this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2026
538 points (95.0% liked)

me_irl

7915 readers
2061 users here now

All posts need to have the same title: me_irl it is allowed to use an emoji instead of the underscore _

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] olenkoVD@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 day ago

Where's the me_irl?

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 44 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Also, I don't think that is why we aren't attacking Russia.

[–] favoredponcho@lemmy.zip 10 points 2 days ago

Agent Krasnov

[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 32 points 2 days ago (1 children)

In the world of nuclear weapons, there's a big difference between "I have nuclear weapons," and "I will be able to get nuclear weapons soon."

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 days ago

Also a big difference between "I might have one or two nuclear weapons, but I don't have any way to get them anywhere that might threaten you" (i.e. North Korea) and "I am a former nuclear superpower and have probably accidentally lost more nuclear weapons than most countries have ever developed, oh, and I have ICBMs, MLRS systems, submarines designed to launch ICBMs, etc." (i.e. Russia).

There's a lot of doubt whether Russia could actually launch an ICBM and have it hit the US. Even at the peak of the cold war there was some doubt. But, now, decades later, the corruption and neglect might mean they are no longer capable. Still, even if there's a 1% chance they could launch a nuclear-tipped ICBM that has to be part of your calculation.

[–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

...what do you do for work, OP?

[–] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 20 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I don't break bad, but I think this isn't the correct format (isn't the last image "You're goddamn right"?)

[–] jxk@sh.itjust.works 23 points 2 days ago

You're goddamn right

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago

Captions work for the image though

[–] glockenspiel@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (3 children)

To prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. I get America-bad or whatever, but even the IAEA has made many statements that Iran has not been compliant for years, is fabricating and outright omitting data, does not permit previously agreed upon inspections, and is stockpiling materials to make nuclear bombs.

Now, is that really the reason we got involve? Israel struck first. So probably not. But it is definitely a reason, and a valid one at that. Any way one slices it, a fundamentalist religious state should never be allowed to have nuclear weapons. The world is bad enough as it is with the fundamentalist religious who do have them already.

[–] wpb@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

Iran has been "one week away from nuclear weapons" for 30 years. They should write a children's book about it, "the fascist ethnostate who cried nuke".

[–] ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Not compliant with what...? The deal to comply with was scrapped by the US in 2018.

[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world -3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

*Trump

not the US. even Iran can make the distinction, so can you.

[–] ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Who is he president of again?

[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I don't think the Brits have any ground to stand on when it comes to upholding agreements... do I hold it against all of Brittan? no, I call out the leader that was responsible at the time. why? just because your leader did the thing doesn't damn the whole country.

[–] ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I don't see the issue with offhand referring to agreements between nations, by using the titles of the nations involved. Whether the US likes it or not, the US did pull out of that agreement.

To be clear, when Starmer runs around doing his latest shit thing that he does... I don't rush to correct people who say that Britain is doing shit things. What he's doing represents me, whether I like it or not.

[–] Nurgus@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

you know...the Brittney Isle's!

[–] LePoisson@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

My personal hot take: the middle east will be much more peaceful when Iran has nuclear weapons.

I trust them more than Israel with them. I also would say that Israel is a fundamentalist religious state with nuclear weapons, hell so is Pakistan and I'd go so far as to say what has kept the conflict between Pakistan and India from exploding into even worse violence and outright war is that they both have nukes.

After this debacle I would be surprised if Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons in a decade or less.

[–] Erusset@slrpnk.net 12 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Where did you get these top secret recordings of the White House conversations?

[–] BlindPenguin@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Just open the group chat

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

This is all basically public. We attacked Iran over nukes, that's the official excuse they landed on after Israel ordered us in.

The whole reason they have given to be cautious with Ukraine is Russia's nukes.

[–] Sibshops@lemmy.myserv.one 6 points 2 days ago

If we actually attacked Iran because of nuclear weapons we would have left a long time ago.

[–] darthsundhaft@piefed.social 2 points 2 days ago

Wait until you tell them the US has nukes.