• 1 Post
  • 150 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: September 6th, 2024

help-circle






  • I support Iran getting the bomb. In the regional context, it would be an overwhelmingly positive thing. History suggests it would be a great mellowing influence on the whole region. The region is unstable right now because there’s one nuclear power in the region without any counterbalancing nuclear power to hold them in check. Israel, a democratic theocracy, now acts with impunity against every country in the region. The US acted the same way prior to 1948, threatening to use its nukes in ways and scenarios we would now consider unthinkable.

    Every single time a nation has been near the bomb, they have been portrayed as a bunch of crazy nutjobs that are going to blow up the world. Russian and China were both portrayed as fanatical Communists willing to die for the cause. India and Pakistan were religious fanatics that were going to blow up the world. North Korea was a dictatorship ruled by a madman that was going to level Seoul. Every single time a non-Western nation is close to getting the bomb, that nation has historically been portrayed as being lead by world-risking madmen or fanatics of one sort or another. The narrative is always that only Western countries can responsibly hold the bomb, and all those other potential nuclear powers will handle the power poorer that the enlightened Western nations have.

    And yet, time and time again, that doesn’t happen. It turns out that rulers, whether elected or dictatorial, tend to care most about maintaining their own power. And even if they think they can miraculously personally survive a nuclear war; no one wants to rule over a radiation-blasted hellscape. And no one wants to see their homeland nuked, even an evil tyrant.

    If Tehran gets the bomb, it won’t immediately use it on Israel. Why? Because the Iranians don’t want to be vaporized. Israel has its own nuclear arsenal, including a submarine-based second strike capability. If they nuke Israel, every major city in Iran is going up in a mushroom cloud.

    It turns out, MAD actually works. And while I would prefer that no nation have nukes, the only thing more unstable than two nuclear-armed rivals is when there are two rivals and only one of them has nukes.

    This is why I want Iran to have the bomb. Do I think Iran is lead by particularly good people? Not at all. But I trust the Ayatollahs with the bomb about as much as I trust the Israelis with the bomb. And Iran getting nukes would greatly stabilize a region that has been so destabilized by having only a single unbalanced nuclear power.


  • Eh, you would still want to test. Even buying from an ally, there’s no telling if the blueprints haven’t been sabotaged to be ineffective or maybe just inefficient. (Maybe your ally supports you having nukes, but wants to make sure their nukes are better.)

    But even beyond that, when you test a nuke, you’re not just testing the design. You’re testing your materials. You’re testing your manufacturing capability. You’re testing every bit of the vast production process that went into making the weapon. And you’re testing your own technical ability to design nuclear weapons. Getting blueprints would be beneficial, but there’s no real substitute to designing your own bomb optimized to your own available materials and production processes.










  • What really gets me is we only seem to ever have this hand wringing when it’s a rich person that meets a gruesome end.

    Imagine if this person had instead been an ordinary person that did something horrible. Imagine there’s a child molester or a serial killer barricaded in their home, the police outside. They fire a flash bang inside, this causes the house to catch fire, and the monster ends up being burned alive. Would people be here lamenting this fact? No, they wouldnt. It is only when the rich and powerful meet gruesome ends that we start moralizing about vigilante justice. When a monster that isn’t rich meets a gruesome end through extrajudicial violence, no one bats an eye.




  • Yes. These are normally handled by the Coast Guard. There’s a reason the Coast Guard vessels are armed. They can more than handle anything a cartel drug boat is carrying. They’re heavily armed enough that most intercepted vessels surrender without a fight. Actually taking fire is extraordinarily rare.

    There is absolutely zero reason to waste US Navy vessels on this. It appears Trump just blew up a random boat that could have easily been intercepted. Even assuming it is a drug boat, this attack is completely detrimental to fighting the drug trade. If you intercept the vessel, you can interrogate the crew, gather evidence from the vessel, and help crack the cartel network they are a part of. But you can’t do any of that with a corpse-filled wreck on the bottom of the ocean.