[lit-ideas] Re: Worst Case Scenarios
- From: Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 00:05:57 -0700 (PDT)
--- Eric Yost <eyost1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> In addition to the arguments you mentioned is the
> outright stupidity of having nukes in the first
> place. They are unavoidably contaminating to
> build, very expensive to maintain, and commit the
> nuclear country to maintaining safeguards and
> storage for thousands of years.
*Yeah. Let's talk about getting rid of the US nukes.
> US and the other nuclear powers are trapped in
> this mess, but encouraging every tinpot
> dictatorship and Madman Mullahocracy to nuke up
> just makes the problem almost unresolvable. Plus
> our new laser weapons go online in a couple years
> tops. That means we can destroy Iranian missiles
> as they clear their silos, which further reduces
> the strategic significance of having nukes in the
> first place.
*Then I suppose the Iranian nukes, when and if it gets
them, should be no problem. But I trust that in the
next post they will suddenly become a horrible threat
again.
O.K.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
