India/Pakistan, China benefits because it puts pressure on India and America. China has a long-standing border dispute with India. However, Pakistan probably would not have had the missile technology to threaten India had it not been for China’s tacit assistance.

    In the case of Korea, it poses a direct challenge to the stability provided by the American Seventh Fleet. Again China benefits from by stirring the pot. Pyongyang is a Chinese client. It is desperately in need of food and fuel. People are starving to death every day in North Korea. The death rate in the political camps exceeds 25% per year. This is not a country that should be jerking our chain.

    There are additional examples including Chinese espionage targeted against American technology; Chinese meddling in our political process; Chinese actions along the Panama Canal; and Chinese belligerence regarding Taiwan.

    Douglas De Bono / DouglasDeBono.Com
    Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota

    E-Mail readermail@DouglasDeBono.Com

    [Douglas De Bono / DouglasDeBono.Com]

    The HTML Writers Guild
    Notepad only
    [raphael]
    [hbd]
    [Netscape]
    [PIR]