At 12:23 PM 9/12/01 +0200 Baardwijk, J. van DTO/SLBD/BGM/SVM/SGM wrote:
>This I do not understand. In recent discussions, several people said that it
>would be likely that terrorists or terrorism-supporting countries would not
>attack with nuclear missiles, but would attack from within the US. This was
>proven yesterday.
That's like saying that because you developed cancer, you won't catch the
Ebola virus.
Why develop a cure for cancer, if it is AIDS that will really kill you?
>How can you now be completely for the Missile Shield, when it is proven that
>it will not help against that what the US fears -- a terrorist attack?
What kind of idiot are you?
Has it really never occurred to you that if we deployed a terrorism shield,
maybe our enemies will develop missiles?
The only answer is to defend ourselves as much as possible against *all*
available threats.
What Tuesday proved is that there are people, and most likely *States* that
are very capable of commiting acts of mass destruction against the United
States. The idea that somehow terrorism and nuclear ICBM's are either-or
propositions is just dumfounding.
JDG
__________________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ICQ #3527685
We are products of the same history, reaching from Jerusalem and
Athens to Warsaw and Washington. We share more than an alliance.
We share a civilization. - George W. Bush, Warsaw, 06/15/01
