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: Ilaine who wrote (42578)	9/8/2002 12:09:43 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

NYTimes poll questions are hysterical - example: >>Which comes closer to your opinion? 1. The United States should not attack another country unless that country has attacked the United States first, or 2. The United States should be able to attack any country it thinks might attack the United States?<< nytimes.com Talk about a loaded question. How about "The United States should be able to attack another country that it thinks is likely to attack the United States"?

To: Ilaine who wrote (42578)	9/8/2002 1:34:37 PM
From: KLP	Respond to of 281500

"And it's the fuel that will bring down civilization if it falls into the wrong hands I wonder how many read that article carefully? Even here?? ...There are many things to be concerned about, and the article points out some of them... >>>>>"Plutonium is still seen as the ideal fuel within the nuclear fraternity," said Paul Leventhal, former president of the Washington-based Nuclear Control Institute. "And it's the fuel that will bring down civilization if it falls into the wrong hands<<<<< >>>>>Even if the IAEA adopted security requirements, India, Israel and Pakistan have refused to sign the 1968 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which is the basis of the agency's powers. Iran and North Korea have evaded full disclosure. Iraq refuses to cooperate altogether. <<<<<