Suppose a nuclear device is detontated in Manhattan...

[Paco]

Fix:
There was really no need for this. The economy is totally in the hands of the people. It is ours to break or build.

-Hey brother, I wish I could be so optimistic but when people get scared, really scared? They horde, they collect, and they don't spend unless it's the initial rush to land some gear and food.

This country, this whole thing runs on money. That is why we have the best toys, best everything when it comes to technology. We consumers drive the market. The military contractors drive their own market too, constantly posturing and trying to suckle off the gov. by offering better and better weapon systems.

Without money greasing this whole operation, the might of this country would be no greater than any other nation. We would not be the king of the heap power-wise and probably not even a contender. Yes, for now,we have the best army and one of the biggest in manpower, but folks won't work for free-they need to feed themselves and their folk. Ofcourse, we could suspend, in our rage, the whole money thing for a bit, but not forever.

Enter NYC. This is where most of the wealth of this country is represented both physically, structurally, socially etc.etc. You knock this fat-cat down and the lands will reel brothers and sisters: mark me on this. I agree that it shouldn't be set up this way, but because of the mighty infrastructure of this city, it's EASY to do business here, and that's why most of the companies STAYED after 9/11 and all it implied.

 

[M1911Owner]

7.62, you bring up an interesting point. All those billions of dollars of real estate in Manhattan, and millions of people, and what is really produced there? There are no automobiles rolling out of factories, no paper coming from paper mills, no oil coming from oil refineries there. Perhaps a few computers assembled for local folks at Joe's Computer Shop, some jewelry made at Tiffany's. Would we even notice that they're gone? (Don't even get me started on Washington DC.)

 

[Paco]

m1911owner,

It's the proverbial head of the body of business. Cut the head off and the body is gonna do a chicken dance... or hopefull grow a new head. It doesn't need to produce anything, just govern.

 

[fix]

Hey brother, I wish I could be so optimistic but when people get scared, really scared?

That's actually my point. We really don't know how the public will react. History suggests that anger will be the result, rather than fear. Despite the best efforts of the touchy feely left to suppress it, we are a nation of warriors...even the liberals. It just takes a lot to get us all riled up and ready to fight, but once that happens...look out! The attacks on September 11, 2001 came pretty close to sparking the kind of collective outrage that Pearl Harbor did, but it didn't quite get there. A nuke on US soil, IMO, will take us far beyond the Pearl Harbor stage of anger...and the world will tremble. We were far from the top of the heap, in terms of military power, back then. This time, we'd be starting from the top.

 

[longeyes]

"7.62, you bring up an interesting point. All those billions of dollars of real estate in Manhattan, and millions of people, and what is really produced there? There are no automobiles rolling out of factories, no paper coming from paper mills, no oil coming from oil refineries there. Perhaps a few computers assembled for local folks at Joe's Computer Shop, some jewelry made at Tiffany's. Would we even notice that they're gone?"

You might, given that NYC is the head of media, advertising, the arts, and fashion, along with finance. A great silence might descend over the land. Then again some people would find that a pleasant change.

 

[G1FAL]

About the detonation itself:

A suitcase/backpack/whatever nuke of say 10 kT wouldnt have the sheer destructive power of a warhead of the same size attached to a missile, because of that whole groundburst vs. airburst thing. Now if Mr. Yo Momma bin Slobberin an Farteen were to jump out of a plane and detonate himself, thats a whole different animal.


Our response:

I think that people would be madder than a eunuch in a whorehouse at first, but that would subside and everyone would be scared. Yes, I can see people fleeing from NYC, and what a mess that would be. I can also see muslims all across this country feeling the effects. American anger over something like this could make krystallnacht look like two boys throwing rocks thru the windows of a car in a junkyard.

I think we'd suffer pretty bad, economically, for a while, but manage to make it thru and reorganize. We'd survive, and recover.

