Originally Posted by
jerryleber
No, 'they' would not have used nukes for minimal loss of life or treasure.
There's some threshold where they would have agonized over the use, even back then. We could come up with countless hypothetical scenarios and argue all day as to what they would have decided, but I'm not wasting energy on alternate history fantasies.
Originally Posted by
jerryleber
Not even close if it involved nuking general population.
As I said, "culprits to target". But since 9/11 was 100% an attack against civilians, it actually would be proportional to nuke an equivalent number of enemy civilians, if that's what you wanted to (to say nothing of military targets). There's nothing magical about nuclear weapons that make them any more or less proportional than any other weapon. Yes, we can target and "dial-a-yield" to achieve specific end results.
It would be a good idea to consider fallout effects on nearby allies or neutrals, if any.