From: Adam <""4thwormcastfromthemolehill\"{at}the field.near
the bridge">

Mark wrote:
> "Geo"  wrote in message
news:44cd279f$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>> "Mark"  wrote in message
news:44cd21bd{at}w3.nls.net...
>>
>>
>>>> You can test your theory by watching the news and the price of gas.
>>> The less perceived stability in general, the higher the price.
>> And who's words have more influence on global stability?
>
> That's a tough one to answer/measure. It depends on what the words are and
> when they're spoken.When Bush, Blair, the French (and France threatens to
> nuke Iran) and others all say that Iran can't have nuclear weapons, then the
> security council agrees to agree to think about doing something someday,
> people get nervous.
>
> Then when Iran says they're going to annihilate Israel and reestablish a
> caliphate from Iran to Spain and kill all who stand in the way, people get
> more nervous, especially so when that threat is coupled with the feckless
> security council inaction. I don't think anyone is seriously worried about
> Iran being able to carry out that threat, but they worry they may try and
> what may happen to the oil supply when they have to be stopped. If, for
> instance, forgetting a nuke in Iran, Iran were to lob missles directly
> (instead via Hezbollah) into Israel, they'd have to be taken down
> permanently and that would affect oil more than just the words from whomever
> right now.
>
>

"they'd have to be taken down permanently"

Huh?

A) By Who ?
B) It mot possible to take down a people of that size
"permanently" unless you're advocating something so nasty that
the perpetrator would be "taken down" as well.

It's not a steven segal film.

Adam

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5