You must log in or register to comment.
Pretty simple. Currently not all nations have nukes, out of those who have, a few have enough to completely destroy a rival nation. This means that the nations with the big nuke stocks are the ones calling the shots as to who should have nukes and how much. Iran being mostly against the US is not allowed nukes, Israel being mostly a US ally is allowed nukes.
This is the unpolitical explanation.
In an oligarchy, corporate media is state media.
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.
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.
That is the conventional wisdom. Wisdom written by people with nukes who can’t stop bullying everyone else.
Everyone’s got them but nobody uses them. So do they really need them or just need to convince other countries that they have them.
not every country has a nuclear arsenal
Why not? Everyone should keep a nuke in their basement just in case
It’s my uhh hunting tactical nuke. I use it when I need to blast 40-60 wild hogs in 5 milliseconds
Just gotta dig up grandpa’s old Atomic Energy Lab play set and experiment a bit.
We should welcome an Iranian bomb. Honestly, it’s what the Middle East really needs to bring it to stability.
The biggest destabilizing force in the Middle East is Israel. They’re a destabilizing force because they’re an expansionist nuclear-armed power with no hard borders. Their borders aren’t actually fixed; they’re in a decades-long process to slowly expand them. For those who forget, Israel’s MO is to:
- Destabilize border regions of neighboring countries and foster the creation of militant groups within them.
- Use those destabilized regions as justification for military occupation of the territory of neighboring countries.
- Announce the creation of border “buffer zones.”
- Allow their civilians to move into what is supposed to be a DMZ-like buffer zone.
- Again have civilians in the line of fire of militants, demanding further border expansion.
Israel has been expanding like this for decades, and there’s no end in site. Their immediate neighbors are all to weak and destabilized to resist this process of slow Israeli lebensraum. The people in the Middle East are rightly afraid that they’ll be next under the Israeli boot, and they’ll find themselves reduced to the plight of the Gazans.
Israel is out of control. It’s an expansionist military power hellbent on gobbling up its neighbors. The reason they’re able to get away with this is because they have nuclear weapons. No Arab nation can invade them without the threat of being nuked in return. Israel uses its nuclear arsenal to conquer its neighbors.
Another nuclear power is desperately needed in the region to hold them in check. A nuclear Iran would serve this role well. They wouldn’t be able to wipe Israel off the map, as that would result in them getting nuked in return. What a nuclear-armed Iran can do is to finally put a check on Israel’s endless military expansion. We need powers that can stand up to the Israelis as equals and say, “no. Your borders are fucking big enough. You’re not taking one more square meter of land.”
As much as I agree that Israel is a destabilizing force and that you have their MO fairly spot on, Israel doesn’t seem to be using its nuclear arsenal as a deterrent for invasion. They don’t have to, they have significant conventional forces with US backing, making invasion nigh-impossible anyway. That’s how it went in the past at least with the various regional wars.
I’m not sure an Iranian bomb would stabilize much if anything. Israel sees it as a direct existential threat and will stop at nothing to prevent or disable such a weapon. Iran has also repeatedly threatened to use it on Israel offensively, which doesn’t really bode well for peace either. Suppose Iran does lob a bomb at Israel, how would they respond? Or what if Israel strikes first? I don’t trust either party to be reasonable and responsible here tbh.
Iran can’t use the weapon to threaten Israel as you say, because it’d be an empty threat. Iran can’t nuke Israel without getting nuked right back. Israel knows this, so they can continue their expansions just fine.
MAD doctrine prevents nuclear wars from breaking out, but as we have been seeing recently it doesn’t prevent conventional wars.
Israel doesn’t seem to be using its nuclear arsenal as a deterrent for invasion.
So it’s just a coincidence that no neighboring country has threatened them with outright military invasion since they got nukes?
And when has Iran ever threatened to use a bomb against Israel? They deny they’re even trying to get a bomb. Do their politicians like to say, “death to Israel?” Sure, but that’s just part of their discourse. The Iranians use “death to” as a synonym for “down with.” They say the same thing during political campaigns against opposing political candidates.
An Iranian bomb would stabilize the situation because the same pattern has occurred in numerous other conflicts. Yes, nukes don’t prevent conventional wars, but they do prevent total war between nuclear powers. Russia would have never attempted its invasion of Ukraine if Ukraine still had their nukes. India and Pakistan’s arsenals are what kept the recent conflict between them from spiraling further than it did.
