It saddens me how everyone gives practically for granted that the "unfortunate incident" was caused by bombs, even so I believe there are tons of elements to understand that this isn't a likely scenario.
But this kind of general agreement leaves me too discouraged to start a debate, just don't say I haven't warned you.
Your understanding of the proportion of the disaster is also very far from the kind of destructive force that I think, at this point, is reasonable to assume.
This is what I believe should be expected: