cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/31683994

Fox News reports that Donald Trump may consider using nuclear weapons to eliminate Iran’s Fordo nuclear facility

The U.S. military has reservations regarding the success of using a bunker-buster bomb, a non nuclear weapon, to eliminate Iran’s Fordo nuclear facility, buried deep in a mountain. Two defense officials were reportedly briefed that only a tactical nuclear weapon could reach the facility.

top 100 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 52 points 1 year ago (4 children)

If this were to happen, it would be a green light for Putin.

Let's hope to all fuck that our idiotic congress or who the fuck ever, prevents this abject, fucking, idiocy.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 45 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Something tells me he has already given the order multiple times but the people around him have to carefully explain to him why that’s a very bad idea until he backs down.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 33 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    "We want to stop nuclear proliferation by starting a nuclear war." - these fucking geniuses, apparently

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Then I hope the rest of the world does something about it.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 59 points 1 year ago

    Same guy that kept ripping on Zelensky for "instigating" nuclear war

  • source
  • [–] 152 points 1 year ago (27 children)

    Trump will drop a nuke before leaving office. He been begging to use one since his first term. They literally had to stop him from nucking a hurricane. He wants to do it. My worry is he will drop one on an American state.

  • source
  • hideshow 27 child comments
  • [–] 92 points 1 year ago

    I agree with you completely. He's fascinated with nukes, and believes naked demonstrations of power show that he's strong. If he does drop a nuke in Iran, you can guarantee that Russia will use them in Ukraine, and that quickly opens the door to a much wider war in Europe. Strategic thinking is not Trump's strong suit, and he's likely to bumble us into a nuclear WWIII.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago* (6 children)

    My worry is he will drop one on an American state.

    Wouldn't be the first time, but those were on accident and thankfully didn't detonate.

    Edit to add reference: 1961 Goldsboro B-52 Crash

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    I mean we also blew up a lot of nukes on American soil on purpose too!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 35 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I fully expect him to nuke a blue state in a false flag attack. I can't prove it, but I won't be surprised if he does

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (11 children)

    WHO GETS THE NUKE FIRST? IRAN, GAZA OR THE FIRST HURRICANE OF THE SEASON! sadtimes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    What’s the us city that matches the following:

    • democratic
    • least amount of white people
    • more than 100k inhabitants
    • doesn’t have critical military infrastructure
    • Trump doesn’t go golfing there or at least doesn’t like to
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (5 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Nah he's too connected to NYC.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Probably still owes payment on construction in NYC

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    “Art of the Deal”. Always start “negotiations” with a threat to go nuclear, then brag and posture and bully. Deal

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I'm sure Jesus Christ would definitely 100% want this.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    What a great precedent that would set. Seems like humans are moving towards ending all life on earth. Just another dead rock in an infinite vacuum.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Not to say that nuclear war isn't bad, but we literally don't have enough bombs available to do that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago* (6 children)

    I just very much believe that a chain reaction after a nuclear war will kill everything alive on it. Almost certainly all humans would be gone pretty soon.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    You can believe it all you want, the numbers just aren't there. There are only ~3800 nuclear warheads that are ready for launch, across all countries that possess them. That's not enough to put a permanent dent in the human population even if you launched all of them targeted to inflict maximum casualties. Which isn't how they'd be launched, of course - most of them would be aimed at military targets, such as ICBM silos and airstrips that are out in the middle of nowhere.

    I expect you'll propose nuclear winter as the actual killing effect. Nuclear winter has been drastically overblown, often for this very reason - to scare people into an anti-proliferation stance. We know a lot more now than we did when the first wild predictions were made.

    Again, not to say that nuclear war isn't bad. But if one is to make good decisions one should strive for realistic understanding of the world. It wouldn't literally cause human extinction.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    What's your point and why do you think it matters in this context?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago

    I'm responding to someone who said:

    Seems like humans are moving towards ending all life on earth. Just another dead rock in an infinite vacuum.

    That's the context.

    My point is that this is not true, and I'm explaining why it's not true.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    offf. Ok. Thanks for all the perfectly factual and proven references, or ahhh...on-going debates, you gave.
    Does any of it consider the wars that will be triggered? How the water supply will be affected? How the weather is going to be affected after an already fucked up atmosphere absorbs this damage? I could go on but this is pointless with a person like you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Does any of it consider the wars that will be triggered? How the water supply will be affected? How the weather is going to be affected after an already fucked up atmosphere absorbs this damage?

    Did you consider any of it? In an actually analytical way, that is, instead of just imagining the outcome you wanted?

    I provided links, you provided nothing but belief and fearmongering. And downvotes, of course, which also prove nothing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    So we'll have a war of aggression with Iran for? We don't like them? Israel has committed more violations of national borders and laws. The KoSA and Egypt's citizens were involved in 9-11 and they are "allies".

