A post about Iran & aliens over at Nation Building.
More like this
that Iran said, that Israel said, that Cheney said to Oman that the US might attack Iran...
unsourced, unsubstantiated, speculative
but do the Iranians believe it?
Iran is never far from U.S. news headlines. Nuclear threats, unfair elections, captive reporters, a lack of religious freedom, all seem to demand that we do something. But what is to be done?
Iraq denies reports Israeli Jets exercising deployment to Iraqi airfields in preparation for Iran strike...
PS rhetoric is heating up further
razib,
I'm having difficulty following the logic of your probability calculus. First off, why are you using the Soviet probability of use for the Iranian probability of use? Second, again for the Iranian case, why have you squared the probability of use, making the Iranians far less likely to use nukes than the Soviets? Third, why subtract 1 at the end of the Iranian equation?
At first I thought you were trying to use a Bernoulli variance [p(1-p)] as an uncertainty measure and just blew the parenthesis, but the signs of the 1 and second probability and your not using the same equation for the Soviets rule out that explanation.
Finally, even if the Iranian probability of use were 1, the relatively few weapons they have in comparison to the Soviets make it hard to conjure up an equation for the Iranians being scarier, especially if we in America (rationally) factor in differences in range and reliability.
Please help me out here.
I'm having difficulty following the logic of your probability calculus.
dav, don't take it too seriously! it was a joke in part. my only point is that either|or rhetoric is used is kind of stupid. the aliens example should tip you off that it was more a joke than a serious analysis, but, i don't think saying something is "infinite more likely" reflects seriously what someone is thinking either.
dave, to be clearer
a) people like krauthammer use probabilistic language
b) then, they also use a necessary/sufficient model (e.g., any risk is unacceptable)
they conflate the two in a mish-mash which obscures the reality that they draw lines and employ heuristics which are necessary in line with a) and suggest to me that b) is just a rhetorical ploy.