in light of the Nuke thread, what would happen if:

[ahurtt]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: cwjerome
There would absolutely not be a civil war. The country would come together even more so than 9/11. There might be some fringe elements going bonkers, but nothing too horrible.

The government would get stronger, especially regionally, but mostly temporarily. They would certianly not try and grab guns... that would lead to problems and issues worse than the nuke.

I agree.

I think you underestimate the chaos people in mass hysterical states can bring about. Just look at what happened in L.A. after the Rodney King verdict. . .and that was just for ONE GUY! The people in the areas affected by the blast would riot and go insane especially because they would know that there was little if any chance they could be saved or rescued.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: maluckey
ahurtt,

Good imagination!

A 1-3KT sized nuke (as stated in the thread title) would not greatly affect major cities near LA. Fallout would be minimal because of the mountains. Cleanup in Hiroshima and Nagasaki began shortly after being hit. Cancer rates are slightly higher in those locations nowadays than average cities. The cancers are mainly in the oldest of the citizens, likely from exposure in the days following the initial strike.

Martial law would likely end as soon as California could re-shift police forces for citizen protection and it's National Guard units to guard access points to the city.

Where I disagree is the end to martial law. People will wonder who's next. Fear will override sense. Just as the airlines were closed nationwide, martial law would be coast to coast. As bad as the damage might be, the "fallout" would be worse than the radioactivity.

 

[ahurtt]

Originally posted by: NeoV
I agree I don't see a 'gun grab' taking place....but I'm not sure the country would come together like it did after 9/11 - I think there would be a ton of finger-pointing after a short period of unity, and I think it would get ugly.....

would we pull out of Iraq? would we use our military to secure our borders?

Secure our borders from what? Who would want to invade an uninhabitable poisonous radioactive wasteland?

 

[maluckey]

Riots occur to improve ones situation, not as a protest to a foreign invasion. Foreign invasions trigger mass hysteria and over-the-top patriotism to go and kill the enemy.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: ahurtt

Originally posted by: NeoV
I agree I don't see a 'gun grab' taking place....but I'm not sure the country would come together like it did after 9/11 - I think there would be a ton of finger-pointing after a short period of unity, and I think it would get ugly.....

would we pull out of Iraq? would we use our military to secure our borders?

Secure our borders from what? Who would want to invade an uninhabitable poisonous radioactive wasteland?

PSA: One relatively small nuclear weapon won't render the entire country uninhabitable.

 

[ahurtt]

Originally posted by: irwincur
Word in DC a while back was that there is a clear understanding between Al Queda and the US Government that if a bomb is indeed used against an American city that Mecca would be likewise destroyed and tainted. The question becomes, would a terrorist risk their holy city if they knew the outcome to their actions?

If a nuclear weapon is indeed used - the gloves would finally come off.

We are not dealing with rational individuals here. . .OBL might consider the risk of sending millions of innocent Muslims to meet Allah a bit earlier than planned an acceptable casualty to destroy the infidels. He has stated in his terrorist training manual that if a terrorist has to act in a non-Muslim fashion in order to wage war on the infidels, Allah would understand in the afterlife. And don't forget, these terrorists are not really Muslims if you ask any faithfully practicing rational and sane Muslim person.

 

[maluckey]

ahurtt,

Once again, you waaay overestimate fallout and damage. Japan took two Atomic hits and did quite well afterwards. Japan is a very small country compared to most any, and is only slightly larger than California.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: ahurtt

Originally posted by: maluckey
For a couple of weeks, the economy would suffer, then it would rebound, and the United States would go total isolationist. All foreigners would likely be monitored if Residents, deported if not. Borders would be sealed. Martial law in California would be declared.

We would quickly find the country that allowed the nuke to be built and demand reparations for their lack of vigilance. A scapegoat would be needed, so if said country wasn't apologetic enough it would be destroyed in a way that would make the war in Afghanistan seem long and drawn out.

Further punitive strikes would likely follow. If a nuke was again used against it's interests, The United States might reply in kind.

