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 : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jttmab who wrote (3540)	6/16/2001 6:33:00 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93284

There are still facilities in the former Soviet East, especially Kazakhstan, that would provide an opportunity for terrorist use of missiles. If a renegade group were responsible for launching an attack, we would not return fire on Kazakhstan per se. Also, the willingness of Arab fanatics to participate in suicide bombing shows that one cannot count on even a surgical strike, taking out the responsible parties, being a disincentive. Since MAD is a gridlock situation, the use of nukes has mainly been contemplated as part of a graduated response, with the possibility of breaking off before total destruction. Eliminate these scenarios, and there is no situation in which nukes are usable, with the possible exception of tactical deployment on the battlefield. Thus, the reduction and eventual elimination of strategic arsenals becomes the most rational course of action. I am not predicting the eventual form of SDI technology. Since I cannot say what the final form will be, I cannot firmly say whether there will be conventional adaptability or not. But, since you asked, I would not be surprised if there were adaptability as a shield against any form of air attack. Not being an engineer, I cannot argue the point hard, though......