|
In this mailing:
by Douglas Murray
• December 28, 2015 at 5:00 am
- Vadim Nikitim is
the genius who last week proposed not only that we treat ISIS as a
state, but that we grant ISIS diplomatic recognition.
- Rather than
realizing that the Soviet Union collapsed because of its economic
system, Nikitim seems to think it fell apart because countries such as
the US and UK recognized it diplomatically -- demonstrating that there
is no better way to get the present wrong than by getting the past
wrong.
- The case of Saudi
prince Saud bin Abdulaziz Bin Nasir might give the impression that you
can rape and kill a manservant in a London hotel and get away with
only the lightest of sentences.
- Ambassadors from
ISIS, on the other hand, will need to prove themselves somewhat, and
first funnel many lucrative contracts our way before behaviour like
this becomes acceptable.
- Of course, there
is always that pesky problem: What if militant Islam (or Iran) does
not want to "forge a long (or short) peace" with us?
Is there a Plan B?
It is that Dumb Idea of the Year Award time again, and among the many
stellar contenders, one in particular stands out.
The diplomatic convention in Great Britain is that new ambassadors
present themselves at the Court of St James. There they meet
representatives of the monarch and are officially recognized as
representing their state in the UK. So it would be interesting to consider
even just the earliest ramifications of the British Independent
newspaper contributor Vadim Nikitim getting his way. This is the genius who
last week bypassed all those tedious arguments over whether or not ISIS
constitutes a state, and proposed not only that we treat it as such but
that it is also time to grant ISIS diplomatic recognition.
by Peter Huessy
• December 28, 2015 at 4:00 am
- It seems that the
U.S., without a Minuteman missile force, would make it easy -- in fact
tempting -- for an adversary such as Russia to take out the
entire U.S. strategic nuclear force in one or a series of very limited
first strikes.
- Under Secretary
Perry's proposal, the U.S. "target set" of nuclear
submarines and bombers would consist of five military bases: three for
bombers and two for submarines, and a handful of submarines at sea.
From over 500 targets today, to fewer than 10. It would be as if the
U.S. declared to its enemies, "Come and get us."
- The elimination
of the Minuteman missile force, recommended by Dr. Perry, would leave
Russia with an alarming ratio -- nearly 200:1 -- of Russian warheads
to American nuclear assets. This disparity could push the strategic
nuclear balance toward heightened instabilities.
- Another way to
look at it is that the Minuteman would cost only 1/3 of 1% of the
total current budget of the Department of Defense.
|
The U.S. nuclear "Triad" consists of nuclear
warheads mounted on platforms based at sea, in the air and on land.
|
Former Secretary of Defense William Perry calls for the nuclear land
based force of 450 Minuteman missiles to be eliminated. He says that the
United States does not need the missiles for nuclear deterrence. He also
says that, because of Russia's current reckless and cavalier attitude about
the early use of Russian nuclear weapons, he worries that in a crisis, an
American President might launch Minuteman missiles out of fear that Russia
might preemptively launch a first strike against America's
"vulnerable" missile silos.
Although the former Secretary of Defense is to be admired for his
previous work on stealth technology, now part of the backbone of America's
strategic nuclear bomber force[1], his recommendation on land-based
missiles is, in fact, dangerous, wrong-headed and will lead to the very
destabilizing relations with Russia he is hoping to avert.
There are five key reasons why his proposal makes little sense.
|
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment