New York City is a miracle. Somehow, 8.5 million people of every possible race, religion, political affiliation, economic class, and temperament live practically stacked on top of each other in relative peace. The murder rate is at its lowest ebb in decades . The ugly riots in Crown Heights in 1991 seem like a thing of a distant past; apocalyptic visions of the city a la The Warriors or Escape from New York are wildly outdated.

Everyone I brought this question to was very interested in talking about it. The more you consider the scenario, the more possibilities emerge, and the more complicated your theories become. It’s hard not to start looking up relative populations of each borough, game out strategies for each side, imagine bridges being blockaded, tunnels flooded, snipers holed up in penthouses, guerrillas roaming Prospect and Central parks. In search of a conclusive answer to the question, I had conversations with friends, posted on Facebook and Twitter , corresponded with the editorial staff at the popular NYC oddities website Untapped Cities , and consulted several experts at the City University of New York’s Gotham Center for New York City History . The multitude of calculated responses came from a mix of lifelong New Yorkers, longtime transplants, and even some out-of-towners, all of whom seemed eager to weigh in on the fate of the five boroughs.

In this militaristic Thunderdome world that we just created, there is an impenetrable wall around the five boroughs, so nothing can come in, or out—the residents of the Bronx cannot escape into Westchester, and folks in Queens or Brooklyn cannot maintain eastern food supply lines from Long Island (water is an exception). Furthermore, the air is out of bounds; Queens could easily dominate since both airports—LaGuardia and JFK—are within its domain. (Full disclosure: I live there, and I know.) No alliances are permitted, and the only weapons allowed are those that you can find in your borough. Government collapses, meaning that the subway system is finally put out of its misery .

I put this entirely 100 percent hypothetical question to dozens of grizzled New Yorkers, reporters, conflict strategists, and historians, and they all had extremely strident opinions on it. But before we begin, let’s go over the ground rules.

So it seems safe to let your mind wander and imagine a scenario where the city turns on itself in an all-out civil war—not divided along class or racial lines, but something simpler: If the Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Queens, and Staten Island squared off in an epic fight to the death, which borough would come out alive?

The responses were narrowed down to five broad categories: population, terrain and waterfront, arsenal, resources, and transit. Here’s how it played out:

1. POPULATION

Let’s start with the most basic factor: people. According to the Census, there are approximately 8,622,698 people living within the confines of New York City as of July 1, 2017. That breaks down into 2,648,771 in Brooklyn, 2,358,582 in Queens, 1,664,727 in Manhattan, 1,471,160 in the Bronx;,and 479,458 on Staten Island.

One of the most common points I ran across was that, like most modern wars, this conflict would boil down to a war of attrition. Whoever had the most population would, eventually, win. And now that New York had dissolved, Brooklyn was technically the third-largest city in America. So they’re the victors by default. Right?

“Brooklyn. For sheer population.”

–Mara Gay, editorial writer at the New York Times

“Brooklyn also has the population size for conscripting an army.”

–Michelle Young, founder of Untapped Cities

Well, not necessarily. If military history teaches us anything, a large population doesn’t always equate to winning; a small force can effectively stave off a much larger one if it has the right resources, skills, and local knowledge on its side. (Exhibit A: nearly every American military campaign since the Korean War.) There stands to reason that Staten Island, with its relatively minuscule numbers, could survive sustained attacks due to its isolated position, weaponry, and bad transit. (We’ll discuss these factors in depth later.)

But let’s think realistically here. Staten Island could also easily be squashed by Brooklyn, which isn’t that far away, and whose population is nearly quintuple that of Staten Island. On the other hand, Brooklyn and Queens, which have the largest populations, will be locked into combat with each other from the get-go. The true war of attrition is between Kings and Queens County, as countless Queens residents retreat east, drawing in Brooklyn army’s just as Russian and Soviet forces drew in first Napoleon, then Hitler. Meanwhile, Manhattan has a four-front war to contend with. The Bronx’s somewhat large population—nearly 1.5 million is nothing to overlook—is best suited for battle.

“I've given this a lot of thought in the last 30 seconds, so here you go: Manhattan would be the first to go. It's indefensible, would suffer attacks from all sides.”

