This City in New York Is Apparently a High Priority Target in Nuclear War

A new "report" claiming the American cities most at risk of a nuclear attack put one city in the Empire State at the top of the list.

Security experts have been ruminating about the possibility of a nuclear war because of rising tensions with Russia, China and the Middle East. However, while they say it could be a possibility, because nothing in life is ever certain, they say the likelihood is extremely slim.

Even with Iran rattling its sabres, national security issues are doubtful a nuclear war is in the future.

Risk of Nuclear Threat

The Science and Security Board of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists is a little less optimistic about our current situation. In their update of the "Doomsday Clock," which reportedly counts down to "midnight" (humanity's destruction), they kept the time at 90 seconds to midnight.

This remains the closest the hands have ever been to doomsday in its 75-year history. Before Russian President Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine, the closest the clock ever came to midnight was 120 seconds.

The longest period of time between the dial and midnight was in 1991, where the clock was set 17 minutes to midnight after then-President George H.W. Bush and former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev agreed to nuclear arsenal reductions.

Understandably, it does feel like the world is the closest it's ever been to a third world war. And, of course, it's hard not to imagine one without wondering how this theoretical war would be fought.

And some media outlets are loving that. They are feasting on people's organic concerns for a multitude of reasons. Some crave the attention, while others are creating clickbait engaging in fear-mongering to cash in on people's growing insecurities.

That said, 24/7 WallSt issued a report that claims to have a list of the top 15 American cities most at-risk of being targeted in a nuclear disaster.

New York Is #2

This ranking lays out the 15 high-priority targets our adversaries would target in a theoretical nuclear war. Should these cities be attacked, they say it would devastate America either on the war front, financial front, or emotional front.

Of course, the outlet also had to add some plausibility to their list and claimed Russia has nearly 6,000 nuclear warheads that are capable of reaching the United States in 30 minutes. The report adds China has about 500 of these missiles already directed at America.

The report adds China has about 500 of these missiles already directed at America.

And, apparently, if these countries decide to literally cause the end of the world, the report claims New York City would be on the top of their target lists. In fact, the Big Apple was only outdone by Washington, D.C., the nation's capital.

Why New York?

According to the report, the "experts" they spoke to claim NYC has the second-highest risk of being targeted in a nuclear attack. As for why the Big Apple has an apparent target on its back, it's because its among the most densely populated metro areas in the country, in addition to being America's largest metro economy.

That makes NYC the "perfect" civilian target.

New York is home to roughly 10 million people, so a nuclear attack would trigger a mass casualty event. The report added NYC is the second worst for evacuations, so in the unlikely event the city is attacked, it would result in about 1.7 million deaths and 3.1 million injuries.

In short: Attacking NYC would be mostly symbolic with the added bonus of causing mass casualties.

The report also stated the likelihood of NYC being attacked was influenced from data by a Columbia University professor. The research relied on data by Dr. Irwin Redlener, who teaches at the university’s Mailman School of Public Health.

Additionally, the list was also influenced by Stephen Schwartz, who wrote the book “Atomic Audit: The Costs and Consequences of US Nuclear Weapons Since 1940.”

It appears no government official or military personnel was consulted when making this list. Considering these are the people who would probably have the most authority in calculating the likelihood of this list becoming reality, you shouldn't put too much stock or concern into the report.

Will There Be Nuclear War?

I am an optimist and I am fairly certain that a nuclear war isn't in the cards. Ever.

Too many nations now have nuclear-capable weapons and if one country uses theirs to attack another, it'll trigger a chain of events no one wants to see happen.

For example, if Russia decides to go after Poland, all NATO countries will direct their arsenals at Mr. Putin. Same goes for if the United States decides to teach Kim Jong un in North Korea a lesson - his allies would fire their weapons at us.

Nuclear experts are not convinced the world is the closest it's ever been to a nuclear holocaust.

Expert Pavel Podvig, a physicist trained at the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology that now works on the Russian nuclear arsenal, wrote a recent op-ed for the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists why he thinks the Doomsday Clock should move farther away from midnight this year.

Read More: Central New York Prison Named "Most Problematic" in State

He reasoned that Russia backed down from making nuclear threats after having to answer to China and India's "concerns" about Putin's remarks. That seemingly sent a message to Russia that their allies are unwilling to stand by them should they launch the first attack.

In short, if a world leader decides to launch a nuclear missile, they will literally signal the end of the earth and no one wants to go first. The consequences, at the moment, significantly outweigh the benefits of being the aggressor.

So, no, kids these days will not have to do those "duck and cover" drills that were on the rage during the Cold War.

Also, a flash animation from the early 2000's literally predicted how a nuclear war would go down on planet earth, like Nostradamus. While I'd love to embed the video, its language doesn't exactly align with Townsquare Media's rules of posting, so I'll just hyperlink it instead and hope you enjoy the nostalgia.

In short, it's unlikely any country will fire off their nuclear missiles unless they are hellbent on a mutually-assured destruction.

And while the globe has some pretty nutty people in positions of power, they probably enjoy the way things currently are and would rather not trade it all for a nuclear winter and, you know, killing all life on the planet.

You can read 24/7 WallSt's full report HERE.

Get our free mobile app