“““One nuclear bomb can ruin your whole economy.”
I would say that strongly depends upon where it goes off.”
Guess the terrorist could set it off in a desert wilderness, but not likely.”
Nuclear weapons are actually fairly weak, far wearer and less powerful than the popular imagination would lead anyone to think.
You set off a nuke in the middle of Washington D.C. much of the down town area would be devastated but all in all most of the city would be intact.
So unless the weapon actually goes off near the Washington monument while congress in in session and the president is in the white house, your really talking about a relatively limited area of effect. With limited consequences, politically and provably no direct consequences economically.
Indeed almost all of the economic consequences would be a direct result of the surviving government’s actions. marshal law, using their army and police to shut down everything ect...
The actual force of the bomb itself would be relatively inconsequential.
“The actual force of the bomb itself would be relatively inconsequential.”
Interesting. I didn’t know that. You’re probably better informed (since I know defense and military experts lurk here).
Doesn’t it depend on the size of the bomb? If it is a 100 megaton it could wipe out miles and irradiate a larger region, especially if set off near water.
The twin towers caused $33 billion in damages.
I think that the panic a nuclear attack on at US city would cause would result serious damage to the economy — even if it was a small nuke.
This this site accurate? http://meyerweb.com/eric/tools/gmap/hydesim.html