Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGood News! We can Nuke to our heart's content... "blast wouldn't destroy city"
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2012/03/27/national/w003933D74.DTLThinking about the unthinkable, a U.S. government study analyzed the likely effects from terrorists setting off a 10-kiloton nuclear device a few blocks north of the White House. It predicted terrible devastation for roughly one-half mile in every direction, with buildings reduced to rubble the way that World War II bombing raids destroyed parts of Berlin. But outside that blast zone, the study concluded, even such a nuclear explosion would be pretty survivable.
"It's not the end of the world," said Randy Larsen, a retired Air Force colonel and founding director of the Institute for Homeland Security. "It's not a Cold War scenario."
/snip
See? It's "pretty survivable".
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
5 replies, 1134 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (0)
ReplyReply to this post
5 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Good News! We can Nuke to our heart's content... "blast wouldn't destroy city" (Original Post)
TalkingDog
Mar 2012
OP
Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)1. That's a pretty silly interpretation of the article. (nt)
TalkingDog
(9,001 posts)2. I prefer cynical. But thanks for playing along at home.
n/t
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)3. 10Kt is a baby bomb.
I guarantee you that if you're within a quarter mile of large conventional bomb, you may not survive the blast either.
The article is technically correct in discussing blast effects. radiation burns are a different story.
mindwalker_i
(4,407 posts)4. Cool, grab a couple of hot dogs
And some beer.
Angleae
(4,497 posts)5. Here's what a 15kt device can do.