Re: Brin: Re: appealing to old style conservatives\a monopoly on nukes
- My dear Mr. Pensinger,
It would seem to me that those capable of most effectively deploying nukes have a "monopoly on nukes". A nuke sitting in my basement is hardly a threat to anyone but me.
I would confess to being somewhat ignorant at the latest delivery technologies employed by our "friends" and esteemed adversaries. I doubt very much, however, they could come close to matching those created by the US military industrial complex over the past 50 years.
(and let's not even discuss "gods rods", the reserection of project THOR from the 1970's)
The POINT of my rabbling discertation....(sorry it was so rambling but I'm often in a hurry)
(I have things to do around here besides dick on the computer Jack! I have a bunch of kids and a job!)
...............is that the current action against Iraq has little to nothing to do with control of mideast oil supplies. (that was, unless I am mistaken, originally what Mr.Brin was discussing)
It has mostly to everything to do with power and influence for the future. I believe that what is happening today was part of some evolving contingency plan laid out many years ago.
Someone had to get an ass-whupping in order to help keep the rest of the emerging nation-states in line. Iraq was volunteered for obvious reasons. (one of which was, "they did not have any WMD's." ie It was fairly safe, as these things go)
Now, if that's a little clearer. You may feel free to comment, ignore me, or toss me from your list.
Thanks for listening
Leonard J Matusik MSN *Southern Institute of Collaborative ChaosNursing* SICC/N
Doug Pensinger <brighto@...> wrote:
On Fri, 27 May 2005 11:16:16 -0700 (PDT), David Brin
> It was not even remotely comprehensible what point wasNor I, but I'd be interested to find out why he thinks that anyone has a
> intended here....
"monopoly on nukes".
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around