Fark.com's live thread during the Sept. 11 attacks

Re:Fark.com's live thread during the Sept. 11 attacks by nordsieck on Sunday September 11, 2022 @07:30AM (#32798752)

> Quite a few more died in the end than a nuke could manage.

Are you including the ensuing occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq?

Even then, I think you're seriously underestimating the number of casualties a relatively low yield nuke (in the context of modern strategic weapons) would produce if it hit a city like New York.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Fark.com's live thread during the Sept. 11 attacks by Grimburger on Sunday September 11, 2022 @07:51AM (#32798848)

Yes that was the implication. Depends who you ask and talking about it at the time was full of controversy, but I have seen half a million excess deaths in the end for Iraq and maybe half that for Afghanistan?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Fark.com's live thread during the Sept. 11 attacks by ouid on Sunday September 11, 2022 @10:20AM (#32799832)

I think you mightbe underestimating either the population density of a major city or the kill everything radius of a thermonuclear weapon.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Fark.com's live thread during the Sept. 11 attacks by solveit on Sunday September 11, 2022 @01:56PM (#32801736)

And the aftermath of a nuclear war. If they're going to count the people who died after the war proper, they should count them in both scenarios.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Fark.com's live thread during the Sept. 11 attacks by macksd on Sunday September 11, 2022 @10:34AM (#32799945)

Would a nuke not have also led to wars like that?

[ Parent | on HN ]