Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Sender
The effects would be somewhat contained by the concrete jungle itself, but look at the economic and psychological impact from the loss of just two buildings in 2001. It could be hundreds of buildings even with a small nuke, and the loss of life and economic trauma would be devastating.

Also, assuming a ground burst, the fallout and contamination would be impossible to clean up, and Manhattan, (or where ever) would have to be abandoned, think Chernobyl, only 1000 times worse.

39 posted on 09/22/2004 11:29:34 AM PDT by Doomonyou (Molon Labe! FMCDH!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]


To: Doomonyou
think Chernobyl, only 1000 times worse.

WHOA! I don't think that is true at ALL. Chernobyl was an exposed, huge nuclear core. No WAY would ground zero be "hotter" - it couldn't be. Most of the nuclear material would be blown away.

52 posted on 09/22/2004 12:08:04 PM PDT by Shryke (Never retreat. Never explain. Get it done and let them howl.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies ]

To: Doomonyou
Also, assuming a ground burst, the fallout and contamination would be impossible to clean up, and Manhattan, (or where ever) would have to be abandoned, think Chernobyl, only 1000 times worse.

Chernobyl released a lot more radioactive contamination than any nuclear weapon. The Chernobyl plant is still operating and people still work there.

82 posted on 09/22/2004 1:28:31 PM PDT by Dan Evans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson