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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: FaultLine who wrote (2845)	10/5/2001 7:08:29 PM
From: LTK007	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

a question i think that must be addressed when talking Nuclear weapons and that is exactly what is the destructive range and fall-out of the SMALLEST strategic nuclear device--i don't have the answer--anyone? any nuclear weapon that engulphs the innocent is morally unacceptable,and the U.S. would end up having to blow up the rest of the world to fight off the hatred it would justly inspire in others. I state this as a man who also after prolonged study of Truman's decision regards ending WWII,do not judge him,and sympathize with his reasoning. But i also remind,when some yahoo yells "you know what Truman would do!"--i remind that Truman fired MacArthur for his wanting to use Nuclear bombs in Korea. Max

To: FaultLine who wrote (2845)	10/5/2001 8:13:03 PM
From: RocketMan	Respond to of 281500

Still, critics of using a nuclear weapon insist that even an overt threat of using a nuclear weapon would probably have only a marginal impact on Osama bin Laden and his Al Qaeda network in Afghanistan. The U.S. already has always had overwhelming non-nuclear firepower available; that so far does not appear to have made much of a dent in bin Laden's thinking. The flaw in this argument is to worry about what an enemy is thinking. What we should care about are his capabilities. If he is hidden in a well-fortified position, or if he is hiding NBC weapons in a bunker, the purpose of a nuke is not to make a political statement, but to wipe him and his capabilities off this planet. if others rise in his place, and become sufficiently well organized as to develop fortified hiding places or weapon caches, we take them out as well. We may have to maintain this posture for a very long time. But at least we would not have to worry about what they are thinking.