You can speculate that nukes wouldn’t prevent further expansion of Israel, but that’s ahistorical analysis. Having an opponent that is just as well armed as you are makes you act more carefully. The Soviets didn’t just keep expanding across Europe, precisely because the US had the bomb to hold them in check. Israel has been able to act with such impunity because ultimately none of its neighbors can stand up to it. It’s only when some of Israel’s neighbors actually have nukes, and they have to address their neighbors as equals, that peace is actually possible. As long as one side holds complete military dominance, real peace isn’t possible.
There are other countries too that unofficially have nukes
because they’re trying to manufacture consent for a war with Iran
MSM has talked about Israel’s nukes. Can’t remember which channel it was, but yesterday they were doing a comparison between Israel’s and Iran’s offense & defense capabilities.
What’s MSM? MSN?
mainstream media?
e.g. all of them
Gotcha, thx.
Found it. Looks like SkyNews was reporting it.
Why won’t the mainstream media of the Western bloc, a well known propaganda apparatus that will always spin things in favour of capitalists and Western imperialism, mention Israel’s (a Western colonial project) nukes? Gee, I wonder why. 🤔😅
Everyone would rather circle around the answer
Only mainstream Western media and those who consume it without question… which I guess is a lot of people, NGL.
Because then the US any every other IAEA signatory would be obligated to sanction Israel which would be the end of Israel’s economy.
No news media dares mention it because they have no proof and would both loose any insider access and get buried in libel cases.
I think the West has already demonstrated that they’re perfectly happy to just ignore obligations like that, as evidenced by them all refusing to inforce the arrest warrant against Netanyahu.
They’re already ignoring it. They just don’t want to admit their ignoring it.
Forced by who? The Republican Congress would likely say Iran deserved it, and even if they didn’t Trump would dismantle any group the executive branch is supposed to use to enforce them as he was pushing for with Russia .
Their biggest trading partner is China … not sure what they would do
I’m talking about the present, where everyone knows Israel has nukes but not officially. Not some future scenario where Israel nukes Iran.
Why would you think they would need to be sanctioned for not using them? China and India both have nuclear weapons and have small skirmishes (granted not as big as this) and we don’t discuss sanctioning both of them for it. I would think threatening to use or using them would be the only scenarios where sanctions would be “forced hand” for lack of a better term.
China and India both have nuclear weapons and have small skirmishes (granted not as big as this) and we don’t discuss sanctioning both of them for it.
nor india and pakistan. that’s the conflict I worry about more.
I saw elsewhere that Pakistan stated they would be attacking Israel back with nukes if Israel used them against Iran. Which is why I assume it’s a given they won’t be used and we won’t have to worry about them coming into play
Which is why I assume it’s a given they won’t be used and we won’t have to worry about them coming into play
yeeeah, I do wonder about that. the world has seen what a few madmen can get away with for a decade here and there… doesn’t seem to be stabilizing.
It has nothing to do with a ‘republican’ congress.
Democrats wouldn’t stand up to Israel either and you’re delusional if you think otherwise.
Removed by mod
Were you in a coma for all of last year?
Irony
You know that they put the sanctions on Russia right, even with a Republican Congress. Or do you forget how the sanctions were held until Trump came into office and stopped allowing the executive branch to uphold them?
That means democrats would stand up to Israel?
This is what I mean by delusion. You people are so far gone you can’t even realize it.
Sanctioning Israel if they dropped a nuke on Iran? Absolutely. I’m not even a democrat but you are living in another world if you think they wouldn’t. What realm of insanity are you living in.
Post a nuke being dropped Iran only gains sympathy for standing up for the Palestinians.
Democrat Congress members are idiots who were way behind on what their constituents wanted and had money funneled to them. But there is no way they would be able to support Israel after that and ever be elected again
And they didn’t put sanctions on Israel. In fact, they sent them record amounts of free weapons
I know, that’s the part where I said the Democrats congressmembers were slow and had been funneled money from Israel for their campaigns. When they were elected into office support for Israel was over 50% in the U.S. in 2023 it was still over 50% so it was borderline rediculous. In 2025, support for Israel is only over 50% by one of those 2 parties. As for the other guy saying I’m moving goal posts… The post is about Israel having nukes and the media not mentioning them while discussing war with Iran, so I didn’t find it off topic to say this was about Israel possibly using nukes on Iran, but oh well. We’ll just have differing opinions.
