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.

Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Oeconomicus who wrote (148263)	9/30/2002 6:40:16 AM
From: craig crawford	Respond to of 164687

>> There are two reasons why "no first strike" is not relevant to the world today << "no first strike" has never been relevant, including all the pre-emptive attacks and wars israel has engaged in the past several decades. israel is loving this new american doctrine, because they believe they can apply the same standard themselves. once israel drags the US into a so-called "pre-emptive" war against saddam, creating a new doctrine, they will have the green light to launch all kinds of pre-emptive wars against their arab enemies--which they already do anyway, but usually lie about and try to make look like they didn't start.

To: Oeconomicus who wrote (148263)	9/30/2002 9:43:41 AM
From: GST	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 164687

<<There are two reasons why "no first strike" is not relevant to the world today.>> The world has indeed changed since the end of the US-Soviet nuclear standoff and you make valid points about the difference between a state such as the Soviet Union and terrorists. Of course Iraq is a state and there is every indication that Saddam does not want to commit suicide. The argument that he supports terrorists is relatively weak and nobody in in the intelligence community is pushing the idea that Iraq has done much of anything to help the likes of bin Laden. That leaves us without a real basis for attack, save one: In is not in our national interest to tolerate the existence of a hostile regime with nuclear capability in the middle of the oil patch.