If New York was nuked, would that precipitate WWIII/the end of the world? (enemy, border)

[Houston3]

Originally Posted by jtur88

And if you read the contents of my post, you'd see why. Never thought of that, did you?

Yeah, I used to be a Communist, but now it's more amusing to rattle the "Cages of Ignorance" with Islamism.

Just think, if the Americans had never nuked Japan and laid waste to Korea and Vietnam and Iraq and Afghanistan, and posed nuclear threats against Iran and North Korea, and declared America the God-given Fuhrer of the world, I'd have almost no sustainable argument at all.

I've read the contents of your post for years and YOU have always been anti-American so there is nothing new there...

And now you are even admitting to being a "Communist" at one time..

[spiellgood]

Originally Posted by Trimac20

It's an unimaginable scenario, some crazy Iranian or South Korean dictator decides to start World War III by sending one or a few thermo-nukes to hit Manhattan. The immediately impact kills at least a million. NYC is evacuated, but millions more die from radiation. The US retaliates by obliterating Tehran. Would this spell World War III and perhaps the end of the world as we know it?

You're assuming NYers would even notice. In fact, there are some neighborhoods that we'd actually recommend to receive such treatment - its called "urban renewal."

If it landed in midtown manhattan and 100 people were affected, the 40 public union employees would smile and declare it a justifiable day off, the 20 Wall Streeters would start buying up iodine-pill manufacturers' stocks, the 20 illegal aliens would run South thinking it was the INS coming after them, 10 Occupy Wall Streeters would scream that its some new version of the NYPD's mace spray, and the remaining 10 liberal democrats would claim: "no worries, it's just the front of Obama's motorcade passing through."

[Mircea]

Originally Posted by Trimac20

It's an unimaginable scenario, some crazy Iranian or South Korean dictator decides to start World War III by sending one or a few thermo-nukes to hit Manhattan.

Quite right. Your scenario is totally unimaginable and silly.

South Korea does not have nuclear weapons.

Iran does not have nuclear weapons either.

Just so you don't continue to embarrass yourself, you should know that thermonuclear is synonymous with fission-fusion, and it requires plutonium, which Iran does not have.

To produce plutonium, assuming you have a nuclear reactor conducive to plutonium production, you would enrich uranium to 3%-5% U235.

The IAEA report says Iran is enriching uranium to 20%, which is proof that Iran is not attempting to produce plutonium.

Raining on your parade...

Mircea

Originally Posted by Bideshi

We have neutron bombs.

No, you don't.

Your neutron weapons were removed from service and disassembled more than 20 years ago.

Personal knowledge (meaning I was there).

Even for the most naive novice, you should have been able to use deductive reasoning:

1] It is not possible to build a neutron warhead in excess of 15 kt.

2] The US produced a 1kt 8"/203 mm ERW (Neutron) AFAP and a 10 kt Lance ERW.

3] The 8"/203 mm ERW was never deployed. It remained in storage at Seneca Army Depot (near Romulus, New York) until all 550 warheads were transported to the PANTEX facility and disassembled in 1989.

4] The Lance ERW warhead was also in storage at Seneca Army Depot until 1986 when 56 warheads were to deployed to Germany under a Top Secret operation.

5] The Lance was subsequently withdrawn in 1990 and all 300+ warheads were transported to the PANTEX facility and disassemble.

6] The M5 Lance Main Missile Assembly has been removed from service and destroyed, as have all of the launchers.

The only country currently known to have neutron warheads is Russia, which has about 3,000 warheads in the 1 kt to 10 kt range for tube artillery and missile artillery.

It is now believed that China has neutron weapons, since the idiot Blow Job Bill on his Ruin the World and Jeopardize the Lives of Every Man, Woman and Child World Tour™ gave China the "football" (and gave North Korea two plutonium producing nuclear reactors and gave Russia two Cray Super II computers).

The "football" is not the football the president carries around, it is a system of linear implosion. Linear implosion is how you miniaturize weapons.

How small can you go?

