15 megaton H-Bomb explodes in Manhatten

In 1952 or so the US test exploded H-devices. One of them was called MIKE. It was a 15 megaton explosion with a four mile fireball. LIFE had an article on the test and an artist's conception of the fireball on Manhatten. What if a 15 megaton explodes on 49th street and 5th avenue son ground. What happens next. How big is the devestation. ST Patrick's Cathedral is on 5th and nearby is Rockefeller Center. Trump Tower is north of the Church. How Bad would the damage be?
 
If the US isn't careful and the rest of the world for that matter, this is a distinct possibility. There are over 200 "briefcase" bombs missing out of the old Soveiet Union arsenal. Don't be surprised if one of those turns up in DC, NY or LA. However, all the coastal cities have heavy monitoring for radiological devices, since that is the way its expected those devices might make their way into the US. There are response teams that have an estimated 30 minute response time to the detection of a radiological device. In other words, within 30 minutes they are supposed to be rolling towards the threat. That still might not be enough. Its only a matter of time now.

Torqumada
 
Here's a link to a PBS site Nuclear Blast Damage which has damage radius data for a 1mt & a 25mt thermonuclear explosion - http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/bomb/sfeature/mapablast.html . Sorry there's no 15mt data, so I guess you'll have to use your imagination a bit.

As for a terrorist 15mt nuclear explosion anywhere, let lone in NYC - it's completely impossible. We're talking about an advanced H-Bomb here. Not even India, a few years ago, could get theirs to work & we're talking about a nation state here which could design & build one (& get several nuclear bombs to explode as desired) with all of the resources & facilities avaliable.
 
DMA said:
Here's a link to a PBS site Nuclear Blast Damage which has damage radius data for a 1mt & a 25mt thermonuclear explosion - http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/bomb/sfeature/mapablast.html . Sorry there's no 15mt data, so I guess you'll have to use your imagination a bit.

As for a terrorist 15mt nuclear explosion anywhere, let lone in NYC - it's completely impossible. We're talking about an advanced H-Bomb here. Not even India, a few years ago, could get theirs to work & we're talking about a nation state here which could design & build one (& get several nuclear bombs to explode as desired) with all of the resources & facilities avaliable.

I am talking about a radiological device in general, not a thermonucelar device specifically. If we are talking the birefcase bombs, the yield is about 1 kiloton with expected fatalities of 100,000 people, depending upon the population density of the target, due to blast damage, heat, secondary fires and radiation.

Torqumada
 
Torqumada said:
I am talking about a radiological device in general, not a thermonucelar device specifically. If we are talking the birefcase bombs, the yield is about 1 kiloton with expected fatalities of 100,000 people, depending upon the population density of the target, due to blast damage, heat, secondary fires and radiation.

Torqumada

Well, to begin with, I'm not a supporter of the terrorist nuke theory. So I'll state my position for all & sundry up front here & now. There are just far too many technologies & resources that are required to build any nuke, let alone a hi-tech suitcase Bomb which you're referring to. Besides, terrorists don't have ready access to such a Bomb as there are only few countries (maybe 3?) which have the suitcase Bomb in the first place.

Anyway, leaving my objections aside on this issue of a terrorist nuke, now a 1kt is not going to cause 100 000 casualities unless it was detonated in a sports stadium filled with a 100 000 people. I say this because the Hiroshima Bomb, which was rated at around 20kt give or take, killed about 66 000 whilst the overall casuality rate was about 135,000. So we're not far from the figure which you've suggested whilst an entire city, for all intents & purposes, was destroyed with a Bomb of 20kts.

In comparision, a 1kt Bomb, will likely destroy a few city blocks & that's it. Furthermore, while we're at it, the constuction of a modern western city is a lot more solid than that of Hiroshima so, as a result, I wouldn't expect overly too much damage elsewhere other than at the location of the explosion. The resulting casualities would be more like 10 000 overall about half of which would be deaths. Longer term radioactive effects will slowly increase casualities due to cancers etc, I'll grant you, & the number will probably double. Yet such rates are not really predictable as a lot of variables can cause cancer.

Importantly, however, you are not going to get 100 000 deaths. It'll be more like 5 000, which is needless to say 5 000 too many. Nonetheless, this is all theoretical anyway as I don't believe in the terrorist nuke in the first place.
 

