Earlier quoted context omitted.
... after regulation, court orders and fines have failed. Which under the premise that AGI is an existential threat would be far more reasonable than many other reasons for raids. If the premise is wrong we won't need it. If society coordinates to not do the dangerous thing we won't need it. The argument is that only in the case where we find ourselves in the situation where other measures have failed such uses of fo…
> If the premise is wrong we won't need it. If society coordinates to not do the dangerous thing we won't need it. But the idea that this use of force is okay itself increases danger. It creates the situation that actors in the field might realize that at some point they're in danger of this and decide to do a first strike to protect themselves. I think this is why anti-nuclear policy is not "we will airstrike you if…
Was that not the official policy during the Bush administration regarding weapons of mass destruction (which covers nuclear weapons in addition to chemical and biological weapons). That was pretty much the official premise of the second Gulf war