Saturday, July 17, 2010

I'd like your opinion: first,

go take a look at this. Short version: Obama is likely to take us to war with Iran because if Iran gets the bomb it'lll blow Obama's desire to build the whole world into a bit European Union. What particular part that troubles me about the article is this:
The consequences of the Iranian nuclear drive for the President’s Wilsonian project are deadly; the Iranian nuclear program can fairly be called an existential threat to the Wilsonian ideal. In particular a nuclear Iran will kill the two dreams at the heart of President Obama’s foreign policy and indeed of his view of the world: the dream that the genie of nuclear weapons can be forced back into the bottle and the dream that the nations of the world can build a post-Westphalian international order in which the world’s governments are bound by deepening networks of laws.

There are a lot of people in the foreign policy world who consider both of President Obama’s dreams to be hopelessly naive. The idea that the world’s nuclear powers would ever agree to give up these expensive and powerful weapons strikes many realists as laughable. There is a realist case (which I personally buy) for the President of the United States to advocate the abolition of nuclear weapons; the United States, with its overwhelming superiority in conventional weapons, would be safer and more powerful in a world without the big bomb. Conceivably, the UK could go along as that county might welcome a chance to save money while looking idealistic. Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Israel, North Korea and France won’t buy. Those countries have good reasons for their nuclear arsenals and they won’t give them up
Number one: that genie ain't going back into the bottle. Period. Thinking you can force it means you're willing to use the kind of force necessary to to prevent other countries from building nukes, and Obama isn't willing. He'll talk and plead and try to bribe, but he won't do that.

Second, if he actually believes that signing a treaty means "Nobody will ever build one again", actually believes it, then he's a bigger fool than I thought. We signed a big, serious treaty with the Soviet Union outlawing biological weapons and research on them for offensive purposes, and the Soviets were breaking it while the ink on the signatures was still drying. Including not only growing smallpox, but genetically modifying it to make it as virulent and lethal as possible. If the Soviets were doing that, what the hell makes him- anybody- think countries like Iran under its current government will obey any treaty or international law they don't like?

So if this guy's right, Obama will be willing to start the shooting with Iran because Iran getting the bomb will trash his dreams of World Government EU-style.

I wonder how many other peoples' lives he's willing to throw away for that dream?


dick said...

My thoughts?

Iran will get the bomb, and Obama will stick his head in the sand.
The caveat being that Israel doesn't punch a hole in their asses first.
And I believe that Israel is the key player, not us.

Keith said...

I agree, you cannot un-invent.

It's been tried with all sorts of arms in Japan, and the peasants just found everyday tools to use as weapons.

Winston Churchill had the first electronic computer destroyed after WWii, but some one else went and built more computers.

The Iranian regime is supposed to believe in some sort of milenialist shit about some imam or other, coming back to earth if they commit certain actions.

If that is true, then they cannot be allowed to get a nuke capability as they are likely to use it to try get their descendant of the bearded child molester back to earth.

Prime target would be a certain democracy where all faiths are allowed to practice freely.

I guess they'll be used as the proxy to do the job.

A certain prominant person in the US, according to some, used to be a moslem, but isn't any more.

Isn't apostacy supposed to be punished by the faithful by carrying out a fatwah?

That hasn't happened.

so either he was never a moslem, or else he still is.

The second one could complicate things in dealing with Iran (unless he considers them to be heretics).

Lots of ifs there. I don't know one way or another. My guess is on Israel making a strike, and probably taking out some of their top technical people too.