For a couple of weeks? Underestimate much? haha 🙂 The state of California would not be under martial law. It would be a wasteland due to nuclear fallout. The entire state and possibly neighboring states would have to be completely and literally evacuated and quarantined as the pall of radioactive smoke and debris plumed into the air for hundreds of miles around. The entire region would be uninhabitable for many many decades to come. Hospitals would be overrun and people would be dying of radiation sickness in the streets. Disease and famine would ensue. It would be totally dog eat dog. . .food, crops, and water would be contaminated and poisoned with radiation. And fire. . .lots and lots of fire and smoke. It is likely that many survivors would have to be fenced into the affected areas and left to die with no infrastructure left operational to be able to mount rescue operations. Computers, cell phones, communication lines, radio towers, cars. . anything electronic all rendered useless. You want to revise that "couple of weeks" estimate yet? Just look at the ripples 9/11 caused and now magnify it about . . .I dunno. . .lets say 250 times? The best I think you could hope for if it happened in your home city or state. . .pray that you are at ground zero when it blows because you would NOT want to survive.

you have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[ahurtt]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: ahurtt

Originally posted by: maluckey
For a couple of weeks, the economy would suffer, then it would rebound, and the United States would go total isolationist. All foreigners would likely be monitored if Residents, deported if not. Borders would be sealed. Martial law in California would be declared.

We would quickly find the country that allowed the nuke to be built and demand reparations for their lack of vigilance. A scapegoat would be needed, so if said country wasn't apologetic enough it would be destroyed in a way that would make the war in Afghanistan seem long and drawn out.

Further punitive strikes would likely follow. If a nuke was again used against it's interests, The United States might reply in kind.

For a couple of weeks? Underestimate much? haha 🙂 The state of California would not be under martial law. It would be a wasteland due to nuclear fallout. The entire state and possibly neighboring states would have to be completely and literally evacuated and quarantined as the pall of radioactive smoke and debris plumed into the air for hundreds of miles around. Hospitals would be overrun and people would be dying of radiation sickness in the streets. Disease and famine would ensue. It would be totally dog eat dog. . .food, crops, and water would be contaminated and poisoned with radiation. And fire. . .lots and lots of fire and smoke. It is likely that many survivors would have to be fenced into the affected areas and left to die with no infrastructure left operational to be able to mount rescue operations. Computers, cell phones, communication lines, radio towers, cars. . anything electronic all rendered useless. You want to revise that "couple of weeks" estimate yet? Just look at the ripples 9/11 caused and now magnify it about . . .I dunno. . .lets say 250 times?

Your fallout scenario is unrealistic and exaggerated for a yield on the order of 15-20KT.

Alright, maybe you are right. I forgot that part of the original post where it said a bomb the size of one of the ones used on Japan while I was typing up my response. I was imagining something on the order of a modern day nuclear device. However, I stand by my description of what the effects would be. . .just on a smaller more localized scale.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: cwjerome
There would absolutely not be a civil war. The country would come together even more so than 9/11. There might be some fringe elements going bonkers, but nothing too horrible.

The government would get stronger, especially regionally, but mostly temporarily. They would certianly not try and grab guns... that would lead to problems and issues worse than the nuke.

The government will certainly get stronger, and if people object, many here will turn them in. The main function of any government is to remain in power. I believe many would make flowerly statements as to the need to surrender our rights to the State. The people would indeed pull together. They would form an enormous mob dedicated to destroying all that might threaten the US. You would have the opportunity to watch how the Germans could support the Nazis. Not pretty.

reichstag anyone?

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

*edit*

Double post 🙁

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: ahurtt

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: ahurtt

Originally posted by: maluckey
For a couple of weeks, the economy would suffer, then it would rebound, and the United States would go total isolationist. All foreigners would likely be monitored if Residents, deported if not. Borders would be sealed. Martial law in California would be declared.

