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: Jill who wrote (6356)	10/19/2001 8:05:42 PM
From: RocketMan	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

Sigh--enuf of anthrax for the moment! I know its OT to some extent Perhaps the medical aspects are slightly OT, but not the subject. I still don't know what the topic is supposed to be on this thread, but from the very first link, to the Foreign Affairs briefing, I find the following: The New Threat of Mass Destruction, Richard K. Betts (January/February 1998) A prescient discussion of the dangers of terrorist attacks on the U.S. homeland and our failure to protect against them. "[The most] worrisome danger [is] that mass destruction will occur in the United States, killing large numbers of civilians. The primary risk is not that enemies might lob some nuclear or chemical weapons at U.S. armored ships or battalions, awful as that would be. Rather, it is that they might attempt to punish the United States by triggering catastrophes in American cities. But retaliation requires knowledge of who has launched an attack. Today some groups may wish to punish the United States without taking credit for the action." So that when you say: I tend to think its NOT homegrown--NY Times Rio de Janeiro office just got an anthrax letter-- And I lean towards it being homegrown, this is just the kind of ambiguity that is referred to in the article above, and just the type of asymmetrical warfare that we are up against. Our Cold War-era defense posture was structured to respond to a known aggressor. This is all new territory. Even if we get Bin Laden, we still will have ambiguity as to who else is responsible and capable of another attack.