SESSION Vi 303 “ . This, of course, may be a more complicated problem than, let's say, you would have at Oak Ridge, you see, and that others might have. But your situation on Long Island would be dreadful because there would be millions of people trying to get cut there and now, of course, they couldn't get out but they would try to get out there because it’s the one place that they can go if they can't get across to the other side of town, U wonder—this may seem Jogical, but [think perhaps it isn't—if what we are trying to do is to focus on some of the things that should be done without really having perhaps an adequate discussion of what the problem is. ATTACK DAMAGE AND PROBLEMS OF POST-ATTACK RECOVERY EISENBUD: One of the difficulties that one always faces in a dise cussion of thie kind jie that there are almost an infinite number of permutations and combinations that could result in a nuclear war of any dimension and any pattern, and I thought it night be worthwhile to take a few minutes to discuss the kinds of situations that have been asoumed in the past in discussions of this kind, [think it would he unfair to call on anybody on short notice. tried to stick Dr, Dunham with it but he didn't exactly bite. So f would hike to run down, from at my own recollections,. what the assumptions were at the taat Joant Committee Hearinga on Nuclear War. The size of the attack wae on the order of 10,000 megatons, take off a factor of 2. Maybe It doesn't matter for purposes of discussion. A megaton ia a big number. AYRES: The attack in question involved 1,450 MT on the U.S, (Reference £6). EISENBUD: AYRES: What was the whole war? 1 think it was about twice as much, EISENBUD: 3,000, then? AYRES: Yes. EISENBUD: All right, we'll say 3, 000, I want to put the size of this into perspective by pointing out that 20 megatons of TNT—within a factor of 2— would be a block of TNT 10 feet high and 10 feet wide and ~