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: zonder who wrote (61517)	12/13/2002 9:50:48 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

>>And KILLING non-Americans, "in massive numbers", is OK?<< In a word, yes. Deal with it. >>That is "conscionable"?<< If they start it, we'll finish it. You didn't read that stuff I posted about tit-for-tat, did you?

To: zonder who wrote (61517)	12/13/2002 11:02:52 AM
From: aladin	Respond to of 281500

Zonder, Ar you really this naive? This is exactly what kept the peace between the Soviets and us for decades. Its was called MAD - Mutually Assured Destruction. The effect is you gas, bio or nuke us - we nuke you. No tit-for-tat, all WMD = a nuke response. Nixon put this into policy back in 1972. John

To: zonder who wrote (61517)	12/13/2002 1:22:56 PM
From: Neeka	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

If your community were being surrounded by a pack of hungry wolves and little by little the wolves were killing your people without warning or discrimination would you retaliate by doing everything in your power to eliminate the threat? If you did do everything in your power to protect your people would innocent wolves be killed? How would you go about protecting yourself? M

To: zonder who wrote (61517)	12/14/2002 12:44:33 AM
From: D. Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

It's called nuclear deterrance. Deterrance doesn't work unless you're willing to do the dirty. A fact that fails to register with many. Also, you do realize that all nuclear weapons aren't city engulfing Boomers, right? Derek

To: zonder who wrote (61517)	3/6/2003 9:42:09 AM
From: BubbaFred	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Non-Americans are considered as worthless piece of dirt and can be exterminated at any time for the convenience and propagation of American supremacy (i.e. for the good of Americans). This is the basic underlying morase. It can be broken down on how much (ethnic, religion, etc) kinships between and among the societies that will tangle in conflict(s). It's the nature of the beast. As the saying goes "You can take a man out of a jungle, but you cannot take the jungle out of the man". No one wants equality specially if it's within one's power and ability to make most everyone else his inferiors.

To: zonder who wrote (61517)	3/6/2003 10:52:12 AM
From: Sig	Respond to of 281500

Consider an example 1. At 10 AM a missile launch is detected by Norad, with no pre-announcement 2. At 10.01 the country of origin is identified as N Korea 3. At 10 :02 A General at Norad is on the red phone to N Korea Is it a satelite launch?. What is the payload ? Do we trust them ? Is it an errant launch? 4 At 10:05 We know its headed our way but cannot tell the distance/trajectory We go to Defcon 1 and scramble fighters. Notify all friendly Nations 5 At 10:10 we get a clue as to range expected 6: At 10:15 we know it is probably not a satellite launch 7: At 10:20 we identify the probable target/landing sight area. Still dont know whats in the missile. 8. Orders go out to fighters and/or Patriot batteries to destroy the missile at all costs So far I see no way for us to decide "take out" the launch site with a nuke unless they have threatened us first. In the worst case it was nuke and we lose 1 mm people before being able to respond. At the best we destroy it in the air without knowing the payload To prevent this insane scenario from happening we must have fast communications with a responsible trustworthy person in as many countries as possible ( in case it was headed toward them) We will also use "all possible means" to stop a second launch if the missile caused destruction From whatever sense can be made of this, I would say if N. Korea launches a missile toward a land mass they should announce what they are doing or countries involved should exercise their unilateral right to destroy it in flight if possible. Sig