Yes, well, it's very convenient to say that your neighbour is "crazy" if you want justification for breaking into his house and committing premeditated murder on him, BB.

"I had to do it. He was crazy and he was out to get me."

Hitler probably thought the Poles were crazy too.

Your assumption that Iranian and North Korean leaders are "crazy" is convenient for your policy because it allows you not to treat them as you would treat normal human beings, but to merely exterminate them like rats or other vermin. It justifies planned aggression on your part.

It sounds a lot like the justifications Hitler used to exterminate Jews and various other people to me, in that it is a closed circle that defies logic or moral responsibility.

Did you know that the leader of Korea has a little sign on his desk as a constant reminder? It says (in Korean), "It's about survival, stupid!"

They are well aware of the risks, and I'm sure the Iranians are also.

North Korea wanted the bomb so that it would not BE attacked by a larger nation. That is why smaller nations want the bomb. They want it as a deterrent, so that they can negotiate from some position of relative equality rather than live like a beaten dog on its knees waiting for the ax to fall. That is why Pakistan wanted it too. None of them will ever use it unless they are simply at the final extremity of desperation, in my opinion, meaning: not until they are attacked in such a way as threatens their total defeat and annihilation.

Only he who has overwhelming firepower can dare to use the bomb first. That means primarily: the USA, Israel (in its own region), and Russia. Perhaps China.

They are the people who feel (relatively) free to use the ultimate weapon if they want to, because they think they can get away with it...under certain limited circumstances, such as hitting a nation like Iran which doesn't have it yet. They think they can get away with it, because no one will dare initiate full scale hostilities with them on that level.

And if they want to do it...well, it's simple. Just accuse the Iranians or someone small power of being "crazy", and you have your justification to commit genocide, don't you? And who can ever prove afterward whether or not the Iranians were in fact "crazy"? Or whether they ever would have done what you say they were thinking of doing? The dead cannot testify in their own defence, can they?

I agree with you that once even one nuke is used by anyone, all bets are off. It could lead to a succession of unpredictable reactions among different nations, and that could spiral into a world war. Undoutedly. So could a conventional war with Iran that does not involve any nukes. It's all very dangerous.


It works exactly like civil law, Bruce. You cannot just go and kill your neighbour, say "He was crazy, that's why I did it. He was planning to kill me, you see..." and expect the judge and the police to see it your way. They will arrest you and charge you with murder. They will also probably think you are crazy, and with considerable justification! Your lawyer may try an insanity plea, in fact, when you go to trial.

Unfortunately, the world has no higher authoritative courts or police structure who are able to arrest the USA or Russia or Israel if they commit such an attack. They are, in effect, a law unto themselves, merely because they are militarily powerful and no one can stop them if they decide to act.

That is the problem in a nutshell. We live in a lawless world. It pretends to have rule of law between nations, but that's a fiction. Just as in the time of Greece or Rome, naked power rules the affairs of nations. They quote international law when it suits their plan. They ignore it when it doesn't...or they cynically pretend to be upholding it even as they violate it.