Foreign Affairs Discussion Group 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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Sam Citron who wrote (159261)	3/18/2005 2:34:05 PM
From: Jacob Snyder	Read Replies (2) of 281500

re: Iran nukes: IMO, you're right, "figleaf" is the correct word to describe this. The Iranians know, in advance, that this proposal will be rejected. Therefore, it isn't a serious proposal. It's a PR stunt. What is important is capabilities, not intentions. Intentions can and do change constantly. The steadily, inexorably spreading capabilities for making nuclear weapons, are the real threat. There is no essential difference between nuclear technology for making power, and making bombs. It's a spurious distinction. It's like the difference between the "political" and "military" wings of Hezbollah or the IRA. I find the Asia Times to be a most useful info source atimes.com

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next