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 : High Tolerance Plasticity -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JungleInvestor who wrote (8685)	9/26/2001 11:09:44 AM
From: kodiak_bull	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23153

J.I. Thanks for the response. Remember, though, you not only have to win the war but you have to win the peace. No one will remember (or believe) that the U.S. dropped a small but safe tactical device and got all the terrorists and only the terrorists. What will be remembered is that the U.S. used NUCLEAR WEAPONS on Muslim people. No one will remember or care about the details of 4 jetliners or 7000 bodies in NYC and DC. The memory and the ignominy of using nuclear weapons on Muslim people will be on the record for hundreds of years. You might as well put a sign up sheet in every Mosque everywhere for terrorists. I don't disagree that these weapons would be effective, but it would not be an intelligent use of them. There's just too much at stake in phase 2, the peace and rebuilding process, to bungle it in phase 1. It's a chess game; it doesn't do any good to take the other guy's queen if you end up checkmated by his knight and his bishop two moves later. Kb

To: JungleInvestor who wrote (8685)	9/26/2001 11:16:30 AM
From: Think4Yourself	Respond to of 23153

Another benefit to a major explosion is that it will destabilize and collapse caves if it is strong enough. Bury the terrorists in their own holes. Most explosions will be in remote areas, so civilian losses should be minor anyhow. Here's another idea to deal with the taliban. Let nature do the dirty work. There has to be some insect pest that loves to destroy opium plants. find it, grow it, and release it into the poppy fields. They could be delivered by any number of inexpensive and effective delivery systems. OTOH it might be a shame to destroy the only contribution to society that Afghanistan has ever made.

To: JungleInvestor who wrote (8685)	9/26/2001 11:18:35 AM
From: Wowzer	Respond to of 23153

Here here I couldn't agree more. We need to fight this war to win, period. No matter what we do the terrorists are planning their next attack on us and will try to execute one. We need to stop making up rules on how to fight a war, to make it somehow more respectable. War is pure hell and my opinion a very inhumane and a disgusting trait we humans have. But if we are going to do it...do it right and win. No more **cking excuses and trying to make up rules to somehow make "war" a humane act. One of the generals in the Gulf war had a great quote, to media concerns that American tanks were plowing over Iraqi fox holes burying its victims alive. His quote if I remember right was something like..there is no humane way to kill another human. This is war.

To: JungleInvestor who wrote (8685)	9/26/2001 11:19:04 AM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 23153

JungleInvestor, Re: <<We are at war. If there is anything that we should have learned from the Vietnam War, it's that we should not go to war if we do not have the intention of winning, and this means not pulling any punches.>> If that is the thing we learned from the VN war then we are doomed to learn an even bigger lesson in the future. The one thing we SHOULD have learned from the Viet Nam war was that you cannot win a foreign war in a country where the people support the enemy you fight. Dropping tactical nukes in the Middle East will create fanatical anger and determination in people who might otherwise have sat this one out. The bigger danger is not Bin Laden and the current crop of terrorists. They are dangerous and must be dealt with but the real danger is the climate of anger and mistrust that creates a fertile breeding ground for many potential Bin Ladens. You don't drop tactical nukes in a region that you want to live in harmony with in the future. We should decide whether we want to engage in a scorched earth policy and wipe them all out or whether we want to respond only to those who fit our definition of terrorists who are a direct threat to our people and property. The truth is that we cannot build a great wall around our country. As KB says, if we cock this up and make it bigger and stronger, then we will have signed the death warrant for many more of our own, including women and children. Why not take a long term view to do the most good for the most people? Why not think rationally now instead of later when the repercussions of our actions have resonated back to us and we have to acknowledge that you cannot bomb an idea? If you try, you simply write it in blood. Ed

To: JungleInvestor who wrote (8685)	9/26/2001 12:10:18 PM
From: que seria	Respond to of 23153

PENG and nukes: First, about PENG: I expect many investors cheered by PENG's buy-back program using money from brighter times are expecting some similar sort of salvation again. Recent retrace just wipes out a pop-up; response to fundamentals begins at 20: stockcharts.com[h,a]wbclyimy[pc25!c50!c200!i!f][vc60][iUb14!Uk14!Lc14!La12,26,9!Lp14,3,3!Lg] It should be a fast trip to 15-16, whenever it comes. When this quarter's 10Q comes out the company's deteriorated financial situation will leave no illusions about renewed pumps. I think the race out the door has to begin well before that report. JungleInvestor: Agree about existing terrorists, but the point is that have a powerful say by our actions in whether more or fewer arise from here forward. Using nukes would, overnight and permanently, stamp us as the Great Satan in the eyes of tens if not hundreds of millions of Muslims who don't now agree we are. It would surely bring tens of thousands more people, many of them much smarter, more cultured, and deadly, to the ranks of those willing to die to kill us, preferably using comparable WMD. No disrespect intended, but it would be the single worst thing we could do. Terrorists are not people who you can reason with! They are going to continue attacking to win with any weapons at their disposal, no matter what weapons we use against them. Do you not think that they are planning right now attacks with non-conventional weapons (aka nuclear, biological, chemical)?