As far as nuking anyone, I dont know how effective that would be, since we its not like there would be the 2007 Allah Is Great Let's Smash the Great Satan Fundamentalist Muslim Terrorism Convention and Barbecue where we could lob a nuke and get them all at once, or even a sizeable portion of them. They'd probably spread out and run to every hidey-hole they have. What we could do is nuke the capital city of any country that harbors them, such as Libya, Syria, Jordan, etc. When I say 'harbors', I dont mean we find a terrorist camp there and nuke. No, because the scum could set up a camp without the gov of the country in question knowing about it.

But even that probably wouldnt be that effective, really.

How about taking over every muslim holy place, stationing large numbers of troops, and declaring everything within 2km of our lines to be a free-fire zone for a couple of years? Yeah, it would suck to be a sitting duck, but anything comes within that 2 clicks, it gets wasted, and just having their holy sites in our possession ought to make every one of the bomb chuckers so mad that they attack.

One thing I wanted to say, cant remember who had said something about nuking the mountainous areas of Pakistan and Afghanistan, nukes wouldnt be that effective in that area. Mountains can withstand a lot of abuse. BUT, maybe we could air-drop ricin or something else very deadly so that when the jerkwads come out of their caves, its curtains for them. Anthrax, perhaps? They walk out the cave, kick up a little dust, and then BITE the dust.

Or just pump massive quantites of poison gas into any cave we find.

After all, nukes arent the only mass destruction weapon in our inventory.

 

[Jeff Thomas]

This scenario is my big concern about the near-term future.

With respect, I think many are minimizing the economic impacts, both financially and geographically.

Private property rights, and the willingness of people to invest in American assets is what underpins our economy. For example, if we see such an event, it brings all urban real estate investment into question ... not just NYC. If there was a crater where the center of Manhattan used to be, how would you feel about your real estate investments in downtown Washington D.C., Chicago, Boston, Los Angeles? Uneasy, if you're smart. Following 9/11, many commercial real estate experts agreed that that event encouraged greater geographical diversification for commercial real estate holdings.

The massive loss of personal net worth through damage to principal residences (direct or indirect, physical or financial) would be noted by lenders and owners throughout the U.S. All of this would have severe economic repercussions in all urban areas, and beyond.

Some "tin foil hat" writers have hypothesized all of this for years ... an exodus to rural areas, to escape urban blight and terror attacks.

The security questions are massive. The economic impact would be massive. And, the impact on civil liberties could be crippling.

Having said all of this, most people who worry about such scenarios have predicted 50 of the last 1 major U.S. terror attacks in the last 20 years. I hope they continue with that track record. Still, I have concerns about this scenario.

Regards from TX

 

[kingfisher]

Any aspect of a nuclear response on the part of The U.S. is out of the question.

We have become far to politicaly correct for that type of action, and USL knows it!

 

[M1911Owner]

and USL knows it!

USL = ??? Expand TLA please!

Something occurs to me. For some reason, "Osama Bin Laden" has been transliterated in that fashion, or as Usama Bin Laden, so we tend to abbreviate his name as OBL or UBL. However, "Bin" in Arabic in normally transliterated as "Ibn", which would give us Osama Ibn Laden, or "OIL"!!! Just something to ponder...

 

[Drjones]

Something occurs to me. For some reason, "Osama Bin Laden" has been transliterated in that fashion, or as Usama Bin Laden, so we tend to abbreviate his name as OBL or UBL. However, "Bin" in Arabic in normally transliterated is "Ibn", which would give us Osama Ibn Laden, or "OIL"!!! Just something to ponder...

Actually it now translates into "Dead Man Walking."

 

[fallingblock]

I like that thought, longeyes.....

"....given that NYC is the head of media, advertising, the arts, and fashion, along with finance. A great silence might descend over the land. Then again some people would find that a pleasant change."
************************************************************


I spent enough time working in NYC to be quite happy to leave.

If anyone seriously believes that taking out NYC, even completely, would 'destroy' the U.S., they are either longterm residents of NYC or deluded as to the size and diversity of the U.S.A.. (or both)

Oddly enough, there has been some discussion about Sydney being made uninhabitable in the event of a terrorist attack here in Australia.

Many of the same fears are expressed about Sydney being the "heart of the nation", "the business centre" (shared with Melbourne) and so on.

