And if a city has ten Three Mile Island incidents, that would be pretty bad, and we would be worried
Like, Chernobyl was the worst nuclear disaster in history, yeah? Right now, the radiation pockets remaining are places where you don't want to have a picnic, and it was handled horribly.
I mean, seriously man, that's the same reasoning people use to justify doing anything and everything to stop terrorism. In fact, it's nearly literally the same things being worried about, with cyberattacks, it's just worrying about Russia doing it instead of random terrorist organizations.
Like, they're disasters, yeah. Take a look at Chernobyl's death toll. Take a look at Fukushima's death toll. Take a look at how many of these disasters have happened per year, on average, for each severity level. Fearmongering and panic is significantly more dangerous than a reactor melting down in typical circumstances. Radioactive material tossed up by a fire? Radioactive particles in water? That causes some problems. But a typical reactor meltdown is expensive, not deadly. Even one initiated via cyberattack.
Oh, right, and look at how the average has been changing over time, and how many have occurred in recent years. Compare this to total number of reactors in operation, and accident rates from other energy sources.
Rolling blackouts would be much more deadly, because it would inspire much more panic in widespread areas. And any advantage gained by a country would be negated by the fact that you just pissed off the United States of America and they will have no qualms about retaliating. Not against an uprovoked attack on it's citizenry. Pearl Harbor was just a military base. Putin's not stupid enough to try that unless he is actively planning to start WWIII.