woolaf

In 2018, both arguments were on the table. Many in the U.S. saw withdrawal from INF as necessary to "strengthen security in the Indo-Pacific." Even if it meant the risk of a Europe bristling with INF missiles, many then (and more now) saw the benefits of deployments as far outweighing the risks.

Sorry, yes, I mean 2022. And, "why not July 2021" is answered in all my other replies. Politically untenable with the history of Russian denials hanging over the Administration and with the growing pressure to address the China problem.

Finally (really, this is such old news), there was a lot of pressure in some segments of the U.S. policy community, many who then and now worked for the President who pulled the U.S. out, to get out of the Treaty to deploy INF-range missiles in the Indo-Pacific.

Russia could not admit 9M-729 was a violation and U.S. could not negotiate a new INF Treaty (or even a moratorium) with that lie hanging over the talks. No President or Administration could take on this challenge, and no where near 67 Senators would vote for ratification. (1/2)

U.S. offered to address INF issue in Jan. 2021 SSD meeting. Russia rejected this and insisted that U.S./NATO had to accept everything in the draft treaties, we couldn't pick and choose issues to discuss. And there is NO WAY the U.S. could agree to anything after Russia lied about 9M-729 for years.

Are you really arguing that Russia invaded Ukraine because the U.S. withdrew from INF???? The invasion of Ukraine was over the existence of Ukraine and the existence and enlargement of NATO. The moratorium proposal was just part of the list of grievances and demands, but was a side-show. (1/2)

And they had already repeatedly denied the one verification measure we needed to gain confidence in any proposals going forward. While the range of 9M-729 may not have mattered to the moratorium, it (and Russia's lies about it) mattered a lot to the U.S. polity. Without resolution of that, no deal.

It "suggested" verification measures. Those would have been part of the delay tactic of a negotiation. While we spent months (years?) in negotiations on the contours of the agreement, they would have had relatively free reign to do whatever they wanted with the program. Fait accompli, hidden away.

It was similar to one of the Soviet INF proposals from the early 1980s, which essentially said "we should all freeze where we are." So Soviets got to keep the SS-20s they had and the U.S. would have deployed nothing new. (Some of us have long memories; sorry, still feisty today.)

I have read the entire proposal. Engaging would NOT have stopped the invasion of Ukraine. It was a ruse and delay tactic to drag out negotiations (during which the U.S. would not deploy) while Russia continued to develop and deploy INF-range missiles. (Sorry, I'm a bit feisty today). (1/2)

Want!!!!!

You offered a more measured response than I did.

If he insists he is posturing for escalation, then does nothing the next time Medvedev posts in a drunken rage, then U.S. credibility takes hit. The alternative is that he feels compelled to follow through on his commitment, and nukes Russia to save his personal reputation. Holy effing sh&t.

I would offer high odds that he did absolutely nothing to alter the deployment pattern of submarines already at sea and nothing to deploy additional assets. But THIS IS NOT HOW YOU PLAY THE MIND GAME OF DETERRENCE. As with the old "fire and fury" statement, it is a commitment trap.... (1/2)

It's not Reagan Airport. It's Reagan National Airport. Everybody in DC calls it National (DCA is the code when you are searching for a flight, which matters, or you might book out of Dulles and end up at the wrong airport.) We have BWI, National, and Dulles as choices.

This thread is an amazing case of Jewish geography. 😛

Given her previous position and connections in the building, I'd be pretty sure she has a source that you can't find.

You didn’t ask me, but my favorites are Crimson Tide and Testament.

Take it from whence it comes: someone who created his "brand" by arguing for the bombing of Iran.

That's a big "IF" in the last sentence, as Iran already/still plenty of enriched uranium.

He's not a particularly clever deal-maker. He treats everything like a real estate deal: Here's my first and final offer. Take it, or I'll say bad things about you on social media.

Iran will retaliate. He’s promised to destroy them if they do. So, either he escalates or he backs down and destroys credibility.

That statement was an effing COMMITMENT TRAP

Kagan has surprised me a lot over the years, and I’m always surprised when I agree with (or at least appreciate) his points. I went to grad school with him and we never agreed back then.

The reason you need a lot of “boom” on the B61-11 is that it doesn’t penetrate that much. So taking it down to single-digit, primary-only yield almost certainly wouldn’t be enough boom for Fordow unless you used a few.

So often, hyperventilating about the risks of sole authority assumes (or actually asserts) that the President will certainly choose to launch even if warning is ambiguous or unexpected. The President can choose to wait. But this obviously, requires competence under pressure from the President. 2/2

Well done! I especially appreciate the fact that you note it is the vulnerability of command and control, not ICBM vulnerability, that undergirds conceptual support for sole authority. But you should also mention that the President, in uncertain or ambiguous times, can choose not to launch. (1/2)

Sounds like spring allergies. Headache is mostly from inflamed sinuses and sore throat is from post-nasal drip of draining sinuses over night (is it worse in the morning?). Years ago, my son's pediatrician recommended Benadryl at night and Claritin during the day (I add Ibuprofen, as needed.)

Only 3 years. 100% effective (against all missiles if all types, if launched simultaneously or against a handful of missiles launched with sufficient notice???) Only $175 billion? In other words, he’ll spend the money, then simply declare he’s achieved the impossible?

Oh no!