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: John Soileau who wrote (124479)	2/7/2004 11:29:48 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 281500

This brutal leader actually HAS WMDs, and the means to deliver them to California, and has threatened to do just that. Even without the WMDs, this brutal leader could destroy Seoul in a day. The city is within range of his artillery. With WMDs, it's worse. Do you think that the lives and wishes of the South Koreans might be influencing our decision making? Of course, we could have done nothing in Iraq, and waited until Saddam too had gone shopping at AQ Khans Sam's Club for Nukes. Would that situation be better, do you think?

To: John Soileau who wrote (124479)	2/8/2004 12:56:20 AM
From: Sig	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

<< How about these "acts on a daily basis"? This brutal leader actually HAS WMDs, and the means to deliver them to California, and has threatened to do just that. "Compare and contrast" to Iraquagmire. Odd that we didn't spend the war resources further East, eh? >>> If speaking delivery of nukes to LA by air, I assume a plan is ready. Do we try to save Chicago from the next strike, or do we try to save Seaul? Priority one: Convert some rough Korean terrain into future flat agricultural ground where nuclear facilities now exist. Time estimate 1 hour Priority 2: While communications are still blocked out, test our newer Moabs and Jdams on that line of N Korean artillery pointed at Seaul. Unfortunately our required post- Korea planning will be non-existent which may hinder our response. And then again, perhaps no planning will be required and we can move right to the action. I have no choice but to trust the thousands of military planners to have a plan do the 'right thing' at the beginning and to handle the subsequent 'fallout' as best they can. Sig