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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (153675)	10/20/2002 8:44:41 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1580445

And we don't have any ICBMs either or any other defensive/offensive weapons. No we just have no ABMs or any other defence against missiles. We can only deter or retaliate or premtivly attack we cannot defend against missle attack. Then what are our billions of defense dollars spent on? Mostly personel costs, convetional weapons, and R+D. The only reason we and the Russians agreed to the ABM treaty was because AMBs were not all that great for defense. IF they don't work why do you need a treaty against them? My point was that a rejection of even this minor attempt at peaceful behavior sends a signal to the rest of the world we are not so committed to peace. Not having a defense isn't a sign of peaceful behavior if anything it might make you more agressive. If you are not vunerable you don't have to shoot first. The expanding missile threat? What? All of the countries that are working on missile technology from Iraq, to South Korea, to Iran and others. Also the fact that even without a big program to work on the technology it will eventually find its way to most of the world. Tim