this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2024
40 points (63.9% liked)

World News

46888 readers
3522 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 !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


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
all 36 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 69 points 1 year 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@lemmy.world 64 points 1 year 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.

[–] Sami@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year 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.

[–] Conyak@lemmy.tf 11 points 1 year ago

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

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago (3 children)

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

[–] FigMcLargeHuge@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 year ago

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

[–] A_A@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year 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.

[–] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Irish unification, Bell riots, and then the nuclear war

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And then the post-scarcity utopia!

[–] IHawkMike@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Can we just skip to that? Pretty please??

[–] psychothumbs@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year 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.

Then Iran starts pulling the bullshit russia is doing.