That would depend entirely upon several factors, such as; from where the missile was launched, what it's range was, the reason for the miss, etc. With the information (or lack of) information you have provided, the only answer that can be made is, 'somewhere other than Washington DC'.
I think its MOAB(Mother Of All Bombs)........ The most destructive missile would be the peace maker missile carried 12 nuclear warheads.
Well, nuclear war. Both countries would likely be destroyed by missile and nuclear weapons. They do host the world's first and second largest nuclear arsenals (to many people's surprises, Russia is ahead of the US. In fact, theres is almost twice the size of Americas). I doubt a soldier would even touch either countries land.
A nuclear missile launched from Cuba could reach Saginaw, Michigan, in approximately 10 to 15 minutes, depending on the specific type of missile and its trajectory. The distance from Cuba to Saginaw is about 1,100 miles, and modern intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) travel at speeds exceeding 3,000 miles per hour. Therefore, the time frame for such a missile to cover that distance would be relatively short.
No one would be able to ask this question, or systems such as this wouldn't exist to ask the question.
there never was a blockade of cuba, if there was a blockade it would probably started a nuclear war.
The minimum velocity of the missile would depend on the time it takes for the missile to reach the target. If the missile travels 100 meters in 1 second, then the minimum velocity would be 100 m/s.
North Korea would first launch a Nuclear Missile at South Korea, due to there past arguments. This would prompt the U.S to launch a missile, causing a nuclear war between communists and democracies.
Yes, a nuclear missile has the potential to cause massive destruction and loss of life, significantly impacting a country's infrastructure, economy, and society. The immediate effects of a nuclear explosion include a powerful blast, intense heat, and radiation, which can devastate cities and contaminate large areas. However, the extent of destruction also depends on the missile's yield, the target location, and the country's preparedness for such an event. Ultimately, while a single missile could severely damage a nation, completely "destroying" a country would require multiple strikes and would also lead to catastrophic global consequences.
america
It depends on the size of the Nuclear device, anywhere from 5 square miles and up
I think its MOAB(Mother Of All Bombs)........ The most destructive missile would be the peace maker missile carried 12 nuclear warheads.
You likely mean to limitation and disarmament of nuclear weapons. This would be the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
A nuclear war, which would result in a nuclear winter and the end of most if not all of life on Earth.
Agni-5 7500km & with nuclear warhead it would be 5500 km
Well, nuclear war. Both countries would likely be destroyed by missile and nuclear weapons. They do host the world's first and second largest nuclear arsenals (to many people's surprises, Russia is ahead of the US. In fact, theres is almost twice the size of Americas). I doubt a soldier would even touch either countries land.
No, and saying it is would be an asinine and absurd statement. A cruise missile is a guided precision weapons system, intended to deliver a warhead to a target.
In a nuclear missile attack, the consequences are catastrophic with widespread destruction and loss of life. There are no winners in a nuclear war as the use of such weapons would have devastating effects on both sides involved. It would result in massive loss of life, environmental destruction, and long-term consequences for the entire planet.