it is the consequences directly where he may have been a nuisance, let alone he posted it all over the web where you don t know if this guy is a lunatic. there is intent in this matter. why. because criminal law is graded purposeful knowledge, reckless behavior. this is recklessness. that s weighed against perceivable conduct. is it reasonably foreseeable by just driving by and yelling at him that they ll topple over and get serious physical injury? i don t see that. yes. he was charged appropriately. it was a misdemeanor. case closed. it is definitely an offense that needs to be punished. don t you think we ll look at these youtube videos more closely in light of what happened in california? that s what happens. witch hunts and crazes come out of this. any conduct where someone sounds like they are an idiot gets criminalized. you can t criminalize idiotic behavior. if you re going to run over a
it could be setting the stage to get in a nuclear arms race with others in the region. steven gates is the former deputy assistant to vice president cheney for national security affairs, and a distinguished fellow at the hamilton foundation. steven good to see you. good to be with you. these dealings, they always come with a double edged sword, a more immediate deal, concerns more immediate concerns like nukes, but couldn t iran be seen in a different light like radicals that could be able to figure out how to work the diplomatic system? that s the concern here, they have been actively negotiates about their nuclear programs for the better part of two decades. a similar point in the second term of the clinton administration, where we thought that a reformer had been elected. we entered a negotiating
oh what a relief it is. instead of paying too much for an ipad, i got the surface 2. first of all, it comes with office and outlook. then, with free skype calls to phones in over 60 countries, i can talk to my cousins any time. and then, i got 200 gigs of cloud storage free so i can get my photos and stuff almost anywhere. others charge for that. surface is such a great deal. i feel like i should tell somebody. hey! honestly i want to see you be brave
process, but late in clinton s second term, we backed off when we learned that the ayatollah was in charge, the same ayatollah that s in charge now. our allies in the region, even some of our arab allies, they have seen this before. and they might squeeze in some concessions in to secure a deal and it leaves them vulnerable. setting the stage for a nuclear arms race, saudi arabia, for example, they re saying that if iran gets nukes, we might need to get some too? when the united states ceases to be a reliable ally to help work together and protect their interests, they really have no choice but to recalibrate their even deterrence.
iran lately has been destabilizing many sunni regimes in iraq. there s the battle in syria, spilling over, but also throughout the arab spring, so they see a broader threat than just the technicalities of a nuclear program. some would argue steven, a perceivable bad deal is better than no deal at all. but that one constant that can t be extracted from this equation and that s distrust. can countries like iran or north korea be trusted to followthrough on any deal that might be reached? history would suggest that they can t be trusted. but we have had effective negotiations in the past with governments we didn t trust. the highest profile example, this would have been during the reagan administration, at the same time negotiating arms control. there are ways this can be done, but we have to have a serious purpose about deterring in case of failure diplomacy.