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago

    The headline is a reading into it a bit. They said nothing is off the table, but they are confident that a conventional strike would accomplish the goal.

    Not that a strike would happen anyway, but they rarely say that any option is completely off the table. A nuclear first strike should be one of those options off the table, but it's the Trump administration we're talking about.

  • source
  • What the actual hell.

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago*

    What is a country? A miserable pile of war crimes.

    Turning a habitable area full of innocent people into a pile of radioactive rubble and dying people why? Because fucking the Israeli government wants to genocide palestinians without resistance? Damn we fucking suck as a country

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago

    MADness.

    Hopefully someone drops him beforehand.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Gleefully sounding the trumpet for the end of the world

    Can somebody please please stop him before he kills us all?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    He will commit whatever horrible atrocity he's going to commit, and then the world will say he went too far, and only then will the world put an end to it. But unfortunately, the atrocity will come first.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Welp, time to see if aliens really are keeping us from extinction

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    OK, who had "The opening from Threads but in 4K" on their bingo card?

  • source
  • The fact that experts concluded that a tactical nuke would do the job doesn't imply that they are considering using it. I don't like the US administration, but this is wildly overblowing statements and pure fearmongering.

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    He is going to back pedal because Iran is his boss's (Putin ) ally. He is once again talking shit he has no intention of backing up. I could see him ordering a nin-nuke strike on something that wouldn't get him in trouble with his handler though as a fake tough man move.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    He floats the craziest idea so that whatever happens he can say "at least I didn't do that one thing" and his base will praise him for it--even though the thing he actually did was still moronic. This is the "permanent 300% tariff", "Canada will be the 51st state", or the "Golden Trump Gaza" video. It's the only way this imbecile knows how to negotiate.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    The Golden Trump Gaza, what a fucking joke. I could be totally wrong but I'm going to take a guess and say that the Gaza strip is one of the most bombed out places in the world. If true it'll be littered with unexploded ordinance forever or at least practically forever. He wants to make a giant Mar'a Lago? Sure okay, I'm sure your guests would enjoy the risk of losing a limb or being killed cause a forgotten bomb goes off 10 years later.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago

    At this point I’m alright with a nuclear apocalypse, we had it coming. I just hope I’m close enough to a blast sight to not have to deal with the aftermath.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    "Considers". Fake news. They want the price of oil and gas to go up to please Putin.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    Fine, start a nuclear war. It's the waiting I can't stand.

  • source
  • I'll wait for the US to demand that Israel destroy its nuclear weapons...this may take a while...

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago*

    Worse president than Putin, worse people than Russians considering the power the people have had and the person they allow to do this.

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    Ah yes, very smart, let's use a nuke to blow up a nuclear facility. There couldn't possibly be a much larger explosion and spread of radiation because of that.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Explosion no. Extra fallout, maybe. But the facility we're talking about is deep underground, so even if it happens, hopefully that contains some of the fallout.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Unfortunately, ground burst or partial underground bursts are significantly dirtier than air bursts. You only get partial completion of the reaction on the parts closer to the ground or underground which further irradiates the debris that is kicked up. Its all kinds of bad news.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Well, there actually wouldn't be a much larger explosion, that's just not how nukes work.
    A nuclear explosion is an incredibly delicate process, and the material just won't go critical because there's another detonation nearby. It's not like dropping a bomb on a dynamite warehouse. There's not a great analogy for what it is like though. Expecting a satellite launch to happen because you blew up a tank of rocket fuel next to it? Not quite there.

    Additional contamination from onsite material is a different matter. Most nukes detonate above their target since that maximizes damage, but it also reduces fallout. There would, however, be vaporized material that would be sucked into the air by the vacuum created by the detonation. It's not clear if the presence of radioactive material would make it significantly worse than the general "radioactive dust and molten sand" that would normally be sent into the air.

    In general, if you nuke something there's going to be radioactive issues afterwards, and you shouldn't do it. Adding a nuclear facility to the mix is kinda just throwing rocks at the windows on 9/11.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    tons of enriched uranium becoming part of the fallout plume and spreading across middle east and possibly some parts of europe and asia is a very likely outcome.

    netayanahu is scum enough to not care and trump is too stupid to care. then there is possibilities of pakistan launching nuke in return on israel and then idf activating samson.

  • source
  • parent
  • Just please wait until after I've seen Dune Messiah a couple dozen times in theaters. Please. That's all I'm asking. I don't even need to get laid again, that ship isnt even that important and it happens to a lot of people every day. I just want to see Dune Messiah before we all die.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    I vote for tariffs on the nukes pls taco pls

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    56 comments in c/politics@lemmy.world view that post
    9 comments in c/usa@midwest.social view that post