RE: opt out? An apology

["Tom Hansen" <thansen@moscow.com>]

Greetings Visionaires -

Definition of Weapons of Mass Destruction from

http://www.militaryworld.com/reference/dictionary/data/w/06784.html

"(DOD) In arms control usage, weapons that are capable of a high order of
destruction and/or of being used in such a manner as to destroy large
numbers of people. Can be nuclear, chemical, biological, and radiological
weapons, but excludes the means of transporting or propelling the weapon
where such means is a separable and divisible part of the weapon. Also
called WMD. See also destruction."

This does sound extremely general in nature.  Considering advancements in
weapons technology the line between "conventional" weapons and WMD may get
grayer and thinner.

Those bomb shelters from the early 60's may be back in style pretty soon.

Take care,

Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho

***********************************
Work like you don't need the money.
Love like you've never been hurt.
Dance like nobody's watching.

- Author Unknown
***********************************

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kelley Racicot [mailto:kelley@racicot.org]
> Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 8:11 PM
> To: vision2020@moscow.com
> Subject: Re: opt out? An apology
>
>
> HI Sunil,
>
> As conventional weapons grow in power, the line blurs.  Fuel-air
> explosives
> and other 'area' weapons might likely be called weapons of mass
> destruction.
> Same with cluster bombs.  The Daisy-cutters used in Afghanistan hazed the
> issue a bit more.
>
> Chuck
>
> > From: "Sunil Ramalingam" <sunilramalingam@hotmail.com>
> > Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 14:28:52 -0700
> > To: sunilramalingam@hotmail.com, credenda@moscow.com,
> vision2020@moscow.com
> > Subject: RE: opt out? An apology
> > Resent-From: vision2020@moscow.com
> > Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 14:29:00 -0700 (PDT)
> >
> > Sunil
> >
> > PS Does napalm count?  Would that get me off the hook?
>