this post was submitted on 17 Jun 2025
162 points (99.4% liked)

World News

47538 readers
2803 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
 

Tehran “is the principal source of regional instability and terror,” declare G7 leaders in a joint statement.

The leaders of the G7 countries on Monday issued a joint statement saying Iran should not have nuclear weapons and affirming Israel's right to defend itself.

"Iran is the principal source of regional instability and terror. We have been consistently clear that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon," declared the statement, issued by the leaders of the U.S., U.K., France, Germany, Italy, Canada and Japan, along with the EU.

They pledged to "remain vigilant to the implications for international energy markets and stand ready to coordinate, including with like-minded partners, to safeguard market stability."

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Mrkawfee@lemmy.world 107 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (3 children)

Israel is the principal source of regional instability and terror and everyone and his dog knows this.

The kowtowing to Trump and his Zionist sponsors by the client states of the US Empire is an insult to objective reality.

[–] MBech@feddit.dk 27 points 8 hours ago (3 children)

Please don't make Iran out to be some sort of victim in all this. What Israel is doing is wrong, but Iran has funded a lot of terrorists throughout the years, and execute people in medival ways for holding hands with the "wrong" person.

The iranian government is pure fucking evil and deserves to die horrible deaths for what they instigate and fund around the world and in their local area.

[–] Akasazh@feddit.nl 9 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

It's a deep sarcasm that Western oil companies destabilized the Iranian monarchy, that * shockingly* wanted a piece of the pie in such a way it paved the way for islamist extremists to gain power.

Ian used to be pretty liberal and western minded, however westen meddling caused this extreme government.

But God forbid they get the means to (to use the Israeli turn off phrase) 'defend' itself, that would be horrendous.

[–] Velypso@sh.itjust.works 10 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Yes, yes, we all know Iran used to be liberal a very long time ago.

That ship has sailed, and the current regime isn't great, to say the very least.

Nuclear bombs would not be used to defend Iran. They would be used to defend Khamenei. In the same way that nukes are for defending that shit stain in Israel and not Israel.

[–] Akasazh@feddit.nl 10 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

Ik no fan of the current regime, I think both Israel and Iran would benefit from a regime change. There's nothing more moral on the Israeli side to explain them deserving nukes over anyone in that region.

But the hypocrisy is that the Western world directly caused this shit.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 8 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

And not only that, Israel has nuclear weapons.

[–] BeatTakeshi@lemmy.world 5 points 5 hours ago

...and it's supposed to be a secret because God forbid having to comply with international treaties on nukes. Well it's not like they respect international law anyway right? But the ones on nukes they just bypass and no one bats an eye

[–] slaacaa@lemmy.world 4 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

Two things (countries) can be bad at the same time

[–] SARGE@startrek.website 36 points 9 hours ago (16 children)

nobody should have nuclear weapons.

Sometimes I wonder what the world would be like if the scientists working on the Manhattan project had all agreed it's too much and intentionally sabotage every test.

[–] Rolder@reddthat.com 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Well then we wouldn’t have nuclear power either

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

The first nuclear reactor was in 1942.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 22 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (8 children)

Why? If the West will allow Israel to live stream a genocide and both political parties in the US stick their fingers in their ears and make sounds like children, Iran has no choice but to pursue a nuke to defend itself.

[–] palordrolap@fedia.io 12 points 10 hours ago

I would have worded this differently, but you're right in that it's probably a good idea not to give anyone an extra excuse.

"Oh but we had to" isn't a great excuse, but it is one, and if you take away the threat, it takes it away that argument.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] mlg@lemmy.world 21 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

China, India, and Pakistan once again proving that having nukes does actually matter because you can't be arbitrarily shoved around around by the only other nuclear powers.

[–] fullsquare@awful.systems 4 points 4 hours ago

it also helps if your air defense network doesn't collapse immediately because it turns out that in order to guard these nukes you need also regular capable conventional military

[–] Deflated0ne@lemmy.world 13 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

Iran will have nukes. They don't have a choice. Not anymore. It's existentialism at this point. Israel has been trying to engineer a war against Iran for more than 30 years. All the while Iran has played along. IAEA inspectors and all that good shit. And it was all for nothing. Iran knows that now. So does everyone else.

If you're an adversary to the US and its Imperial interests then its a matter of when, not if. Doesn't matter if or how closely you follow their rules. They will come for you in time.

[–] Mrkawfee@lemmy.world 6 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

They're out of time. US B52s and B2s will obliterate what's left of their nuclear facilities. F35s and drones will do the rest. For all the Zionist propaganda, there's absolutely no evidence Iran wanted to weaponise Uranium and every evidence that they wanted to cooperate with the West in return for sanctions relief, as they did in 2015 with the JCPOA.

The question is can Iran make it painful enough for the US by causing chaos in the straits of Hormuz and damaging oil and gas infrastructure that Trump loses interest and declares victory before he imposes regime change, which is what Netanyahu really wants.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 12 points 3 hours ago

Ukraine had nukes and gave them up. They were invaded.

Iraq gave up their WMD program after the first Gulf War. They were invaded again.

Iran definitely had a nuclear program, but doesn't appear to be pursuing it anymore. They're getting attacked and quite possibly will get invaded.

South Africa had a nuclear program and gave it up. Left alone.

The Great Powers, particularly the United States but also Russia, have shown that your country should just keep going once you start. Chances are, you'll get invaded, anyway.

This is not the way towards anti-proliferation.

[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 12 points 3 hours ago

But genocide against Palestinians is a-OK.

What does the "G" in G7 stand for? Gaslighting? Genocide? Grift? Maybe there are 7 Gs.

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 9 points 4 hours ago

"Iran is two weeks away from nuclear capability" - Netanyahu: 2012, 2015, 2018, 2023, 2025

[–] flandish@lemmy.world 8 points 10 hours ago

Why not? The claims made by G7 members as to why are admissions - heck, one of the members has used nuclear weapons on civilians, and they’re still allowed to have them.

If anyone can, everyone can.

[–] Vupperware@lemm.ee 6 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

“We will do anything to maintain the status quo, up to and including genocidal ethnosupremacy”!

I am honestly so revolted.

[–] rumimevlevi@lemmings.world 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

What status quo? They are complicit

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] chebur54@lemmy.world 4 points 2 hours ago

Decided bunch of criminals who brainwashed everyone with existence of the nukes. Legalize recreational nukes. Lol

[–] peoplebeproblems@midwest.social 4 points 9 hours ago (3 children)

Iran is the principal source of regional instability and terror.

Ok does someone want to catch me up on this opinion shared by world leaders but quite literally no one else?

Like yes, Iran is a terrible authoritarian state that is very dangerous. But so is Saudi Arabia?!

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Well you see the existence of Iran forces Israel to bomb them, thus destabilizing the region. If Iran would simply stop existing, Israel wouldn't have to bomb them, and the region would be stable

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Gates9@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 hours ago

“We will vaporize every living thing on the face of the earth in order to ensure that the threat of Iran possibly maybe but probably not having a nuclear weapon will be neutralized!”

[–] rumimevlevi@lemmings.world 3 points 10 hours ago
load more comments
view more: next ›