Yossi,

Yes, there were doors on every side, but all but one of those doors are only big enough for people, including the door on the north side of the building. The only door big enough for any kind of vehicle is the one I previously mentioned on the east wall.

For the many in this town who tend to go overboard praising the wise, statesman-like ways of Senators Lugar and Hagel, please note that they fully abetted and voted for a partisan rejection of a critical international treaty.

I don’t want to deflect attention from the CTBT, but the question itself at the VP debate should not be lost. It was, “What should be the trigger, or should there be a trigger, when nuclear weapons use is ever put into play?”

Gov. Palin got the first crack at it: “Uh, nucular weaponry of course, would be, uh, the be all end all of just, too many people in too many parts of our planet, so those dangerous regimes again cannot be allowed to acquire nucular weapons. Period.”

Who knows how she was trying to answer the question, or was trying not to. Palin did manage to indicate she knows the word but may not be fully in command of the concept of “deterrence” before she changed the subject.

Sen. Biden responded to Palin’s change-the-subject topic, Afghanistan, and then addressed the CTBT.

Unfortunately, neither really answered the question, which, if one or the other had, might have led to comments on no first use or the Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations. Sadly, that would be too much to expect of a debate such as this. Kudos to Gwen Ifill, though, for posing a bold, important question.

Is it possible to deny that Syria built a nuclear reactor when everyone saw the famous “core top” photo? The French Foreign Minister mentioned the alleged Syrian reactor in an interview to Haaretz. He seems to think it was a “factory”.

In the English version the Israeli interviewers suggested that bombing Iran may facilitate a dialogue like Syria started negotiating after BoE was bombed. Kouchner answered: “It is not the same thing. Bombing a very little place, a factory, etc”.

By the way, Syria offered to start peace talks with Israel long before BoE was attacked. Kouchner should have corrected the interviewers if they really said otherwise.

The Hebrew version says:

Haaretz: “In the case that Israel will attack Iran, can she expect a similar international response like the one after the attack on the nuclear site in Syria – i.e. a silent agreement?”

Kouchner: “This is not the same. There [Syria] a small place was bombed, some factory but what you are allegedly preparing now is a wide and large operation.”

Thanks to Jeffrey for the heads up on the competition and Stephen Schwartz and Cat Auer for making the editing process painless.

I still feel slightly embarrassed to win a student prize after working in the field for 20 years.
Also minor point, “Russell” has two “ll“s.

It gets even worse. On the PBS “Newshour” this evening, senior correspondent Judy Woodruff recapped the debate and near the end of her segment (audio) accused Biden of “stretch[ing] the truth” by, you guessed it, criticizing McCain for voting against the CTBT.

“In truth,” said Woodruff, “President Clinton never sent the test ban treaty to Congress for formal ratification because of overwhelming Republican opposition in the GOP-controlled Senate.”

Gee, I wonder where she got that idea? Apparently nobody at the NewsHour remembered that in 1999 they ran long segments on the CTBT on October 6, 11, 12, and 14. Biden was even one of the guests on October 12. Woodruff was working at CNN at the time, but still.

I just was watching the News Hour on PBS, which when listing when the vice presidential candidates had “stretched” the truth” cited word-for-word that “Clinton had not submitted the CTBT to the Senate for ratification because of GOP opposition.” I expected a little more out of the News Hour.

You be sure to post the juicy tidbits if you two get into digital fisticuffs.

I think having a potty mouth is a good thing, and ad hominem attacks kick ass.

In fact, I want more potty mouth on ACW like the good old days.

LTR:

Thank you for mouthing the USG propaganda.

1. RRW is not just a “few $$$”.

2. The stockpile can be “built-down” without RRW.

3. RRW will require testing.

Not for certification but for the military users. Show me the General who will accept an untested RRW in his operational command.

4. RRW will encourage other nations to develop new weapons also.

5. Most importantly, it is unnecessary: a 90% reliable warhead has exactly the same deterrent effect as a 97% reliable warhead.

Do you know the reliability of the Russian warheads? No. But you are nevertheless deterred.

The reliability of the warheads should be a state secret and not be being divulged to potential adversaries!

In any case, reliability has nothing to do with deterrence until it starts approaching <10%.

These warhead will never be used.

As long as no one finds out, they can be replaced by Mexican pinatas, and deterrence left intact.

Come to think of it, do you have any real proof that the Russian warhead are not pinatas?

USG (DoD/DoE) needs a big logic injection. (However, there is a real danger they may self-destruct if that were to occur.)