Proctol

Banned
A man who really believes he's on a mission from God, "Deus Dixit", is the most dangerous thing on Earth: he will wait years, he will harbour, he will scheme endlessly, he will persevere, he will never give up, he will endure unbelievable suffering & privation before unleashing himself on his mission. Witness Belushi in the "Blues Brothers"! The terrorists today also believe themselves to be on "Deus Dixit" missions: the odds of them letting off a radiological device or some other type of WMD, within the next 10 years let alone the next century, has got to be 100%.
 
I may get in trouble about this, but I know for a fact you are wrong. There are radiological devices in the hands of terrorists. ITs not specualtion, its fact. The scare the US went through in December of 2003, when the threat level was raised was not due to the fact it was a major holiday. It was due to a credible threat by a radiological device. That plan was thwarted. The government doesn't tout the fact so not to panic the general public. Now, the devices that terrorists do have access to are dirty bombs and the smaller Soveit Union birefcase bombs. then 100,000 casultiy rate is based upon the statements from former Russian National Security Adviser Aleksandr Lebed. Initialy, it was though only 100 of those bombs were missing as of 1997, investigations have found that over 200 are missing (this is as of Feb 2004). Al-qaeda doesn't need to build their bombs. They are/have buying/bought them.

As for the casulties, that is taking in all the effects of a nulcear weapon: Heat, blast, fire, radiation, EMP. Some of this will be mitiaged by building strength, weather etc.. However, these bombs can have an effective 100% death from Radiation (1350 rems) alone at distances of 3000+meters. That is 2.5 miles. How many people can you fit into 2.5 miles in New YorK City? 100,000? A million? 2 million? Have someone set one of these off in say the Emprie state building and that gives you 20,000-30,000 confirmed dead right there. Some people won't get the radiation, but they may get taken out in the blast, heat pulse, secondary fires, or dying from the effects of the EMP. IT would be a major disaster and depending upon the fallout and the effect of a ground burts much of NYC could be uninabitable for many years.

See this website for publically accessible material: http://www.calguard.ca.gov/ia/Nukes/Suitcase Bombs and Loose Nukes.htm

Torqumada
 
Well God isn't going to miraculously have a nuke appear for some nutcase religious freak terrorist to explode. God, just like everyone else, has to abide by the laws of nuclear physics. Anything else is Tom Clancy & Hollywood.

There are basic facts of nuclear science which must be adherred to. Now I made various comments on a another thread some time ago on this topic & they're as relevant then as now. Contrary to popular myth, nukes are about the hardest thing on Earth to build. Not only do you need U-235 or Platonium, which needs to be weapons grade to top it off (in other words over 90% pure), you also need to figure out which way you're going to go in nuke design. So you have your pick - U-235 or Platonium. I'm not even going to talk about a terrorist H-Bomb as it's even far beyond the abilities of even several nuclear capable states to build successfully.

Now the U-235 bomb requires more than merely slaming together two pieces of weapons grade U-235. This first part will be impossible anyway for terrorists to get because it's very rare & only a few countries have it. Using reactor grade U-235 isn't going to give you critical mass let alone a dangerous reaction, as the common reactor grade U-235 is only about 30% pure. Considering we're talking about 5kg of U-235, I'd highly doubt that a runaway reaction will even take place. But there's much more to the U-235 bomb than just the U-235. You need two isotops of lithium which are only used for one thing - that's getting the critical mass to take place for the explosion. Well if you think getting U-235 difficult to get there's no chance you'll get these isotops.

The Plutonium bomb can be easier, as you don't need the two isotops of lithium, but then again you still need 5kg of weapons grade plutonmium. Guess what? That's even harder to get than weapons grade U-235. So you're stuck even before you start. And this is besides the fact that you need the all important atomic triggers in order to get the exact imposion that is required in order to have the Plutonium go critical mass & thus the explosion. Well these atomic triggers are used for basically one thing - a Plutonium bomb. Like everything else required for a nuke, they don't drop off the back of a truck, but a highly guarded. In other words, the terrorists won't be getting the triggers either.

The only real choice for a terrorist is to steal a nuke. Forget it. The Bomb business is the most dangerous one on planet Earth & is taken deadly seriously. Anyone trying to steal one will, either die in the attempt, or will be hunted down & killed even if, and it's one huge IF, they manage to steal one. And this is besides the point that everyone's Bombs have some sort of security system on them requiring the necessary code(s). Believe me, all this has been gone into by the powers that be & every angle has been covered.

