[Coop]

Guys..think ** SUITCASE NUKE **.

Makes no sense. Why in the world would a terrorist risk getting caught trying to sneak a suitcase nuke through airline security just to blow it up in the sky where it would do less damage? Why not drive over to important location X and simply detonate the device?

[jstolzen]

Coop - I seem to remember on one of the various threats made that they talked about blowing up a nuke mid-air (for whatever reason).

(BTW, I think this was one of those 'net posts that had [to me] little/no credibility. BUT - it WAS mentioned).

Also..AQ seems obsessed with Aviation. Sooo, if you were to detonate on an aircraft, it'd be "double" the psychological impact IMHO.

[Sender]

Actually an airburst nuke would devastate a much larger radius than one on the ground between buildings. If a nuke went off at ground level in a major urban area, the massive 'concrete jungle' itself would somewhat contain the blast radius, as horrific as that would be. If on the other hand a nuke went off at say a mile over the same city, the devastation would spread much farther, and the EMP effects might fry electronics for miles in all directions.

[sweetliberty]

"Why in the world would a terrorist risk getting caught trying to sneak a suitcase nuke through airline security just to blow it up in the sky where it would do less damage?"

I wouldn't think it would be that hard to do if they were working in airline security and had access to the tarmac. It's not like being a Muslim prevents one from working for the airlines, although it probably should.