I rarely link to Mark Whittington any more, because I see no need to give him the traffic for which he seems to troll, but I’ll make an exception in this case, because it’s so blatant and stupid:
Rand Simberg, like many commercial space advocates, has attacked the Iran Nonproliferation Act (now including Syria and North Korea) as being ineffective and harming commercial space operations.
I have never “attacked,” or even criticized INKSNA, nor do I know anyone else in the commercial space community who has, so he is either making this up out of whole cloth, or he doesn’t understand the difference between INKSNA and ITAR. I guess the latter interpretation is more likely, and more charitable, since he understands little about space and technology policy in general.
[Afternoon update]
Mark has updated his post to continue his fantasies about me:
I suspect that he will play Clinton-like word games by saying not “attacked” but rather “expressed reservations” or “was dubious about” or even “mildly amused by.” Since it seems so important to him, I’ll give him that.
I have done none of the above. I have rarely, if ever, discussed INKSNA prior to that piece yesterday. He needs to adjust his meds, either up or down.
It would of been useful if he had provided a link or quote for where you allegedly attacked INKSNA.
Mark is right when he says Russia will do whatever it wants regardless of treaties, as they have done in the past.
Using INKSNA as a tool to help convince people to support commercial access to LEO, is a good argument to make. However, your point 4, seems to be a much stronger argument to me.
“4) We can embrace the Obama administration plans, announced in February, to harness private enterprise — and utilize existing or almost existing technology — to reduce the amount of time that we’re held hostage by the Russians. “
It would of been useful if he had provided a link or quote for where you allegedly attacked INKSNA.
He can’t, because it doesn’t exist. He can never substantiate his fantasies about me, or his imaginary friends in the “Internet Rocketeers Club.”
“He needs to adjust his meds.” Usually I have to check my blood pressure medication when you deliver one of these rants, Rand. You’re being very silly and are missing the point that INKSNA doesn’t matter in regards to the House bill. Your article therefore did not make any sense, something you refuse to contradict by throwing up this nonsense.
Btw, if I am wrong about your position on INKSNA, then what is your position? Please don’t be vague.
I fully support INKSNA, I have always fully supported INKSNA, and I have no idea where you get your delusions that I have ever done otherwise. Probably from your imaginary friends in the IRC.
Or is that too “vague” for you?
Ah, thank you then and I’ll retract. However, I do wonder why you support a law that has no practical effect but to complicate commerce. But that is a minor nit.
Wow, rare form today Mark. Perhaps if you *read* Rand’s piece on INKSNA you might actually understand what his position is on INKSNA.
I can’t imagine how anyone could come away from reading that article thinking that Rand is against it, so you obviously didn’t read it.
“I do wonder why you support a law that has no practical effect but to complicate commerce”
Again suggesting that you have no idea what INKSNA is, perhaps you could try reading it?
However, I do wonder why you support a law that has no practical effect but to complicate commerce with a country with which we are still at war.
Fixed it for you.
Karl, I wasn’t aware that we are at war with Russia or even Iran for that matter. Mind, we might ought to be at war with Iran, but that is another matter.