this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2024
36 points (74.3% liked)

World News

39364 readers
2413 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

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

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

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

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] PugJesus 38 points 2 months ago (1 children)

All of this argues not only for Israeli strikes—which will surely come—but for vigorous American action as well.

Jesus fucking Christ.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 2 months ago (16 children)

All of this argues not only for Israeli strikes—which will surely come—but for vigorous American action as well. Israel may well choose to attack economic targets, and in particular the oil industry that keeps Iran’s economy afloat. Attacks on the nuclear program—buried and dispersed at different sites—would probably be more difficult. In either case, Israel will need American help.

Israel has a large and capable air force, including nearly 40 F-35s. But it lacks a large fleet of aerial refueling planes, necessary for long-range strikes, which the United States has in plenty. At the very least, the United States can quietly help supply that deficit. The question is: Should it do more?

The answer is yes.

Holy fuck this is deranged bloodthirsty shit.

load more comments (16 replies)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Objective 1: Stay the fuck out of it.

Objective 2: Stay the fuck out of it.

Objective 3: Stay the fuck out of it.

Objective 4: Stay the fuck out of it.

US Government response: "unfortunately we weren't able to achieve any of our stated objectives. We promise we didn't try to at all. The following is unrelated I promise, but Congress is meeting to give Bibi $69420Ungabijillion for self defense and we're sending every troop, drone, and warship we have to Iran."

[–] BombOmOm 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (6 children)

The fun problem with isolationism is it just allows problems to fester; then you have something much worse to deal with later. You may want to ignore the world, but the world won't ignore you.

Edit: An Iranian proxy has been shooting civilian shipping and civilian crews from all countries for the last year. There are problems one cannot simply ignore.

[–] smooth_tea 6 points 2 months ago

That's like poking a bear and then halfway through your shenanigans claim you'll have to put it down because you're in danger. What a bunch of hollow rhetoric. There's 3 sentences in your paragraph and each one is just a slogan. Each one vague enough that it means both nothing and anything you can think of.

Diverting from the usual warmongering is not isolationism, in fact, the problem you allude to is the result of the former, not the other way around.

I know it's a crazy idea but perhaps we should look at our failed approaches from recent history and try to learn from it. But judging from your edit, you have an extremely short attention span mixed with tunnel vision. Where were you when the US and its allies assassinated people inside Iran? Funded terrorist groups to carry out attacks in Iran? Sabotaged their nuclear facilities? Or, you know, when the idea of another pre-emptive attack on that nation was so imminent that one presidential candidate figured it'd be funny to fuel that by singing "bomb bomb Iran", based on nothing but the lie that they were close to getting a nuclear bomb?

Was all that a festering problem that Iran should've responded to, or is it different when you're on the receiving end?

[–] mlg 6 points 2 months ago

An Iranian proxy has been shooting civilian shipping and civilian crews from all countries for the last year. There are problems one cannot simply ignore.

Hmm yes I wonder why the Houthis just suddenly decided to attack a global supply line

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago

Did Israel try stopping their genocide.

Some problems are very easy to solve.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

Just out of curiosity, how do you believe blockades are enforced?

What do you think happens(ed) to ships approaching Gaza BEFORE the war?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 months ago

This author has big Dr. Strangelove energy.
He can't seem to wait for another big war to start.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago (1 children)

One of the more-hawkish takes I've read.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It's Eliot Cohen. That dude has been beating the drum for war with Iran for more than 20 years.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

So he's not a fan of apartheid per se but just hates Iran and feels the victims of Iran's oppression of women - ie Persians - need to suffer for not taking state-orchestrated mass murder lying down?

One wonders what that guy is thinking sometimes.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago

The amount of comments in here treating real life like a game of Risk is honestly shocking and upsetting.

What do you all really think you would do differently if you were born in Gaza or Lebanon?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago (3 children)

So umm, Iran's leadership won't stop nuclear weapons development. It can't stop. Therefore to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons, it means that the US has to help remove Iran's leadership. Now why would this turn out any better than any of the previous times they've done this, including in Iran?

[–] BombOmOm 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Their ability to make nukes has been delayed several times in the past, another delaying action is likely better than letting them get nukes.

[–] Tattorack 2 points 2 months ago

Well, the Iranian youth would certainly love it if the current leadership were replaced with something a lot less hateful and a lot more secular.

[–] Tedesche 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

They can absolutely stop; they just choose not to. And hamstringing their attempts to develop their nuclear program is a far better option than trying to topple their government in terms of maintaining stability in the region. Toppling the Iranian government would make every other Arab nation skittish and potentially be a rallying cry for them. Keeping their military options limited is far less incendiary.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Given what we've seen over the last little while, do you think Israel won't be able and willing to topple the regime if they don't have a lethal gun pointed towards Israel? There's pressure from the outside, and from the inside on them. They have to keep terrorising to maintain the internal pressure. They have to be able to stop Israel from taking them out as a result of their terrorising. I don't know if their current arsenal is a deterrent enough for that. If I were a supreme leader who wanted to stay in power, I'd be overturning mandatory prayer for the nuclear scientists and enginners working overtime to get to a test detonation (not over Israel) ASAP. As a supreme leader I feel like last year, perhaps even weeks ago, I did have the option to not make nukes. After the attacks in Lebanon that left my primary deterrent in an unknown state of degradation, I'm not feeling so lucky.

[–] Tedesche 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

No one is forcing Iran’s dictators to remain dictators. They could become benevolent leaders or simply flee the nation. Israel gains relatively little from creating a power vacuum in Iran that will likely just be filled by another Israel-hating regime. They gain much more by destroying Ming the current regime’s ability to attack Israel.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Israel gains relatively little from creating a power vacuum in Iran that will likely just be filled by another Israel-hating regime.

Exactly.

They gain much more by destroying Ming the current regime’s ability to attack Israel.

Agreed. If this could be achieved without dragging the rest of us in an Iraq-like war. It might be possible but I don't trust the current Israeli leadership to act in a way that achieves it. Especially given their PM said straight up he's up to toppling the regime couple of days ago.

No one is forcing Iran’s dictators to remain dictators.

If that were possible, it would have likely happened already given how long this regime has stayed in power. It's also very unlikely that it's 5 guys in rags after so many decades, so even if they go crazy, the remainder would likely say fuck that and replace them. I think it's much more useful to look at people as automatons whose actions are driven by the systems they exist in, than to consider them as free actors.

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

The current editor of The Atlantic was a Zionist prison guard during the First Intifada. But don't worry, he says his friends describe him as very leftist.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Huh? America doesn't have to do anything about Iranian impotence.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›