We would quickly find the country that allowed the nuke to be built and demand reparations for their lack of vigilance. A scapegoat would be needed, so if said country wasn't apologetic enough it would be destroyed in a way that would make the war in Afghanistan seem long and drawn out.

Further punitive strikes would likely follow. If a nuke was again used against it's interests, The United States might reply in kind.

For a couple of weeks? Underestimate much? haha 🙂 The state of California would not be under martial law. It would be a wasteland due to nuclear fallout. The entire state and possibly neighboring states would have to be completely and literally evacuated and quarantined as the pall of radioactive smoke and debris plumed into the air for hundreds of miles around. Hospitals would be overrun and people would be dying of radiation sickness in the streets. Disease and famine would ensue. It would be totally dog eat dog. . .food, crops, and water would be contaminated and poisoned with radiation. And fire. . .lots and lots of fire and smoke. It is likely that many survivors would have to be fenced into the affected areas and left to die with no infrastructure left operational to be able to mount rescue operations. Computers, cell phones, communication lines, radio towers, cars. . anything electronic all rendered useless. You want to revise that "couple of weeks" estimate yet? Just look at the ripples 9/11 caused and now magnify it about . . .I dunno. . .lets say 250 times?

Your fallout scenario is unrealistic and exaggerated for a yield on the order of 15-20KT.

Alright, maybe you are right. I forgot that part of the original post where it said a bomb the size of one of the ones used on Japan while I was typing up my response. I was imagining something on the order of a modern day nuclear device. However, I stand by my description of what the effects would be. . .just on a smaller more localized scale.

even a modern day 20 megaton device would not make that necessary.

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

Originally posted by: JustAnAverageGuy

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: irwincur
Word in DC a while back was that there is a clear understanding between Al Queda and the US Government that if a bomb is indeed used against an American city that Mecca would be likewise destroyed and tainted. The question becomes, would a terrorist risk their holy city if they knew the outcome to their actions?

If a nuclear weapon is indeed used - the gloves would finally come off.

That's a little more comforting.

Until you think about the reaction the Islamic world would have.

I'm going to have to agree with your earlier guess.

Originally posted by: ntdz
WW3 probably.

 

[nageov3t]

if a nuke was dropped on LA?

probably breath a sigh of relief.

jk 😛

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: azazyel

Originally posted by: irwincur
Word in DC a while back was that there is a clear understanding between Al Queda and the US Government that if a bomb is indeed used against an American city that Mecca would be likewise destroyed and tainted. The question becomes, would a terrorist risk their holy city if they knew the outcome to their actions?

If a nuclear weapon is indeed used - the gloves would finally come off.

Isn't Mecca right next to the Wailing Wall?

about 1000 miles south-southeast

 

[ahurtt]

Originally posted by: maluckey
Riots occur to improve ones situation, not as a protest to a foreign invasion. Foreign invasions trigger mass hysteria and over-the-top patriotism to go and kill the enemy.

They can also occur when people have a sense of impending doom and feel that they are in a life or death situation. Darwins law of survival of the fittest would definitely be in effect amongst the survivors in the immediate vicinity of the blast. How do you go about imposing martial law to control the situation in an area full of radioactive fallout? It would just be crazy to send troops in to be exposed to that kind of mess. I really fear that there would be some places where we would simply have to write off any possible survivors for dead.

 

[ahurtt]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: ahurtt

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: ahurtt

Originally posted by: maluckey
For a couple of weeks, the economy would suffer, then it would rebound, and the United States would go total isolationist. All foreigners would likely be monitored if Residents, deported if not. Borders would be sealed. Martial law in California would be declared.

We would quickly find the country that allowed the nuke to be built and demand reparations for their lack of vigilance. A scapegoat would be needed, so if said country wasn't apologetic enough it would be destroyed in a way that would make the war in Afghanistan seem long and drawn out.

Further punitive strikes would likely follow. If a nuke was again used against it's interests, The United States might reply in kind.