The only realistic option for terrorists is the dirty bomb. That is they use industrial nuclear waste & explode it using a conventional device, on top of a tall building, where the wind carries the nuclear waste as fallout over a city. The only hassle is, thanks to numberous studies, it has been found that this idea not very effective. It's been calculated that somewhere between 1 000 - 10 000 people might get cancer as a result of such a dirty bomb, but this is in the long term casuality region & it doesn't have the desired effect of a high number of deaths. Having said that, there would be the perceived threat, now obviously known by the public, that they are under nuclear attack. And it's this perceived threat, which will have a much more impact upon countries, than the actual threat from terrorist nuclear attack. But, in reality, little has changed other than the terrorists have tried a different apporach. In the aftermath, however, of such an attack by a dirty bomb, you can expect that all nuclear waste, in future, would be guarded as highly as if they were Bombs.
 

Proctol

Banned
WI they buy or are actually given a functioning nuke/micro-nuke by North Korea, Iran, Pakistan, China, Indians, French, disgruntled Russians, Ukranians or even Israelis or Americans (cf Tommy Lee Jones in "Under Siege")?
 
Torqumada said:
I may get in trouble about this, but I know for a fact you are wrong. There are radiological devices in the hands of terrorists. ITs not specualtion, its fact. The scare the US went through in December of 2003, when the threat level was raised was not due to the fact it was a major holiday. It was due to a credible threat by a radiological device. That plan was thwarted. The government doesn't tout the fact so not to panic the general public. Now, the devices that terrorists do have access to are dirty bombs and the smaller Soveit Union birefcase bombs. then 100,000 casultiy rate is based upon the statements from former Russian National Security Adviser Aleksandr Lebed. Initialy, it was though only 100 of those bombs were missing as of 1997, investigations have found that over 200 are missing (this is as of Feb 2004). Al-qaeda doesn't need to build their bombs. They are/have buying/bought them.

As for the casulties, that is taking in all the effects of a nulcear weapon: Heat, blast, fire, radiation, EMP. Some of this will be mitiaged by building strength, weather etc.. However, these bombs can have an effective 100% death from Radiation (1350 rems) alone at distances of 3000+meters. That is 2.5 miles. How many people can you fit into 2.5 miles in New YorK City? 100,000? A million? 2 million? Have someone set one of these off in say the Emprie state building and that gives you 20,000-30,000 confirmed dead right there. Some people won't get the radiation, but they may get taken out in the blast, heat pulse, secondary fires, or dying from the effects of the EMP. IT would be a major disaster and depending upon the fallout and the effect of a ground burts much of NYC could be uninabitable for many years.

See this website for publically accessible material: http://www.calguard.ca.gov/ia/Nukes/Suitcase Bombs and Loose Nukes.htm

Torqumada

I'm not quite sure how to respond to all of this other than to treat it as Hollywood rubbish. As a result, I completely reject it as such. Nuclear science is the reality here, not Tom Clancy. Terrorists do not have any nuke. The only scenario I would accept is the dirty bomb scenario, which is something to be concerned about. But a dirty bomb is a far cry from a nuke. There is no-where near the explosion of a nuke as there isn't any nuclear explosion. Instead, it's cheap way of developing a terror weapon which confusingly includes the word "nuclear". In actual effect, however, it's a means to terrify a population & nothing more. Anything else, especially the sale of operational nuclear weapons to anyone I'm not prepared to believe. If AQ did have an operational Bomb they would have blown up someone by now. They don't because, unlike scared members of the public, the reality is that responsible governments don't do such things in relation to nuclear weapons because every government understands the long term ramifications. This is besides the fact that the terrorist group, who is sold such a weapon, may use the very same weapon against the country who sold it to them.

Weapons damage - the 1 ktn nuke data you supplied I reject completely your claim. The 1 ktn device was originally designed as a demotion charge. In other words it was designed to destroy a brigde, tunnel or some similar structure instead of using a company of engineers & tons of explosive to do the same job. Now obviously the suitcase Bomb can be used for nefarious purposes, but it won't cause the damage which you claim. The information I have on Horishima is irrefutable. See this link for a good overview of the two Bombs drop on Japan in the only real use on actual living cities http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/abomb/mpmenu.htm . As I said, both devices were in the 20ktn range &, interestingly in Nagasaki, which was hit with the Plutonium Bomb, the overall casuality rate is 64,000, which incidentally was even lower than your 100 000 figure for a 1ktn Bomb!
 
