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: Jacob Snyder who wrote (82015)	3/14/2003 10:45:39 AM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

"....it is very possible, we "solve" this problem with one or more small tactical nukes. That may be the only method to save Seoul; all conventional means wouldn't work fast enough....." <the NK's know they will lose> "If Seoul is destroyed, we lose, and the S. Koreans will never forgive or forget, even if we go on to do Regime Change in N. Korea." So are you saying we should use tactical nukes to save seoul or are you implying that the US has caused this crisis and the the destruction of seoul as seen by the SKs? <they cheat> "We cheat. An honest look at what was promised in the 1994 agreement, by both sides, and then what was actually done, is that neither side kept their word. " How did we cheat? First i have heard of that. And if you can prove we did something wrong, who did it first and what are the differences in scale? They snooker Jimmy and Billy because there was more Trust than Verify and you blame the US and Bush. You really have a completely negative and jaundiced view of your country's fp, re: North Korea. Next you will tell us that Kim had justification to kidnap those japanese civilians or saddam was within his rights to gas the kurds? mike

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (82015)	3/14/2003 11:59:21 AM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

What you have, is a failure of imagination. There are other choices. If that is what I have, why don't you make up for my failure by listing the other choice? The truth is you don't have a viable "other choice." The risk if we do something is great. The risk if we do "trust but can't verify" is greater. And you know we can't "verify." What I am getting from you and everyone else here on this issue is a recoil from the possible consequences of taking action in NK, and a refusal to discuss the almost sure consequences if we don't take action.