Trump..... (The Sophistry Thread)

Binaural

Binaural

Eats Squid
Zaf said:
ever justified) about Isreal you get publicly lynched as an "anti-semite" faste
Click to expand...
I think you are mixing up the perspective of Israel's leadership and the average observer here. Israel obviously doesn't exactly live in constant fear of being labelled anti-semitic. They just want to keep every possible detail of their program secret for military purposes, as they don't want to give any advantage to their numerous potential adversaries. Making nuclear arms is not exactly illegal for them under international law (Israel is not a signatory to the relevant arms control protocols) but the nuclear arms industry has some pretty shady corners and I am sure the secrecy helps make it harder to track their activities.
 
Binaural

Binaural

Eats Squid
slowmick said:
Is there a simple reason why Israel gets to have an undeclared nuclear program?
Click to expand...
There's such a thing in international politics as strategic ambiguity - you don't clarify your position because you benefit from the uncertainty overall. It's generally a sign you have some serious conflicts of interest. In this case, in addition to reasons of military secrecy, Israel are afraid that openly declaring nuclear weapon capability would (a) cause the Arab states or Iran to withdraw from the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (b) and/or pursue their own nuclear weapons for self-defence or deterrence against a first strike by Israel. That's a hell of a downside so Israel don't openly declare their nuclear capability, but they throw enough hints to make sure decision-makers in those countries get the message.

Apropos this thread though, some commentators who should know better think Trump is employing a related "madman" strategy. This is similar to strategic ambiguity in the sense that you want to create doubt as to your capabilities while being totally clear about your terrible intentions. The basic idea is that you make your enemies think you're crazy enough to do something stupid if pushed the wrong way or provoked (think North Korea). In US politics, Nixon is the man most associated with this, but it really wasn't very effective - turns out that the point of being the world's pre-eminent military and commercial power means you have a hell of lot of tools to get compliance, and making empty threats isn't the best one generally available.
 
Last edited:
John U

John U

MTB Precision
Zaf said:
Because if you say anything (however justified) about Isreal you get publicly lynched as an "anti-semite" faster than you can blink.
Click to expand...
Saw a great quote somewhere, from a Jew.
Anti Semite used to mean ‘someone who hates Jews.’ It now means ‘someone who Jews hate’.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zaf
Oddjob

Oddjob

Merry fucking Xmas to you assholes
John U said:
Saw a great quote somewhere, from a Jew.
Anti Semite used to mean ‘someone who hates Jews.’ It now means ‘someone who Jews hate’.
Click to expand...
Strictly speaking semites includes jews and arabs.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
 
johnny

johnny

I'll tells ya!
Staff member
Zaf said:
Because if you say anything (however justified) about Isreal you get publicly lynched as an "anti-semite" faster than you can blink.
Click to expand...
That's certainly part of their political and diplomatic arsenal.

Binaural said:
There's such a thing in international politics as strategic ambiguity - you don't clarify your position because you benefit from the uncertainty overall. It's generally a sign you have some serious conflicts of interest. In this case, in addition to reasons of military secrecy, Israel are afraid that openly declaring nuclear weapon capability would (a) cause the Arab states or Iran to withdraw from the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (b) and/or pursue their own nuclear weapons for self-defence or deterrence against a first strike by Israel. That's a hell of a downside so Israel don't openly declare their nuclear capability, but they throw enough hints to make sure decision-makers in those countries get the message.
Click to expand...
I struggle a bit with this, even though it is the orthodox. Maybe I've got to go back and read my Freedman and Schelling again, and this goes to the DPRK situation again as well.

You're saying that if Israel is a declared nuke state that will cause Iran to go nuke. The ambiguity now means that Iran is unsure and therefore isn't forced to do so. This is where I don't think that works:

#1 - Iran has had a nuke program for decades with Israel and the US being primary targets with KSA likely secondary. This didn't take Israel being a declared nuclear state
#2 - It's pretty much conventional knowledge that Israel is a nuclear state, Mordechai Vanunu and others are on the record, etc. etc. Everyone assumes that Israel is a nuke state, it's the working assumption. So what difference does an open declaration mean? Same question for DPRK. They are so close to having a weaponisable device and they have the ability to launch a multistage ICBM. Do we feel safe making the assumption that they haven't miniturised it? Do we feel safe that they can't throw a flatter trajectory ICBM with a survivable warhead? Who's willing to bet their population on those gambles? No one, that's one of the reasons that THAAD is in place, why the region is full of Aegis, etc. etc. Does it take a declaration and recognition to precipitate a response? No.
#-3 and that brings up #3. If Iran even thinks it's possible that Israel has nukes they have to assume they do, even if they declare they are not (as in they are not playing the ambiguity card) because the risk of getting that assumption wrong is an existential one. I guess this falls into the capabilities rather than intent area. If you think your adversary has the capability you don't care what they say, you take measures to protect yourself. Just as the US, Japan, ROK, etc. are doing against DPRK and just as Iran was doing against Israel, etc.



Is there a reason Israel gets to have their undeclared program? Same reason why India and PAkistan get to have their declared program without being part of the NPT - because whaddaya gonna do?

India and Pakistan don't threaten anyone but each other. Yes, India and China stare down the missile at each other but there is little risk of nuclear war between them, it's just not a thing, at the moment. Nobody feels threatened by them and the cost to remove that capability from them (in case their intent changes) is far too costly. The bigger powers - US, Russia, UK, France, China etc. get along with India, PAkistan and Israel all well enough that trying to coerce them into losing their nukes would cost more than it would gain now that they have them and the means to deliver them. Once countries have nukes it's very hard to persuade them to lose them - countries get nukes specifically so they CAN'T be coerced into doing things they don't want to do. That's what nukes are.
 
johnny

johnny

I'll tells ya!
Staff member
The coming twitter storm as he lashes out will be like no other. Everyone has to take a shot each time he tweets NO COLLUSION - WITCH HUNT or HILARY SERVER

An indicator that he’s gone into damage control will be a lack of tweets or well-worded and properly considered tweets that aren’t coming from him.
 
Oddjob

Oddjob

Merry fucking Xmas to you assholes
What I can't understand is how two blood and soil conservatives from opposing powers can get on so well. It's almost like the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top