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 : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: wiz who wrote (93088)	11/15/2001 11:23:59 AM
From: Knighty Tin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

Wiz, In all honesty, I don't think it will really happen. It will be like that big hole they were going to dig in Texas for the SuperCollider. Bad idea, lots of money spent on feasibility, then, public outrage and lousy real estate prices in Denton, Texas after that. Basically, Illinois and California, which didn't get the hole in their states (a Texan as President and should we really be putting expensive equipment in a hole in an earthqaukey state), decided to withdraw their support in Congress.

To: wiz who wrote (93088)	11/16/2001 8:59:59 AM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

Hi wiz; Re: "Seems to me an engineer with 10% of the smarts of the defender, can defeat the missle system.." While this is probably true, the purpose isn't to protect ourselves against the better engineered products of Russia (or China, for that matter). Instead, it's to defend ourselves against Iraq's ICBMs, which they probably won't have until 20 or more years from now. And sure, eventually Iraq could engineer all the decoy stuff, but by then we'd be working on the next stage of defenses, etc. The program would be mostly welfare for scientists and engineers, but there would be some military advantage hidden in there. On the other hand, who ever said that military expenditures are efficient? Frankly, I'd rather see them put the money into landing men on Mars, but they don't listen to me. But most of the people arguing that the problem is impossible have other irons on the fire and don't appear to be entirely neutral on the subject of nuclear weapons. -- Carl