“Then we have this poor pathetic mental midget Geo”

“This asshole Geo”
_______

I’m beginning to get this vague feeling I’m your BFF.

Rereading your post, Ogenec, it seems you and I are in almost complete argreement, although I seem to have a great deal more pessimism about Obama’s will to match action to word.
_________________________

I agree — I think that’s the critical difference between us. Let us see what transpires.

_____________________________________________________

That part of your post I do agree with POA.

And your idea that there is a possibility that Israel will “roll-back” is ludicrous. They won’t even admit they have a nuclear arsenal, much less agree to “roll it back”. And as long as Israel has nukes, her neighbors will strive to acquire them. Period.

I honestly believe that the far more constructive route to take diplomatically would be to openly press Israel to reveal the extent of its nuclear arms program, then press for them to join the NPR. It would be a refreshing bit of even-handedness, and would show Iran and the rest of the Muslim world that non-proliferation and disarmament is our true objective, rather than making sure that Israel maintains a massive degree of military superiority.

Yet, instead we demonize Iran, while lauding Israel. Its a dead end. Of course Iran wants nukes. They’d be stupid not to.

Have you seen me make that contention? What I DO contend is that so far, at least according to the IAEA, there is no evidence of a nuclear WEAPONS program. In light of what we now know about the run-up to the Iraq war, I think we need to observe great pessimism about what the United States and Israel assert about the “threat” posed by nations that are deemed as threatening. Show me the actual evidence that Iran is violating the terms of the NPR treaty, and I might change my tune.

In fact, on another thread, I made the argument that the logical course of action for Iran is to pursue a nuclear weapon, considering Israel’s possession of a nuclear arsenal, and the threatening tone that both Israel and the United States has taken towards Iran. Does that sound like I am making the contention you attribute to me?

And what “mossad fantasy” would that be? Spell it out. What do you dispute, EXACTLY? What is this “fantasy” you speak of, EXACTLY?

You are absolutely right that what Iran is trying to do is not a violation of the NPT. But I think you are wrong if you contend that Iran wants to stop at civilian use. North Korea is a perfect example. Clinton reached a deal with them to confine their activities to those allowed by the NPT. But North Korea cheated. They now have nuclear weapons. And they are actively looking for ways to deploy via rocket, as this week’s tests demonstrated.

If you take the current world order as a given, it is not irrational to try to prevent Iran from acquiring even the civilian capabilities covered by the NPT. Better to shut them out altogether than to take the very real risk of Iran cheating. However, I don’t take the current world order as a given. I think it fails on both moral and political grounds. It fails on moral grounds because, as I noted above, the United States is the only country to use nuclear weapons against another. So the notion that we can be an effective gatekeeper of “good” nuclear use has always struck me as hypocritical.

It fails on political grounds because, even if you assume that we are in the right morally, our actions have in a perverse way escalated the arms race. When we assail certain countries as part of an “axis of evil,” and then proceed to invade one of them, it is a dead certainty that the others will push even harder to acquire nuclear deterrence. Same with other bellicose statements about such countries, such as were made during the primary campaign. Add to that the deal we did with India, which is not even a party to the NPT. That affects Pakistan, which in turn affects the other countries in that part of the world. And so the nuclear arms race picks up speed. Israel is also a very important factor here, although I would argue that it needs some kind of deterrent, given its peculiar circumstances.

In such a world, it has always seemed to me that the U.S. needed to show moral resolve by reducing its own stockpile. I am elated to no end that Obama wants to pursue that path. It is fraught with peril — again, game theory teaches us that some countries will try to cheat to gain leverage they don’t now have — but it is the only viable way. If we and allies like Israel reduce, and we pass the Comprehensive Test Ban, then we will have the moral and political capital to persuade Iran and North Korea to abandon their ambitions. Which, I am convinced, are about more than civilian use.