My take is that in either case, there'd be a big flash/bang, lots of unfortunate folks would be killed or injured, real estate prices would readjust locally, and the huge majority of the remaining parts of the nation would make the necessary changes to restore the functions of NYC or Sydney very quickly. No city is indispensible.

Finance, business, management, arts...all very portable and duplicable, especially with a bit of forward planning.

Nearly all food production and manufacturing capability would be left intact in either of the above scenarios.

Whomever did the deed, however, would find some serious stuff incoming.

 

[Gewehr98]

The nuclear response will begin within minutes.

Starting with the forensics and consequence management aspects. It's all good, just another day at the office for at least one THR member. Fact is indeed sometimes stranger than fiction - we (I) have been waiting for just such an event since 9/11. It's gonna make for a couple very long days, regardless:

 

[Paco]

Dear Fallingblock,

My take on, when I say TEOTWAWKI, is just that: the America we knew and grew up in would be gone... Ofcourse the country would survive. We're probably one of only a few countries in the entire world that could, albeit with great cost, close off our borders and have every resource we need, and the ability to process/refine, and otherwise utilize those resources. But say goodbye to many freedoms and the easy life that we once knew as a people.

 

[ravinraven]

Well, this thread has been an exercise in mental exercise! And some good points and questions have drifted in.

I don't think we can afford to sit around and wait for IT to happen and then figure out what to do. As with the USSR in the "good old days," we need a plan.

We MUST have an ongoing and ever strengthening intelligence system. That involves politically incorrect operatives on the ground as well as the ability to count the hairs on a camel's butt fom outer space. [No. I'm not thinking "camel jockey." You are.]

The intelligence operation would have two objectives as I see it. One would be to develop the ability to stop IT from happening. The other would be to enable us to make a fast, accurate and devestating response in the event IT happened. {It can be anything you can dream up.}

The fast, accurate response would be the best post IT action that would start us back on the road to normalcy, I think. Nuking a bunch of innocents has a certain P.R. down side, but the big thing is that after all the noise is gone, the jerks who committed the act are still in business unscathed and with a few hundred thousand extra mad allies helping them out.

It all makes me sortta glad I ain't running things.

rr

 

[Fudgie Ghost]

Falling Block: Glad you were able to "get over the wall". Like many who work in NYC, it isn't necessarily because I want to---more like I have to. But that's another story.

I don't think anyone here posted that this kind of thing would "destroy" the US. I agree that this country is huge and would be able to withstand much. However, as other's have posted, what would the "damaged" US be like?

I don't think many of you realize how interconnected our economy is--one of it's strenthgths, but also a vulnerability. I'm no econimist (I don't think I even spelled it right!). Lawsuits, insurance losses, bankrupt companies(esp. medium and small ones that service what would be severly crippled businesses) would all cause ripples that would effect the US far and wide.

As to the amount of radioactivity at the blast site: Look, the soccer moms where I live are so obsessed with "safety" and their own neuroses (the wearing of perfume is an issue--offensive or causes them problems---***?!), they wouldn't care if you had 20 leading scientists licking the rubble to prove it's ok---they and those who think like them (and this area is FILLED with such) would be convinced that anything close to the destroyed area would be lethal.

Anyway, it would cause a major disruption, of one kind or another. Who can say for sure what the exact outcome would be?

As to response, the US has always been slow to anger/war/military action. But, when roused, look out. Something happening like this would, I think galvanize the nation, and ,at least for a time, there would be wide agreement and unity as to some drastic response. The problem, as noted by others, is who do you strike?

 

[Gary H]

Can you imagine the public panic? The East Coast sniper run had people changing their lifestyle. Waiting for the other shoe to drop would create chaos. The public seems to have little stomach for loss of life.

Good thread. Now, we wait.

It is only a matter of when and where.

 

[Moparmike]

Indeed. Good thread.

A suitcase/backpack/whatever nuke of say 10 kT wouldnt have the sheer destructive power of a warhead of the same size attached to a missile, because of that whole groundburst vs. airburst thing. Now if Mr. Yo Momma bin Slobberin an Farteen were to jump out of a plane and detonate himself, thats a whole different animal.

So if a backpack nuke were detonated in, say, the top floor of the Empire State Building, NYC would be in deep doodoo, right?


