[NorthMountain]

What could possibly go wrong?

For one thing, shattering it without sufficiently deflecting the trajectory of the shards.

[Paine in the Neck]

For one thing, shattering it without sufficiently deflecting the trajectory of the shards.

The now radioactive shards.

[billorites]

I think this is an agency worried about its mission and its budget.

[C210N]

without sufficiently deflecting the trajectory of the shards....

But, at least it ensures that all the shards are radioactive.

This whole thing about nuking an asteroid sounds like a side show to strengthen the UN and glowBull governance.

[DoughtyOne]

Exactly!

[ClearCase_guy]

For one thing, shattering it without sufficiently deflecting the trajectory of the shards.

I'm not a physicist, so maybe space behaves differently than I think, but I would have a pessimistic attitude toward deflection in general.

On earth, a big explosion pushes earth and debris and air molecules -- and these all push more earth and debris and air molecules. We've all seen blast waves from nukes and whatnot. You can knock down a building a mile from the blast site.

In space, there is no dirt, no debris, and no air molecules. I don't know how much "pushing" can be affected in a vacuum.

If the explosion takes place on the surface of the asteroid, I think Newton's Second Law would move it significantly. That would be good. But, if the explosion takes place "nearby" I would worry that it might have almost no effect.