2 Comments

You probably realize that no one will lob a single nuke at Washington and call it a day. If Washington gets hit at all we are probably talking about a full exchange where at the very least a couple hundred warheads are flying.

So the main thing you are accomplishing by moving these 50 or so agencies to other cities is - besides making the administration less efficient - painting a big red cross hair on 50 or so additional cities. Under certain assumptions about enemy strategic goals and warhead count this may be worth it, but that is a nuanced discussion and not a slam dunk.

The administrative efficiency thing otoh. makes it a slam dunk. In the other direction.

Expand full comment
author

Thanks for engaging Marcel, and apologies for the quibble, but terrorists might very well hit Washington D.C. with a single nuke as suggested in the article (see the videos). Washington Is a VERY inviting target for any group wishing to do us harm. Given the concentration of important assets, it's hard to think of a more inviting target.

If nothing else, the concentration of assets leaves us wide open to crippling blackmail. If a group could make a credible nuclear threat they could disrupt the government for weeks without even having a bomb.

Terrorists did hit the Pentagon with a plane on 9/11, and were hoping to hit another target in Washington too. But somehow, we didn't seem to learn anything from that. More apologies, but um, you seem to have forgotten 9/11 too.

Expand full comment