Damn. Yall are really starting to make me want to invest in tinfoil. And ammo. And MRE's. And Missile Silos.

 

[longeyes]

As I see it, "IT" has already happened. You have a lot of angry people and you have extremely dangerous, and available, weapons technology. I think we are in a new era, one in which we either find some new solutions or watch the clock of civilization wind back a few thousand years. We are going to have to change MINDS. We can do that by good argument, by P.R., by propaganda, by indoctrination, by psychotropic drugs, by genetic engineering, by...? Whatever we do it will have to be vast and systemic in scope.

We can fantasize about, for example, anti-missile devices that are 99% effective. Had we had such a system in place to deal with the Soviet Union we would still have lost the essence of our nation. We can talk about responding to a single backpack nuke attack--but what if there are ten, not one? What if the attacks don't come all at once? What if the small nukes are--as has been speculated about the Soviets--already smuggled in and in place, "just in case?"

Defense by itself isn't the answer, and neither is offense. I think the world either comes to its senses or loses its senses.

 

[VNgo]

Forgot to add: who would run the New NYSE if such records were kept elsewhere. Besides lots of banks have their headquarters here and the EMP would be 'that's-all-she-wrote' for most of the stored software. PRAY for us!!!

An appreciable EMP pulse is only produced if a strategic-grade nuclear weapon is detonated at high altitude; in this scenario, we have a tactical-grade nuclear weapon detonated on the ground. While the damage from such a detonation would be severe, it would by no means completely obliterate NYC (a strategic nuclear weapon is necessarily for destruction of that magnitude) and fallout levels would be minimal due to the low yield of the weapon.

All in all, the effects of such a detonation would be primarily psycological rather than physical in nature; the degree of panic and fury which would be caused by a nuclear detonation on U.S. soil far eclipses the actual detonation.

 

[Paco]

VNgo,

-I'm right with you, as I had mentioned in previous posts. As for the whole EMP thing, that was a new one. Read my post at the top of this page then the one after it. It's the fear driven stampede an act like this wpuld produce that would be the greatest damage it to the country. Fear, fear and more fear...

There's gotta be a way to prep for this or stop it from wrecking our way of life without comprimising our way of life, but that's just it: maybe we've moved in to a new era where such things like the patriot act and big brother are the only ways to keep our heads above the water. I dunno, but I hope not...

 

[Tex Ram]

I believe the answer to this question can be found in Revelations. And God WILL sort them out.

Tex

 

[Sean Smith]

A sad fact of life is that the technology of true "weapons of mass destruction" is getting too old and "primitive" to control. Think about it in these terms:

-Effective chemical weapons are 100-year-old technology. Nerve agents are 70+ years old. V-agents are 50+ years old. A binary sarin bomb has already been used in a terrorist attack (Aum Shinrikyo's gassing of the Tokyo subway system in 1995).

-Biological weapons have been around basically forever, but in terms of cultivating them in a modern way they are, roughly speaking, 100-year-old technology. Mass production of biological weapons is 60-year-old technology. Anthrax has already been used in terrorist attacks.

-Nuclear weapons are 60-year-old technology.

Back in, say, 1994, if you talked about the threat of Anthrax or Sarin being used by terrorists, you were considered a paranoid nutjob who probably read too much Tom Clancy (from back when he could still write well). In 2004, Sarin and Anthrax are just a couple more terrorist options on the menu. Luckily, they are still figuring out how to get the most of biological & chemical weapons; their early efforts have produced mediocre results, like most early efforts at anything do.

Without even getting into the nuclear question, how many people will an Anthrax attack kill once your delivery system is better than the US Postal Service? How many people die if your binary Sarin bombs in the subway system don't fizzle?

 

[fix]

Anthrax can be treated. Smallpox can be prevented. There ain't no cure for a nuclear blast.

 

[Gewehr98]

Says who?

There ain't no cure for a nuclear blast.

1. Time
2. Distance
3. Shielding

 

[fix]

You can't freeze time immediately after the flash and head for another town. You pretty much have to be there already. But what if the blast is in the other town? Doh.