this post was submitted on 17 Jun 2025
289 points (98.0% liked)

World News

47689 readers
3312 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
 

Tehran “is the principal source of regional instability and terror,” declare G7 leaders in a joint statement.

The leaders of the G7 countries on Monday issued a joint statement saying Iran should not have nuclear weapons and affirming Israel's right to defend itself.

"Iran is the principal source of regional instability and terror. We have been consistently clear that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon," declared the statement, issued by the leaders of the U.S., U.K., France, Germany, Italy, Canada and Japan, along with the EU.

They pledged to "remain vigilant to the implications for international energy markets and stand ready to coordinate, including with like-minded partners, to safeguard market stability."

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] wpb@lemmy.world 31 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (39 children)

Ukraine gave up their nukes, look what happened to them. Libya gave their nuclear weapons program up, and look at them today. North Korea didn't, and they're still standing, for better or for worse. Iraq was accused of having nukes, but didn't have them, and got destroyed. Seems that if you want any semblance of sovereignty outside of NATO, you better have some nukes.

So for any nations reading along I'll summarize the basic conclusions:

  1. Get nukes
  2. If you have nukes, do not give them up
  3. If you're accused of having nukes, drop everything and get nukes asap

Do you think Israel would be bombing Iran if they had nukes?

load more comments (39 replies)
[–] zymagoras777@lemmy.world 15 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Nobody should have nukes, you fucking hypocrites..

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Except France and the UK of course.

[–] Vanilla_PuddinFudge@infosec.pub 17 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

People with nuclear weapons have forbidden you from having nuclear weapons?

Humans are a goofy lot.

[–] gobbles_turkey@lemm.ee 8 points 2 days ago

Well Pakistan will give them one if needed so they kind of already have one. Maybe stop pushing them to use it on Israel.

[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 12 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Israel is the criminal and everyone knows it.

Israel will face the long-term consequences of its reckless behavior. Just not today.

[–] SirActionSack@aussie.zone 4 points 2 days ago

A disturbingly large group think that history started on October 7 2023 and prior to that it was all sunshine and rainbows in the region.

Those people didn't hear about 70ish years of Israeli bullshit on the nightly news so as far as they're concerned it didn't happen.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 37 points 3 days ago (1 children)

"Tehran “is the principal source of regional instability and terror,”

I guess we all just have to pretend Israel doesn't exist?

[–] Crashumbc@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

Tbf they both are...

[–] Mrkawfee@lemmy.world 166 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (6 children)

Israel is the principal source of regional instability and terror and everyone and his dog knows this.

The kowtowing to Trump and his Zionist sponsors by the client states of the US Empire is an insult to objective reality.

[–] MBech@feddit.dk 36 points 4 days ago (13 children)

Please don't make Iran out to be some sort of victim in all this. What Israel is doing is wrong, but Iran has funded a lot of terrorists throughout the years, and execute people in medival ways for holding hands with the "wrong" person.

The iranian government is pure fucking evil and deserves to die horrible deaths for what they instigate and fund around the world and in their local area.

[–] LeninOnAPrayer@lemm.ee 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Dude. I don't disagree but this is not helpful. What's helpful is acknowledging that none of that matters to the US. Our greatest allies in the region have all of what you listed and more.

All this sentiment does is manufacture concent for this war. There is one constant factor in the west asia. A constant that continues to keep countries from being able to have civil rights movements, keeps their citizens impoverished, keeps dictatorships and monarchs in power while everyday people suffer.

That constant is US intervention and disruption of the region. Intervention against evil authoritarian rule only when that countries rulers don't allow US exploitation or threaten it's imperialist interest.

It serves no purpose what you're doing. Otherwise I think you should be more concerned about the US arming Saudi Arabia or Israel. Both of those countries have significantly more innocent people slaughtered under their rule.

Iran and it's people will only know civil liberties and equal rights when they are given the stability to have those movements of their own.

Do you think the best thing for the US civil rights movement would have been a bombing campaign from Canada? No.

Please. Again, I don't defend Iran if we're talking about it in a bubble. But the world does not work like that. And comments like yours only manufacture consent for the invasion of a country that attacked no one without first being attacked. That's it. We don't need to try to pick apart anything more than that.

If you care about gay people in Iran. You should care about them being bombed. End of story. That should be everyone utmost focus right now. There is no gay person in Iran right now thinking "oh, finally the bombs of freedom reign!". No, they are thinking "oh fuck, I need to get me and my family and friends out of here"

Sorry, a bit of a rant. So much so that I came back to re-edit the comment later. But, right now, I think it's really important that we don't fall for this type of narrative. The fascist controlling America are doing everything they can to manufacture concent with the Liberals.

The intentions of your comment are good and correct. But they are only helpful in a vacuum outside of the war mongering fascism that is rising.

