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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (81142)	2/9/2009 1:27:26 PM
From: one_less	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

If the attacks were sufficiently neutralised by such defense capability, the cost in launching them becomes a prohibitive excess, far above the benefits of the launch. If only a tiny percentage get past the defense and they land in the dirt someplace the massive campaigns would likely be stopped. Of course Hamas would likely put its resources into some other mode of attack in that event, either escalating to a superior weapon or to something more insidious like, bio/chem or like human bombs. It isn't the systems themselves that have my attention, it is the strategy of neutralization. When neither side's destructive weapon strategies have any effect on the outcome of this dispute, what are we left with but reasonable disputation toward practical and beneficent goals. Currently the over riding goal is the destruction of the opposition, with no end of that in sight.