Politics for Pros- moderated 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.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: epicure who wrote (31487)	2/26/2004 1:35:40 AM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) of 793637

You are discounting one factor, X. The maximum threat level and the chances of occurrence of most hazards like traffic accidents or most diseases has been fairly well quantified. The only exception would really be the chances of SARS or some such disease turning into a new pandemic, and the World Health Organization is marshalled to monitor and head off such an occurrence. It has troops and tools to fight off a pandemic. The maximum threat level of terrorism and its chances of occurrence are not exactly quantified and what we know is not comforting. Because unlike traffic accidents and disease, there is a very different set of variables at play - human cleverness and malice. The terrorists want to do us harm, and have no scruples about their methods. We know that if they had a suitcase nuke they could use, they would. That makes the threat quite different in both quantity and kind. What Bush is trying to do with the Bush Doctrine is set up a scheme of deterrence that might work on suicide bombers, by extending the net to their state sponsors.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next