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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Spheres who wrote (79864)	10/22/2004 9:35:53 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794019

Absolutely clueless. Tell me you majored in engineering . . . .

To: Spheres who wrote (79864)	10/22/2004 10:40:41 PM
From: SBHX	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 794019

I am as much in awe with you as how Reagan and his allies convinced the Iron Curtain to change. However, if you look at why the soviet union did not attack, it was because there is a Moscow, and the immoral doctrine of mutual assured destruction actually does work as a deterrent. In this case, the enemies appear to have nothing they can lose. For example, though we know binLaden is from Yemen, decency prevents us from levelling the country of innocents, though we know all members of Zawahiri's and binLaden's family, our humanity does not allow us to assassinate every member of that gene pool. And even though we know that the symbol the jihadists hold dearest in their heart is a black stone in Mecca, it would be immoral for us to reduce it to rubble. Because fundamentally, we are not like them. And it is because they know we are not like them that they think we are weak. This is why there is no doctrine of mutually assured destruction that can work here. If you believe there is a better way, I'm all ears.