This is coolbert: The nuclear threat from Al Qaeda, in my opinion, cannot be minimized. All during the time since the inception of the nuclear weapons age, and with the acquisition of nuclear weapons by the Soviet Union, has the U.S. been in danger of nuclear attack. But now from Al Qaeda, even more so than from the Soviet Union, this threat exists, and is more real. It is true that a nuclear attack for the Soviets would have totally devastated the U.S., but the likelihood of this occurring was very slim indeed. The nuclear standoff guaranteed that both sides were deterred from using nuclear weaponry or even with letting a crisis get out of hand. The consequences of nuclear weapons usage was not worth the risk. With Al Qaeda, the danger is very much more real. In all probability, Al Qaeda at this time does not possess nuclear weaponry. If they did, they would have probably used the weapon or weapons by now. That is the problem. With the Soviet Union, the opposition could be counted on for rational, measured response to crisis or incidents or "situations". Not so with Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda is not deterred by the usual threat of retaliation. Not only are they not deterred, they would welcome retaliation, so as to alienate the entire Islamic world. These Al Qaeda villains would not only use the a-bomb, they would relish [Tony Blair used this very word] using it, and would also relish to see retaliation. This is just not something the "think tank" boys could contemplate or know how to deal with.

coolbert.