Iran test fires missile capable of reaching US bases or Israel

Started by jimmy olsen, May 20, 2009, 05:08:52 PM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
User actions

Neil

#75
May 21, 2009, 04:10:02 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on May 21, 2009, 03:58:11 PM
Quote from: Berkut on May 21, 2009, 02:56:10 PM
Rampant speculation used to justify our own unwillingness to do anything about anything.

If we are so afraid that the crazies will go even more crazy if we oppose them, then I guess they have won. So sit back and enjoy the show.

I would argue that even if we are so afraid that taking action will result in some horrendous uprising of crazy muslims (I thought most of them were actually very moderate???), then it is going to happen anyway. It can happen now, or we can wait until they nuke something, and it will happen after we respond to that, which we will be forced to do.

How is it crazy to respond to a declaration of war (which is what bombing Iran would be) with acts of war?
Actually, only a declaration of war is a declaration of war.  Bombing someone is not a declaration of war.
I do not hate you, nor do I love you, but you are made out of atoms which I can use for something else.

Ender

#76
May 21, 2009, 04:13:30 PM
The west have grown weak, and the iranians are betting on this.

jimmy olsen

#77
May 21, 2009, 04:16:37 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on May 21, 2009, 03:58:11 PM
Quote from: Berkut on May 21, 2009, 02:56:10 PM
Rampant speculation used to justify our own unwillingness to do anything about anything.

If we are so afraid that the crazies will go even more crazy if we oppose them, then I guess they have won. So sit back and enjoy the show.

I would argue that even if we are so afraid that taking action will result in some horrendous uprising of crazy muslims (I thought most of them were actually very moderate???), then it is going to happen anyway. It can happen now, or we can wait until they nuke something, and it will happen after we respond to that, which we will be forced to do.

How is it crazy to respond to a declaration of war (which is what bombing Iran would be) with acts of war?
The Iranians responding wouldn't be crazy, random Muslims in unrelated countries would be.
It is far better for the truth to tear my flesh to pieces, then for my soul to wander through darkness in eternal damnation.

Jet: So what kind of woman is she? What's Julia like?
Faye: Ordinary. The kind of beautiful, dangerous ordinary that you just can't leave alone.
Jet: I see.
Faye: Like an angel from the underworld. Or a devil from Paradise.
--------------------------------------------
1 Karma Chameleon point

Queequeg

#78
May 21, 2009, 04:18:50 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 21, 2009, 04:16:37 PM
The Iranians responding wouldn't be crazy, random Muslims in unrelated countries would be.
Shi'ite Muslims and Persian speakers in Afghanistan?  Really?  That's crazy?  When they share a border and a tongue or a faith?  Really?
Quote from: PDH on April 25, 2009, 05:58:55 PM
"Dysthymia?  Did they get some student from the University of Chicago with a hard-on for ancient Bactrian cities to name this?  I feel cheated."

Ender

#79
May 21, 2009, 04:19:37 PM
Bottom line is muslims are nothing more than an angry powerless mob.
We shouldn't be afraid of them.
Like dogs, they can smell our fear.

Tamas

#80
May 21, 2009, 04:29:37 PM
Berkut pwns everyone in this thread, frankly.

The Minsky Moment

#81
May 21, 2009, 05:24:28 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on May 21, 2009, 03:34:46 PM
That said, this is a good debate; I am not totally sure if the Iranian government is fundamentally rational.

I would phrase the question somewhat differently.  I am not totally sure Iran has a "government" - at least in the sense that term is commonly understood in the West: a coherent state entity with clear lines of authority and a monopoly on legitimate use of force.  It seems to me that there are multiple (and sometimes competing) sources of authority in Iran which makes assessment of rationality rather difficult.  One can guess about the rationality of certain individuals, but inidividual human beings are prone to erratic behavior from time to time.  It's not clear to me that there exist a viable institutional framework though which the rationality of the state system can reliably trump the vagaries of individual human behavior.
The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.
--Joan Robinson

