186
submitted 1 month ago by Lemmynated@lemmy.zip to c/world@quokk.au
top 34 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] IhaveCrabs111@lemmy.world 78 points 1 month ago

I’m really liking all this talk from so many world leaders about nuking each other. I think we’re on the right track here

[-] misk@sopuli.xyz 27 points 1 month ago

Honestly? It’s a great deterrent. Have you heard of a nuclear power being attacked for real? Ukraine disarmed voluntarily and see where that got them. Everyone should get nukes and threaten everyone (or „warn” if you’re Israel).

Mexican standoff nuclear doctrine, you’ve heard it here first.

[-] Hadriscus@jlai.lu 13 points 1 month ago
[-] misk@sopuli.xyz 12 points 1 month ago

MAD only assumes inevitability of retaliation. Mexican Standoff doctrine adds complete global proliferation so that nobody can be bullied.

[-] dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

... and it only works if all governments are rational actors that can reliably safeguard their nuclear stockpile. If either of those cease to be true, Bad Things^TM^ happen.

[-] misk@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 month ago

You live in a state with nukes, opinion disregarded.

[-] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 month ago

You can insaneify this further:

Not only have total nuclear armament for every country on Earth...

Every country on Earth also employs Israel's Samson Doctrine.

Which is: If we're going down, we are sending a nuke at every nearby capital we can, ally, foe, neutral, doesn't matter; if we can't exist, no one can.

[-] misk@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 month ago

Which is: If we're going down, we are sending a nuke at every nearby capital we can, ally, foe, neutral, doesn't matter; if we can't exist, no one can.

And that guarantees they’re never going to be existentially threatened. Now let’s have that for everyone so it’s actually fair.

[-] Hadriscus@jlai.lu 4 points 1 month ago

so it's either everybody or nobody, makes sense

[-] misk@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Alternative is nuclear powers do what they want to everyone else. As someone living in a non-nuclear capable state I think that’s something that should be fixed asap, for our benefit, and others must be thinking that too. Especially after how worthless security guarantees turned out to be.

[-] smayonak@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

It's pretty dumb as a deterrent because a single miscalculation and it would set off a chain reaction that ends human civilization.

Think of it this way: because nuclear missiles are not immediately traceable to their country of origin, each nuclear-armed country will immediately launch at their perceived enemies without validating who attacked them. All it takes is one launch. This might deter a sane person but we are led by narcissists and these are not rational people.

[-] misk@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 month ago

Yes, that argument would make sense if there were no nukes in existence but some countries have nukes already.

[-] Diabolo96@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 1 month ago

Israel think they can attack anyone and everyone and their dog USA will protect them. This is the only way to make them stop. I approve.

[-] Sabata11792@ani.social 32 points 1 month ago

Did they discover mutually assured destruction?

[-] Nyoka@sh.itjust.works 23 points 1 month ago

That's a bold statement, since I'm pretty sure Hindu Nationalists intend to glass Islamabad the second they get a good excuse.

Maybe everybody chill the fuck out. Two uses of nuclear weapons were enough.

[-] electric_nan@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 month ago

Two uses were too many.

[-] selkiesidhe@lemm.ee 22 points 1 month ago

Can we have one crises at a time please???

Ukraine. The US becoming a dictatorship under a moron pres. Gaza. And now this shit???

[-] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 month ago

One crisis per nation

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 17 points 1 month ago

As I've noted before, Israel will be the catalyst that starts another global war if we don't stop them.

[-] SirMaple__@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 month ago
[-] TheEEEdiot@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 month ago
[-] P1k1e@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago
[-] caveman8000@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago
[-] fishy@lemmy.today 8 points 1 month ago

Well zen, take a nap. THEN FIRE ZE MISSILES!!

sorry it's been years

[-] P1k1e@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

What's going on ey?

Edit: ok so I just watched it for the first time in like.....15 years. I remembered nearly all of it except the part where California breaks off of the US to chill with Hawaii and Alaska.....how is this shit so goddamn relevant

[-] 13igTyme@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

[-] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 1 month ago

Welp, good thing I don't live in any major metro area nor near any strategically critical infrastructure.

[-] Nomecks@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 month ago

Opting for the slow, agonizing death eh? Nice.

[-] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 month ago

Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

[-] joyjoy@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 month ago

If Israel gets nuked off the map, what happens to the second coming?

[-] trumpetmouth@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

the number of countries on the maps does not affect my ability to bust a nut

[-] Wazowski@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago
[-] Scott_of_the_Arctic@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago
[-] varnia 2 points 1 month ago

I always thought the setting of Piercy's He, She, It was a bit too close to comfort.

this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2025
186 points (100.0% liked)

World News

473 readers
510 users here now

Please help and contribute as we vote on rules:
https://quokk.au/post/21590

Other Great Communities:

Rules

Be excellent to each other

founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS