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: Sun Tzu who wrote (242486)	9/20/2007 1:16:07 PM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

You really think saudis will just fold up tent and go away as a threat and that tribes will take over if kingdom falls? You see no danger of al queada takeover? You dont believe iran is planning on building nuke weapons. I think thats a naive poaition. I didnt understand the end of the paragraph re: nukes. Also you didnt answer my question about israel as to whether going back to 67 lines was enough for you given the geographic cohesiveness you were looking for pal. I assume 67 lines are good enough but my point was that you dont get what you want with them. Pal issue is a tough one.

To: Sun Tzu who wrote (242486)	9/20/2007 1:24:45 PM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

"And if they don't feel threatened, then they won't need nukes, will they?" If they are developing nukes is it because they feel threatened by the US and/or Israel? Is that your point? I dont see it that way. I think it can be perceived as a forward move to gain more influence and power in the arab world by deterring israel and imposing will on arab states with nukes, hizbo and alliance with syria. I hope you are right becuase then a deal is possible.