ASCI Posted March 2, 2006 Author Share Posted March 2, 2006 I guess my point was that India has never signed the NPT. I haven't seen anything mentioned about bringing this up during the presidential visit, so the proposed cooperation with nuclear reactors wasn't framed in the context of India joining the NPT. 616477[/snapback] I thought I did read something about inspections though, with the shared “civilian” nuclear technology being the carrot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 Was watching NewsHour last night. They had some arse on from the Non-Proliferation Center at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. You should have heard this HACK going on and on about how this deal would cause ius to lose leverage with DPRK and Iran. I felt like reaching through the TV and strangulating him. Some people just can't think strategically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 Was watching NewsHour last night. They had some arse on from the Non-Proliferation Center at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. You should have heard this HACK going on and on about how this deal would cause ius to lose leverage with DPRK and Iran. I felt like reaching through the TV and strangulating him. Some people just can't think strategically. 617113[/snapback] What leverage? By the way, if anyone cares, there was a major reorg at State a few months ago in the non and counter proliferation areas. Some poster, I forget who, had actually used it as evidence in a "Bush cronie" thread. There is/was a huge faction that believes all proliferation issues can be solved by treaties. There's another faction who doesn't. Some of the treaty only faction left, and some now work for certain think tanks. Another hit on "proactive" policy thinking. Anyone explaining a layered approach to proliferation issues is going to come off on the news as a militaristic hawk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 What leverage? There is/was a huge faction that believes all proliferation issues can be solved by treaties. 617124[/snapback] Just like the 18th Amendment solved all drinking problems in 1920. How does this strain keep popping up in America every generation? If national prohibitions can't work, how are international prohibitions going to work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 Just like the 18th Amendment solved all drinking problems in 1920. How does this strain keep popping up in America every generation? If national prohibitions can't work, how are international prohibitions going to work? 617184[/snapback] Moot point anyway. The national strategy to combat WMD calls for a multi-layered approach and "targeted strategies against known proliferators". I don't know about you, but that's pretty clear to me. If folks don't like it, they need to elect someone with a new strategy. When that happens, I'm definitely moving somewhere in the southern hemisphere. Wouldn't the weather patterns keep most of the fallout north? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts