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: tekboy who wrote (48809)	10/2/2002 2:03:11 AM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Hi tekboy; Re: "There was a pretty decent consensus among foreign policy professionals that a combination of new types of terrorists and greater availability of WMD meant that the odds of a catastrophic attack were greater than they had been in the past, ..." I cannot resolve the contradiction inherent in these facts, can you? (1) Al Qaeda was supported by the Taliban. (2) The Taliban ruled Afghanistan. (3) Afghanistan had plenty of weapons that would destroy aircraft, including missiles and RPGs, and these weapons were available to the Taliban. (4) Al Qaeda used knives to make the WTC attack. (5) Civilian aircraft do not seem to be taking hits from RPGs or missiles. -- Carl P.S. My conclusion is that the Taliban support for Al Qaeda was limited. I'm afraid that if a regime ever gives unlimited support to terrorists we will have a real problem on our hands, but we haven't seen it yet.