3.5 kg of plutonium in a canister with an external diameter of 6" (155 mm) weighing about 38 pounds with a nominal yield of about 0.03 kt (personal knowledge). Them babies were hot too, meaning when you picked them up, they were warm in your hands, even on a cold day (personal knowledge).

Enhancing radiation...

Mircea

Originally Posted by Dd714

Not necessarily, depending on the scenario. If the OP also includes radioactive explosives such as "dirty bombs" the death toll would actually be light, with perhaps panic taking more lives then the actualy explosion.

No such thing as a "dirty bomb." Woe to the naive and ignorant.

Originally Posted by Dd714

Their are other low yield type nuclear weapons as well. Russia has or had nuclear "suitcase bombs", but they are designed to take out bridges and fortifications, not cities.

Back-pack nukes, not suitcase bombs. They're also designed for cratering. The US removed theirs and dismantled them in 1986.

You do realize that armored vehicles cannot traverse a slope greater than 30° right?

Even Hitler knew that (hence the autobahns are elevated on berms with 30° slopes). Put a huge freaking crater in the ground, and you just stopped an armored column from advancing.

Back-packing...

Mircea

Originally Posted by PullMyFinger

You are trying to appear reasonable but to most of us you just look bitter with an ax to grind. Seems you are the only one bringing your own personal politics to this discussion.

No, a reasonable person would acknowledge that the OP scenario is silly and that Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapons program. Even Leon Panetta said so.

Of course, long before he said so, I told you Iran had no nuclear weapons program and have repeatedly asked for evidence showing the technical, ordnance, missile, maintenance, security, storage, communication, transportation, support or administration infrastructure.

You already got suckered into a PSY-OPS warfare program by a bunch of retired military officers spewing propaganda and disinformation on the MSM.

Are you up for a rematch?

Being reasonable...

Mircea

Originally Posted by kevxu

I think before North Korea or Iran would ever be capable of such an act, that there is another more likely atomic scenario.

Pakistan attacks India with its nuclear arsenal in an attempt to wipe it off the face of the earth, and the Indians retaliate.

Not likely.

Look, this is so simple a 4th Grader can get it.

Does Pakistan have plutonium? No, but India does.

What does that tell you about their nuclear weapons?

Okay, let's take this approach: Which country (Pakistan or India) has thermonuclear weapons?

Not Pakistan. That requires plutonium, and Pakistan has none.

Since Pakistan has only uranium, what is the largest possible warhead Pakistan could possibly build in theory?

60 kt

In reality (not theory) what is the largest uranium warhead ever made?

40 kt (by the French). That is most unfortunate, because Pakistan no longer has any B-57F bombers, so Pakistan has no possible means to deliver a 40 kt uranium warhead (no, sorry, something that monstrous will not fit on a missile).

So, applying your vast knowledge of "things nuclear," describe Pakistan's nuclear arsenal.

Well, that would be easy. All of Pakistan's nuclear warheads are in the 0.01 kt to 10 kt range. Pakistani F-16s could probably carry a 20 kt warhead.

Pakistan has mostly 8"/203 mm double-gun artillery rounds and some short range missile artillery in the 1 kt to 10 kt range.

Pakistan's nuclear arsenal is defensive, not offensive. It is designed to prevent the Indian Army from rolling over Pakistani units in short order.

Originally Posted by kevxu

In the horror and chaos of this catastrophe, Israel takes the opportunity to zap Iran, or Iran attacks Israel, and a second nuclear holocaust is ignited.

What video game is that? Because that isn't reality.

I do rather wish you would all grow brains and learn how to distinguish between an aircraft's combat radius and its range.

Originally Posted by kevxu

It would undoubtedly ignore the Pakistan/India event....

And you base that on what? Certainly you aren't taking into consideration Kissinger's duplicity during the 1971 Pakistani-Indian War, where the USS Enterprise was sent with Task Force 74.

Thanks to the idiot Kissinger, 1971 was the closest the world ever came to nuclear Armageddon.

Raining on parades...

