If the United States drops a nuke, the world needs to unite against us.
post
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!
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.
Tucker is only against this because he’s been paid by Putin right?
I assumed most of the Magats that are against the bombing Iran are paid shills. What’s Tim Pool’s take on it? (Disclaimer, I actually couldn’t give two shits what any of them think, we should be negotiating and solve this like fucking adults).
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.
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.
He’s a psychopathic narcissist. He thinks he always needs to be at the center of attention. Wouldn’t call that complicated.
Not even a complete day later and we've used B2 bombers to bomb them
I don't trust him not to nuke even NYC.
Just like the original video for Land Of Confusion where senile Reagan in a hospital bed pushing the NUKE button that's next to the NURSE button.
He should start a youtube channel that tests dropping nukes on various things
Not desperate enough, apparently. I’ve yet to see any of the people who were absolutely certain yesterday that a nuke was going to be dropped admit they were wrong.
What a shitty country.
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.
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.
Lol. No. Fsce rey reality of your country, otherwise you'll be unable to fix it.
He has an almost 50% approval rating from Americans so while you’re technically correct, that’s still a ridiculous amount of Americans who like him
That's not the statistic I've seen. It was in the 30s last I saw. Among Republicans it was still fairly high, like 60s, and higher among MAGA, but the general public was much lower. Can you cite a recent source for your number? Otherwise, I'll bolo for some updated numbers.
These are the stats I found:
- According to the most recent Gallup poll, Trump's job approval rating was 43% in May.
- The Economist shows that 41% of people are favorable of Trump and 53% are unfavorable of him, according to the latest update from June 20.
- Rasmussen Reports poll from June 20 showed 52% approval and 47% disapproval of Trump.
- The Morning Consult tracker poll taken mid-June has dropped to 46% approval rating and 52% who disapprove.
- A Reuters/Ipsos poll reported that, as of June 16, 42% of those surveyed gave him a favorable approval rating of his performance in office.
- An InsiderAdvantage poll taken between June 15-16 showed Trump with 54.4% approval over a 44.1% disapproval of his job performance.
From here
Nice work, mate. Good on ya! (I'm watching Bluey with my kids right now) Looks like I've been outdated.
Well, the rest of Americans need to wake tf up. It's going to take most of us to right the ship. Fuck the rich, fuck the racists/sexists/homophobes/etc., and fuck any MAGAts who somehow aren't covered by the previous.
Most Americans are against him
Most Americans should have showed up to vote, then. Or not protest vote for a limp-dick 3rd party. As far as I'm concerned, most Americans are in support of what he's doing, because they didn't show otherwise on election day.
The only voter demographic that saw a decrease in the last election compared to 2016 was white men. If you’re going to cry “rigged election,” then you’re undermining democracy in exactly the same way the MAGA crowd does.
Iran’s a shitty country.
(not who you replied to) We can be anti-zionists without being pro-Iran. They have a horrific history of human rights abuses. Their sovereignty is being violated, but their government is not a good one.
Sorry the be pedantic, but why not link the original source?
Since it’s their inside sources.
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.
Did you even read the article you linked? The fuckin "source" you got your panties in a bunch over arent even cited beyond, "according to people familiar with the deliberations." They dont even say its their own source in their own article you dolt.
"according to people familiar with the deliberations."
Afaik that is synonymous/how journalist say "inside source".
To expand on Shrubbery, you can read the Guardian’s editorial standards and the base ones they follow: https://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Guardian/documents/2011/08/08/EditorialGuidelinesAug2011.pdf
according to people familiar with the…
In journalism, this is common lingo for “our journalists personally communicated with sources (more that one) that wish to remain anonymous.” It’s the guardian's legwork and integrity for shielding anon sources here, not them copying it from some other site (which they'd link if they did).
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.
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
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.
There are 13k ton bombs that can penetrate pretty deep dropped by B2 bombers, which might be headed to the ME right now.
I’m sure the military has plenty of other options.
The other option is the GBU-57 bunker buster bombs, which is what they used - but a single bomb like that isn’t capable of reaching deep enough on its own. So they had to use a significant portion of their stockpile to achieve their objective that way.
The alternative would have been to drop in special forces and have them break into the heavily defended facility the traditional way.
If you are not ready to use a nuke ever, it stops being a deterrent. Game theory.
But this situation is not the kind where a nuke is used as a deterrent. If Israel was saying they're sorry and asking for ceasefire, while Iranians would be absolutely destroying what remains of it and not listening, then yes.
Or, if Iran had a nuke and Israelis were succeeding in destroying Iran.
But neither are true.
Oh honey, read some of the norbert weiner type of nuke cult guys, and their Soviet counterparts.
This is a rabbit hole nobody wants anybody to ho down.
hole nobody wants anybody to ho down.
If this series of murderous far right zionist military adventures proves anything, its that American politicians will ho themselves down any hole.
It is so odd that this info being publicized...
They are trying to scare Iran into giving into what they want.
He thinks this is a genius plan.
It's stupid.
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.
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.
Indeed, on Tuesday Trump said, “I don’t care” that the U.S. intelligence community has assessed that Iran isn’t building a nuclear weapon, according to his own top intelligence official.
Don't worry guys we're not going to war.
Bring your steam decks
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?
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.
People think everything they don't like is illegal.
Don't get me wrong, it should be illegal to do a preemptive nuclear strike, it just sadly isn't.
It might not be feasible for the entire chain to have the information needed to make that call, but there is definitely someone in military authority positioned to know if it's defensive or offensive, and that person should be both allowed and obligated to refuse the order if it's an offensive strike.
Morality and the law may not be equivalent, but it would certainly be more convenient if they were closer.
I suppose what I mean is that he doesn't just have a big red button on his desk labeled Iran that he can press when he chooses.
We've stood up a system over many years, and he's just barrelled through every norm/law/etc. up to and including having his sentence reduced to 0 on felonies, simply because he's a politician. If we cannot protect ourselves from this man launching a nuclear weapon, or even hold him responsible, then we don't deserve to survive beyond our planet and the resulting catastrophic collapse of society may be the best thing for the universe overall.
I mean, technically, Congress has to declare wars. But no president cared about this since WW2
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.
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.
We could just show him videos of nuclear tests and he would probably fall for it. Fucking idiot.
Jokes and laugh tracks are how humans normalize things, if anything it needs to begin with ’attention bajoran workers’ and some eerie music.
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.
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.
So basically the won't destroy it and Iran will though horrible expensive an even deeper facilty and go for the bomb, now for real.
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.
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.
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.
What do those acronyms mean
Don't let Kegseth drunk drop it
Dumbo with the big ears is pulling the strings of the empty-headed Scarecrow.


top 100 comments