Saturday, May 26, 2007

nuclear weapons are good in *some* dictators' hands: economist

may 26th, 2007

note that the atlanticist is not so bothered about the nukes in pakistan's hands, and is quite thrilled about the 'break-india's-kneecaps' nuclear 'deal' put forth by america.

note the last paragraph:
"As in Congo, where a dictator was unable to ensure the secure storage of the nuclear material, or as in North Korea, where a dictator seems keen to develop nuclear weapons, the lesson for Russia over Myanmar should be clear: spreading nuclear technology to troubled countries is a bad idea."

that is, unless the troubled country's name starts with P-A-K.


Ghost Writer said...

While I do not support the Atlanticist preaching sin to the Russians; I am not too thrilled at Burma having nukes - they are now effectively a Chinese protectorate and are being used against India. This is one instance where Russian actions are detrimental to our interests.

nizhal yoddha said...

good point, ghostwriter. burma is a chinese proxy these days. remember the gas deal? they reneged on a promise to sell natural gas to india, and instead sold it to china.

the venom with which the atlanticists attack russia shows that they are clearly worried, and have good reason to be so. they are addicted to russian hydrocarbons, which means that putin has them over a barrel, no pun intended.