this post was submitted on 23 Mar 2026
97 points (95.3% liked)

World News

56161 readers
1009 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
 

The threshold the Israeli authorities have set for the use of a nuclear weapon is dangerously low.

Israeli strategic thinking has long been shaped by the fear of an existential threat. Unlike most nuclear states, whose doctrines revolve around deterrence or competition with other nuclear powers, Israel’s security narrative is rooted in the belief that the country could face destruction if a war turns decisively against it. Israeli leaders have repeatedly framed regional conflicts — from the wars of 1967 and 1973 to present confrontations with Iran and armed groups in Gaza and Lebanon — as struggles for national survival. That mindset matters enormously when nuclear weapons are involved.

top 39 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Bullerfar@lemmy.world 37 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Everything about the current Israel is worrying

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Current? They seem to have always been a rogue borderline terrorist state. Didn't they steal their nuclear weapons from the US basically?

[–] Sharkticon@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

"steal"

More like they were allowed to "steal" them.

[–] DaMummy@hilariouschaos.com 2 points 1 month ago

Well, there was one president who didn't let them steal them. Whatever happened to him?

[–] Akh@lemmy.world 24 points 1 month ago

The only concern I have are countries lack of willingness to hold Israel to account

[–] ZiggyTheZygote@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 month ago (4 children)

I'm not a weapons expert, but all the bombs they've dropped so far in Palestine and the region could add up to a few nuclear bombs, no?

[–] cmbabul@lemmy.world 20 points 1 month ago (2 children)

The collective explosive power isn’t this issue. The issue is that if Israel believes it will lose a war its policy is to believe it will not be allowed to exist in any capacity. Which means its security policy regarding nukes is to take the entire region with them by glassing the Middle East.

Thats bad enough, but additionally because of the way the rest of the worlds nuclear arsenals work, that sort of event could and almost certainly would be the trigger for the end of all life on this planet

[–] ZiggyTheZygote@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The Sampson option. And the world is held hostage to their insanity.

[–] cammoblammo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

That term is rather ironic: Samson’s final act was in Gaza.

[–] daychilde@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

Your question was addressed in the article:

The intensity of the bombardment has been extraordinary. Some military analysts estimate that the explosive power dropped on Gaza during the early stages of the war alone amounted to several times the explosive yield of the Hiroshima atomic bomb.

The comparison does not suggest equivalence between nuclear and conventional weapons. The devastation of a nuclear detonation would be vastly greater. But it does reveal something important about the scale of force Israeli leaders have been willing to deploy when they believe national security is at stake. If a state is willing to unleash such overwhelming destruction through conventional means, the uncomfortable question arises: what would its threshold be if it believed it was actually losing a war?

[–] how_we_burned@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 month ago

I'm not a weapons expert, but all the bombs they've dropped so far in Palestine and the region could add up to a few nuclear bombs, no?

No where near even a few kiloton.

But you don't need nukes when you're dropping a few kilos of He on a target given to you by Palantir's kill chainm-. The precision is crazy.

System detects a Palestinians saying a bunch of stuff these neo-fascists think is bad. Meta data is scrapped from the telco systems to map the targets location via latitude and longitude. A Hermes drone orbiting the city gets those coordinates and automatically fires a Spike missile at the target.

Victim is murdered and the Israeli's claim in a bullshit press release that they killed another terrorist.

Netanyahu has gone amok

[–] filister@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Today's atomic bombs are way more powerful than the ones dropped over Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Humanity hasn't learned anything from history.

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago

rooted in the belief that the country could face destruction if a war turns decisively against it.

Every nuclear nation would use them if they were losing whether they were public or not about it.