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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Karen Lawrence who wrote (187100)	9/26/2001 4:53:36 PM
From: Thomas A Watson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

You logic once again fails to see cause and effect. If plains were available to intercept they could have given identification of the planes and reported an estimate of intent. There was no point to issuing any order that could not be execute. With intercept monitoring of the planes the decision could have been informed and made. The question that was asked that I answered was where was the Airforce. tom watson tosiwmee

To: Karen Lawrence who wrote (187100)	9/26/2001 5:02:50 PM
From: Dr. Voodoo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Karen, The point was made, all be it in a partisan fashion that military cutbacks have hurt our defenses. I think it should be well taken. Intercepting an aircraft doesn't necessarily mean shoot it down. There is NO way of knowing what would have happened on that day if we had better defenses and the appropriate aircraft in position. It is however, dumb, to suggest that Clinton is soley responsible for our military cutbacks. Vitually all federal elected officials have cashed in on the "peace dividend" that came as a result of the collapse of the soviet union. This should be a wake up call to our country that we still have to maintain a high state of readiness, and an effective defense force. V