Solomon Lurke
My Boys Dey Be Lurkin...
First thing I said as well
New Golden Dome Missile Defense System will highly prioritize protection of a few major cities. The rest, best of luck.
- Thread starter IIVI
- Start date
Secure Da Bag
Veteran
And probably even if it was it would be less useful.
Richard Glidewell
Yall done tore all the bottom of ya shoes w/me!!!
The actual targets cities would be mostly shyt you never heard of because that's how strategy works. Disperse your strength so it doesn't all get destroyed at once. This is some bullshyt just like that lame ass space force shyt
Exactly. You'd only need it to protect like 10 cities max. Still fukking stupid
Strategic places are rarely in big cities. For example, the gulf coast produces plenty of ships, processes oil, and has naval air bases. The population isn’t huge but it’s definitely a target.
Huntsville, the Virginia Coast, and nuclear plants would also be on the list.
Theoretically speaking, nuking somewhere like NYC would be a waste. Just take out the bridges and tunnels and are trapped. If you blow them people would become trapped on their individual islands.
Map shows safest US states to live during nuclear war
Newsweek's new map is based on a simulated attack on U.S. silos.
www.newsweek.com
But my small city has a company that has a slogan "Supermarket to the World". The WORLD, Savvir
nyc would be a waste?
cities are economic engines with massive brain-trusts especially in nyc. theres a reason israel took out all the neighborhoods where academics resided in gaza and destroyed all universities and academic institutions. you need the people who can out think the enemy and strategize to win a conflict and those who can impart thst knowledge to others.
Good bye south and Midwest.
IIVI
Superstar
A lot of people are underestimating the importance of rural areas. The farm belt is a high-priority target for an enemy.
A few nukes would obliterate and poison food supply for decades if they hit our nation’s farm belt. A single firestorm alone would be wild and spread. It took decades to scale up the farm belt to supply 300 million Americans and having to start over from scratch would be insane. If that region gets wiped out it’s only a matter of time the major cities start dying out.
Major cities don’t have a complete and sustainable food supply. Major California cities don’t grow their own food we get it from out of state or the rural regions of California. I didn’t see a single farm when I went to NYC. It’s like having a high-performance car with no wheels.
A few nukes would obliterate and poison food supply for decades if they hit our nation’s farm belt. A single firestorm alone would be wild and spread. It took decades to scale up the farm belt to supply 300 million Americans and having to start over from scratch would be insane. If that region gets wiped out it’s only a matter of time the major cities start dying out.
Major cities don’t have a complete and sustainable food supply. Major California cities don’t grow their own food we get it from out of state or the rural regions of California. I didn’t see a single farm when I went to NYC. It’s like having a high-performance car with no wheels.
Last edited:
Map shows safest US states to live during nuclear war
Newsweek's new map is based on a simulated attack on U.S. silos.
This is with the understanding that their unclear armament would be used to only attack our US silo fields. Not if our cities were attacked too. If you placed a couple of silos in South Dakota, you'd protect them.
Other than that, the east coast from Boston to DC would be protected by a couple sites. Then a few strategically placed in California, Texas Triangle, SoCal, NorCal, Northern Indiana or Western Michigan (to protect the Chicago/Great Lakes) and Western PA.
Outside of that, there isn't enough density to justify it. So Colorado, Nevada, Missouri, Oklahoma, North TX, Arizona, New Mexico, Tennessee, Kentucky, Maine, and other's are fukked probably.