Vulnerability of Space Settlements to Attacks

Thank, Ryan, for your helpful answers. I'm also wondering about the dangersof atmospheric leakage if an explosion does breach the shell. And whatearly warning measures could be taken to detect and prevent any hostileattack.
Monart
Starship Aurora <
http://www.starshipaurora.com
>
Starship Forum <
>

Ryan Healey wrote:
--- Monart Pon
> Sparked by the recent terrorist attack on New York, a questionwas
> posed on another list, Starship Forum, about how much more vulnerable
> a space settlement would be to a hostile attack, from Earth orsome
> other space settlements, and how it would just take one missileor one
> bomb to destroy an entire settlement -- it being a pressurizevessel
> in vacuum.
With about 2 metres of radiation shielding that would also functionas low
strength, very thick Armour. Ultimately it depends on thenature of the
weapon. Chemical explosives aren't going to do much but Nuclearcould wipe out
a settlement. Kinetic could cause some damage but it wouldprobably be
survivable.
> Would anyone here provide an answer?
>
> My partial answer is that it would be safer for a space settlement
> at L5 than it would be for any city on Earth from terrorist or
> military attack, mainly because of the greater distance separating
> Earth and L5 than between any two cities on Earth. Long beforea
> missile from a hostile force on Earth could reach L5, an L5-erwould
> be able to blast it into the void, assuming the L5-ers have been
> prepared for such attacks. Besides, L5-ers would have the highground:
> it would be easy to just "drop" big rocks on hostile Earth bases.
It would take a few days for a chemically propelled missile to reachL5, longer
if its electric and shorter if it is nuclear propelled. Thedistance wont stop
a bomb being smuggled to the station although El Al like securityon all
transports to the settlement would be able to prevent that.
As for high ground it would be very easy for those at L5 to havea rock hit the
earth which would provide a very good deterant to earth not toattack although
terrorists probably wouldn't give a shit. Also earth wouldby that time have a
significant space presence and be able to put a rock on a collisioncourse with
the settlement.
> But suppose a missile, a shuttle loaded with explosives, or a
> smuggled-in bomb does detonate on a space vessel, even a country-size
> vessel, would the consequences be more catastrophic than whathappened
> in New York?
It really depends on where it detonates and how powerful it is.