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.

Pastimes : Kosovo -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jacalyn Deaner who wrote (3670)	4/14/1999 6:27:00 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17770

Australia is good, but New Zealand is an even better option. Better climate, further away from global hot spots, less inviting to invasion, very civilized. If I go anywhere, that's where it's going to be.

To: Jacalyn Deaner who wrote (3670)	4/14/1999 6:55:00 PM
From: nuke44	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17770

Big negative on Australia having it's own nukes. They are more than happy to rely on their close ties with their old NATO pals Great Britain and the U.S. to provide whatever nuclear clout they might need. Under the former ANZUS treaty, they had military ties with the U.S. as strong as we have with our NATO allies. The ANZUS treaty was dissolved at the instigation of the Australian government, because the third partner in the treaty, New Zealand was not holding up it's end of the pact. The Australian government now has closer military ties with NATO than you might suspect. (Interestingly, quite a few of the aircraft that Australia has bought from the U.S. in recent years, are nuclear delivery capable).