Mircea

Originally Posted by nightbird47

In the TV show Jericho, the 23 cities where nukes went off had a greater impact that if one city was nuked. The impact of a nuke attack would be as much psychological as physical. It would produce panic and paranoia about who was next.

Um, okay, I'll accept that at face-value.

Originally Posted by nightbird47

Interestingly enough, North Korea and Iran are blamed and nuked off the map in retaliation. It does not cause a world war. I think these two places were picked because if there are nations which wouldn't be missed it would be them since they have no allies.

But Iran does have allies. Iran is part of a 5-nation mutual defense pact anchored by Russia (the other 3 countries are Central Asian States).

Originally Posted by nightbird47

A series of localized nukes COULD be done by someone who didn't have long range capabilities, which is why there is a much more possible danger of smaller ground based bombs.

Then that speaks more to North Korea, who, based on burn up time and operating time, produced about 60 kg of weapons grade plutonium, enough to produce about twelve 1 kt back-pack nukes.

Localizing...

Mircea

Originally Posted by mofford

Now we are at a point where nuclear technology is not only out of the bag, but getting out of control and costing us plenty to keep a lid on.

What about the Oxygen Bomb?

The fission of any atom produces 180 million electron volts of energy. Doesn't matter which atom: uranium, plutonium, carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, iron, aluminum.

The difference between fissile material and non-fissile material, is that fissile material is self-sustaining.

Eventually the world will acquire the technology to produce sufficient energy to fission in any atom and maintain a cascading reaction that leads to the nuclear explosion.

I'm sure you'll be thrilled with that.

Letting the cat out of the bag...

Mircea

Originally Posted by sky1949

I followed your post until the above statements. To the extent that you suggest that the USA actually used atomic (it has never used 'nuclear') weapons to "resolve their petty aspirations for global domination", you need to remember that the US was initially attacked by the country we defended against with atomic bombs; we were not seeking "global domination."

That gets my vote for silliest comment of the year.

The US has used nuclear weapons, and you have been seeking global domination. That is most evident in your Geo-Political Strategy. You might want to educate yourself by reading white papers and such published by the the infamous Neo-Conservatives, who were formerly the Social Democrats who were formerly the Young People's Socialist League.

Start looking around 1974-1976. You'll probably have to go to a university library, but the main branch of your public library might have some documents.

Not so stupid as to confuse atomic and nuclear...

Mircea

Originally Posted by BoxCar Willie

jtur88, You are obviously anti American with your tone and retoric. IF you don't like this country. WHY do you remain here?

Probably because he is trying to save your life, and the lives of other people in other countries. That's why I work to get the US out of Romania, before you turn our country into a freaking parking lot with your half-baked plans of global domination.

Didn't anyone ever explain to you the ultimate fate of bullies?

Toning with rhetoric....

Mircea

Originally Posted by Memphis1979

But if it were a single bomb, we would need to investigate. Where did the uranium coke from? That can be determined by testing the radiation.

No it can't. Stop reading idiot Tom Clancy novels.

The best you could do is rule out where it came from.

Investigating...

Mircea

Originally Posted by Falconman

wELL iSREAL HAS more THAN ENOUGH NUKES TO ELIMINATE both Russia and the Arabs except in the flurry Isreal too would be eliminated

Using capital letters doesn't alter the fact that USrael, ooops, I mean Israel cannot hit Russian cities with nuclear weapons.

Not capitalizing...

Mircea

Originally Posted by Neuling

What is the purpose of this thread?

This entire war crap is really getting on my nerves,

Ah, Neuling, the voice of reason. I don't know what the purpose of this thread is. The OP scenario is FUBAR.

And yeah, the whole war thing is getting kind of surreal.

Unfortunately, the long-term US Geo-Political Strategy calls for taking control of the eastern Russian republics.

To do that, the US has to control Central Asia, and to do that, the US needs control of Iran or Afghanistan, so that it can have air and ground corridors from the Persian Gulf/Arabian Sea/Indian Ocean to Central Asia, and since the US has failed in Afghanistan and is seeking an exit strategy, I guess that leaves Iran.

Wondering...

Mircea

[AONE]

I'm afraid people think we would be in a position of responding quickly in this event.

