<No uninvited on-site inspection of facilities, anywhere, anytime. AND, if a weapon of mass destruction is used against the US or our interests, anywhere, anytime, if a country CAN'T prove you don't have the capacity to make that particular weapon, we will obliterate you. Every man, woman and child of you will be gone. Period. (At least the capital and political leadership as well as the manufacturing and utilities infrastructure would be gone. History, finis, over, a memory for those left to remember.)

If another country "frames" your country, we'll be sorry, and unless you could demonstrate you couldn't have made that weapon, you're gone. If you demonstrated before the incident you don't have a WMD capacity, you're safe, and we'll even include you under the "Bowser Doctrine" umbrella.



Bowser, as far as I know its not possible to prove a negative.

Could I prove that I don't know how to create a nuclear weapon? I could act pretty dumb when I want to, so how would the accuser know if I was dumb or just acting dumb?

Also, putting the burden of proof on the defendant is not very american. The American way is to make the prosecuter prove that I am guilty, not for me (the defendant) to prove that I'm innocent. Of course I will do every thing in my power to convince the prosecuter, judge and jury (and if it comes to that executioner), that I am innocent, but that burden should not initially rest on me.

Now when dealing with nation-states, I don't consider that to be much different. We need to ask questions before shooting, but once we come to a conclusion beyond reasonable doubt, we should unleash all hell on that nation state. As Larry pointed out in some previous topics, to determine something 100% would be the same as never doing anything, because it would be impossible to know 100%. I can live with only obtaining a verdict beyond reasonable doubt, as should be done in the courtroom.

-Steve G.