“Playing the patsy” - Educating Jim, Part II
The education of Jim continues.
Even though I have several times and even recently addressed this issue of bullying, I am going to once again present some of my current confusion about this issue in hopes that someone can educate me by letting me know where my mind is going amiss and not taking in “the facts.”
In the “our views” section of the editorial page of the Tampa Tribute on August 12, 2015, I read the editorial “Reject patsy treaty with Iran.”
My first thought was, “Are we really still in middle school?” Really! Patsy? Merriam-Webster defines patsy as “a foolish person who has been tricked or cheated.”
The last paragraph of the editorial asserts:
“Obama maintains that the alternative to this flawed treaty is war. But the world is likely to be far less safe if the United States, with the most powerful military in the world, plays the patsy to an oppressive, terrorist regime intent on annihilating Israel and violently opposed to Western culture. This deal should be soundly rejected.”
It is again interesting that other than pointing out that we, the United States, can use military force, there is no concrete alternative offered. Sanctions have clearly not worked. Mutual demonizing each other – the United States and Iran – has not worked. Apparently, the theory is that we have not bullied enough while, at the same time, maintaining that either Iran or President Obama’s team of negotiators will not be permitted to bully us.
As my readers know, I do not now believe that violence ever leads to a long-term solution to any problem or situation. I also do not believe that bullying and threatening the end of a nation or the possible end of a nation (Iran towards Israel and Israel toward Iran) is moral, kind, or should be condoned. At the same time, I am well aware that not everyone is a pacifist, and I certainly do not live in a nation which espouses pacifism. Just the other day I heard renewed recommendations to replace aging nuclear weapons. We hold the threat of the use of nuclear weapons over other countries, as do other countries. We remain the only nation which has used nuclear weapons. Other nations, which also do not hold to the pacifist beliefs, believe that as long as the United States, Israel, and other countries possess nuclear weapons that they, too, must have nuclear weapons if they are to be safe. Currently according to Wikipedia:
There are eight sovereign states that have successfully detonated nuclear weapons. [1] Five are considered to be "nuclear-weapon states" (NWS) under the terms of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). In order of acquisition of nuclear weapons these are: the United States, Russia (successor state to the Soviet Union), the United Kingdom, France, and China.
Since the NPT entered into force in 1970, three states that were not parties to the Treaty have conducted nuclear tests, namely India, Pakistan, and North Korea. North Korea had been a party to the NPT but withdrew in 2003. Israel is also widely believed to have nuclear weapons, though it maintains a policy of deliberate ambiguity regarding this, and is not known definitively to have conducted a nuclear test. [2] According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute's SIPRI Yearbook of 2014, Israel is estimated to have approximately 80 nuclear warheads. [3] Furthermore, according to Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Nuclear Notebook 2014, the total number of nuclear weapons is estimated at 10,144. [4]
South Africa has the unique status of a nation that developed nuclear weapons but then disassembled its arsenal before joining the NPT. This means that there are three European countries, one country in the Americas, four Asian countries, zero Oceanian countries, and zero African countries which are known to possess nuclear weapons.[5] Nations that are known or believed to possess nuclear weapons are sometimes referred to informally as the nuclear club.
The same argument which has been successfully used in this country to pass laws allowing many citizens of the United States to carry concealed weapons are used to by various nations to justify having or attempting to possess nuclear weapons. More weapons will lead to a safer world. “People kill. Guns do not kill. Criminals or ‘bad’ people will get guns no matter what the laws.” Certainly it is true that if we keep manufacturing guns and other weapons for use in the United States and to supply many in other world of this world, both healthy and unhealthy people will continue to gain possession of guns. It is also true that as long as we continue to manufacture and/or “overhaul” our nuclear weapons and to develop new weapons delivery systems the rest of the world is going to find it difficult to believe that we are serious about our membership in the nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty club. Armscontrol.org tells us:
‘’The United States has embarked on an overhaul of its entire nuclear weapons enterprise, including development of new weapons delivery systems and life extension programs (LEPs) for and modernization of all its enduring nuclear warhead types and nuclear weapons production facilities. Moreover, rather than constraining the role of nuclear weapons, the Obama administration’s 2013 nuclear weapons employment strategy reaffirmed the existing posture of a nuclear triad of forces on high alert. There are currently approximately 4,650 warheads in the U.S. stockpile, down from 5,113 in 2009, and another 2,700 retired warheads awaiting dismantlement.
Unlike other nuclear-armed states, the United States has modernized its nuclear arsenal over the past two decades mainly by upgrading existing weapons rather than fielding new types. The intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) force is the final phase of a decade-long $8 billion modernization intended to extend its service life until 2030. Similarly, beginning in 2017, the Navy will begin to deploy a modified version of the Trident II D-5 submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) on ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) to extend its service life through 2040. The Air Force has begun LEPs for the air-launched cruise missile and the B-2 and B-52 bombers.
Beyond these upgrades of existing weapons, work is under way to design new weapons to replace the current ones. The Navy is designing a new class of 12 SSBNs, the Air Force is examining whether to build a mobile ICBM or extend the service life of the existing Minuteman III, and the Air Force has begun development of a new, stealthy, long-range bomber and a new nuclear-capable tactical fighter-bomber. Production of a new guided “standoff” nuclear bomb, which would be able to glide toward a target over a distance, is under way, and the Air Force is developing a new long-range nuclear cruise missile to replace the current one.” (Armscontrol.org)
Obviously the department of defense is not going to confirm or deny the above if I call them. I have heard basically the same information from various sources, which leads me to think that it is accurate information. If anyone has more accurate information then it need to be published and clearly communicated to all other nations. Assuming, however, that it is accurate, it is difficult for me to believe why any country, which is not an avowed pacifist country, would refrain from attempting to maintain and/or obtain nuclear weapons. Of course, there may be “saner” countries that correctly surmise that if anyone decides to start a nuclear world war, whether or not every country has nuclear weapons will not make much difference. The countries, which currently possess nuclear weapons., already have the capacity to wipe out the entire human population. In fact, according to wmdawareness.org.UK states as of July 2015, “There are 16,400 nuclear weapons on Earth today, more than 20 years after the Cold War ended.” Although I found some disagreement regarding the number of such weapons there seems to me no disagreement that there are enough weapons currently to destroy all life on this planet.
Although I realize that there are, in nature, some evidence of self-cannibalism, it seems insane that we humans would want to participate in creating, using as bullying power, or continue to manufacture such weapons. Yet, we seem not only determined to do so, but to use them as a threat to keep others from doing the same things. If my child said to me that he/she wanted to take an AK47 gun to school because other kids were bringing a 22 pistol to school, I would not allow him/her to do that. I would certainly insure that the school officials keep all guns out of the school. Yet, some, here in Florida have been attempting to pass a law allowing concealed weapons on college campuses. College/University officials seem to agree that this is insane.
Even if updating and creating new methods of delivery is technically okay under the terms of the current nuclear non-proliferation treaty, it seems inconsistent with the intent. Again, if my six-year old friend, Sam, said that she was going to take an modern version of the AK 47 assault rifle to school while the school was putting into effect the new rule forbidding all guns I would laugh and say, “Really poor try Sam. It is not going to happen.” In other words the statement would be so patently ludicrous that I could not take it seriously.
Yet, here we are wanting to use our muscles which everyone knows includes our nuclear weapons to force Iran to behave the way we want them to behave which is, paradoxically, very different than how we behave. Whew! Think about that sentence.
I suspect that I will continue to be challenged and attempt to get more educated about these and similar matters in the days and weeks to come. Jim may need to get very old before he can claim to be educated. He is certainly feeling pretty stupid right about now.
The education of Jim continues.
Even though I have several times and even recently addressed this issue of bullying, I am going to once again present some of my current confusion about this issue in hopes that someone can educate me by letting me know where my mind is going amiss and not taking in “the facts.”
In the “our views” section of the editorial page of the Tampa Tribute on August 12, 2015, I read the editorial “Reject patsy treaty with Iran.”
My first thought was, “Are we really still in middle school?” Really! Patsy? Merriam-Webster defines patsy as “a foolish person who has been tricked or cheated.”
The last paragraph of the editorial asserts:
“Obama maintains that the alternative to this flawed treaty is war. But the world is likely to be far less safe if the United States, with the most powerful military in the world, plays the patsy to an oppressive, terrorist regime intent on annihilating Israel and violently opposed to Western culture. This deal should be soundly rejected.”
It is again interesting that other than pointing out that we, the United States, can use military force, there is no concrete alternative offered. Sanctions have clearly not worked. Mutual demonizing each other – the United States and Iran – has not worked. Apparently, the theory is that we have not bullied enough while, at the same time, maintaining that either Iran or President Obama’s team of negotiators will not be permitted to bully us.
As my readers know, I do not now believe that violence ever leads to a long-term solution to any problem or situation. I also do not believe that bullying and threatening the end of a nation or the possible end of a nation (Iran towards Israel and Israel toward Iran) is moral, kind, or should be condoned. At the same time, I am well aware that not everyone is a pacifist, and I certainly do not live in a nation which espouses pacifism. Just the other day I heard renewed recommendations to replace aging nuclear weapons. We hold the threat of the use of nuclear weapons over other countries, as do other countries. We remain the only nation which has used nuclear weapons. Other nations, which also do not hold to the pacifist beliefs, believe that as long as the United States, Israel, and other countries possess nuclear weapons that they, too, must have nuclear weapons if they are to be safe. Currently according to Wikipedia:
There are eight sovereign states that have successfully detonated nuclear weapons. [1] Five are considered to be "nuclear-weapon states" (NWS) under the terms of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). In order of acquisition of nuclear weapons these are: the United States, Russia (successor state to the Soviet Union), the United Kingdom, France, and China.
Since the NPT entered into force in 1970, three states that were not parties to the Treaty have conducted nuclear tests, namely India, Pakistan, and North Korea. North Korea had been a party to the NPT but withdrew in 2003. Israel is also widely believed to have nuclear weapons, though it maintains a policy of deliberate ambiguity regarding this, and is not known definitively to have conducted a nuclear test. [2] According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute's SIPRI Yearbook of 2014, Israel is estimated to have approximately 80 nuclear warheads. [3] Furthermore, according to Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Nuclear Notebook 2014, the total number of nuclear weapons is estimated at 10,144. [4]
South Africa has the unique status of a nation that developed nuclear weapons but then disassembled its arsenal before joining the NPT. This means that there are three European countries, one country in the Americas, four Asian countries, zero Oceanian countries, and zero African countries which are known to possess nuclear weapons.[5] Nations that are known or believed to possess nuclear weapons are sometimes referred to informally as the nuclear club.
The same argument which has been successfully used in this country to pass laws allowing many citizens of the United States to carry concealed weapons are used to by various nations to justify having or attempting to possess nuclear weapons. More weapons will lead to a safer world. “People kill. Guns do not kill. Criminals or ‘bad’ people will get guns no matter what the laws.” Certainly it is true that if we keep manufacturing guns and other weapons for use in the United States and to supply many in other world of this world, both healthy and unhealthy people will continue to gain possession of guns. It is also true that as long as we continue to manufacture and/or “overhaul” our nuclear weapons and to develop new weapons delivery systems the rest of the world is going to find it difficult to believe that we are serious about our membership in the nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty club. Armscontrol.org tells us:
‘’The United States has embarked on an overhaul of its entire nuclear weapons enterprise, including development of new weapons delivery systems and life extension programs (LEPs) for and modernization of all its enduring nuclear warhead types and nuclear weapons production facilities. Moreover, rather than constraining the role of nuclear weapons, the Obama administration’s 2013 nuclear weapons employment strategy reaffirmed the existing posture of a nuclear triad of forces on high alert. There are currently approximately 4,650 warheads in the U.S. stockpile, down from 5,113 in 2009, and another 2,700 retired warheads awaiting dismantlement.
Unlike other nuclear-armed states, the United States has modernized its nuclear arsenal over the past two decades mainly by upgrading existing weapons rather than fielding new types. The intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) force is the final phase of a decade-long $8 billion modernization intended to extend its service life until 2030. Similarly, beginning in 2017, the Navy will begin to deploy a modified version of the Trident II D-5 submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) on ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) to extend its service life through 2040. The Air Force has begun LEPs for the air-launched cruise missile and the B-2 and B-52 bombers.
Beyond these upgrades of existing weapons, work is under way to design new weapons to replace the current ones. The Navy is designing a new class of 12 SSBNs, the Air Force is examining whether to build a mobile ICBM or extend the service life of the existing Minuteman III, and the Air Force has begun development of a new, stealthy, long-range bomber and a new nuclear-capable tactical fighter-bomber. Production of a new guided “standoff” nuclear bomb, which would be able to glide toward a target over a distance, is under way, and the Air Force is developing a new long-range nuclear cruise missile to replace the current one.” (Armscontrol.org)
Obviously the department of defense is not going to confirm or deny the above if I call them. I have heard basically the same information from various sources, which leads me to think that it is accurate information. If anyone has more accurate information then it need to be published and clearly communicated to all other nations. Assuming, however, that it is accurate, it is difficult for me to believe why any country, which is not an avowed pacifist country, would refrain from attempting to maintain and/or obtain nuclear weapons. Of course, there may be “saner” countries that correctly surmise that if anyone decides to start a nuclear world war, whether or not every country has nuclear weapons will not make much difference. The countries, which currently possess nuclear weapons., already have the capacity to wipe out the entire human population. In fact, according to wmdawareness.org.UK states as of July 2015, “There are 16,400 nuclear weapons on Earth today, more than 20 years after the Cold War ended.” Although I found some disagreement regarding the number of such weapons there seems to me no disagreement that there are enough weapons currently to destroy all life on this planet.
Although I realize that there are, in nature, some evidence of self-cannibalism, it seems insane that we humans would want to participate in creating, using as bullying power, or continue to manufacture such weapons. Yet, we seem not only determined to do so, but to use them as a threat to keep others from doing the same things. If my child said to me that he/she wanted to take an AK47 gun to school because other kids were bringing a 22 pistol to school, I would not allow him/her to do that. I would certainly insure that the school officials keep all guns out of the school. Yet, some, here in Florida have been attempting to pass a law allowing concealed weapons on college campuses. College/University officials seem to agree that this is insane.
Even if updating and creating new methods of delivery is technically okay under the terms of the current nuclear non-proliferation treaty, it seems inconsistent with the intent. Again, if my six-year old friend, Sam, said that she was going to take an modern version of the AK 47 assault rifle to school while the school was putting into effect the new rule forbidding all guns I would laugh and say, “Really poor try Sam. It is not going to happen.” In other words the statement would be so patently ludicrous that I could not take it seriously.
Yet, here we are wanting to use our muscles which everyone knows includes our nuclear weapons to force Iran to behave the way we want them to behave which is, paradoxically, very different than how we behave. Whew! Think about that sentence.
I suspect that I will continue to be challenged and attempt to get more educated about these and similar matters in the days and weeks to come. Jim may need to get very old before he can claim to be educated. He is certainly feeling pretty stupid right about now.
RSS Feed