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: FaultLine who wrote (32521)	6/18/2002 8:59:25 AM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 281500

The Palestinian H-Bomb: Terror's Winning Strategy By Gal Luft Very helpful article.

To: FaultLine who wrote (32521)	6/18/2002 9:39:38 AM
From: jcky	Respond to of 281500

Thanks for the article FaultLine. A dose of reality for the Israelis: a pure military solution to the suicide bombings is unlikely to succeed.

To: FaultLine who wrote (32521)	6/18/2002 10:29:16 AM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

I got the hard copy of the July/August issue of Foreign Affairs last night. Interesting that the article you linked was the first article--I'm not saying "leading" because I have not yet finished reading the entire issue. The H-bomb article makes a lot of very good points, and should be read by anyone with an interest in the conflict. The writer concludes that there is ultimately very little that can be done to counter terror bombers, that they have tremendous support in even moderate Palestinian populations because they cheaply and effectively counter Israeli military advantages, and that the only way to deal with the terrorist bombers is to engage in negotiations. The other article that I read is one dealing with US power. The author, whose name I've forgotten, makes the point that the US is so far ahead of the rest of the world in the military and economic arenas that it is unlikely to have any effective power challenges for the foreseeable future. The argument is made that the US's geographic isolation from potential challengers will continue to be a huge buffer. On the other hand, American ability to project overwhelming power anywhere on the globe will make any challenger think twice. The author makes the point that the US's military might is bought on the cheap, at only about 3% of GDP, a figure that is historically quite low. Moreover, defense R&D expenditures are larger than some potential challenger's entire defense budget, a fact that will probably mean that the US's lead in military power will become even more substantial in the future. Reading the Palestinian H-bomb issue alongside the article on US hegemony pointed out how easy it is to become arrogant. Israel is in many ways in the same hegemonic position in the ME as the US is globally. This has not stopped a cheap, effective means of creating disruption from being used. Why is the US in any different position?