If you recall the terrorist won on 9/11. the nation was paralyzed with fear . No one would get on an airplane and our economy went down the tubes. This was only a large city block destroyed.

If you eliminated NY, our economy would melt down. Immediately all banks would freeze assets. The stock market would vanish.... there would be no market. company values would be reduced 75-90%. The electric grid would be in shambles. transportation would be incapable of moving quickly. We would likely have Marshall law. The medical community would be swamped. telecommunications would be a mess there are more lines in NY than any other city in the US, cut them and the system fails. that is for Sprint, AT&T and Verizon. There are other circuits but they would be so taxed.

it would be probably our leadership would change to something closer to a dictatorship.

The search and rescue aspect of our nation would be busy for months. This would tax the National Guard and the Military.

Our nations money would be at risk of being abandoned as the world currency, which if occurred would put us in a deeper tailspin.

imagine how many companies would cease to be. How many people would not have the funds or resources to eat. I would guess people would create havoc. We just don't have a history of being reasonable. People go into hoard mode, trying to take more than they need and leaving others in the lurch.

While it is easy to think from a bravado stand point we would "go show them" we would be lucky to know which way was up.

Sorry for the bleak view but Here in Orlando. Immediately after 9/11 there were NO tourists, there was no income for hotels, for the restaurants, and hundreds of other stores. Businesses couldn't pay their taxes, there are still empty businesses lining Kissimmee (where Disney is) and that is 10 years after the fact.

I went to Epcot about 10 days after the attack. I parked within feet of the entrance. Employees out numbered guests. I was on an airplane about 16 days after. There were more staff than guests. The airports were empty. People were petrified. the reality , it was the safest time in history to fly as you flew alone. The people allowed the terrorists to win. Do you think they would do less if NY vanished? We like to think of ourselves as invincible, but this would be hard for anyone to over come.....

What would happen if China took the opportunity to inhabit the West coast?

We are an extremely vulnerable nation. We have dependent people. We have a poor system for power.... where the people aren't independent of a power company. most people can't get their own water if the water companies stopped pumping. Few garden, or can foods.

Do you think the 2'nd amendment folks might be a little concerned and add to the strife?

An attack on the US would not be like it was 65 years ago, where the big country steps in to rebuild the nation. How long did it take for Japan to recoup? then multiply that by 2 for us and that is likely how long it would take.

I suggest we hope the US , or any other nation is not nuked.

[BoxCar Willie]

Originally Posted by Mircea

Quite right. Your scenario is totally unimaginable and silly.

South Korea does not have nuclear weapons.

Iran does not have nuclear weapons either. YET

Just so you don't continue to embarrass yourself, you should know that thermonuclear is synonymous with fission-fusion, and it requires plutonium, which Iran does not have. The FIRST Atomic bomb WAS URANIUM

To produce plutonium, assuming you have a nuclear reactor conducive to plutonium production, you would enrich uranium to 3%-5% U235.

The IAEA report says Iran is enriching uranium to 20%, which is proof that Iran is not attempting to produce plutonium.

Raining on your parade...

Mircea



No, you don't.

Your neutron weapons were removed from service and disassembled more than 20 years ago.

Personal knowledge (meaning I was there).

Even for the most naive novice, you should have been able to use deductive reasoning:

1] It is not possible to build a neutron warhead in excess of 15 kt.

2] The US produced a 1kt 8"/203 mm ERW (Neutron) AFAP and a 10 kt Lance ERW.

3] The 8"/203 mm ERW was never deployed. It remained in storage at Seneca Army Depot (near Romulus, New York) until all 550 warheads were transported to the PANTEX facility and disassembled in 1989.

4] The Lance ERW warhead was also in storage at Seneca Army Depot until 1986 when 56 warheads were to deployed to Germany under a Top Secret operation.

5] The Lance was subsequently withdrawn in 1990 and all 300+ warheads were transported to the PANTEX facility and disassemble.

6] The M5 Lance Main Missile Assembly has been removed from service and destroyed, as have all of the launchers.

