Eliezer did not call for enforcement via nuclear war. He said that:
Make it explicit in international diplomacy that preventing AI extinction scenarios is considered a priority above preventing a full nuclear exchange, and that allied nuclear countries are willing to run some risk of nuclear exchange if that’s what it takes to reduce the risk of large AI training runs.
and later clarified:
My TIME piece did not suggest nuclear strikes against countries that refuse to sign on to a global agreement against large AI training runs. It said that, if a non-signatory country is building a datacenter that might kill everyone on Earth, you should be willing to preemptively destroy that datacenter; the intended reading is that you should do this even if the non-signatory country is a nuclear power and even if they try to threaten nuclear retaliation for the strike. This is what is meant by “Make it explicit… that allied nuclear countries are willing to run some risk of nuclear exchange if that’s what it takes to reduce the risk of large AI training runs.”
Eliezer did not call for enforcement via nuclear war. He said that:
and later clarified: