Back at the Day Job: I’d forgotten that I’d cleaned up my office, and I hardly recognize the place. Who knew I had a desk? Or a floor? Remarkable what comes to light if you give it half a chance.
In a quick conversation I had with someone at the Parsnip Ritz, I threw off a line about the difference between a preemptive strike and a retaliatory strike, which could indeed frame the idea of the US squaring off against a newbie nuclear opponent, at least on the affirmative. If all we have is a choice between those two, then there’s no question about which one to choose. If one clearly identifies one’s enemy as an active threat, willing to use nuclear weapons, then there you are. A big issue, of course, is anyone’s willingness to use nukes offensively. The claim is always that a nation is acquiring nukes as a protection against other nation’s nuclear powers. This is certainly the claim that North Korea and Pakistan make, against the US and India respectively. Of course, NK seems to use its weaponry primarily as a trigger for financial aid (and, I guess, as the basis for a business trading technology with other non-US-aligned countries), while the Pakistanis were, as much as anything, building a Moslem bomb in response to the Hindu bomb: I was just listening to the authors of a book about Pakistan’s nuclear capability, and how they got the bomb, and why, and that was their theory, and it’s realistic. To some extent, the Pakistan bomb was built as a bomb for all connected Moslem countries, with support in building it from Iran and Libya (and, not surprisingly, the US), although in the main it was intended by the Pakistanis as a stasis defense against India (whose acquisition of the bomb was welcomed by the US rather than scorned as anti-proliferation—it’s amazing how the US plays all sides of the fence in these affairs). A stasis bomb, i.e., a bomb to balance some other bomb, is not the greatest fear, of course. The greatest fear is nuclear technology in unstable countries, where rogue or renegade groups can get their hands on firepower without the responsibility of their own sovereignty to restrain from its use. But that seems to be, if not non-resolutional, at least damned indirect. Then of course there’s the Baudleroo approach that the weapons’ nature makes them unusable. The OB’s warrant for this is, as I understand it, the consumption of way too many Galouises and way too much absinthe. The realpolitik of the thing strikes me as the most complicated and confusing aspect, while nonetheless ultimately going negative. I mean, all sorts of enemy states have acquired nukes since 1945, and we haven’t attacked one yet (to my knowledge). The closest we came was Iraq, which we attacked for non-existent WMDs, the pseudo-possession of which may merely have been a Gulf of Tonkin for the Middle East. Whatever. I do give arguments why a country might want to acquire nukes in the Geopolitics essay. I also give arguments why the US might want to act against it. What I don’t discuss is either just war or the concept of preemptive strike. I mean, I shouldn’t have to do all the work here, eh?
Meanwhile, one thing you’ve got to love about Pfffft is that every time you turn around, there’s a new resolution. Russia has become a threat to U.S. interests. You know, if this was LD, we’d be arguing about the concept of “has become” as compared to whether Pooty Poot the Eternal is simply up to no good, American-style. [Sigh.] Of course, back in the day, with the USSR at least we had someone our own size to pick on. Not that it kept us completely out of mischief (does the name Vietnam ring a bell?) but at least it concentrated the mind. In fact, the Cold War is the underlying reason for all that other nuclear proliferation being allowed to happen. Our eyes were on the Soviet Godless Red Communists. [Sigh again.] Anyhow, PF does keep our minds, if not our souls, fresh, by forcing focused research after focused research. In the end, the Pffffters may graduate high school as our most educated students (along with, arguably, the Extempers). PF certainly makes for more educated debate coaches. I can’t get away with just reading the funnies in the paper anymore (which is exceedingly hard in the Times but I’m not the kind of guy to give up, but you knew that already).
In other words, oh VCA, welcome back to school. Let the second half of the season begin!
No comments:
Post a Comment