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: TimF who wrote (2497)	10/14/2000 8:00:07 PM
From: American Spirit	Read Replies (6) \| Respond to of 10042

My friend, the missile defence system you republicans want so bad does not work. ANY money spent on it is a waste. 200 billion, 400 billion, 20 cents. Remember the Sergeant York system?

To: TimF who wrote (2497)	10/14/2000 9:04:26 PM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10042

China now has the ability to cause great damage to the US. China's ability to damage the US has not increased appreciably since they first deployed ICBMs. If you actually read the Cox report, you will discover that the Chinese nuclear development - and espionage - programs are aimed at developing warheads small enough to allow a mobile ballistic missile system. The purpose of a mobile system is to ensure that a nuclear force can survive a first strike with sufficient strength to remain an effective deterrent. It does not enhance offensive or first-strike capability at all. Unlike the US or Russia, China has never attempted to expand its nuclear force to a first-strike level; their policy has always been to maintain a force sufficient only to deter attack or blackmail by the US or the Russians. Do not forget that for most of the last 50 years, the Russian threat has weighed far more heavily on Chinese planning than that of the US. The Chinese military force is large, but structured in a way that makes it practically useless for any purpose other than defence of their territory. No sealift/airlift capacity, a navy limited to coastal duty, little long-range logistic capability. They can deliver only a tiny fraction of their force outside their borders, and they would have a hard time maintaining even that. While there are Americans who would like to portray China as an immediate military threat to the US, for reasons of their own, the simple truth is that they are not. Our most effective response to the limited threat they pose is engaging them in trade and giving them an incentive to keep the peace, not stockpiling more weapons. A nuclear missile would be the last weapon any terrorist would choose, simply because within minutes of launch, the entire world knows exactly where it came from. This is thought to be undesirable, for obvious reasons. Leaders of rogue states are every bit as concerned with personal survival as anyone else. While an individual terrorist might be perfectly willing to blow himself up, it is unimaginable that any state would allow their territory to be used as a base for a terrorist missile attack. I'll be taking the kids out sailing in a few minutes (it's morning here), so I'll be off SI today. Priorities.