Beware of counterattack

Submitted by Andre Siroli (United States), Aug 21, 2002 at 01:10

I concur with Tom Cox. Perhaps the threat of a WMD response is what stays the president's hands. And what I see of "homeland security," I have little confidence that we're protected from an attack.

After all, Pakistan is clearly linked with Bin Laden and Al Quaeda both before and after the 9/11 attacks; but no one publicly entertained the idea of attacking that country as we attacked Afghanistan. A conclusive victory would destabilize the nation's control over it's own nuclear arsenal.

You can't undo proliferation. You just have to make the cost very high -- the end of a regime.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".