US Politics Mega-thread - Page 2130

On July 25 2015 02:11 always_winter wrote:
What constitutes a non-proliferation expert? I wonder if that comes on a business card.

A non-proliferation standpoint is an ideological standpoint. Enlisting labels as a source of discourse is entirely counterproductive. Non-proliferation is an ideology. It's simply yours.

Imagining the deal from a non-proliferation standpoint relies on a series of assumptions, the first of which is that Iran isn't within reach of a developmental breakthrough already. No one outside of Iran knows the current stage of the program; Iran could already be nuclear. It's only logical Iran would keep that hand close to the chest.

Another is the belief Iran's nuclear ambitions could possibly be limited to energy, an astronomically naïve insinuation which ironically exhibits an incredibly poor understanding of Middle Eastern politics and the incredibly complex dynamism between increasingly non-rational state actors. A child could understand the concept of non-proliferation; similarly a child could be persuaded to view the entire world order through a single lens. That's dangerous.

On July 25 2015 02:11 always_winter wrote:
What constitutes a non-proliferation expert? I wonder if that comes on a business card.

A non-proliferation standpoint is an ideological standpoint. Enlisting labels as a source of discourse is entirely counterproductive. Non-proliferation is an ideology. It's simply yours.

Imagining the deal from a non-proliferation standpoint relies on a series of assumptions, the first of which is that Iran isn't within reach of a developmental breakthrough already. No one outside of Iran knows the current stage of the program; Iran could already be nuclear. It's only logical Iran would keep that hand close to the chest.

Another is the belief Iran's nuclear ambitions could possibly be limited to energy, an astronomically naïve insinuation which ironically exhibits an incredibly poor understanding of Middle Eastern politics and the incredibly complex dynamism between increasingly non-rational state actors. A child could understand the concept of non-proliferation; similarly a child could be persuaded to view the entire world order through a single lens. That's dangerous.

But we need to be clear about what we’re getting. In exchange for a nuclear weapon the Iranians don’t yet possess and may never develop, they get billions of dollars in sanctions relief; an “open-for-business” sign that’s worth even more; the pleasure of sticking it to Israel and Saudi Arabia; an administration in Washington so eager to get and preserve the deal that it shies away from confronting Iran’s regional ambitions; and the capacity to weaponize should they so choose. Iran isn’t 10 feet tall and has a bunch of regional allies that are pretty weak tea. But when it comes to the art of the deal, we’re not playing in Tehran’s league. On this one, we played linear checkers, and the mullahs played three-dimensional chess. I hope I’m wrong! But I worry that the future course of Iran’s role in the region will make that painfully clear.

On July 25 2015 04:04 always_winter wrote:
Iran's been developing nuclear technology for decades. Whether they've achieved the technology to create an atomic bomb is unclear; what is clear is Iran would be hard-pressed to manifest that technology into something palpable while incapacitated under international sanctions. We haven't even broken into discussion about nuclear delivery.

And I don't think we will, nor do I think this debate will progress on any meaningful terms. Based on the caliber of recent posts, I think now is a good time to re-evaluate my Friday afternoon on this beautiful summer day. One love, y'all.

Fiat Chrysler has decided to recall about 1.4 million cars and trucks in the U.S. just days after two hackers detailed how they were able to take control of a Jeep Cherokee SUV over the Internet.

The company will update software to insulate the vehicles from being remotely controlled, and it said in a statement that hackers are committing a crime by manipulating vehicle without authorization.

The recall affects vehicles with 8.4-inch touchscreens including 2013 to 2015 Ram pickups and chassis cabs and Dodge Viper sports cars. Also covered are 2014 and 2015 Dodge Durango and Jeep Grand Cherokee and Cherokee SUVs, as well as the 2015 Chrysler 200 and 300, and the Dodge Charger and Challenger.

Fiat Chrysler says it also has taken security measures on its own vehicle network to prevent hacking. Those measures require no customer action and became effective on Thursday.

The recall covers about 1 million more vehicles than the company had originally believed were affected, all with a certain type of radio, the company statement said.

Fiat Chrysler says it knows of no incidents involving hacking of its vehicles except for the one unveiled this week. Initially the company didn't issue a recall, but said it would contact all affected customers about a software update.

The fix is a response to a recent article in Wired magazine about two Defense Department-funded hackers, Charlie Miller and Chris Valasek, who remotely took control of a Jeep Cherokee through its UConnect entertainment system. They were able to change the vehicle's speed and control the brakes, radio, windshield wipers, transmission and other features.

The hacking duo, however, had revealed some of these vulnerabilities in the 2015 Cadillac Escalade and 2014 Jeep Cherokee a year ago. Cadillac has yet to issue a recall.

On July 25 2015 04:07 ticklishmusic wrote:


lol

On July 25 2015 04:04 always_winter wrote:
Iran's been developing nuclear technology for decades. Whether they've achieved the technology to create an atomic bomb is unclear; what is clear is Iran would be hard-pressed to manifest that technology into something palpable while incapacitated under international sanctions. We haven't even broken into discussion about nuclear delivery.

And I don't think we will, nor do I think this debate will progress on any meaningful terms. Based on the caliber of recent posts, I think now is a good time to re-evaluate my Friday afternoon on this beautiful summer day. One love, y'all.

On July 25 2015 04:13 Gorsameth wrote:

He is kind of right tho. It took them years to get to the point where they are now.
As someone said before. It doesn't matter that it takes 10 years under sanctions when they are currently in year 9.

On July 25 2015 04:42 ticklishmusic wrote:


It took Iran time to get a nuke because it takes time to develop the technology to get a nuke. International sanctions likely had close to zero effect on delaying their nuclear research. The only meaningful interventions that have impacted their development timeline were when Stuxnet wrecked some of their centrifuges and that time the Israelis assassinated one of their nuclear physicists.

Anyways, sanctions didn't stop North Korea, one of the most backwards and isolated regimes in the world from getting a nuke. If they can't do that, how the heck can they stop Iran, who is probably close to the BRICS nations in development from building a nuke? (Notably, Brazil is the only one of those without a nuke, I think South Africa might have some but I'm not sure). But Brazil is a turnkey state, if they wanted a nuke they could get one in a couple months (optimistically).

On July 25 2015 05:56 cLutZ wrote:

This is why I'd rather they have focused on the terrorist ties in negotiations. If they want nukes nothing can stop them long term, but cutting off the money from people actually nuts enough to use them is a big priority.

On July 25 2015 10:37 Millitron wrote:
I think it's the peak of irony that the US, the only country on Earth to ever use a nuclear weapon on people, is going around saying other people are too irresponsible to have nuclear weapons. It's like a drunk driver manning a DUI checkpoint, or a pot-smoking DEA agent.

On July 25 2015 10:45 GreenHorizons wrote:


That's probably not as uncommon as you may think it is. Welcome back to the thread btw.

On July 25 2015 11:17 Millitron wrote:

Thanks, though I'm sorry to say I don't think I'm going to stay long. I just felt so much better not being a part of all the bickering. I seriously recommend taking a break from it all, it's so soothing.

I just came back because I was curious about what current event was being discussed. Good to see it's a more substantive subject instead of all the identity politics.