this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2025
428 points (93.5% liked)

News

30453 readers
3514 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] doctortofu@piefed.social 179 points 4 days ago (8 children)

Trump just desperately wants to nuke something. Anything's fine, he just wants to drop a nuclear bomb on stuff. I mean, he was floating nuking a goddamned hurricane before.

He's like a toddler that sees a big red button and just HAS to push it, because it's just there and it's so big and red and it will make things go boom!

[–] Etterra@discuss.online 31 points 4 days ago (4 children)

While you're not wrong, in general, I personally think this might be an excuse for us not to bomb the place. Trump has got himself caught in a civil war between his own cult members, and he hates not being at the center of attention and obeyed unconditionally. This might be a way to placate both sides. He can tell the pro-war side that he can't use a weapon that'll do the job, and he can tell the no-war side that he's not gonna nuke it.

That way the Orange Jackass can wrench the conversation back to about how "he's more peaceful than anyone's ever seen before" or whatever bullshit he decides to vomit up.

[–] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 53 points 4 days ago (2 children)

You're giving him waaay too much credit.
All he does is rant and complain, while doing what the Heritage Foundation people tell him to sign.

It isn't anything more complicated than that.

[–] elucubra@sopuli.xyz 26 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

This. His fan base thinks he's playing 5D chess, while the liberals think he's playing chess, but in reality he's being allowed by his babysitters to throw checker pieces everywhere to divert attention.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] sun_is_ra@sh.itjust.works 8 points 4 days ago

He should start a youtube channel that tests dropping nukes on various things

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Lucky_777@lemmy.world 116 points 4 days ago (4 children)

If the United States drops a nuke, the world needs to unite against us.

[–] rhvg@lemmy.world 63 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

The world should do that now.

They kinda already are, looking at Gaza vote in UN.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 24 points 4 days ago (4 children)

The West for the most part isn't. Relations between Europe and America have gotten more antagonistic, but for the most part the former is toeing the latter's party line.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] GuyDudeman@lemmy.world 21 points 4 days ago (1 children)

The right has been talking about nuking the Middle East for decades. They now have “one of theirs” (a “common man” who believes in the things the common MAGA believes), who is just stupid enough to actually do it. I’m taking things day by day.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 10 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Nothing like nuking a part of the world you don't know shit about. They probably think it's a piece of desert with Disney characters (mostly centered around the capital of Agrabah and capable of hiding) and evil terrorists hurting our good Israel.

[–] Jordan117@lemmy.world 7 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Beyond parody (for nearly a decade at this point).

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 88 points 4 days ago
[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 76 points 4 days ago (4 children)
[–] thoralf@discuss.tchncs.de 28 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Especially, because the original article states „Trump is not considering using a tactical nuclear weapon on Fordow and the possibility was not presented by defense secretary Pete Hegseth and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff Gen Dan Caine in meetings in the White House situation room, two people familiar with the matter said.“ while the linked article here implies that this option is considered.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 49 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

Trump is as dumb as a sack of hammers, and he’s looking for a nail. He just wants to treat nukes like playthings, a rich man’s flex. Just to say he did. Like a canned trophy hunt of a Lion from the safety of helicopters and trucks with everyone around him at his paid service. No risk, no personal jeopardy. Drop the bomb for lols just to experience the fact he did it and will brag about it.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmings.world 8 points 3 days ago

If he drops a nuke, he instantly becomes the most dangerous man in history, they only guy willing to use a nuke for normal war purposes (for which there are nearly infinite alternative options), and to flex his ego (which has no limit). Now when he threatens a country, they will have to believe him, because he's done it before.

With that in mind, I would think nearly every nation with a highly organized covert intelligence service would decide that it's time to remove that threat from the planet.

[–] k0e3@lemmy.ca 47 points 4 days ago (5 children)
[–] MattTheProgrammer@lemmy.world 18 points 4 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (11 children)

Trump cheated to win the election. Most Americans are against him.

edit: I'm not just saying this, there's evidence to suggest it

https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/kamala-harris-won-the-us-elections-bombshell-report-claims-voting-machines-were-tampered-with-before-2024/ar-AA1GnteW

However, yes, the country is shit right now. I agree.

[–] chronicledmonocle@lemmy.world 21 points 4 days ago

Most Americans might be against him, but the majority of those that voted voted for him. People's apathy and the DNC continually being useless helped Trump win.

[–] KingPorkChop@lemmy.ca 9 points 4 days ago

Most Americans are against him.

I'll believe it when I see it. What I see is Trump and his ICE Brownshorts running all over the place with almost zero resistance.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] MintyFresh@lemmy.world 30 points 4 days ago (2 children)

That oompa lumpa of ours just wants to drop a nuke. I vote we not and tell him we did. Also all of his press conferences and appearances henceforth will be accompanied by a 90's sitcom style laugh track.

[–] ramenshaman@lemmy.world 8 points 4 days ago

We could just show him videos of nuclear tests and he would probably fall for it. Fucking idiot.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] frustrated_phagocytosis@fedia.io 30 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Nuking them to prevent them getting nukes? Why do you think they want them in the first place? Now they will want them even harder. Should try to bribe their way into getting access to US nukes, just need a white supremacist asshole techbro to do the talking and they'll give you whatever you want.

[–] ToastedRavioli@midwest.social 8 points 4 days ago

Unleashing megagodzilla just to stop godzilla. So smart you couldnt believe it. Very rational and very cool

Over the series' history, the films have reflected the social and political climate in Japan. In the original film, Godzilla was an allegory for the effects of nuclear weapons, and the consequences that such weapons might have on Earth

[–] sturmblast@lemmy.world 26 points 4 days ago (7 children)

Seems to me, like there is EXTREMELY, next to zero, or perhaps zero reason to ever HAVE to use a nuke. Nuke's should be a defensive deterrent, not a first choice. I'm sure the military has plenty of other options.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 26 points 4 days ago (1 children)

It is so odd that this info being publicized...

[–] RagingRobot@lemmy.world 23 points 4 days ago (1 children)

They are trying to scare Iran into giving into what they want.

He thinks this is a genius plan.

It's stupid.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 18 points 3 days ago

Pakistan saying they would nuke Israel if Israel nuked Iran probably was the only thing holding Israel back from pulling the trigger. If there was ever a group of people who should never be permitted to have nuclear weapons, its the Israelis.

[–] Geobloke@lemm.ee 16 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Well, they did it. Now Iran will lash out and close the straits of Hormuz. It's the only threat that they can carry out now...

[–] Opinionhaver@feddit.uk 19 points 3 days ago (1 children)

US Reportedly Assesses It Would Need to Drop Nuclear Bomb to Destroy Iran Nuclear Facility

Well, they did it.

No they didn't. It was conventional bombs, not nuclear.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmings.world 8 points 3 days ago (1 children)

...and we'll sink the ships, and have dogfights over the sea, and it will escalate, and hello World War 3!

[–] Geobloke@lemm.ee 8 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I was hoping they could wait a few more years so I'd be too old to be drafted, but looks like I'll be twerking in Tehran

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 13 points 4 days ago (2 children)

US reportedly also forgets the arithmetic of AD and MD efficiency, and the fact that there are countries capable of nuking it in response, and in case it uses a nuke against Iran those will multiply like mushrooms after a rain.

[–] Kirp123@lemmy.world 22 points 4 days ago (1 children)

If they use a nuke on Iran then Russia will start popping a bunch of them on Ukraine. Maybe that's Putin's plan all along, get Trump to drop a nuke so it becomes a free for all.

Anyways, hope you know where your nuclear shelter is and you like canned food and iodine tablets.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 15 points 4 days ago (2 children)

I live in Russia, in Moscow, in a kinda golden (in Stalin's time) place, so the shelter is right under me, its ventilation shaft exit is near the playground.

The problem is - nobody knows how the hell do you get in.

I do like canned food. I even had a small stockpile in 2022 when I thought things had gotten real and it's time to prepare. Have eaten through it.

If it becomes a free for all, though, hiding from the physical effects will be easier than hiding from the social ones.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] pycorax@lemmy.world 11 points 4 days ago (1 children)

What do those acronyms mean

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] maxxadrenaline@lemmy.world 13 points 3 days ago (5 children)

Don't worry guys we're not going to war.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] lectricleopard@lemmy.world 12 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I would have to think using nukes on a country that doesn't have nuclear power would be a slam dunk illegal order. Like, I mean, if he says to do it, the guys that make that happen, top to bottom, should say, "No, this is an illegal order, and i am not going to follow it."

If such an order is followed and nothing is forthcoming from some checking force in the federal government, I think i may have lost faith in humanity as a concept. This is the great filter. Can we be trusted as a species?

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 10 points 4 days ago (5 children)

Upfront: it should be obvious that no sane person wants us to drop a nuke or thinks there's any connotation of "okay" to any aspect of it.

Why do you think it would be an illegal order? There are very clear rules on what makes an order legal or not and, horribly, attacking a nation that poses no real threat isn't on the list. What nations we attack is a policy matter, and the rules are very clear that the military doesn't get a say in policy.
Explicitly targeting civilians for a strike on a city is where the line would be. Targeting something else in the city and deciding the civilians are acceptable collateral damage is right on the line. Legally, it's entirely unambiguously evil morally.

There are checks that keep the president from unilaterally launching a nuke. Unfortunately, the intent of those is to ensure the president is legally competent and actually the president, not to ensure he's wise or rational.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Hering

The system has been explicitly designed to minimize the risk of conscience preventing a launch. Issue training orders where the firing crews have no idea if it's real or not. Keep them on two week rotations where they don't have access to the outside world so they wouldn't know. Specifically select for people who will follow the order because it's validcand legal, without considering the greater context. People who are legitimately confused but ultimately unconcerned with protests against them specifically doing what they do, including clergy from their own religion. (Actual story of an ICBM operators reaction to nuns protesting and attempting to block access to the missile site he was stationed at)

There is no doubt in my mind that if the order were given and the VP and cabinet didn't remove him, that the order would be followed.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Opinionhaver@feddit.uk 12 points 4 days ago (2 children)

President Donald Trump is not considering using a nuclear weapon, The Guardian reported on Wednesday

There’s no need to lose one’s mind over this. The headline isn’t saying a nuke should be used - it’s simply pointing out that a nuclear weapon would be the only thing capable of reaching a facility buried that deep under a mountain. The next best option would be the GBU-57 bunker-buster, but the U.S. would need to use a significant portion of its stockpile, since you’d have to hit the same spot multiple times to drill that deep. And even then, you’d likely only damage one section of the facility, with other parts protected behind blast doors.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 13 points 4 days ago

Trump isn't "considering" anything. He's not a rational actor, he's a narcissistic egomaniac, unable to ask or take advice, unable to think about anything that isn't about how cool he is perceived.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 10 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

I checked if this was the onion after reading the title

load more comments
view more: next ›