Major cities most likely, esp Washington DC and New York. Any major military cities or holdungs known to the Enemy. Hawaii. Any military holdings outside the US like Guam and Guantanamo etc. No one wins a nuclear war. Thats the reason nukes are last resort only.
1 year ago
Last edited at 4:48AM on 3/26/2013
Many cities people are unaware of will be targets. Hope one is yours because it's fast. With out defense I would not worry about it. It's a no win situation. Bomb us, die slow painful deaths from fallout years from bombing.
1 year ago
Last edited at 8:39AM on 3/26/2013
Most of California, Florida, most of the eastern states, Hawaii, any place that has a major military base, any place that has missiles, the White house, Pentagon, and that would be just the start.nobody would win.
First strike targets are always the same: nuclear silos, military bases and boomers at sea. The target mix for second strike is then typically urban centers, power grid and ports. Rather than use nuclear weapons as offensive weapons of war, it has been the bedrock principle of our nuclear strategy to maintain them to deter an adversary's use of its nuclear weapons by maintaining the capability to absorb a nuclear attack, retaliate, and cause unacceptable damage to the attacker (second strike). Ensuring this capability has been the focus of U.S. nuclear weapons programs since the Soviet Union developed the capability to threaten the U.S. homeland directly. While the U.S. deterrent rested on its capability to "ride out" a first strike and still be able to inflict massive harm on its attacker, the United States also maintained several first-use missions for its arsenal. Starting in the late 1950s, the United States deployed thousands of tactical nuclear weapons to permit a so-called flexible response to a Soviet invasion of Europe. Given that many of the tactical weapons deployed were more powerful than the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, a tactical nuclear war would have killed millions. But the United States and other NATO members saw tactical nuclear weapons as the best way to offset Soviet conventional superiority in Europe and deter a Soviet invasion. America's threat to use nuclear weapons first to respond to non-nuclear threats against U.S. forces or allies has been a key element in providing "extended deterrence." So technically, we have a first use, but not first strike, capability. But Bush dismantled many of these forces, leaving only a few in Europe for flexible response. About 1000 warheads are required for a suitable deterrence. These can be in 7-8 subs and 20 B-2s, and our land-based silos could be reduced; however, about 220 tactical nucs are needed for deterrence of a conventional attack, thus a limit of 1200 warheads could be made. As long as the majority of these warheads could find their target, deterrence is assured.