Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Al Gore vs George Bush: the moderate's perspective -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (2197)	10/13/2000 8:25:51 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10042

I think it's sensible to prepare for all threats within a reasonable level of probability. If you prepare for anything that is possible you may bankrupt yourself trying to defend against a fantasy. I don't think you need to be prepared against fantasy threats, nor do I think you have to be prepared against any conseivable possible threat. However if a country can afford it then being able to deal with unlikely but possilbe threats is a good idea. Thus my comment about being prepared for more then the likely missions. WWII wasn't considered likely after WWI so our military was allowed to atrophy. Fortunately we had the ability to build it back up, but if it had not atrophied so badly we probably could have ended the war quicker with less death on both sides, and saved money as well. We should be prepared for such unlikely senarios as North Korea and Iraq both causeing problems at the same time. We should also prepare a ballistic missle defence. Tim