DMA, they have them. They did steal or buy them. We have known these bombs are missing since 1997. The Russians have known as far back as 91 that there were problems in accounting for all of their nuclear weapons. Its not a Tom Clancy story. Its the cold hard truth. Now, I agree that a dirty bomb is much more likely, but there are people in this world who are in charge nuclear mombs that aren't the authorised members of nation-states. You can believe that they aren't there. I know different. When someone sets one off in a population center you'll know the truth, just like I do and wish I didn't. I won't even have to come back here and say I told you so, becasue the cost of winning that argument will be way too much.

Edit: You posted as I posted this reply. You will notice that earlier I have made a differentiation between a radiological device and a nuclear bomb.
Torqumada
 
Proctol said:
WI they buy or are actually given a functioning nuke/micro-nuke by North Korea, Iran, Pakistan, China, Indians, French, disgruntled Russians, Ukranians or even Israelis or Americans (cf Tommy Lee Jones in "Under Siege")?

Well this is, again, a disservice by Hollywood. Now I'll take the minni-nuke first. Only a few countries are know to have them - the USA & Russia (USSR). China might have a couple because they stole the relevant plans from the USA back in the 1990s. The main thing with minni-nukes is that they are at the very hi-tech end of the nulcear spectrum. Not only is everything reduced in size, but the technology must be there to also reduce the yield of the explosion. None of this is simple as nukes go. So other than the three countries I just mentioned, only the UK & France would have the required technology knowhow, but as far as I know, they've never built one (I could be wrong I must stress to be fair). The other countries don't have the technology, although Israel might.

Now the selling of a regular nuke part - out of the list I would only be prepared to think that it might be North Korea. Now this is a big might , mind you, as at present they'd only have a handful of nukes at best & they'd won't to hold onto them for a while just in case they need them. Would NK, at a future date sell one? Well, again, I'd highly doubt it as even Uncle Kim isn't that crazy. You see there's always the risk that the thing might be found in transit. Well that won't go down well with the countries of the world. Then there's the fact that, if it is exploded, as terrible as that idea is, the originator of the Bomb will be discovered from the radioactive "signature" which will remain. So say NYC does suffer from such an explosion (which I reject BTW) - guess what? Within 12 hours the military knows where the Bomb came from. I'll leave you to imagine what life in North Korea will be like after the place has been turned into a radioactive waste land when America takes its revenge.

But much of this stuff, that I'm discussing, isn't anything overly new & can be accessed at a respectable & trustworthy internet source at the Federation of American Scientists website @ http://www.fas.org/nuke/index.html
 
Torqumada said:
DMA, they have them. They did steal or buy them. We have known these bombs are missing since 1997. The Russians have known as far back as 91 that there were problems in accounting for all of their nuclear weapons. Its not a Tom Clancy story. Its the cold hard truth. Now, I agree that a dirty bomb is much more likely, but there are people in this world who are in charge nuclear mombs that aren't the authorised members of nation-states. You can believe that they aren't there. I know different. When someone sets one off in a population center you'll know the truth, just like I do and wish I didn't. I won't even have to come back here and say I told you so, becasue the cost of winning that argument will be way too much.

Edit: You posted as I posted this reply. You will notice that earlier I have made a differentiation between a radiological device and a nuclear bomb.
Torqumada

Well the figures & explosive yield that you've connected with this "radiological device", & the fact that the suitcase Bomb is mentioned, all appears like a small nuclear device, especially when you go on about a 1ktn yield. So what exactly are you meaning when you say a "radiological device"? Do you mean the "dirty bomb", which won't cause the damage & casualities, or are you going on about the EMP Bomb(?) which theoretically, will have the same effect as a small nuclear explosion in regards to the EMP release but doesn't have the damage & radiation caused by a nuclear explosion.

