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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (38182)	8/16/2002 5:42:58 PM
From: Eashoa' M'sheekha	Respond to of 281500

I Think We Can Agree on Threat And/Or Consequences....... Of this " a dog on a unicycle " having WMD capabilities , however I will have to somewhat disagree with the assertion that rhetoric is any more than just that. If you recall China's rhetoric towards Taiwan during the elections a couple of years back , you would have thought WAR was immanent if you took those threats at face value. More recently , Between Indo - Pak , the rhetoric of blowing each other to smithereens was no less harsh. This rhetoric and saber rattling was discussed here recently , and I think we can all agree , it is all part of the " Game Of War " , we are becoming more and more exposed to. I think what we( SR and I )are looking at here is Israel trying kill a fly with a sledge hammer maybe.It just appears so out of balance with the reality of 500 nukes and well tested multiple delivery systems ,against the possibility of one country obtaining the technology and material. Threats are often just that...threats." We " have lived under them for decades , but never did " our " forces contemplate a preemptive strike. As a matter of fact , it has only been Israel that has made any such strike in the ME, when they blew up shithead's new nuke power facility some years ago.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (38182)	8/16/2002 5:43:55 PM
From: kumar	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

If you were in Israel's shoes, you'd be beefing up your second strike capabilities too. So why is the world p'd off at India and Pakistan having nuke capability ?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (38182)	8/16/2002 7:51:04 PM
From: SirRealist	Respond to of 281500

Well, after Israel gets its first and second strike completed, I don't imagine Hussein's possibilities will be much on anyone's mind. Avoiding being downwind will be the top concern. And imo, fundamentalists with the conviction that theirs is the sole true religion, be that Muslim, Christian, Jew or BPOE are far more likely to skip adhering to the MAD theory. Pakistan is a Muslim country with the bomb. Turkey might have some access to theater nukes of ours. Hussein hardly qualifies as a Muslim despite leading a Muslim country. Israel has regained its popular support from a broad majority of US citizens because it appears we have a common enemy and we're fighting mad. Sharon and its other hardliners have so far been able to exploit that successfully. But some of its actions have gained criticism elsewhere that was justified. I keep hoping they won't make enough poor choices to squander US support because it seems certain the hardliners would then just view us as one more in a long list of enemies, and some of that arsenal would be aimed at our backyard. We have an Israeli spy doing life as a clear reminder of the threat of extremism, by whatever faith it labels itself.