this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2025
458 points (93.9% liked)

World News

47530 readers
2686 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Deflated0ne@lemmy.world 23 points 11 hours ago (3 children)

Iran needs nukes to defend itself from a nuclear armed aggressor. Everyone needs nukes for that reason. Greenland needs nukes to protect itself from the US.

Yeah after ukraine, i don't think anyobe else will ever make that mistake again.

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 4 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

Probability of nuclear war rises with number of states having nukes. It's best to keep that number as low as possible, so I would not think it wise for Greenland to have nukes. It would not be a sin for Iran to have them, though, given Iran's allies aren't exactly offering a nuclear umbrella.

[–] Deflated0ne@lemmy.world 5 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

That is the conventional wisdom. Wisdom written by people with nukes who can't stop bullying everyone else.

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 hours ago

the conventional wisdom checks out to me. Sometimes bullies happen to be right.

[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

best to keep the number low

Yeah it would be cool if Ukraine was a positive example of what happens when you surrender your nuclear weapons.

How about we all just agree to glass any religious fanatics, especially ethnostates, that get their hands on the things?

[–] nutsack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

with extinction technology, i don't know what the answer is. i think you either need a high level of trust and cooperation between all wielding parties which never goes away, or you need a singular world government which has no reason to arm itself with such a thing.

the stalemate situation where all enemies have a gun to point at one another so that nobody fires a shot is crazy. that can't be the solution.