The only country currently known to have neutron warheads is Russia, which has about 3,000 warheads in the 1 kt to 10 kt range for tube artillery and missile artillery.

It is now believed that China has neutron weapons, since the idiot Blow Job Bill on his Ruin the World and Jeopardize the Lives of Every Man, Woman and Child World Tourâ„¢ gave China the "football" (and gave North Korea two plutonium producing nuclear reactors and gave Russia two Cray Super II computers).

The "football" is not the football the president carries around, it is a system of linear implosion. Linear implosion is how you miniaturize weapons. ACTUALLY in THIS country the football is the satchel that carries the codes to LAUNCH nuclear weapons. A military officer carries WHEREEVER the Presiident is.

How small can you go?

3.5 kg of plutonium in a canister with an external diameter of 6" (155 mm) weighing about 38 pounds with a nominal yield of about 0.03 kt (personal knowledge). Them babies were hot too, meaning when you picked them up, they were warm in your hands, even on a cold day (personal knowledge).

Enhancing radiation...

Mircea



No such thing as a "dirty bomb." Woe to the naive and ignorant.
Talk about naive and ignorant a dirty bomb is an explosive devise with RADIOACTIVE material wrapped AROUND it and when it explodes the radioactive material spreads. [Retire firefighter with Haz Mat level II training]


Back-pack nukes, not suitcase bombs. They're also designed for cratering. The US removed theirs and dismantled them in 1986.

You do realize that armored vehicles cannot traverse a slope greater than 30° right?

Even Hitler knew that (hence the autobahns are elevated on berms with 30° slopes). Put a huge freaking crater in the ground, and you just stopped an armored column from advancing. Stop using old science todays armored CAN traverse slopes up to 50 degrees

Back-packing...

Mircea



No, a reasonable person would acknowledge that the OP scenario is silly and that Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapons program. Even Leon Panetta said so. And WHO believe that lying SOB anyways? he's a shill for Barry Sotero [AKA Barrak Obama]

Of course, long before he said so, I told you Iran had no nuclear weapons program and have repeatedly asked for evidence showing the technical, ordnance, missile, maintenance, security, storage, communication, transportation, support or administration infrastructure.

You already got suckered into a PSY-OPS warfare program by a bunch of retired military officers spewing propaganda and disinformation on the MSM. You got your head in a toilet spewing YOUR propaganda and disinformation.

Are you up for a rematch?

Being reasonable...

Mircea



Not likely.

Look, this is so simple a 4th Grader can get it.

Does Pakistan have plutonium? No, but India does.

What does that tell you about their nuclear weapons?

Okay, let's take this approach: Which country (Pakistan or India) has thermonuclear weapons?

Not Pakistan. That requires plutonium, and Pakistan has none.

Since Pakistan has only uranium, what is the largest possible warhead Pakistan could possibly build in theory?

60 kt

In reality (not theory) what is the largest uranium warhead ever made?

40 kt (by the French). That is most unfortunate, because Pakistan no longer has any B-57F bombers, so Pakistan has no possible means to deliver a 40 kt uranium warhead (no, sorry, something that monstrous will not fit on a missile).

So, applying your vast knowledge of "things nuclear," describe Pakistan's nuclear arsenal.

Well, that would be easy. All of Pakistan's nuclear warheads are in the 0.01 kt to 10 kt range. Pakistani F-16s could probably carry a 20 kt warhead.

Pakistan has mostly 8"/203 mm double-gun artillery rounds and some short range missile artillery in the 1 kt to 10 kt range.

Pakistan's nuclear arsenal is defensive, not offensive. It is designed to prevent the Indian Army from rolling over Pakistani units in short order.



What video game is that? Because that isn't reality.

I do rather wish you would all grow brains and learn how to distinguish between an aircraft's combat radius and its range.



And you base that on what? Certainly you aren't taking into consideration Kissinger's duplicity during the 1971 Pakistani-Indian War, where the USS Enterprise was sent with Task Force 74.

Thanks to the idiot Kissinger, 1971 was the closest the world ever came to nuclear Armageddon.

