SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Hawkmoon who wrote (3195)10/7/2001 1:40:45 AM
From: epsteinbd  Respond to of 281500
 
Lots of sense and clarity in this paper. Thanks.



To: Hawkmoon who wrote (3195)10/7/2001 1:45:56 AM
From: Rick Julian  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
You seem confident that everyone has laid their nuclear cards on the table so that we can see them. I'm not so sure. FWIW, a nuclear option has, in fact, been floated in the press

The Soviets had thousands (I seem to remember the number 30,000) of scientists working on their biological warfare program, lots of those guys are/were out of work, and many were reportedly hired by IRAQ . . .I'm not being afraid, trust me, I'm trying to be aware. I know it's hard to develop bioweapons. . .it was unimaginable that the WTCs could fall like they did, and that the Pentagon would be attacked. These are evilly ingenious opponents and I would not eliminate many possibilities

Here's my bottom line: you have to respond to the circumstances that present themselves to you. The guys on flight 93 had to make quick judgements and "roll" immediately. We don't, and I like our odds, the more we hedge our bets. I've been in a couple of, and seen hundreds of, "can't lose" situations, where the odds on favorite wakes up on his back and asks "What the hell just happened?" It happens to countries too.. . . it happened to us on 9.11 and I don't want to see it again (but believe I will.)

I want us to be confident, but cocky worries me.