It wouldn't change the reason, but the article would say fire bombed. Which is conclusive of the evidence that wood burned, buildings stood, vehicles were driving around the next day, and plants and life could move in to the area right after, flourishing.

Spraying radioactive sand and aresol to make it look like a nuclear bomb, creating toxic burns on people gave them the photos they needed to convince the people at the time. But for those of us who question the narrative, nuclear bombs appear to be science fiction used as fact.

There are plenty of texts and videos that you can watch that shed light on the topic. No need to argue here