SI
SI
discoversearch

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 ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: haqihana who wrote (132692)8/15/2005 3:58:14 PM
From: Lane3  Read Replies (1) of 793840
 
I did acknowledge the impressive nuclear arsenal that the Soviets had, and stated that they were not going to use it for all the reasons already posted, and that they had too much to lose in a bomb to bomb exchange.

I see. What you said was:

>>Agreed on the weaponry, but those terrorists are now trying to get possession of nuclear material with which to make dirty bombs.<<

Which I read as, "yeah, the Soviets have weaponry, but not weaponry more threatening than the terrorists, who are trying to get dirty bombs, after all."

And then you continued to repeatedly argue with my assertions that Soviet weaponry was the greater threat.

So I never saw anything that looked to me like an acknowledgement that the Soviets were the greater threat from any perspective, let alone an overall greater threat.

I guess that explains it, for the most part. Thanks.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News