this post was submitted on 16 Apr 2024
490 points (97.5% liked)

World News

39142 readers
2589 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

If the United States and its allies can rush to Israel's defense in the skies, shooting down dozens of drones and missiles fired by Iran, why can't they do the same for Ukraine — which has suffered under Russia's missile attacks for more than two years?

That's the question Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and his country's staunchest backers in the West were asking on Monday, hours after the U.S., the United Kingdom, France and Jordan helped Israel shoot down some 300 drones and missiles fired by Iran in retaliation after Israel killed its senior military commanders in Syria.

“European skies could have received the same level of protection long ago if Ukraine had received similar full support from its partners in intercepting drones and missiles," Zelenskyy wrote Monday evening in a post on X.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 18 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Yep. Which is why the liberal "international rules based world order" is nothing but a scam at this point. To many countries the only line of defense against getting invaded by a major nuclear power is having a capable nuclear arsenal themselves.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

This. This is what it boils down to. This is why Pakistan and India keep getting away with the shit they pull along with all other nuclear nations. The moment Iran claims nuclear capable, “restraint” will be shown. With the amount of back channel communication that’s been happening between the US and Iran over the Gaza and Israel situation, it’s very likely they already have shown their hand and ability to be nuclear, and therefore the calculus is now extremely complex compared to something like Iraq and Afghanistan.

This also explains why Iran demonstrated and telegraphed their attack the way they did and the US agreed to it, despite the “Iran is the devil” rhetoric being perpetuated worldwide.

Hate to say it, but might is right and has always been.

Edit: To add, if they admit they are nuclear capable publicly, they are inviting more sanctions and another escalation which is the last thing they need given the state of their economy. They will also be on the back foot because Israel gets the moral high ground for being right about their nuclear ambitions.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 7 months ago

Your interpretation sounds pretty likely to me. I'd guess if they get nukes, they'll go Israeil's way and will newer admit to it publicy.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Kind of weird everyone needs a thesis on this. It's literally why everyone wants a nuke. No one's going to attack a nuclear power. Ukraine wouldn't be in the position they're in if they kept their nukes.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

100%. There are fewer bigger security mistakes than giving up nukes. It’s a case study of why you shouldn’t just trust “diplomacy”.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

There's no black and white morality in real life. Even the chance to choose between actual totalitarianism and a hypocritical rules based world order is a massive privilege most don't get. Most of us are born into one or the other and that's that.

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

I completely agree with that but I fail to understand what you're trying to exactly say in this context The international rules based world order has way too many holes and now with the emerging of the multipolar world we will see a lot more countries willing to exploit these holes. Some of these will end up invading others. That's why many countries with aspirations to becoming a regional power will always invest in nuclear capabilities.

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

I'm being an apologist for the "not actual totalitarians" here. I like the idea of a rules based international system a lot more than I like the idea of dictatorships, and I'm fortunate to have even these poor options.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago

I fail to understand what the system of governance (parliamentary republic, one party system, or whatever) has to do with how the world is run, or better said what the protocols on handling situations and relationships between nation states have to do with how those countries are ran politically or economically.

With that being said, don't forget that the "not actual totalitarians" here don't necessarily have a problem with supporting or installing totalitarian regimes as long as it benefits them.