Virus spreads.

Roman revival… most anything with arches, pillars, ashlar, obvious lentils, a strong sturdy feel.

But also high tech / structural expressionism.

(Uniklinikum Aachen, Germany)

The internal explosive may malfunction from an external stimuli, such as a massive bomb detonation near it.

One-point safety sets cutoffs for how much yield can be produced from a malfunction. That’s for countries experienced with nukes who had time to fix their catastrophic failures.

Considering there’s many ways to design nukes, different countries have different technological capabilities, the answer isn’t a squeaky clean “No.” when someone asks if nukes can explode when bombed. Answers should have more gradation. And they shouldn’t imply a nuke in Iran wouldn’t catastrophically fail because sophisticated designs from countries allowed to have nukes have ironed out the wrinkles. Iran is smart and capable like any other country but they’re being badly stressed and their context is different than the traditional nuclear powers.

Yes. The people in this thread are wrong. Bombing a nuke can set it off, just not fully.

A nuke may require many precise detonations to function as intended. When everything goes right it will release it’s full power.

When an external explosion hits the nuke, only some material should activate, causing a relatively tiny explosion. Shouldn’t be any real fallout.

This assumes the designers specifically made the nuke to not go off from one explosion. There’s no rule that says you need to make nukes safe. People shouldn’t dismiss a partial detonation of a nuke like it’s nothing.

Edit: look up “one-point safety.” Safer nukes are designed so very little happens when there’s eg an explosion. If nukes didn’t go off when bombed this wouldn’t be a thing.