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: Win Smith who wrote (50784)	10/10/2002 8:32:25 PM
From: Brumar89	Respond to of 281500

A "crash program" sort of assumes lack of external interference. Enriching uranium in quality and quantity sufficient for weapons isn't something that can easily be done in a basement bunker or two. Yes, but Saddam's been pretty much free of external interference since late '98, hasn't he? I presume he has much more than a couple basement bunkers - for example, since the Gulf War he's built about 50 presidential palaces - large enclosed areas with extensive buildings. Saddam is not going to last till '04 without inspectors on the ground in Iraq. I hope you're right. Given an American threat of unilateral action, perhaps. The inspectors may not have gotten everything last time around, but I'm sure they didn't miss any industrial scale enrichment facilities, and it's highly improbable that a more stringent regime, which would be demanded at this point, would miss the buildup either. Again I hope you're right. But a more stringent inspection regime may not happen. The US and Britain are about the only countries in favor it seems to me.