Raining on parades...

Mircea



Um, okay, I'll accept that at face-value.



But Iran does have allies. Iran is part of a 5-nation mutual defense pact anchored by Russia (the other 3 countries are Central Asian States).



Then that speaks more to North Korea, who, based on burn up time and operating time, produced about 60 kg of weapons grade plutonium, enough to produce about twelve 1 kt back-pack nukes.

Localizing...

Mircea



What about the Oxygen Bomb?

The fission of any atom produces 180 million electron volts of energy. Doesn't matter which atom: uranium, plutonium, carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, iron, aluminum.

The difference between fissile material and non-fissile material, is that fissile material is self-sustaining.

Eventually the world will acquire the technology to produce sufficient energy to fission in any atom and maintain a cascading reaction that leads to the nuclear explosion.

I'm sure you'll be thrilled with that.

Letting the cat out of the bag...

Mircea



That gets my vote for silliest comment of the year.

The US has used nuclear weapons, and you have been seeking global domination. That is most evident in your Geo-Political Strategy. You might want to educate yourself by reading white papers and such published by the the infamous Neo-Conservatives, who were formerly the Social Democrats who were formerly the Young People's Socialist League.

Start looking around 1974-1976. You'll probably have to go to a university library, but the main branch of your public library might have some documents.

Not so stupid as to confuse atomic and nuclear... SAME Commie BS still flows well.

Mircea



Probably because he is trying to save your life, and the lives of other people in other countries. That's why I work to get the US out of Romania, before you turn our country into a freaking parking lot with your half-baked plans of global domination.

Didn't anyone ever explain to you the ultimate fate of bullies?

Toning with rhetoric.... No he's not, he's an anti American communistic troll [much like yourself] . I would love to get US out of Romania [personally don't know WHY we're anywhere near that backward commie country anyways] ! Yes we MAY be bullies in YOUR eyes, BUT who's the first to start crying and wailing and holding out there grubby, greedy little hands when the have a disaster and want OUR aid and OUR money?

Mircea



No it can't. Stop reading idiot Tom Clancy novels.

The best you could do is rule out where it came from.

Investigating... Trouble is Tom knows much more then YOU ever will and makes more money because of it I think jealousy is showing

Mircea



Using capital letters doesn't alter the fact that USrael, ooops, I mean Israel cannot hit Russian cities with nuclear weapons.

Not capitalizing...
Ya never know what Mossad can do AND Israel is it's own country they do as THEY please.
Mircea



Ah, Neuling, the voice of reason. I don't know what the purpose of this thread is. The OP scenario is FUBAR. I guess you don't understand the concept of what ifs. That's OK I understand as a foreign commie that is not logical for you.

And yeah, the whole war thing is getting kind of surreal.

Unfortunately, the long-term US Geo-Political Strategy calls for taking control of the eastern Russian republics. RIGHT, the old communist BS is still alive and strong I see.

To do that, the US has to control Central Asia, and to do that, the US needs control of Iran or Afghanistan, so that it can have air and ground corridors from the Persian Gulf/Arabian Sea/Indian Ocean to Central Asia, and since the US has failed in Afghanistan and is seeking an exit strategy, I guess that leaves Iran.

Wondering...

Mircea

Since Al Quaida [with the help and support of the Taliban] attack US [The United States ] on Sept 11th 2001 THAT was why we went into A stan. I don't see this country invading Iran [really have no use for it] The ONLY thing that THIS country and MOST are concerned IS the fact they ARE working on obtaining a nuclear weapon AND IF succesful will pass it on to one of their sponcered terror groups on either US or more likely Israel [THAT not only concers THIS country BUT many others including many in their own region.

YOUR BS doesn't wash with me. So spare us ALL your crap, please!!!

[Rick Roma]

Originally Posted by Trimac20

It's an unimaginable scenario, some crazy Iranian or South Korean dictator decides to start World War III by sending one or a few thermo-nukes to hit Manhattan. The immediately impact kills at least a million. NYC is evacuated, but millions more die from radiation. The US retaliates by obliterating Tehran. Would this spell World War III and perhaps the end of the world as we know it?

