Why Didn't Al Qaeda Aim The Noses Of Those 4 Airliners At 4 US Nuclear Power Plants on 9-11?

Question

Thousands more dead, entire areas of the US made uninhabitable for centuries.

9-11 was bad enough, but why did they decide for more "symbolic" targets instead

ESweetPea - you don't think the idea hadn't crossed their mind???

Is there anywhere that you clowns know of that I can get info on nuclear plants being able to withstand a direct hit from a fully fuels airliner? - or are all of you just talking out of your behinds?

Answer 1

When I graduated High School I went to work at the Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant in Searbrook NH. My job for a while was tending carpenters who built the form walls the containments systems.

The innner liner wall is 6 inches of steeloutside of that is a shell of rebar as thick as your thigh. Each 40 foot length cost $920.00. They were welded together using cadmium crucibles and chemical welding temps of over 3000 degrees. There was one layer of rebar which ran up and down, one which horizontally, one layer which ran diagonally to the right, and one which ran diagonally to the left, all layered one on top of the other. Then a two foot space, another 4 layers of this rebar, then the outside form wall. All in all. almost a 5 foot thick shell of reinforced concrete, mixed ON SITE.

We were told it was SPECIFICALLY engineered to withstand a direct impact from a jet airliner.

Answer 2

I think that their reasoning was probably two-fold. First, they thought the symbolism of the targets they chose was to show the vulnerability of the US government, and the world. Second, it's obvious that they were mistaken in our initial response. They new our reaction was a possibility. If they had hit nuclear plants, and caused more rampant destruction, our response may have been much more harsh. Also, as the scars from the attack heal, the resolve of the nation has faded. Had they hit such targets, we would have had much more lasting effects. They rely on the infighting now going on to divide us from within.

Answer 3

One reason is they would have taken those jets way out of their flight patterns. If they were heading for a nuclear power plant, they could have been taken out of the sky easily. But, fly a passenger jet full of American citizens over NYC and it would not be such an easy decision to make simply because they were not following their original flight plan.

Answer 4

actually nuclear power plants already have BARRIERS in place that are thicker than the walls at the pentagon.

ramming a plane into those plants would result in just damage to the plane...not the plant

Answer 5

The containment buildings of nuclear plants are actually pretty tough, so such an attack might not have been successful. Symbols are also very important. The WTC has long been a hated symbol of American-led golbalization.

Answer 6

Because they considered the WTC to be the center of our economy and the pentagon our military center. The 4th plane was to be aimed at the Capitol or White House. Its basic Pych warfare.

Answer 7

Why don't you give them an idea for something they haven't done yet?

Geez.

The reason why they aimed at the Twin Towers is probably the same reason why they bombed them earlier. Don't you remember that they put bombs in the basement before they put planes through the towers?

They did it because they're not anti-nuclear power. They're against capitalism, multiculturalism, the American Way.

Be glad they didn't aim for something more destructive.

Answer 8

Osama Bin Laden was comitted to destroying the WTC, which he saw as the center of American imperialism. He tried once in 1993 but failed.

Answer 9

Hitting a nuclear power plant does not mean they will cause a nuclear explosion. Do some research.

Answer 10

nuclear reactor has a protective re-enforced containment vesicle that no airplane could penetrate, russian reactors don't have this containment, hence why the chernobyl disaster occured.