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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ish who wrote (12383)	11/2/1998 7:29:00 PM
From: mauser96	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

I thought of adding simple methodology like that to my post, but unless you are talking about nuclear weapons it is not a very effective delivery method. It's hard to get adequate dispersion of chemical or biological materials without an air burst or aircraft spray. That's why you see crop dusters. Attacking the water supply with a toxin would probably work better, but compared to megaton yield thermonuclear devices these are not very good weapons of mass destruction. I'm less worried about attacks from a nation than I am from terrorists. A nation attempting to attack the US with germs or chemicals might be answered with thermonuclear missiles, targeted directly at where the leaders live. Remember our reaction after the dead Americans at Pearl Harbor. Terrorists don't have a nation to attack. Of course a country might be led by a lunatic, so we should be putting more effort into developing a defense against ICBM's.