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 : Dutch Central Bank Sale Announcement Imminent? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: philv who wrote (23359)	7/20/2005 3:41:25 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Respond to of 81050

Re: What do you think of the policy that's being followed to try to stop Iran's uranium processing through negotiations? I agree that we should try to stop the processing and probably, tactically, it's very useful to let the Europeans do the negotiating and we back it up. But the fact is, at some point in the relatively near future, we will have to decide whether those negotiations are working or whether they are not simply a way of legitimizing a continued program. That will be hotly disputed. Then we have to decide, we together with our allies, what measures are appropriate, and then we will face the question of how far we are willing to go to prevent nuclear-weapons technology in Iran. Iran will get us probably beyond the point where nonproliferation can be a meaningful policy, and then we live in a world of multiple nuclear centers. And then we'd have to ask ourselves what the world would look like if the bombs in London had been nuclear and 100,000 people had been killed. "...and then we live in a world of multiple nuclear centers." Well, Mr Kissinger overlooks the fact that we ALREADY live in a world of multiple nuclear centers: the US, Russia, the UK, France, India, Pakistan, China, are all nuclear centers on their own. Why couldn't Iran join the club? Because of her hostility to Israel? But then, India and Pakistan too are at odds with each other, to put it mildly.... The US had better think twice before messing with Iran... If a nuke is set off in, say, Chicago, you'll not be able to identify the culprit --you've got too many enemies! This ain't the cold war when all the nuclear threats, one way or another, stemmed from the USSR... Today, the gallery of rogues that might launch a preemptive, asymmetrical, non-conventional strike against the US heartland includes: China, North Korea, Pakistani rogues (the Khan connection), Russian nationalists, Israeli provocateurs, and even homebred militia far-rightists (Waco, McVeigh, Rudolph,...). Kissinger offhandedly talks about a nuclear terrorist attack on London.... Well, that would be quite a trauma inflicted upon Britain, yet, I sense that the Brits would tough it out. I don't think, however, that a nuclear strike on the US wouldn't shatter the US polity at the same time... It would be the straw that breaks the camel's back, the spark of a second civil, racial, war.... Gus