Lets say your nation's enemy throws at you every nuke he got. but you have an ICBM ..

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

sdifox

No Lifer
Sep 30, 2005
96,815
16,129
126
Guys, guys, guys, keep it civil. This thread is made for arguing about which American city is the crappiest besides Detroit NOT arguing about whether the theoretical scenario is plausible.

Now you are just trying to stir up the non Americans! :D
 

Murloc

Diamond Member
Jun 24, 2008
5,382
65
91
the republic of Appenzell Innerrhoden

15'000 casualties, mostly right-wing herders who didn't allow women to vote until they were forced to do so by the federal government in 1990 thanks to a federal law promulgated in 1971, plus some cows.
No big loss. It's also in the northern part of switzerland and made of mountains, so it doesn't have much value for humans, and for nature it's not much damage because it's small.
 

Jumpem

Lifer
Sep 21, 2000
10,757
3
81
What did you do, run down a list of cities with the highest GDP in the US and decide those were best to nuke?

Nope. I go by big government nanny-state places. NYC is tops on my list. How much better those of us upstate would be without it.
 

IndyColtsFan

Lifer
Sep 22, 2007
33,655
687
126
Can the incoming nuke that I can't shoot down target a smaller area? Say, like a stadium? An NFL stadium? Perhaps one in Foxborough, MA?



:awe:
 
Last edited:

GagHalfrunt

Lifer
Apr 19, 2001
25,284
1,996
126
You are making a big assumption in that they would waste a nuke on Detroit.

Are you sure Detroit has not already been nuked?

I'd be pissed that there was only one city that needed to be sacrificed. At least half this country could disappear and we'd be better off.
 

Scotteq

Diamond Member
Apr 10, 2008
5,276
5
0
Kupreanof, Alaska


Why?


Population: 25, and therefore minimal impact on the tax and voter base.

2nd positive aspect? Canada is close, and downwind.
 
Last edited:

Terzo

Platinum Member
Dec 13, 2005
2,589
27
91
Nope. I go by big government nanny-state places. NYC is tops on my list. How much better those of us upstate would be without it.

Obviously I'm taking this too seriously, but we would lose so much. Broadway, UN headquarters, Juilliard, Statue of Liberty, Empire State Building, and a ton of television networks (okay, maybe that's a plus :D).

Of course, depending on the OP's definition of a major city we'd lose a lot regardless. I'd try to balance loss of life with detrimental effects on the country. No doubt it'd be a difficult task.

Kupreanof, Alaska


Why?


Population: 25, and therefore minimal impact on the tax and voter base.

2nd positive aspect? Canada is close, and downwind.

OP stipulates major city. I don't think Kupreanof would count as a city, much less a major one :D.
 

guyver01

Lifer
Sep 25, 2000
22,135
5
61
There is obviously only one REAL answer to this question.

Whatever city TridenT lives in.
 

guyver01

Lifer
Sep 25, 2000
22,135
5
61
He should move to Littleton, CO. 2 birds, 1 stone.


middlefinger.jpg
 

Gibsons

Lifer
Aug 14, 2001
12,530
35
91
LA. We'd lose most of the movie/porn/TV industry, but I can't think of a down side.
 

Mo0o

Lifer
Jul 31, 2001
24,227
3
76
Wait, we can destroy one state? Oh my gosh, really? A dream come true...


CALIFORNIA

Why?

California produces a lot of stuff the benefits the rest of the country: movies, music, food, wine, technology: silicon valley, google, apple, ebay etc. It has a <1 federal spend/tax ratio. Which means it pays more in federal taxes than it spends (something that can't be said about North Carolina).

What exactly dont you like about California that actually affects your everyday life?