Quote:
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce
How would you determine worse than 9-11? More bodies? More infrastructure damaged? More costly in economy disruption? Bet I could top 2 out of 3 with a dirty bomb. Maybe with gas.
|
9/11 was complicated because it was a physical attack along with a symbolic attack.
Not only did it kill people, it installed fear of being able to hijack 4 airplanes, something most people have been on, and being able to crash them into symbolic structures.
A dirty bomb could cause more damage but it would never had the meaning of 9/11 with not only attacking civilians, but attacking and installing fear by using a method that is much deeper than "wrong place at the wrong time". That borders along with economic disruption too.
I can not prove it, but I would think that the reaction against 9/11 would be less if they just bombed the WTC and other buildings.
If they are going to plan something that is worse than 9/11 I am sure they are talking about the first two and not the third and symbolic meaning of it.