No it would not. Obozo would bow to the President of Iran and apologize.

[kelsius]

Originally Posted by ovcatto

As many times as I've read this "scenario" I can't possibly fathom what WWIII has to do with anything. Where are the interlocking alliances what would trigger such a conflagration? Where is the mutual suicide pact between Iran and anybody? Sure North Korea provides nominal protection for North Korea but I just don't see an ideological or strategic reason why China would jeopardize its economy by entering in a full fledge war on Korea's behalf? Alternately, if there were a preemptive nuclear strike against the U.S. I can't foresee see a single nation of any significance even raising political objections to an American conventional counter-strike.

Well, it would likely destroy the global economy. New York City is a vital organ in the body that is the global economic system. Without it, our system would become very ill if not die completely, and it would stain relationships between all countries most likely. It would certain make our current economic depression look like a cakewalk.

[Fred314X]

Given the opinions that a lot of people express about New York, something tells me that most of the United States actually wouldn't mind very much if the city was targeted for a nuclear attack. (If it was their hometown...World War III. But New York City? They'll call everyone who lives here black, Jewish, liberal or some combination of the three and then go out and get a beer).

[BigCityDreamer]

Originally Posted by AONE

I'm afraid people think we would be in a position of responding quickly in this event.

If you recall the terrorist won on 9/11. the nation was paralyzed with fear . No one would get on an airplane and our economy went down the tubes. This was only a large city block destroyed.

If you eliminated NY, our economy would melt down. Immediately all banks would freeze assets. The stock market would vanish.... there would be no market. company values would be reduced 75-90%. The electric grid would be in shambles. transportation would be incapable of moving quickly. We would likely have Marshall law. The medical community would be swamped. telecommunications would be a mess there are more lines in NY than any other city in the US, cut them and the system fails. that is for Sprint, AT&T and Verizon. There are other circuits but they would be so taxed.

it would be probably our leadership would change to something closer to a dictatorship.

The search and rescue aspect of our nation would be busy for months. This would tax the National Guard and the Military.

Our nations money would be at risk of being abandoned as the world currency, which if occurred would put us in a deeper tailspin.

imagine how many companies would cease to be. How many people would not have the funds or resources to eat. I would guess people would create havoc. We just don't have a history of being reasonable. People go into hoard mode, trying to take more than they need and leaving others in the lurch.

While it is easy to think from a bravado stand point we would "go show them" we would be lucky to know which way was up.

Sorry for the bleak view but Here in Orlando. Immediately after 9/11 there were NO tourists, there was no income for hotels, for the restaurants, and hundreds of other stores. Businesses couldn't pay their taxes, there are still empty businesses lining Kissimmee (where Disney is) and that is 10 years after the fact.

I went to Epcot about 10 days after the attack. I parked within feet of the entrance. Employees out numbered guests. I was on an airplane about 16 days after. There were more staff than guests. The airports were empty. People were petrified. the reality , it was the safest time in history to fly as you flew alone. The people allowed the terrorists to win. Do you think they would do less if NY vanished? We like to think of ourselves as invincible, but this would be hard for anyone to over come.....

What would happen if China took the opportunity to inhabit the West coast?

We are an extremely vulnerable nation. We have dependent people. We have a poor system for power.... where the people aren't independent of a power company. most people can't get their own water if the water companies stopped pumping. Few garden, or can foods.

Do you think the 2'nd amendment folks might be a little concerned and add to the strife?

An attack on the US would not be like it was 65 years ago, where the big country steps in to rebuild the nation. How long did it take for Japan to recoup? then multiply that by 2 for us and that is likely how long it would take.

I suggest we hope the US , or any other nation is not nuked.

You're talking about possible/probable after-effects on the U.S. economy and government.

That doesn't mean we can't drop nuclear weapons and utterly obliterate every human life in the country that did that to us. INSTANT mass extermination.

[BigJon3475]

Video: The World's Biggest Bomb | Watch Secrets of the Dead Online | PBS Video