Razgovory

#82
May 21, 2009, 05:53:25 PM
Is any government fundementally rational?
I've given it serious thought. I must scorn the ways of my family, and seek a Japanese woman to yield me my progeny. He shall live in the lands of the east, and be well tutored in his sacred trust to weave the best traditions of Japan and the Sacred South together, until such time as he (or, indeed his house, which will periodically require infusion of both Southern and Japanese bloodlines of note) can deliver to the South it's independence, either in this world or in space.  -Lettow April of 2011

Raz is right. -MadImmortalMan March of 2017

The Minsky Moment

#83
May 21, 2009, 06:16:42 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on May 21, 2009, 05:53:25 PM
Is any government fundementally rational?

At least in the formal Weberian sense, yes.  That is a limited form of rationality, but I am not sure the Iranian system even has that.
The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.
--Joan Robinson

Oexmelin

#84
May 21, 2009, 08:05:46 PM
I am not sure if we can use weberian rationality in such an either / or mode.

Btw, Minsky, there was a somewhat recent translation of a book by one professor here in Montréal on Keynes: Gilles Dostaler, Keynes and his Battles. I haven't had the time to read it, but thought it might interest you.
Que le grand cric me croque !

Berkut

#85
May 21, 2009, 11:12:27 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on May 21, 2009, 05:24:28 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on May 21, 2009, 03:34:46 PM
That said, this is a good debate; I am not totally sure if the Iranian government is fundamentally rational.

I would phrase the question somewhat differently.  I am not totally sure Iran has a "government" - at least in the sense that term is commonly understood in the West: a coherent state entity with clear lines of authority and a monopoly on legitimate use of force.  It seems to me that there are multiple (and sometimes competing) sources of authority in Iran which makes assessment of rationality rather difficult.  One can guess about the rationality of certain individuals, but inidividual human beings are prone to erratic behavior from time to time.  It's not clear to me that there exist a viable institutional framework though which the rationality of the state system can reliably trump the vagaries of individual human behavior.

Bingo.
"If you think this has a happy ending, then you haven't been paying attention."

select * from users where clue > 0
0 rows returned

Slargos

#86
May 21, 2009, 11:21:11 PM
The only way the arabs can win a war with the west is by unconventional means (read: suicide bombers en masse) and remind me again why we are letting them seed our entire civilization with fifth columns?

YOU WERE WARNED.

Queequeg

#87
May 21, 2009, 11:35:57 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on May 21, 2009, 05:24:28 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on May 21, 2009, 03:34:46 PM
That said, this is a good debate; I am not totally sure if the Iranian government is fundamentally rational.
It's not clear to me that there exist a viable institutional framework though which the rationality of the state system can reliably trump the vagaries of individual human behavior.
I think it is reasonably clear that there is some political balance of forces within the Iranian "government", and that there are moderating forces and extremists.  While I agree that the Iranian government is too incoherent to be called rational, I don't think any single faction ever has enough power to do anything holly irrational (like, say, nuking Israel), at least not right now.  Ahmedincompetenijad is too unpopular, and the upcoming elections too close.

The fact that Iran's undemocratic element of government are more confused than is average for an authoritarian regime (saying something by itself), it also seems fair to say that the entire pseudo-Democracy element complicates things even further, but the fact that the different factions tend to balance eachother out means that I don't think Iran is prey to the "vagaries of individual human behavior" as you described.
Quote from: PDH on April 25, 2009, 05:58:55 PM
"Dysthymia?  Did they get some student from the University of Chicago with a hard-on for ancient Bactrian cities to name this?  I feel cheated."

Queequeg

#88
May 21, 2009, 11:39:58 PM
Quote from: Berkut on May 21, 2009, 11:12:27 PM
Bingo.
:lol:

That's a pretty subtle argument, Berk.  I very seriously doubt that Minsk is arguing that we should go Dresden on all of Iran. 
Quote from: PDH on April 25, 2009, 05:58:55 PM
"Dysthymia?  Did they get some student from the University of Chicago with a hard-on for ancient Bactrian cities to name this?  I feel cheated."
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
User actions