cctalk digest, Vol 1 #472 - 25 msgs

From: Mail List <mail.list_at_analog-and-digital-solutions.com>
Date: Sat Feb 22 15:16:01 2003

Hello Mike,

There are a lot of ideas that are very good in theory, but in the actual
execution of, get bogged down in complexities.

> So then why not demand that all countires with weapons of mass destruction
> disarm? Why not start with those that have actually used them in the past.

But the question arises of who goes first. The SALT talks and treaties did
reduce the number, but it would take everyone to simultaneously gradually
disarm. No one country would want to allow itself to be completely vulnerable.
But some one or more countries would probably secretly keep more than they
disclosed, so the results would always be limited.


Best Regards







At 01:41 PM 2/22/03 -0500, you wrote:
> > Nobody wants war, but in case such as this... This war
> > will prevent the deaths of millions. Not only by Iraq
> > and Hussein, but by others in the future who will take
> > this example to embolden themselves to do evil without
> > fear of retribution.
>
>So then why not demand that all countires with weapons of mass destruction
>disarm?
>Why not start with those that have actually used them in the past.
>
> > The penalty for breaking laws and rules must be swift
> > and predictable. That's the only way for there to be a
> > deterrent.
>
>And not applied randomly. There are many other UN sanctions that are being
>ignored or have been vetoed.
>
> > Saddam Hussein can avoid the war in a minute. He
> > simply can abide by the U.N. agreements, disarm
> > himself of the illegal weapons and technology, and
> > dedicate himself to making a good life for his
> > countrie's citizens.
>
>He claims to have done just that and the arms inspectors have not been able
>to find anything. If the US has been concealing the evidence of this then
>they are as guilty as he is.
>
>
> > Why aren't there protests calling for all police
> > forces to be disbanded? Using the same arguments that
> > people are using against this war, if the police
> > didn't carry guns or shoot criminals committing acts
> > of crime, why... There'd be a lot less death in the
> > world.
>
>Because in most countries the police require proof before an arrest and then
>there is a trial before an execution. The police do not stop you on the
>street demand proof of your innocence claim you are lying and shoot you.
Received on Sat Feb 22 2003 - 15:16:01 GMT