this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2024

40 points (63.9% liked)

World News

37626 readers

3770 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]

Recommendations

How to spot Misinformation and Propaganda

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Iran Issues Unprecedented Nuclear Threat in Duel With Israel (www.thedailybeast.com)

submitted 3 months ago by jeffw to c/world

36 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 36 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 69 points 3 months ago (3 children)

A bit of a click bait title. They said they would hit Israel's nuclear facilities if Israel attacks Iran's.

[–] EdibleFriend 64 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yeah I wouldn't even call that clickbait. That is straight up fucking bullshit. They knew what they were doing with that title.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

"make it possible to review our nuclear doctrine and deviate from our previous considerations"

Context being their purported self-limitation on developing nuclear weapons. Not stated directly given context but implied.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 months ago

A bit? As far as we know they don’t even have nuclear weapons. This is major click bait.

[–] Mango 4 points 3 months ago

A bit?

[–] FlyingSquid 12 points 3 months ago (3 children)

I wasn't betting on 2024 being the year everyone died, but it looks like we're heading that way...

[–] [email protected] 13 points 3 months ago

Well, it's been a blast. Pun intended.

[–] A_A 9 points 3 months ago

my wild guess about "everyone (60% and +) to die" :
0% chances from Iran & middle east wars
10% chances from russ & NATO wars
50% chances from climate change
... say, in the next 30 years.

Also, 90% chances i am missing something important here.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Irish unification, Bell riots, and then the nuclear war

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

And then the post-scarcity utopia!

[–] IHawkMike 4 points 3 months ago

Can we just skip to that? Pretty please??

[–] psychothumbs 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

If I were the Iranian leadership I'd want to develop a nuclear arsenal yesterday. It's the only way to really deter Israeli or American aggression. As an American myself I'd appreciate the resulting reduction in the likelihood of our going to war against Iran.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago

Then Iran starts pulling the bullshit russia is doing.

[+] pennomi -13 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

If Iran uses a nuclear device, the whole world will use conventional weaponry to flatten the entire country, just to make an example of them. None of the serious players actually want nuclear war.

[–] shalafi 6 points 3 months ago (3 children)

All the, "We're gonna DIE!" posts come from people that never lived the Cold War.

[–] NOT_RICK 23 points 3 months ago

The same Cold War where if a couple of people made different choices (like Stanislav Petrov) the earth would be an irradiated wasteland?

The doomers can be irritating at times but let’s not get complacent.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago

It's the result of growing up under 2 very different impending calamities. Nuclear annihilation was a constant but invisible threat that promised to wipe the world clean before you would even have time to comprehend what was happening, so the mentality was to live in the moment and pretend it didn't exist, because it all might not tomorrow. While climate change is a constant but blatantly visible threat that clearly gets worse and worse as time goes on, giving a real sense of desperate urgency to do something now.

So you have a dissonance of the older generations who shrug their shoulders at the horrors of the news and pretend that nothing's happening because it doesn't immediately affect them, and the younger generations who are freaking out about everything all at the same time because their whole lives they've basically been on the train tracks watching the train come barreling towards them and begging the older folks to just drive the car off the tracks.

[–] darthsid 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Share with us your sagely wisdom because the daily dread I feel is unreal

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago

Enjoy the little moments

If the worst should happen (nuclear war) unless you live somewhere quite rural you would die incredibly quickly.

So rather than constantly worrying about if the world ends, enjoy the little moments and work on building a better world with the people around you. And hopefully with your small collective and other people doing the same we can steer the world into a less treacherous direction.

[–] NOT_RICK 2 points 3 months ago

This is kind of a cliche at this point but I have found mindfulness to be helpful for me. I like to go out into the woods and just watch the wind blow the trees around and just appreciate the nature around me. Keeping yourself in the present is tough but it does wonders.

[–] Ab_intra 3 points 3 months ago

They don't even have them. How would they be able to use something they don't have?

[+] edwardthefma99 -40 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (7 children)

Iran might have 1 or 2 but we have hundreds iran doesn't want us to get MAD also known as Mutual assured destruction there desert country would be irrataded for the next 100 years where as NORAD would of stopped there missile over flying over the Pacific or Atlantic ocean

[–] NOT_RICK 35 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Reading this makes my brain hurt

[–] credo 16 points 3 months ago (1 children)

These people actually think they are smart. Can’t fathom why “the rest of the world” doesn’t understand them, disagrees with them, is against them.

[–] darthsid 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Wants to nuke them.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

I pictured a mentally deficient trucker, ala Curt Russell in Big Trouble in Little China, but fatter and uncool screaming into his phone while Real American by Rick Derringer plays in the background.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

Do you find it irratading? Because I also find it irratading.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The point of building nukes isn't really to launch a nuke at someone, it's to make others decide that attacking you is too risky. Missile defense isn't perfect, so even if it probably would stop them, there's still a risk one gets through, that someone would have to take into consideration before launching an attack. It's even more a threat against Isreal, since they have less time to intercept, and even one missile getting through would destroy a comparatively larger fraction of the country, being that it's fairly small.

[–] symthetics 5 points 3 months ago

Are you fucking five?

[–] meliante 5 points 3 months ago

Can I get you some rabbit?

[–] Ab_intra 3 points 3 months ago

Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons..

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

irrataded, you say?