So when Obama talks about strengthening the NPT, I don’t think we should analyze it in isolation, but as part of a comprehensive regime that intends to preserve civilian use while avoiding the kind of cheating that will lead to a re-escalation of the arms race. My prayers are with him, because he is going to face intense opposition from entrenched interests. But I believe he is absolutely right.

Pardon the length of this post, but I felt the need to spell out my thinking. I’ve got to put the kids to bed, and catch up on some pre-Monday work. But I will check in later to see what you and others think of this.

djjl says:
05 April 2009 at 8:52 pm

Phew…………..
___

now I’m laughin’ again

Geo’s a sad clown

http://highlysubjective.com/images/post/sad-clown.jpg

With that, I will revert to your earlier question, – I have nothing to say to you – you just show little in terms of critical thinking skills.

You are extremely offensive POA. If you want people to carry on a dialog with you maybe you should tone it down some. But then again you seem to think you are above everyone and know more than any of us.

I looked your posting history to figure out where you’re coming from because you mask you underlying beliefs pretty well. I think I figured it out pretty much. A large percentage of your postings on the net have to do with Israel and come from a kind of anti-Zionist bent. But you’re also against the Muslim monarchies. What really sticks in your craw is BIG government and “those that bought and paid for them” (the ones who are REALLY in control)
The same “them” that put Bush in power put Obama in power. Obama may well be WORSE than Bush.

How am I doing?

I know what you’re against, now what are you FOR?

ass
1 (ās) Pronunciation Key
n. pl. ass·es (ās’ĭz)

1. Any of several hoofed mammals of the genus Equus, resembling and closely related to the horses but having a smaller build and longer ears, and including the domesticated donkey.

2. A vain, self-important, silly, or aggressively stupid person.

You’re right, I do owe the donkey world a huge apology.

And thank you for the correction, yes it is “jenny”. I have no excuse for the gaff, except I was recently reading a piece about a Ginnie Freeman, that had to do with mules. Perhaps that can explain the gaff, but it doesn’t excuse it. And Geo the Clown is correct, after a short internet search of the term “ginnie”, I found it is in fact a racial slur against Italians.

So I take it back. You aren’t a ginnie.

Repeat of a good laugh from yesterday.

let me take a stab:

you’re into Daryl Bradford Smith. What say you?

do you?:

3. ginny A Racial Slur Twords an Italain. Means Italain is low class , or cheap , poor , very low word towrds an italain.

Ginny: Italians. In reference to popular Italian garb Ginny T’s, now more commonly known as wife beater shirts.

http://tinyurl.com/cyzhje

This asshole Geo can spend time researching my comments at TWN, but can’t seem to spend twenty seconds informing himself about anything else.

Other than “secular” and Ogenec, its doesn’t appear that any of these big top actors have anything to say about nuclear proliferation, eh?

Lets see, this bozo djjl, on the heels of four of my posts that address nuclear proliferation, comes in blathering some crap about “pissed offedness”, despite the fact my posts were directed at no individual, and were simple posts about nuclear proliferation. With links, I might add. Do one of you simple minded buffoons care to show me what “unfounded accusations” were contained in those posts?

Then we have this Betsy creature chiming in with some fantasy about me claiming I voted for Ralph Nader. I suppose I’m supposed to ignore it when some poster here accuses me of statements I’ve never made? One time, I might overlook it, but this circus here seems to make a show of offering straw arguments and fabricating comments to be attributed to whomever has dared step off the “Obama is God” platform.

Then we have this poor pathetic mental midget Geo poppin’ in with “isn’t that a racial slur?”

Egads.

let’s see, no respect for woman, no manners, no sense of propriety…

And by the way POA, it’s Jenny, not ginny. That’s why Geo couldn’t figure out what you meant. So maybe you need to tone it down. YOU don’t know it all, by far. See I used to raise donkeys and they are wonderful, intelligent animals.

A “ginny” is a female jackass. There, I just “helped you out”. Don’t say I never did anything for you.

Do you ever do any research before you open your ignorant yap, or are all your utterances punted?