Hope you have a good day
Plus they killed the last people who were telling.
sanction Israel
Yeah that’s not happening
Interesting read about the topic
https://www.thenation.com/article/world/israel-nuclear-weapons/.
Not just an interesting read: also a good example of the media mentioning Israel’s nukes, like OP seems to think they never do.
Because Israel has a disproportionate amount of control over the media.
deleted by creator
What about Pakistan?
Netanyahu went on a massive warning rant about them having nukes and using it all over the middle east, yet they haven’t.
Maybe because there’s no danger of Israel slinging nukes all over the middle east,
This has to be a joke right?
Why is there no such danger? Explain.
This is the same Israel which is currently bombing Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, and Iran?
It’s like portraying a person who is actively gunning down civilians with a handgun as "unlikely to kill anyone with a rifle’.
They have also bombed Yemen and Iraq multiple times.
Of course. Israel is one of the most peaceful countries, after all.
Are you genuinely worried they will use their nukes?
Yes. It’s unlikely, but definitely possible.
Yes. Have you seen the yahoos in charge in Israel?
Why are you not?
When terrorists have nukes, you must always entertain the possibility they will use them. Otherwise, you’re a moron.
It’s obviously possible, you’d have to be a moron to not know that. But compared to if Iran or hamas had nukes I’m not as worried.
That’s a big if, huge. The genocidal terror state already has nukes though, no ifs.
But that’s just because you’re racist. Israel is the genocidal state, not Iran or Palestine
I’m sure Iran and hamas want to wipe out israel too
Who, out of the three, are actively committing genocide right now?
Exactly, Israel is such a peaceful country. They would never invade their neighbors like Lebanon, Syria, ignore treaties, or pretend that Palestinian territory is actually belonging to them
Removed by mod
They have literally come very close to launching them when they were losing a few battles during the Yom Kippur war when Golda Meir ordered them readied to be launched. She then extorted Nixon for supplies because if he didn’t agree to airlift in help she’d order them launched.
Like this isn’t crazy talk. They have a known policy under which they will take the entire region with them if they fall.
It’s worth considering and talking about and just because you don’t know basic history surrounding this doesn’t mean others are stupid for considering it a possibility.
If I’ve learned one thing it’s that it’s absolutely impossible to have productive discussions on geopolitics on Lemmy. People are insanely uninformed but at the same time will not move an inch from their preconceived opinions.
The fact that Israel is a warmongering country guilty of a genocide but at the same is no real nuclear threat in the region whereas Iran would be is something that exceeds the binary thinking of people here.
The fact that IF Iran had nukes… A hypothetical fact then? Right…
The fact
You mean the completely baseless assertion
Good job proving their point
No
Do you deny the genocide in Gaza?
No, that part is true
🤡
Nice self portrait
Got em
At some point, with a quarter hundred downvotes and many negative replies, the person you should first inspect is not the other, but self.
a quarter hundred
Lol who says ‘25’ this way?
Supposedly 50 million people voted for a reality tv star to have control of the largest stockpile of nuclear arms on earth… Perhaps the herd is diseased.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option
Israel will destroy the entire planet with nukes if they don’t get unfettered access to their “holy land.”
I just don’t get why they are so fucking evil. It makes no sense.
If you read the link you’ve provided you’ll see that it’s a last resort doctrine meant to deter neighboring countries from invading. Pretty much in line with how most western (nuclear) nations would use their nuclear arsenal.
You mean the nuclear arsenal that Israel denies exists?
Which of those western (nuclear) nations are also doing that?
Israel doesn’t deny that they have a nuclear arsenal
Okay so Israel denies that they have nuclear weapons but at the same time threatens the whole world with nuclear annihilation as the user above claimed. How does that work?
Not sure why you’re getting downvoted. I can’t tell how it’s any different from MAD based on what’s written.
It’s different because they will fuck over allies too, and make sure the world is unlivable. It’s a massive fuck you to the world.
People get very emotional when discussing Israel and can’t stay with the facts.
https://apnews.com/article/israel-nuclear-weapons-gaza-iran-china-1e18f34dcec40582166796b0ade65768
Plus israel has talked before about the “samson option”. When has Iran talked using nukes?
Hard talking about what you don’t have. Well almost, but now very very not almost.
