Subject:
|
Re: A question of remembrance...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 8 May 2001 11:51:21 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1187 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, James Powell writes:
> >
> > > You are missing the point! It has nothing to do with defence. It has two
> > > objectives:
> > > 1. Start a "new" arms race and bankrupt China.
> > > 2. Move large amounts of money from US taxpayers to US shareholders.
> > >
> > > Everything else is salesman’s banter.
> > >
> > > Scott A
> >
> >
> > Na, Dave! has it right, all it is going to do is save the attacking country ~
> > 10 billion dollars or so, on ICBM research as well as Special Weapons
> > (Gas/Bugs/Nukes).
>
> Very good point. However, both arguments assume there is the real risk of an
> attack.
Ya, Taiwan can sleep well at night, Mainland China has no desire to "take
back its rogue province" and all those platforms they're building in the
Spratleys are just fishing shacks.
Ya, Japan can sleep well at night, North Korea is the most sane and stable
country out there, and those missiles they launched a while back were just
testing their new cellphone satellite launching system. Oh, and they're not
using their nuke plants to make weapons grade plutonium either.
Ya, the rest of the Mideast can sleep well at night, Iraq has no desire to
develop any weapons and the UN inspectors made well and sure of that in
their thorough and effective inspections... further Iran has no desires
either, they're just buying weapons from Russia to be charitable, perish the
thought they'd ever get religion and actually USE them against Iraq or
anyone else.
Charming in your innocence, you are.
> > It's a farce. An expensive farce, that I don't think will bankrupt China, >>and as you say, will transfer a large $$$ to the shareholders.
Tell you what. Let's build it and see. What do you care if US taxpayers take
it on the chin? If it doesn't work, you get the last laugh. And if it does,
you get the benefits without the cost. No lose proposition for you.
> I doubt it will bankrupt China too, especially given the amount of $$ the
> west is pumping into it!
Even by your low standards of discourse this statement doesn't make any sense.
++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
| (...) Very good point. However, both arguments assume there is the real risk of an attack. (...) I doubt it will bankrupt China too, especially given the amount of $$ the west is pumping into it! Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
197 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
