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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gao seng who wrote (29476)	9/26/2001 12:09:49 AM
From: cosmicforce	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Me thinks thou don't understandeth radiation. When you dump a nuclear bomb on someone (the U238 case on the megaton component is still radioactive, and like cobalt, absorbs neutrons), you create a cascade of secondary radiation with some very long-lived components. Actually, if we set it off in Afghanistan, in less than a week we'd be measuring the fallout here in California. I live in California. The reason people didn't like neutron bombs wasn't because they "killed people, leaving property". While that is grisly and accurate, there was a perception that tactical usage of nukes was a slippery slope leading to higher levels of usage. I think that IS a possible outcome from such usage. It legitimizes it. You have to remember that WE were the first to use nukes, and we killed more than 250,000 civilians with them.

To: gao seng who wrote (29476)	9/26/2001 12:14:06 AM
From: Mac Con Ulaidh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Thank you. A beautiful land of wild, untameable people. People who bring down kingdoms. Because part of them are whacked? (my word) Because part of them harbor a killer? We'd destroy the lot of them? We DID help put the whacked ones in power. And now we need to undo it. But surely we are better at our jobs, and more civilized, than to need to resort to destroying a country and all within it. If we do, we are either filled with a blood-lust beyond civilized behavior, or our special forces aren't up to the task. I prefer to think that we are more civilized than that, and I believe our forces are up to the task, even in the mountains and wilds. Innocents will die. And that should be, it is, a sad thing. To nuke a bunch of them is barbaric, and unnecessary except to satisy blood-lust. It's even sad to kill a rabid animal. Or a wild one who can't exist in a world civilized beyond his comprehision. If we feel no sorrow in killing, we haven't come far, imo. blahblah, again.