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: Sig who wrote (72579)	2/9/2003 6:01:56 AM
From: D. Long	Respond to of 281500

Which is precisely the idea behind the "Axis of Evil". Atomic bombs are not produced by dispersed networks of non-governmental organizations. They may be assembled by a NGO, but not produced. Producing the Bomb requires tremendous resources and physical plant that only a government can build, or even procure the elements to build such plant. Chemical weapons are much easier, but biological weapon production seems to fit the same set of restrictions nuclear weapons have. So the problem with WMD isn't one of the inevitability of small revisionist NGOs getting them. The problem is the State that has the capacity to produce these weapons, and is disposed to provide them to the NGOs intent on their use, or the failed State that is no longer able to protect them from theft. Alone, the revisionist NGOs are an old matter of guerrilla warfare. It's the rogue State that is the edge of the knife, IMO. Derek

To: Sig who wrote (72579)	2/9/2003 6:37:33 PM
From: Jacob Snyder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

<So here the US comes into play with its widely dispersed tracking and defense installations > I am hearing a lot of techno-babble, by hammers who only see nails. All the advantages you think will win the WarOnTerrorism, are the same advantages we had in Vietnam: overwhelming superiority in firepower, mobility, logistics, communications, hardware. Didn't work then; won't win now. Here's how we could have won in Vietnam (this model was briefly tried, then abandoned even though it worked, because it was too strange to be accepted by the military/civilian decision-makers): 1. Send a squad of U.S. soldiers to every village, and every neighborhood in every city, in Vietnam (today, Afghanistan). Begin with the areas that don't yet have any significant guerrilla activity, and spread slowly into the guerrilla strongholds. 2. Our soldiers will live in the village. They will eat what the villagers eat, shit the way the villagers shit, and soon smell the way the villagers smell. 3. Their job will be to defend the village. When not doing this, they can build a school, repair the local road. 4. They will (and this may take a few years), (1)recruit, (2)indoctrinate (=idealogical recruitment) , and (3)train a local militia. Of those three tasks, the ideological recruitment is the most important, because if it fails, the other two will also. 5. Enforce the strictest standards of behavior on our own soldiers. For instance, the village chiefs should be given the power to arrest, try, and execute U.S. soldiers who rape local women. 6. When the local militia can reliably defend their own village on their own, all over the country, the U.S. declares victory and our soldiers come home.