SI
SI
discoversearch

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: DavesM who wrote (292827)9/3/2002 11:46:44 PM
From: CYBERKEN  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
<<after they develop nuclear weapons?>>

At that point and after, there is only ONE WAY to do it. But don't tell "wrong way" eagle. I think he's already burying himself under his out house...



To: DavesM who wrote (292827)9/4/2002 5:45:56 PM
From: J_F_Shepard  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
" that means that Iraq would already have the bomb. You would bomb the nuclear bomb making facilities"

I was trying to tell you that I would destroy their facilities right now if we could find them, ie before they have a tested bomb.... Just suppose he did have the bomb, paint me a scenario in which he would use it and not have Iraq and himsel f destroyed in return.

Your Pakistan answer was very weak.....most, not many Pakistani's hate us....



To: DavesM who wrote (292827)9/4/2002 9:33:28 PM
From: rich4eagle  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
A nuclear Arms expert stated to me this is not as easy as every one is making it out to be. And as if having a bomb difficut enough, delivering it is another matter. How do you propose Iraq will deliver this "bomb". And when we are done with Iraq do we invade Israel, Pakistan, India, China, Russia, France, and Britain to prevent them from using the "bomb". I listed these countries that possess nuclear weapons by chance of nuking some one.