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: Lou Weed who wrote (246614)	10/25/2007 11:04:23 AM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

but you agree that long range missiles are designed to deter euros from intervening in something untoward iran might do in the future. Thus from a western pov, it needs to be countered and thus we get missile defense. You dont want to attack iran re: nukes and you then you dont want to deter them from using nukes they might develop or intimidating friendly states and/or oil rich states in the gulf, not to mention israel.

To: Lou Weed who wrote (246614)	10/25/2007 11:09:57 AM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

"Isn't that what every country has missiles for?" Sure. Justice is the same for one as it is for the many. As individuals we have the right to take our complaints to a court, to bear arms or to protect ourselves against unjust search and seizure, invasions of privacy, or unjust attacks from the US government forces as we are able ... and I see nothing fundamentally wrong with other political entities doing the same. I don't want to live in a country that acts as though its power should be weilded in an unfettered manner against individuals or other countries. But the word 'untoward' was the qualifier in Nadine's remark. That changes the context of who has the right to act a certain way and be cheered on while they do. Missiles never make actions right or worthy of cheers IMO.