all 9 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 13 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

Okay can the fucking CIA do their thing already? I get why they where hesitant when it was just us filithy peasants on the line. I mean I fucking hate them for it, but I understand their selfish, broken line of thinking.

But those fuckers have to have a sense of self preservation, no?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Why would you turn to one of the most fascist, blatantly ant-freedom organizations to save you? Trump's the exact kinda despot they love installing to fledgling democracies across the world, and you think they're against him?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago* (4 children)

    The primary reporting in the guardian says they aren't talking about it explicitly, and have denied it, but that the depth of the bunkers in question implies tactical nukes would need to be used for the strike they're discussing to be effective

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

    So they're just going to use tiny nukes then?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    Yeah it's definitely not great (any kind of nuclear response is truly bonkers, genie out of the bottle shit) but if I understand correctly they at least aren't talking about glassing the country the way the headline implies

    Edit: just still beyond madness btw, precedent leading to dominos falling pretty quick after that, not sanewashing at all, just... maybe a slightly slower slide into apocalypse than instantaneous global thermonuclear war so... yaaaay

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • 111 comments in c/news@lemmy.world view that post
    56 comments in c/politics@lemmy.world view that post