–Janos Marton, former lead organizer of the Close Rikers campaign

Winner: The Bronx

2. TERRAIN AND WATERFRONT

In the Battle of Brooklyn—the first (and largest) battle of the American Revolution—the British took advantage of the city’s geography to rout George Washington’s army. First, they collected their much bigger forces off of Staten Island, landing on Brooklyn’s southern tip, then flanked Washington from behind as the two armies collided in Gowanus. Facing defeat, Washington was forced to escape inland, and New York would stay under British control until the end of the war. (Although one of the best stories I heard during this story’s research was that American forces once set up fake French bakeries along the shores of Staten Island to make it appear as if a counterattack was imminent.)

But back to our point here: Terrain, and access to water, matter.

“I want to say Brooklyn, but we already lost a war.”

–Daniel Radosh, senior writer for The Daily Show with Trevor Noah

Of course, the terrain in 1776 was much different than what exists today, largely due to land use. If you look at a topographical map of modern New York, there’s little advantageous elevation in Manhattan, which is almost entirely flat, save for uptown. Most of the hills in Brooklyn and Queens lie along the borderlands, and their enormity—Queens is 108 square miles and Brooklyn is 69 square miles—only encourages further in-fighting along their long shared border. Up north, the Bronx is the only borough on the North American mainland; elevations heighten west of the Bronx River and in the north, making it ideal terrain for frontal defense, and retreat.

Staten Island is home to the highest altitude in New York, at Todt Hill. Hypothetically, that is where their forces could gather, or put up a last stand. As mentioned, Staten Island’s distant location offers up its own barrier—even today, in peacetime, there are a lot of New Yorkers who have never stepped foot onto the island.

“[Attacking Staten Island would] be like the US invading Vietnam or Afghanistan. No one else knows the terrain.”

–Dan Rivoli, transit reporter at the New York Daily News

Another important factor to consider is the sixth borough: water. New York’s coastline stretches over 520 miles, and leaves every borough open to some degree of maritime attack. (Of course, New Yorkers would likely be operating personal boats, or kayaks.) That’s where coastal defenses could come in handy. Although Queens has an elongated strip of defense with the Rockaways and Broad Channel, and a handful of small islands in Jamaica Bay, they’re located way in the south, which isn’t strategically helpful. The Bronx has the largest number of small islands in its territory, including its very own potential Gitmo near Queens in the form of Rikers Island.

“Manhattan... long the envy and enemy of the other boroughs, finds itself for the first time on the losing end of New York City history, surrounded in a war of the boroughs, and with too much stuff on the island not to expect an invasion by its three neighbors.”

–Peter Aigner, deputy director of the Gotham Center for New York City History

Winners: Staten Island and the Bronx

3. WEAPONRY

Many of the responses I had received explicitly mentioned the firepower factor. Some speculated that Staten Island—which is home to a tenth of the New York Police Department’s rank and file, and a bounty of presumably pro-gun Trump voters—would come up on top. In March, it was reported that there are 41,000 pistol permits in New York City, 6,400 of which are in Staten Island, based on 2010 data. According to Google Maps, there are also three gun shops in “the forgotten borough”—as opposed to two in each of the other boroughs—where residents could load up on ammo. Staten Islanders are also four times more likely to own guns than other New Yorkers.

“Which borough has the most guns?”

–Richard Betts, director of Columbia University’s Saltzman Institute of War and Peace Studies, who has advised the CIA, the State Department, and the Department of Defense

“Manhattan. Wealth. Weaponry. Cold-hearted ruthlessness.”

–Alyssa Katz, editorial writer at the Daily News

“We know which one has the money.”

–Beth Fertig, legal affairs reporter at WNYC

But of course, New York is no stranger to illegal gun violence, most of which is committed using guns brought here illegally from southern states. In the past, police-sponsored gun buybacks in neighborhoods like Harlem, Bed-Stuy, and Brownsville have secured 100 guns at a time. (It’s also safe to assume that most illegal guns are not being returned to the cops.) And then you have stories like this one from March, when a Queens resident was found with 70 guns and 50,000 bullets, one of the largest arsenals ever found by the NYPD.