Hypothetically, False Flag is a possible explanation, assuming, that the retaliatory strike was directed against North Korea or Iran. In the chaos after the bombs went off in US, nobody would think that rationally about foreign policy (and besides just several questions in the series, flying ICBMs are just forgotten later on) and instead just say "they hit us, we must hit back" (according to the philosophy "do not stand next to a man, who has been hit - even though you didn't do it, he's gonna hit you"). No questions asked. Similarly, I can imagine that if even a single bomb had went off in certain American city in let's say 1970s, nobody would have really debated on "who" and "how" and instead would have launched everything against "the enemy" ("use them or lose them").

On the other hand, would such a massive sacrifice (more than 20 cities) be necessary to attack either Iran or North Korea? I can imagine a single attack would be sufficient.

My idea is, that wiping out Iran and North Korea has to be considered as a "pleasant side effect" of the conspiracy, but not its primary goal.

 out of  found this valuable. Do you find this valuable?