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: Augustus Gloop who wrote (158595)	2/28/2005 11:48:25 AM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Those are questions I can't currently answer. It seems to me that those are questions that should be answered when you get to a position that Iran "must be stopped". There are plenty of other questions as well. On the planet, who is and who is not allowed to have heavy reactors? Who makes up the list? Who enforces the list? Is the US supposed to be the only one that has the moral authority to decide who is allowed to have heavy water reactors? Why doesn't Israel have to be party to the NPT? Wouldn't it be just as good if we stopped Russia from building the heavy water reactor and supplying fuel to Iran? It doesn't look like Bush is willing to go to the mat on that one. He'll come down on Europe to not sell arms to China, but give Putin a pass when it comes to Russia selling arms to China. Pakistan sold nuclear design and technology to up to 16 countries. I guess they're sorry...everything ok now? You want to call a spade a spade. Bush likes to calls spades as hearts and clubs are spades. If he calls a spade a spade, it's by accident. As far as I can tell, Bush has established a foreign policy position: If you want to keep the US off your turf, get WMD. jttmab