For a couple of weeks? Underestimate much? haha 🙂 The state of California would not be under martial law. It would be a wasteland due to nuclear fallout. The entire state and possibly neighboring states would have to be completely and literally evacuated and quarantined as the pall of radioactive smoke and debris plumed into the air for hundreds of miles around. Hospitals would be overrun and people would be dying of radiation sickness in the streets. Disease and famine would ensue. It would be totally dog eat dog. . .food, crops, and water would be contaminated and poisoned with radiation. And fire. . .lots and lots of fire and smoke. It is likely that many survivors would have to be fenced into the affected areas and left to die with no infrastructure left operational to be able to mount rescue operations. Computers, cell phones, communication lines, radio towers, cars. . anything electronic all rendered useless. You want to revise that "couple of weeks" estimate yet? Just look at the ripples 9/11 caused and now magnify it about . . .I dunno. . .lets say 250 times?

Your fallout scenario is unrealistic and exaggerated for a yield on the order of 15-20KT.

Alright, maybe you are right. I forgot that part of the original post where it said a bomb the size of one of the ones used on Japan while I was typing up my response. I was imagining something on the order of a modern day nuclear device. However, I stand by my description of what the effects would be. . .just on a smaller more localized scale.

even a modern day 20 megaton device would not make that necessary.

Well since neither you nor I have ever personally witnessed the effects of a 20 Megaton nuclear explosion in a densely populated region, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this.

 

[maluckey]

They can also occur when people have a sense of impending doom and feel that they are in a life or death situation. Darwins law of survival of the fittest would definitely be in effect amongst the survivors in the immediate vicinity of the blast. How do you go about imposing martial law to control the situation in an area full of radioactive fallout? It would just be crazy to send troops in to be exposed to that kind of mess. I really fear that there would be some places where we would simply have to write off any possible survivors for dead.

Yet that is exactly what will be done in the case of a nuke. You cannot abondon the survivors. Troops will be sent to protect. They are trained to do it, and do it well.

 

[ahurtt]

Originally posted by: maluckey

They can also occur when people have a sense of impending doom and feel that they are in a life or death situation. Darwins law of survival of the fittest would definitely be in effect amongst the survivors in the immediate vicinity of the blast. How do you go about imposing martial law to control the situation in an area full of radioactive fallout? It would just be crazy to send troops in to be exposed to that kind of mess. I really fear that there would be some places where we would simply have to write off any possible survivors for dead.

Yet that is exactly what will be done in the case of a nuke. You cannot abondon the survivors. Troops will be sent to protect. They are trained to do it, and do it well.

If you say so, ok I guess. . .We will see. . .

How would they communicate and coordinate? Shouting?

 

[maluckey]

The same way that they do everyday pehaps? The military does not rely on modern amenities for combat situations. Radios run on batteries quite well. Tanks and military vehicles run fine regardless of nice roads to drive on.

 

[ahurtt]

Originally posted by: maluckey
The same way that they do everyday pehaps? The military does not rely on modern amenities for combat situations. Radios run on batteries quite well. Tanks and military vehicles run fine regardless of nice roads to drive on.

Uh yeah maybe the radios run on batteries but radios do not work in an area where an a-bomb has gone off recently. The following is part of what happens when an a-bomb explodes taken from here.

"At altitudes above the majority of the air, the x-rays ionize the upper air, moving large numbers of electrons. The moving electric charge causes a single wide-frequency radio pulse. The pulse is powerful enough so that most long metal objects would act as antennas, and generate high voltages when the pulse passes. These voltages and the associated high currents could destroy unshielded electronics and even many wires. There are no known biological effects of EMP except from failure of critical medical and transportation equipment. The ionized air also disrupts radio traffic that would normally bounce from the ionosphere.

One can shield ordinary radios and car ignition parts by wrapping them completely in aluminum foil, or any other form of Faraday cage. Of course radios cannot operate when shielded, because broadcast radio waves can't reach them."

 

[imported_Tango]

Financial markets collapse... all bonds-emitting US corporations declaring default. This would mean the end of the US as an economical superpower.