Now I had quick look at the site you gave http://www.calguard.ca.gov/ia/Nukes/Suitcase Bombs and Loose Nukes.htm & it seems to be about the claims of one Russian scientist. The terrorist claims I'm completely sceptical of, although I will agree about the fact that the suitcase Bomb does exist. Importantly, the article starts by saying "It has been alleged that weapons were actually manufactured by the former Soviet Union for use by its intelligence services..." I draw your attention to the word "alleged". Although, as I said, I'll accept the part about the suitcase Bomb, I don't about the terrorist part. Basically everything has been "alleged" at one point or other lately about anything. And much of this "alleging" takes place on the internet.

So if I believe everything I've read on the internet, there are aliens running around naked everywhere, the Anti-Christ is running the world, Jesus is coming back next Sunday morning GMT, & terrorists have nuclear weapons by the truckload & they're in a race to blow everyone up before Jesus arrives next week. Now, about the only thing I'll accept out of all this crap, is that these suitcase Bombs exist - I don't believe anything thing else. As such, I'm not at all convinced that any terrorist group can or will get their hands on one basic nuke, let along a suuitcase one, for a whole stack of reasons, some of which I've mentioned in previous postings.
 
Read it closer DMA. Other researchers have proven it as well as US intelligence. I don't have full 100% confidence in the US intelligence network, but in this I do. I cannot provide you with the additional information that I have access to, since its not available to the general public. You won't find it on the web. You won't find it in the Wall Street Journal on the New Your Times. I felt the same way as you did, until February of this year. Then my eyes were opened. I wish I could go back to being ignorant, but I can't.

Torqumada
 
Torqumada said:
Read it closer DMA. Other researchers have proven it as well as US intelligence. I don't have full 100% confidence in the US intelligence network, but in this I do. I cannot provide you with the additional information that I have access to, since its not available to the general public. You won't find it on the web. You won't find it in the Wall Street Journal on the New Your Times. I felt the same way as you did, until February of this year. Then my eyes were opened. I wish I could go back to being ignorant, but I can't.

Torqumada


I'm NOT rejecting the fact that the suitcase nuke doesn't exist. As I said, both Russia (USSR) & the USA HAVE them. China probably does too. It's possible the UK, France & Isreal have at least the technology to build them if they haven't already. What I completely reject is the claim that terrorists have any nuclear weapon, let alone a suitcase one.

This theory of terrorist nukes all depends upon the "alleged" (here we go again another "alleged" claim) that Russia sometime in the 1990s "lost" some nukes. Now connected with the loss of these nukes has been, wait for it, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, North Korea & lately Al Q. In other words - the usual suspects. Of course, the official response from Russia is that there are NO missing nukes. So we have a lot of "alleged" claims being made, without any proof whatsoever, wherein the usual suspects, claimed by the pro-Bush groups, continue to be bashed with unsubstantiated claims that these countries & groups have nukes. Well, as the world has seen with Iraq, they had no WMDs, let alone nukes. And now Iran is being "alleged" to have nukes, which they reject.

Only Pakistan, out of the list, is KNOWN to have any & that country to acting responsible with these weapons. This leaves North Korea, who isn't hidding the fact that they MIGHT have a couple, but this has NOT been proven one way or the other. Lastly there's Al Q. Considering Al Q. is enemy number one, all sorts of claims are being made against them. But, like with Iraq, there isn't any proof whatsoever that they have any. And as I said earlier, for a whole stack of reasons, no one is going to give a terrorist group a nuke. It's, as I said earlier, all about perception, whilst the reality is something else. But that doesn't stop people believing anything & everything, especially the wild & irresponsible claims being made, which are total crap.
 
DMA said:
What I completely reject is the claim that terrorists have any nuclear weapon, let alone a suitcase one. It's, as I said earlier, all about perception, whilst the reality is something else. But that doesn't stop people believing anything & everything, especially the wild & irresponsible claims being made, which are total crap.

DMA, you can be smug in your certainly all you want. Its a fact. I know the people that have seen the evidence first had. I know the people that work on the teams that deal with chemical, biological and radiological weapons. Here in the US, these teams operate without publicity. The people on these temas are not politicians with an agenda or appointees. They are all highly trained, intelligent proefessionals. Though I am an advocate for full governmental disclosure, except in cases of national secuirty, after the training that I have received, I can understand why . Revealing to the public that there are people with an axe to grind against the US INSIDE the Continental US that possess the ability and means to develop and use chemical and biological weapons and also posess a radiological device, more than likely a dirty bomb, but possibly one of the missing briefcase bombs. IT is the job of these teams to find, destroy and clean up sites that these devices are loacted at, with as little public fanfare as possible. So please, don't call it a fantasy or Hollywood. You can sit there in Australia, in relative safety. The US is Target #1 right now ,rightly or wrongly. Chances are no one is going to come to Australia and attempt a terrorisitc attack at this time. So be smug in you knowledge and safety.

