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 (151789)	11/17/2004 11:33:55 AM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

C2, Policy must be stated to be effective. Given the arab/muslim view of bush, if i were they i would be scared shitless by such a threat. I can see a situation where arab/muslim people start to betray terrorists among them and other leaders with this in mind adopt the quaddafi solution. What percent of arab/muslim people prefer martyrdom to life? Whatever the number one comes up with, ask yourself this question. What good is martyrdom if ulitmately every muslim in the world is annihilated? This is why Israel aquired nukes in the first place being surrounded by 100 million arabs who wanted them in the sea. But dont take this as an endorsement just yet--i will wait for others to comment first. mike

To: carranza2 who wrote (151789)	11/17/2004 2:35:59 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

If such a policy were publicly stated then: 1) Any group wanting to nuke the US would take great pains to make it look like some other group did it. 2) There is an incentive for third parties to nuke the US to get destruction brought to their own enemies. Israel would forever be the suspect. On a related note, many years ago US scientists speculated on building really big H-bombs (50K megatons) as the ultimate deterrent. Attack us and we blow up the earth! Maybe 100 years from now some nutcases will, who knows?

To: carranza2 who wrote (151789)	11/17/2004 4:43:49 PM
From: Michael Watkins	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Terrorists do not exist in a stateless vacuum. In each state in which they have refuse LOL this fellow you've quoted is using the Arlo Gutherie "Alice's Restaurant" Offense. Arrestin' (nuking) him for littering! As for the rest of the article - this man is quite a piece of work. I'm sure that there isn't a speck of recognition that the West is complicit via our domestic and foreign policies. In part, we reap what we have sown. But if he's looking for targetting information, will he be an equal opportunity nuclear terrorist (bomb both Shi'a and Sunni holy places or only those which are shared?)? Here are some suggested sites: Mecca? Perhaps during the great pilgrimage? Medina? Once a capital. Might want to consider what this does to oil trade first. Saudis are not likely to be happy about this. Jerusalem? Dome of the Rock. Just ask Sharon about this first. LOL Hebron? Hmnn, other faiths won't like this either. Qom? Well its only Iranians so go for it. Najaf and Karbala in Iraq? Well that's going to take out lots of "coalition" forces. Yes, I can hardly wait for George W Bush to start firing missiles up and killing millions. It will fit nicely with the orthodox "born again" plan too.