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: TigerPaw who wrote (215410)	1/7/2002 12:33:21 PM
From: DavesM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

I also, doubt that MAD becomes obsolete with SDI. I do think that SDI will give a nation a few extra minutes. Those few minutes allows the U.S. to try to knock down incoming warheads, instead of immediately launching a massive counterattack - upon the knowledge that a missile(s) are in the air (use it or lose it).

To: TigerPaw who wrote (215410)	1/7/2002 12:47:07 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Tit- for- tat is not the same as MAD. MAD is conceived of in a situation where all hell breaks loose, where one country in effect tries to kill the other, and is assured of massive retaliation, so that no one wins. If there were a nuke in a suitcase, it would fall short of the kind of attack MAD is designed to prevent, and if it were known who made the attack, ordinary retaliation would suffice. As far as overwhelming numbers go, it presumes that one can predict the evolution of defenses and countermeasures......