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.

Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ibexx who wrote (91677)	1/12/2001 1:35:15 AM
From: tekboy	Respond to of 152472

Are we heading back toward the cold-war era? Republican party has two foreign policy wings--the realists & business types, and the neocons & ideological hardliner/hawks. You can think of them as the Bushies and the Reaganites, respectively. In practice, most of GW's top national security picks (Cheney, Powell, Rice) have been the former, and in fact the true ideological hardliners have been passed over in droves. (Rumsfeld is a bit of an unknown since he's been out for a while; hard to say which way he'll jump in practice.) Anyway, these guys have very little interest in getting into a pissing match with China, and their corporate backers want good Sino-US business relations to continue. So I wouldn't be too worried. tekboy@butIcouldbewrong.com PS it's still not clear how aggressively they'll move forward on missile defense, by the way. few good reasons to do so (at least for non-true-believers), lots of reasons not to. will be an interesting test of ideology & campaign rhetoric vs. practical realities.

To: Ibexx who wrote (91677)	1/12/2001 10:30:02 AM
From: Art Bechhoefer	Respond to of 152472

The hawk-like attitude being expressed by the incoming Defense Secretary shows the aging, confrontational attitude taken by old timers who still think the enemy is organized communism, not terrorism. The whole anti-missile defense theory is flawed for one key reason. When the enemy missile is up there is space, heading toward its destination, you can't steer an intercepting missile accurately enough to hit it. Why? Because the lack of air/resistance in space makes accurate maneuvering impossible--theoretically and practically. Thus, the whole strategy of confrontation would be better replaced by setting up working relationships that create a climate where the potential aggressor sees there is more to lose by not cooperating. On the practical side, any confrontational attitude expressed by the U.S. in terms of trying to shoot down someone else's missiles will probably be answered by some very antagonistic trade and economic policy. So, yes, the attitude of the incoming administration could hurt the fortunes of companies like QUALCOMM, and also could hurt the whole peace process. It is a truism that revolutions (in this case, away from totalitarianism) only begin when things start getting better. Keep threatening these dictatorships and their leaders will flourish forever. Castro must be thanking Jesse Helms & Co. from the bottom of his heart.