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: Selectric II who wrote (3508)	10/8/2001 1:40:11 PM
From: Jerry in Omaha	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Selectric II, <<Well, what about these potential pragmatic problems: 1) We would make a martyr of bin Laden...>> We're not playing Wyatt Earp here.* We're going to find him and either we're going to kill him or, as per Bin Laden's direct orders, one of the henchmen always at his side will blow his brains out for him. In either case, soon he will be dead. <<2) We couldn't confirm that we got him and his lieutenants, or the bombs. We need the evidence.>> If you read my posting carefully you would have noticed this:<<One thing for sure, we'll never get a body count or find out if any nuke suitcase surprises were actually being stored in the targeted mountain hideout(s).>> We've discussed the possibility of using tactical nuclear weapons on this thread and also what those weapons actually are. My posting was intended to identify a weapon that we previously were not aware of and which would seem to have a direct military application now. I asked what the likely consequences would be. To clarify, what the international consequences would be for the U.S. should we actually use the nuke bunker buster. Hope that clears things up. Jerry in Omaha * It was Wyatt's favorite trick to just disarm his opponents rather than engage in gun play. Often, he would just brazenly walk up and take the gun away from the bad guy.