Why hasn't ther been an attack yet? The most recent one was thwarted. That was December of 2003. I have not been told when or where that event took place. One of the reason these guys on these teams think there hasn't been a radiological attack in the US to date, is the strict control and monitoring of radioactive material in the US. That is one thing the US hadn't slacked on, in terms of National security over the years, since it was feared the Soviet Union could use these kinds of weapons against us. There are monitoring stations in all major ports of entry, as well as sattelite surveillance that can detect radiation from above a minimal threshhold. I am not sure what that threshold is, but since the minimum amount of plutonium you need for a nuclear explosion is 13kg or so, it might be based on that. If someone does arrive with one of those, there is a team of people heading their way. Now, the only way around these monitoring stations is through heavy shielding of the bomb by lead and lots of it apparently. It is felt that the people who have these devices are having a hard time shielding their weapons for transport. Once they overcome that problem, its only a matter of time. It WILL happen. Its a certainty. The only question is when and where. As I have said before, I won't come here to say "I told you so". It is much too tragic a situation to claim a victory.

Torqumada

Edit: Sorry DMA, I am not trying to take your words out of context. The quoting system didn't act the way I thought it would. I am not very good at using it.
 
Last edited:
I need to clear up an error I made earlier. I was juggling figures in my head regarding blast areas and radiation. After I wrote them down, something was nagging at me to recheck my figures and I have. I apologise for my error.

A 1kt nuclear explosion will produce the following effects: The blast radius would be 140 meters. 50% of the people in the blast area would die instantly. 50% of the people out to a radius of 800m would die from ionizing radiation. 50% of the people out to a radius of 370m would die from thermal burns.

Now the resident population of New Yourk City is a little over 8 million of the 2000 census. It is my understanding that another 2 million or so come into NYC for work on a daily basis, so this would give us a population of 10 million on a normal weekday. NYC has an area of 831 sqaure KM. Now, if everyone were equally distributed over that area, it would give us a population density of 12,033 people per sqaure kiliometer 12 people per square meter. (The population isn't equally distributed of course, but it can make my point). A blast radius of 140m gives us an area of 61,544 meters. There would be approximately 738,528 people in that area. 50% of them would die from the blast. That would mean the blast alone could kill 369,264 people. That is more than the 100,000 estimated by the Russians. Some of that will be mitaged by building construction and coverage, but that is still a large death toll for such a small nucelar device. Now we have an ionizing radiation radius of 800m. That gives us an area of little over 640,000 meters squared. That gives us a possible population of 7,680,037 people. This could give us a possible death toll of 3,470,754 due the effects of radiation alone. I subtracted out those who would die in the inital blast. Now in an area of 429866 meters sqaure you have 50% casulties due to thermal burns. That area could have up to 5,158,392 people in it. This could give you a death toll from burns of approximately 2,579,196. Now, some the majority of these deaths would actually have all 3 happening to them at the same time. People just don't get hit by one of the 3, but all 3 at the same time. Also, these are crude calculations, since I am only using 2 dimensional calculations and it doesn't take into effect NYC 3d skyline. Some of those office buildings have tens of thousands of people in them. Set a bomb off near their base and the whole thing can come crashing down like the Two Towers did. These are also worst case scenario calculations based on optimal conditions. Chances are they will be much less, but still 100,000 is possible.

Here is the website I used to check my calculations: http://www.fas.org/nuke/intro/nuke/effects.htm

Torqumada
 
Sorry, DMA, I wouldn't trust that site much. It says it doesn't take into account weather or topography in its calculations, and both, especially the latter, influence the areas affected by the blast.
 
What happens? Millions die. The UN is gone. The World's economy goes bust. And America is no longer a good place to live. Quite simply, New York is america. Heck, New York is the capitol of the world (I know that offends some foreigners, but it's true)
 
Top