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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: CYBERKEN who wrote (689948)	7/4/2005 6:31:44 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Why would you think it was "monstrous"? I know of no other way to describe killing on such scale. Esp. when it isn't in response to an attack. It would be one think in North Korea nuked us. Than nuking them would keep them from doing it again and would discourage everyone else, but an out of the blue massive nuclear strike just because they won't give up their nuclear program would be monstrous. Do you REALLY think the world is like the "It's a Small World" ride at Disneyland? There are many levels between thinking that we can all get together around a campfire and sing songs, and massive preemptive nuclear strikes on anyone who we vaguely feel may be a threat. A world where North Korea was not just stopped, but destroyed by America, carries a message to every bobtailed monkey looking for the NEXT World Trade Center opportunity... It would send a message that we are dangerous lunatics. It might discourage some from testing our patience but it would encourage others to either found stealthy ways to act against us, or to build up their nuclear delivery capabilities. The world trade center attack was aweful but North Korea didn't do it and we have no evidence that they are planing anything remotely similar. And notice that we didn't use nukes in response to the world trade center attack. That was a wise decision IMO. Tim