I think he would wait until we retaliate. If he sets off a nuke without provocation the world would even more roundly condemn him. But... if he does it after we go into Afghanistan and they show TV pictures of 'collateral' damage he will rally the Muslim world, the so-called coalition will be off and we will be at war with all the Arab countries.
I can't say I relish that scenario, but it seems more likely than that he would have already used a nuke if he had a nuke.
I think he would wait until we retaliate. If he sets off a nuke without provocation the world would even more roundly condemn him. But... if he does it after we go into Afghanistan and they show TV pictures of 'collateral' damage he will rally the Muslim world, the so-called coalition will be off and we will be at war with all the Arab countries.
So in your mind TV pictures of collateral damage in Afghanistan by the United States would be justification for use of nuclear weapons by Bin Laden. Interesting. Would you mind telling us what would justify use of nuclear weapons by the United States? I believe I recently observed some collateral damage in New York.