2/ * if we don't live up to our promise, (a) we make it entirely clear that agreements like this in the future are 100% worthless, and (b) therefore we incentivize future people to never trust us / sign such agreements, and (c) also we incentivize EVERYONE to develop WMDs TODAY
-
-
Show this thread
-
3/ Bayesian theory says that 2 data points is better proof than 1https://twitter.com/znfrey/status/1485711268036202501 …
Show this thread -
4/ gosh, what are the chances that I read the third paragraph in the page I linked to in the top tweet?https://twitter.com/zmoreira/status/1485721750130339840 …
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It was a stupid promise, one of GHWB's worst mistakes, and we should still honor it. I hate it, but it's right.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Do we still have their nukes in a suburban storage unit somewhere? Can we just send them back?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
But we didn’t promise Ukraine that. It’s not a defense agreement, it is a non-aggression pact. The U.S., UK, Russia, and China all agreed they would respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity. So we have no legal nor moral obligation to defend them.
-
Gonna have to agree with this take; especially since it only mentions use of nukes against Ukraine (from my quick read of it says). Good breakdown from this guy:https://twitter.com/TommyMarion10/status/1486027539009179649?t=0BhayxEA0wNam7Rjd8KesQ&s=19 …
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
"we promised" i think on the scale of seriousness of international law (ha!), where 'convention' & 'treaty' are on the high-end, 'resolutions'/'agreements' in the middle... 'memoranda' are sort of like "well its something on paper, but don't expect it to mean anything" tho...
-
... i've pointed at that doc myself a bunch of times, and feel (similar to you i guess) that its still sort of interesting from the POV of, "US credibility in nuclear diplomacy" treating it as meaningless is fine, but that's prob also how Iran feels about any deal we offer
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
They never really had nukes. Russia had operational control. There was no way Russia was going to let them keep the warheads. The Memorandum provides political cover for that. Otherwise we would have the Budapest Treaty.
-
As though a large box of cash, motivated gunmen, and anonymous truck couldn’t make them disappear to a suitable, um, Persian locksmith or some such.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.