If the only threat to Iran was it's civil rights violations you'd be right. But the threat to Iran right now is it's population experiencing what Gaza has for the last 21 months. Something I pray they don't experience.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 3 days ago (12 children)

Ok, which country is actively committing genocide?

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] Akasazh@feddit.nl 25 points 4 days ago (4 children)

It's a deep sarcasm that Western oil companies destabilized the Iranian monarchy, that * shockingly* wanted a piece of the pie in such a way it paved the way for islamist extremists to gain power.

Ian used to be pretty liberal and western minded, however westen meddling caused this extreme government.

But God forbid they get the means to (to use the Israeli turn off phrase) 'defend' itself, that would be horrendous.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] thatradomguy@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)

NO ONE should have them. Dumb asses.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MetalMachine@feddit.nl 9 points 3 days ago

Nukes for me but not for thee

[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 102 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (9 children)

I believe ALL of the following;

  • Iran should not have nuclear weapons
  • Israel should not have nuclear weapons
  • Iran should not weaponize Palestinian suffering or coax them into attacking Israel while Iran itself sees little repercussions
  • Israel should not genocide
  • Israel has committed genocide and should pay a hefty price
  • Neither Iran nor Israel will really answer for their fuckery
  • Palestinians will remain fucked...if they survive.

My heart breaks for the Palestinian people who suffer and die for others' greed, ambition, and political squabbles.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] Vupperware@lemm.ee 51 points 4 days ago (21 children)

“We will do anything to maintain the status quo, up to and including genocidal ethnosupremacy”!

I am honestly so revolted.

load more comments (21 replies)
[–] frezik@midwest.social 42 points 4 days ago (5 children)

Ukraine had nukes and gave them up. They were invaded.

Iraq gave up their WMD program after the first Gulf War. They were invaded again.

Iran definitely had a nuclear program, but doesn't appear to be pursuing it anymore. They're getting attacked and quite possibly will get invaded.

South Africa had a nuclear program and gave it up. Left alone.

The Great Powers, particularly the United States but also Russia, have shown that your country should just keep going once you start. Chances are, you'll get invaded, anyway.

This is not the way towards anti-proliferation.

[–] Aqarius@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago

Hell, even if you don't. Gaddafi made a big show of "giving up" weapons that he didn't even really have, and he still got raped to death with a bayonet.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] mlg@lemmy.world 45 points 4 days ago (1 children)

China, India, and Pakistan once again proving that having nukes does actually matter because you can't be arbitrarily shoved around around by the only other nuclear powers.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 39 points 4 days ago (1 children)

"Iran is two weeks away from nuclear capability" - Netanyahu: 2012, 2015, 2018, 2023, 2025

[–] smol_beans@lemmy.world 12 points 3 days ago

He started a lot earlier than 2012

[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 36 points 4 days ago

But genocide against Palestinians is a-OK.

What does the "G" in G7 stand for? Gaslighting? Genocide? Grift? Maybe there are 7 Gs.

[–] SARGE@startrek.website 49 points 4 days ago (25 children)

nobody should have nuclear weapons.

Sometimes I wonder what the world would be like if the scientists working on the Manhattan project had all agreed it's too much and intentionally sabotage every test.

load more comments (25 replies)
[–] CircaV@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Whatever.

Don’t care if yanks go get blown up in the Middle East. It’s all in service of enriching Halliburton and the military industrial complex. Yawn. It is 2003 again?

Whatever happened to: “tRuMp iS tHe PeAcE pReSIdEnT”.

I thought the US was trillions in debt. There’s always money for war.

Can’t wait to laugh at this smoothbrained crew of assclowns as they try to fight a foreign war. Good luck maintaining those supply chains for US war mongering when the whole world fucking hates you.

FFS. Anyway. Next.

[–] wpb@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Don’t care if yanks go get blown up in the Middle East. It’s all in service of enriching Halliburton and the military industrial complex. Yawn. It is 2003 again?

The last time they did this, a million Iraqis died.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] f4f4f4f4f4f4f4f4@sopuli.xyz 15 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Religious zealots can't be allowed to have nukes. You have to at least masquerade as a well-adjusted nation while you develop the nukes and slowly massage your zealots into positions of power over a few decades. Those are the rules.

[–] bobthened@feddit.uk 4 points 2 days ago

And yet Israel not only has nukes, but refuses to say how many, or allow IAEA inspectors in to have a look.

[–] HikingVet@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

So you agree that Israel shouldn't have nukes.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Babalugats@feddit.uk 13 points 3 days ago

Probably best for all of us if nobody can ever have nuclear weapons, but what do i know..

[–] Doorbook@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

Even the statement is not about protecting people lives but about market stability.

They are not working for the people...

load more comments
view more: next ›