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: combjelly who wrote (491532)	6/29/2009 2:36:23 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1576619

>> Do you have a link that this has been deployed to Hawaii? "Speaking at a Pentagon news conference, Mr. Gates said he had directed the military to deploy mobile, ground-based interceptors to Hawaii." nytimes.com Hundreds of billions, 30 years. No, I'd say the naysayers got it pretty spot on. At least so far. We are still a long, long way away from SDI as it was first marketed. Nobody has ever doubted that we could stop a handful of missiles, eventually. It was the all out attack that was doubted. Because only 3 or 4 need to get through to destroy us. Well, Trillions and 40 years later, Medicare hasn't lived up to expectations, either. That's government for you. Reagan estimated it would require "more than 20 years" to develop an effective SDI system. So, maybe it takes 40 years or longer. It doesn't matter. It still takes us to a place where we're far better off than we would have been without it. There is little doubt it will be accomplished, and Carl Sagan (and probably you, as well) were claiming it wasn't possible. By ending the Cold War, Reagan solved the problem of many missiles, many warheads and eliminated our reliance on MAD, which he properly analyzed as an utterly insane proposition. >> What are doing is making the world safe from Scuds. So, you feel the Taepodong-2 is no better than a Scud?