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: TigerPaw who wrote (420795)	9/29/2008 2:33:06 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574678

>> Think of the MAD defense that won the cold war. MAD didn't win the cold war. MAD was the policy of containment which failed for all those years. It was SDI, in which Reagan said, "We are not going to accept containment" that won the Cold War. Reagan took office with the specific intent of bringing the USSR down with an aggressive strategy that worked. Get a clue or don't bother.

To: TigerPaw who wrote (420795)	9/29/2008 2:52:07 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574678

TP, > Think of the MAD defense that won the cold war. You're running further and further away from your own martial arts analogy, yet you still haven't proven that you actually want to follow the words of JFK: > I want to discuss with you today the status of our strength and our security because this question clearly calls for the most responsible qualities of leadership and the most enlightened products of scholarship. For this Nation's strength and security are not easily or cheaply obtained, nor are they quickly and simply explained. There are many kinds of strength and no one kind will suffice. Overwhelming nuclear strength cannot stop a guerrilla war. Formal pacts of alliance cannot stop internal subversion. Displays of material wealth cannot stop the disillusionment of diplomats subjected to discrimination. > Above all, words alone are not enough. The United States is a peaceful nation. And where our strength and determination are clear, our words need merely to convey conviction, not belligerence. If we are strong, our strength will speak for itself. If we are weak, words will be of no help. Instead, liberals think that by simply having a strong military, that in itself would be belligerent, not to mention a waste of money compared to all of the social spending they would prioritize. Like I said, tough words coming from a guy who wants to reduce defense spending. You say you're against "offense spending"? Whoop-dee-doo, what isn't "offense spending" to you? Tenchusatsu