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: paul_philp who wrote (90523)	4/6/2003 1:39:18 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 281500

<'toxic chemical precursors' > Dodecyl benzene sulphonic acid for example - a very scary-sounding toxic precursor to household detergent or maybe shampoo or something. Maybe even some white powders too! Mqurice

To: paul_philp who wrote (90523)	4/6/2003 5:07:56 AM
From: maceng2	Respond to of 281500

Britain sold Syria industrial chemicals. So big deal. I was not necessarily unaware that the article may be a stretch. Fact is though, a rogue nation or a rogue person can do some very nasty things with whatever you send them these days. I would expect an outright embargo against Syria if all the WMD hoopla has a grain of truth in it. A case in point is nuclear power stations. Everyones got them including the USA. France has tons of them. There are some obsolete plants in the UK that are going to take lots of decommissioning. Some parts of Chechnya really does glow in the dark. Lets put some risks into perpective here... Do we invade Syria or do we clean up this mess ? atimes.com No cruise missiles needed though. It's not quite so glamorous a job. Part of the problem with having advanced weapons programs is that other Nations learn the trade. A big security problem now is cruise missiles. I've been part of the industrial military complex and can say yes... it's a dubious beast that can easily go wrong. Ends justifying means in a geometric upward trend. Whats the real point (and the danger) of a world where humans are increasingly intent on making weapons, and are over focused on the security threat?? Invading countries is a big step up in the world unstability league. The trouble with Bilow (Carl) is that he was not only hopelessly wrong... he could so easily be hopelessly right. Not every military planner can assume that no bridges get blown during a retreat. I'll be honest, even with some of Bilows wacky mannerisms and "End Zone Dances", I valued reading his commentry on the Iraq situation, and on matters concerning military threats. Normally you have to expect 10% casualties in a conventional war even if things are well organized. You have to be naive as the British public were in 1914 to think otherwise. That every one will be home by Christmass. So yes, when Tony B puts on his serious pious face and blabs about "WMD threats" I am only half listening. It does not take much imagination that North Koreans are getting real alarmed about whats been happening. What troubles me is that NK might only be trying to build nuclear power stations for the power, not to actually kill everyone in the world by triggering a nuclear conflict. The bullshit political factor in this very technical world of ours is now immense. So, yes.. as a technical person.. I am most interested in whats unfolding here... Iraq, Iran, Syria, and NK. George and Tony would convince me much better without the theatricals when they talk "WMD" capabilities.