Rande Is . . . HOME Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Rande Is . . . HOME

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: KevinThompson who wrote (55757)	12/11/2002 10:36:22 AM
From: Condor	Read Replies (3) of 57584

Hi Kevin and Rande and all, In the case of Iraq, one of the problems with nukes that I see is that we accept that the regime holds the citizenry hostage. Will the US kill all of these hostages in order to get back at the regime for using WMD? It is a hell of a quandry. The world knows that if WMDs were used in Iraq or by Iraq against the US in the US (unlikely) the US could conventional bomb then into non existence. The use of nukes would , in this situation, be unnecessary I believe. The threat of nuclear just looks "so bad" and makes it an on the table play for anyone now. eg: Iraq...hey if the US says they'd nuke us then lets get em first or eg: Israel says ...hey....the US would nuke em if needed so we'll nuke em if needed. The problem is we know the US needs will be somewhat different than the Israelis so up go the odds of a nuclear exchange by somebody. My point is " this nuke talk is very dangerous stuff" to EVERYBODY. Regards C

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next