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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (243127)	7/24/2005 2:50:43 PM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573039

Nope. I said we need to threaten to do it. The idea that worked in the Cold War was mutually assured destruction. The problem with the terrorists is that we don't have any leverage, because they don't care whether they live or die. They aren't rational. Therefore, we have to threaten the governments that are creating these terrorists. That means telling Saudi Arabia and Iran and Pakistan that if we get hit with a nuke or any other kind of WMD, each of them should fully expect some strategic targets within their countries to be wipe out. The upside to this is that if we help them understand we absolutely mean business, then those countries will pull out all the stops to reign in terrorists. Iran may stop recruiting them and/or cut off funding, the Saudis may stop allowing hate to be taught in their schools and stop funding them, Pakistan may make more of an effort to reign in their own extremists. Then if it doesn't work and we get hit with WMD and we retaliate, they will finally know that we were serious and there won't be a next time. I can guarantee that.