A Pressing Concern

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee has been giving some thought to the disturbing fact that Donald Tr*mp has the power to order a nuclear first strike against North Korea — or, perhaps, Venezuela or Iran or Nigeria (having confused it with Niger.)  Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts has proposed legislation that would limit that power to attacks on countries upon which Congress had declared war.

Don't hold your breath awaiting passage.

Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) protects the United States against nuclear attack just as well today as it did when the Soviets first acquired the bomb — better, since now we can respond with submarine-based missiles even if our ground-based capacity is destroyed in a first strike.  That also means no other country would risk involvement should Our President get it into his head to lob one at Pyongyang.  Kim Jong-un really does need his own bombs and delivery system.

The utility and safety of our submarine-based capacity also makes our ground-based missiles unnecessary and obsolete.  It certainly is not worth replacing them, as proposed, at a cost of $100 billion.  The submarines also make it possible to delay a response to an attack — long enough so that the decision does not have to be made by one person.  The choice to engage in nuclear war, at the very least, should be a decision by a nonpartisan group of trusted individuals.

Yesterday, Gen. John Hyten, head of US Strategic Command, said he would disobey an "illegal order" from the President to launch a first strike.  It's a nice sentiment, but the Air Force Academy at Colorado Springs produces plenty of graduates who are both military leaders and Christians eagerly awaiting the Apocalypse.  No matter what Hyten would do, somebody would obey joyfully if an apocalyptic command came from Tr*mp.

Briefly

Peace talks
Turkey, Iran, and Russia (as a surrogate for Assad) have been discussing a plan to end the war in Syria.  It's an odd grouping, to be sure — they've been at each other's throats for decades.  In fact, they seem to have only one goal in common: preventing the establishment of anything resembling an independent Kurdistan.  Personally, I believe it is time for the USofA to stop toadying to the likes of Erdogan and Abadi and back the idea of a Kurdish state in Iraq and Syria — perhaps even with an eye towards parts of Turkey.  The Kurds are the most dependable friends we have in the region, and will remain so unless we betray them.

Nuclear Arms Race
If there is any more dangerous combination than belligerence, ignorance, and vanity, I can't think of it right now — although I suppose we should be grateful that Tr*mp, unlike many of his supporters, at least is not looking forward to the Apocalypse.

Settlements
I was pleasantly surprised when Obama instructed Samantha Power to abstain from, rather than veto, the Security Council vote condemning Israel's expansion of settlements on the West Bank.  It won't  make any difference on the ground, of course, but the president certainly must have enjoyed poking a parting stick into Netanyahu's eye.

The Berlin Aftermath
Angela Merkel's political future is looking dim, and so is the outlook for the EU.  Still, the waves of migration won't be stopped, driven by climate change and the brutal struggles for resources it foments.  As right-wing xenophobes come to dominate the West, any unified response to common threats seems less and less likely.

Etc.

Refugees
Angela Merkel and the rest of the EU entered into a devil's bargain to deal with the flow of mostly Muslim refugees, the devil in question being Recip Tayip Erdogan.  I suppose they preferred to deal with a devil outside the EU rather than the nativist devils who put increasingly fascist governments in charge in Poland and Hungary, and are threatening the rest of Europe as well.

Brexit
See above.  The nativists of UKIP are eating away at Britain's Conservative Party, and the controversy over EU membership is threatening to split the Conservatives in much the same way that Tr*mpism is threatening to split the Republicans on this side of the pond.

"Our" Muslims
Obama is pissing off the Saudis.  Good.  It's about time.  Somebody has to do something to end the human rights abuses in Yemen, and cut into support for world Islamism.  While he's at it, maybe something can be done about the buildup of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal, which now seems to include tactical nuclear weapons, and is vulnerable to Taliban attack.

Merrick Garland
Hopefully, the nomination is more a political ploy than a serious indication of the kind of candidate most Democrats want to see on the court.  We've had more than enough "moderation" from Obama himself, and we don't need a Justice who reflects Obama's illiberal views on the primacy of government over individual liberties.

Bibi Speaks

I'll keep this short. Bibi Netanyahu came to Washington to bolster his tough-guy image in Israel and to land a body blow on Our President (aka "the schwartze") in aid of the Republic Party.  Get rid of the Dems, he figures, and the destruction of Iran is assured.

In case you hadn't noticed, the only possible alternatives to negotiation Bibi offered were truly crippling sanctions and military action.  Stronger sanctions and existential threats will leave Iran with no logical alternative but to hurriedly develop its nuclear capacity.  After all, Israel is believed to have upwards of 100 atomic warheads, and the means to deliver them.  If Iran resisted a conventional attack, would Bibi go nuclear?

Maybe.  The Evangelicals in the USofA would love that.  Their support for Israel arises out of their hope that the "End Times" soon will be upon us.  They figure on rapturing out and leaving the rest of us to deal with the mess left behind.

And a mess it certainly would be.

Iran, Israel, and the Bomb

For fifty years of my life (yes, I'm a kind of a geezer), I lived with something referred to as MAD — a very apt acronym for mutually assured destruction. Both the United States and the Soviet Union were sufficiently supplied with nuclear weapons to destroy each other. Neither was stupid enough to attempt a first strike, so the many times they made me duck under my desk (TAKE COVER!!!) in elementary school were a waste of time.

Mind you, we were led to believe that Soviet leaders were crazy, and that the bombs could fall at any moment. Well, nobody is that crazy, including the leaders of Iran. Considering that Israel has well over 200 nuclear weapons, many of which are submarine based, the Iranian leadership must understand that launching an atomic bomb would result in the total annihilation of Iran.

The only reason an Israeli leader would support a "preemptive" attack on Iran at this time is for the sake of internal Israeli politics. The only reason a US leader (or would-be leader) would support such an attack at this time is for the sake in internal US politics.

Face it — North Korea has the bomb, delivery systems, and some of the most bat-shit crazy leaders in all history. Even they know that a nuclear attack on, say, South Korea or Japan would result in a very severe response from those two nations' most powerful ally — the good old US of A. Even if Israel didn't have its own nukes, Israel would be safe.

In the meanwhile, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader, has proclaimed nuclear weapons a sin; and both US intelligence sources and the IAEA say that Iran has not yet decided whether or not to produce a nuclear weapon. Granted, it wouldn't hurt them to have one, to counterbalance Israel in that good old MAD protocol.

Also in the meanwhile, the cold war style conflict between the US and Iran has inflated oil prices to a point where they threaten the US economic recovery. It's nothing but idiotic.

Politics notwithstanding, it's time to pull back and talk.