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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rich4eagle who wrote (210024)	12/14/2001 11:12:06 AM
From: Srexley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769669

I understand your position and we will continue to disagree at this point. As far as the money part of the equation you look at the total cost, but it will be done in stages that would not proceed unless there is some success. It is worthwhile technology imo and can do America good. How about if it is just deployed to protect Washington and our leaders, and we continue with MAD for the rest of the country. At least we could govern if one of these "arms race" states (like China) gets a bug up their but. The stronger and safer the better imo. We are a rich nation that can afford it, and as someone who pays a fair amount to live in this great nation it is a way that I don't mind the money being spent. You have a number of good points, but to me it boils down to dollars. I think we have enough resources to pursue all strategic defenses being considered. And again, worst case scenario imo is it won't work that well, but we will pick up some new technology that will keep us in the lead. My impression is that the left does not care if we are in the lead (or does not want us to be).