May 27, 2008
Out of school
The NYT citing a Reuters report doesn't seem to feel that this is any big deal.
Former President Jimmy Carter said Israel held at least 150 nuclear weapons, the first time a current or former American president had publicly acknowledged the Jewish state’s nuclear arsenal.
Eldoer of Ziyon points out that it's a big deal from Carter's standpoint:
This is not some investigative reporter coming up with these numbers, this is an ex-president. As such, they appear to have more inside information behind them.If a former Israeli prime minister would tell a public venue about US spies found in Israel, or perhaps about US military capabilities and weaknesses discovered during joint exercises, what would be the US reaction? If Tony Blair announced the exact location of US submarines when he was prime minister, what kind of an uproar would that cause? Because this is exactly what Jimmy Carter just did to Israel.
He just gave priceless information to Iran about Israel's nuclear arsenal.
Heads of state are privy to many state secrets. Perhaps Carter's betrayal of that trust ought to lead to the drafting of laws specifically criminalizing such betrayals and making them subject to enforceable penalties. Carter is not and should not be above the law.
Crossposted on Yourish.
Posted by SoccerDad at May 27, 2008 6:31 AM | TrackBack
Out of sitemeter
Hamas's novelty wears off
Council speak 09/14/08
Still not barking
The Media and The Hubris of Hope?
Osama didn't bark. why not?
Palin's coming out party
I go flying so high
A piece of peace
Seven year ago plus
Since he is now a private citizen, he should be subject to the laws against revealing classified information. The only trouble is that arresting him would confirm the information which would cause even more trouble.
Then again, perhaps Israel has more to gain by letting its enemies think that when Carter was President, they had 150 nuclear weapons and that they have been making more since then.
If a former Israeli prime minister would tell . . . about US military capabilities and weaknesses discovered during joint exercises, what would be the US reaction?
How about actually making war on the US?
If, for instance, Israel were to repeatedly attack a clearly identified US warship in international waters, killing or wounding over 200 crewmembers, what would be the US reaction?
Absolutely nothing.
In fact, the US government would actively conspire to suppress the truth about the attack, endorse Israeli excuses which they knew to be false, and bury the entire incident in the name of "good relations". The Secretary of Defense would personally order nearby aircraft carriers to recall their fighters and refuse to defend the ship while the attack was taking place, as a service to Israel. And the government would continue to deny this in order to protect Israel from accountability for over 40 years.
Don't worry. There's no danger that Israeli immunity from responsibility for its actions will go away anytime soon.
Posted by: Kevin T. Keith at May 27, 2008 2:21 PM