February 22, 2012
With regards to your post about Iran, and the US not bothering nuclear powers, hasn’t the U.S. been less than friendly with Pakistan (a nuclear power) over the last year (between scattered accusations of collaboration with terrorists, unauthorized violations of Pakistani sovereignty, and the drone strike killing a group of Pakistani soldiers)? I was under the impression that tensions, while improving, were once high between the U.S. and Pakistan (despite some strategic cooperation). This is a genuine inquiry because I thought I understood the relationship but I could very easily be mistaken, figured you’d know better than me. — cheddahcheesy

Tensions with Pakistan are certainly high. And we did the bin Laden raid and continue to do drone strikes without Pakistani permission.

But there is no prospect that the United States will seek to invade Pakistan as it did Iraq. Nor is there any prospect that the United States will engage in a systematic series of massive airstrikes against Pakistan as it is considering against Iran and its nuclear program.

Pakistan, like North Korea, has a “get out of jail free” card: nuclear weapons.

Put another way, if Iraq had had nuclear weapons, Saddam Hussein would probably still be in charge of Iraq … or, at least, if he was replaced, it would not have been as a result of a US invasion.

I get why the US wants the flexibility to blow people up without worrying about a nuclear response. I just also get why, given this incentive structure, tin pot dictators all over the world want nuclear weapons.

7:52am  |   URL: http://tmblr.co/ZPUuPyGq-mmc
(Notes: 10)
  
  1. cleanslateforablankmind reblogged this from politicalprof
  2. politicalprof posted this