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: carranza2 who wrote (151284)	11/8/2004 12:48:08 PM
From: Michael Watkins	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

If you read back through the discussion thread you will see, more than once, that I have not suggested that Iran suddenly became interested in nuclear technology in reaction to Bush / Wolfowitz / Kristol / Kirkpatrick / Cheney / Rumsfeld policy or actions. But I have said, more than once, that I would not be at all surprised if Iran or other "treatened" countries were more inclined to "accelerate" weapons programs, directly as a result of the shift in US foreign policy. My premise was, and remains, that the pre-emptive doctrine - so poorly utilized to attack Iraq for no reason - gives threatened states a rational reason to accelerate any programs they may have had. My point has been consistant all long. If you want to play games and quote one line out of context, out of a discussion spanning many posts, that's a game you can play by yourself. For the record........... MW:Its my contention that Bush's (and Wolfy etc) doctrine has encouraged threatened nation-states to accelerate their weapons development programs and frankly I do not blame them one bit. Rather than make the world, or even the US, safer, this new approach (which is just a reworked old approach) has done quite the contrary. Message 20741956 MW:I did say that as a result of Bush's policies, it would not be a surprise to see a threatened nation accelerate if not start a weapons program. Message 20742122 MW:One has to wonder if any nation with the ability to produce nuclear arms would give up that ability given US foreign policy, particular its most recent incarnation. I find it very odd to be agreeing with Madeline Albright but her observation isn't an opinion so its not that hard - she said, in essence: "the US by its actions has proven that it does not attack countries that have nuclear arms. Why would any country give up that ability", especially when the sabres are rattling? Message 20739171

To: carranza2 who wrote (151284)	11/8/2004 2:04:09 PM
From: neolib	Respond to of 281500

It is my opinion that we have seen absolutely zero additional efforts for any states to become armed with nukes as a direct result of the Administration's disrespect for international law. To the contrary, the only thing we can say for a certainty is that we we have seen a salutary abandonment of nuclear effort by Lybia as a result of the Administration's actions. There was some chatter about Saudi & nukes from late 2003. See the link: guardian.co.uk Always denied by the Saudis though, as one would expect. Regarding Lybia. Lybia was well along the road of abandoning its terror policies before 9/11, let alone Gulf II.