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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: epicure who wrote (219304)2/18/2007 7:43:52 PM
From: Nadine Carroll  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
I think I would probably wait until someone used a nuke before I started a war. I wouldn't even start a war over a country merely having nukes. There is a cost to waiting, maybe (and I doubt the Us would pay it)- but that cost is so uncertain, and the burden of war so obvious, I don't favor leaping to assuming calculable costs because of imagined uncertain costs

There were some quite certain corollaries your strategy, namely, allowing Saddam Hussein to become the hegemon of the Arab world and/or sparking an Arab arms race. If the costs of that policy was uncertain, they definitely didn't look cheap, any way you sliced it. Since Saddam had a history of attacking all his neighbors, and was on record as saying that his big mistake was in taking Kuwait before he had nukes, the costs were prone to jump unexpectedly. We might easily be facing a nuclear-armed Saddam Hussein rolling his tanks into Kuwait and the Saudi oil fields right about now. It would have been just his style.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News