Montana
Wyoming
Colorado
Nebraska
North Dakota
South Dakota
Iowa
Minnesota
Their appearance in modeling studies is tied strictly to infrastructure placement — not to any immediate threat or current geopolitical event.
Why Geography Alone Doesn’t Determine Safety
Experts consistently emphasize that even in a hypothetical nuclear conflict, the effects would not be confined to a single region. Fallout patterns depend heavily on weather systems, wind direction, terrain, and the overall scale of the event.
Beyond immediate blast zones, broader consequences could include:
Disruptions to power grids
Damage to water systems
Agricultural contamination
Supply chain breakdowns
Long-term economic instability
For that reason, analysts stress that no location would be completely immune in a large-scale nuclear exchange.
Regions Often Modeled as Lower Direct-Target Risk
Conversely, some simulations classify areas with fewer strategic military installations as comparatively lower in direct-target priority. These frequently include portions of the Northeast and Southeast, such as:
