While I think we ideally shouldn’t build any more nuclear weapons, I don’t think we should prevent any country from doing so.
It’s so hypocritical.
Aside from that, this machine is disturbing, but not more so than a reaper drone. I’m not quite sure why they’d go through the trouble.
That’s one strategy. Another, once the nuclear cat is out of the bag, is mutual assured destruction (MAD). If that’s your strategy then it is hypocritical because then the point is that everyone has enough power to destroy everyone else so no one will make a move.
I personally think that both strategies are stupid. The former will just breed current and future resentment and the latter is vulnerable to one unstable person with authority to use the weapons.
But I don’t have any sort of alternative so it seems like preventing others from getting nukes and then falling back to MAD is just the way the world is working.
Alliance networks are what gave us WW1.
The point is that the reason given is to protect the free world, when it is doing anything but. It’s just keeping the same people comfortably in power, capable of stepping on their enemies at will.
This is why major nuclear power invasions of non-nuclear powers are incredibly dangerous: they incentivize nuclear weapons development and disincentivize adhering to the NPT.
Where the NPT really failed was in handling actors with expansive, violent regional influence aspirations like Iran and Pakistan.
If you're inevitably going to come in conflict with the US and/or international community, your obvious move is to develop nuclear weapons. The NPT provides no carrot to balance out that reality.
So of course Israel wants to do what it can to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear state. This would be in its top 3 foreign policy goals.
Even countries ruled by theocratic leaders who promote hate and obscurity ?
The problem with populist-leveraging theocracies with bad economies is that you need a shared national boogie man. For decades, Iraq, Israel, and the US have been that for Iran.
It’s like NK and the US. They keep bellowing about their rockets, but they’ll never fire them.
But if the tail gets ideas about wagging you? And your populace demands you eliminate the boogie man threat with all means at hand, because you've spent decades inculcating hatred in them and blaming ills on the man?
Well... better the boogie man's head than yours on the chopping block.
Does not seem that different from the past 4 years in the US? If NK can have nukes, I don’t see who can’t.
If I understood the article correctly, it's because the Mossad didn't want to reveal it was them, which is why the gun attempted to self-destruct after use.