this post was submitted on 19 Apr 2024
487 points (99.4% liked)

World News

39102 readers
2707 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

An Israeli missile has hit Iran, two US officials have told the BBC's US partner CBS News.

Iranian state media is reporting that flights have been suspended over several cities, according to Associated Press.

Iran has been on high alert after Israel said it would respond to an Iranian attack against it on Saturday night

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] GrymEdm@lemmy.world 116 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (4 children)

Oh FFS. This had better be an extremely limited response to Iran's response to Israel's bombing of an embassy. Here's hoping it's just the same type of symbolic attack that Iran made last weekend - all show and no intent. Just Israel refusing to let anyone else have the last word.

Anything more serious and things are about to become very messy and even more expensive. Although it would explain why Israel is suddenly arranging to get dozens of jets from the US in the last month or so. Lord knows they don't seem necessary if the only goal is to keep blowing up Palestinians.

[–] yumpsuit@lemmy.world 32 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Although it would explain why Israel is suddenly arranging to get dozens of jets from the US in the last month or so.

Forgive what feels like a nitpick, but we should take a moment for wider historical scorn. WaPo at the end of March:

Last week, the State Department authorized the transfer of 25 F-35A fighter jets and engines worth roughly $2.5 billion, U.S. officials said. The case was approved by Congress in 2008, so the department was not required to provide a new notification to lawmakers.

Biden owns the fuckup, but it comes after all the shit Israel put the administrations of Dubya, Obama, and Individual 1 through, and after all the atrocities upon the Great March of Return and the other surges of conflict. The planes could fill another allies’ order, the MIC could get their warbucks, and Joey could have kicked the can down the road, but here we are.

[–] melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee 26 points 7 months ago (2 children)

why the fuck do they have f-35s?

the Americans aren't even giving peripheral NATO countries f-35's, are they?

why the fuck are they getting f-35's?

even RPing as an american imperialist, I cannot think of a reason other than 'for the evulz'.

[–] yumpsuit@lemmy.world 11 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 10 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

What do you mean by "peripheral" NATO countries? If you mean NATO countries other than the US, then I can inform you that some do have F-35 jets.

[–] melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee -5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

feel like youre missing the point here, maybe kind of on purpose.

[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 6 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

You did ask a question that I attempted to answer... That does not entail in any way that I did not understand the other stuff you wrote nor that I dismissed it.

[–] melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

no? like I know France helped design the thing, so obviously they're getting them, but I know Poland and turkey dont have them yet, and I dont think they're going to soon.

the point is theyre not going to the people who serve amrrica's military interests.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Poland waiting has little to do with politics and more to do with when contracts were signed. They only signed in 2020.

Turkey is trying to develop their own 5th generation fighter after getting kicked out of the f35 program due to being a leaky sieve sending data to the Russians. That's on them.

By and large, the wait elsewhere is mostly to do with the bad reputation the program got before it was operational. Now that it's all in the past and it's proving to be an excellent fighter, contracts with allies are coming in faster than they can be produced. That's the price of waiting.

[–] melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee -1 points 7 months ago

both kind of the point anf completely missing the point;

there are NATO countries, including those on the border of an ongoing war they expect to join pretty soon, who dont have them. why the fuck are the kapostanis getting them? so they can start world war 3 better?

[–] GrymEdm@lemmy.world 16 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

That's a fair point, no need to apologize for keeping me accurate. I had read and forgotten that detail honestly, because in my head I lump the two deals together - the other one being the new $18 billion contract for F-15s that Biden's administration is seeking approval for currently. I think I mentally shorthand it to "arrangements for new jets going to Israel" but there is definitely detail involved as you point out.

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 11 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Although it would explain why Israel is suddenly arranging to get dozens of jets from the US in the last month or so

That's just a quid pro quo kickback between the corporatocracy.

"We'll channel more tax payer money through your military industrial complex if you let us continue with our nationalist ethnostate genocide... We may even start another gulf war and channel trillion$ more"

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 10 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Measured retaliation leads to measured retaliation leads to measured retaliation...

It's fucking hard but Isreal suffered minimally from Iran's bullshit aggression - Netanyahu could "be the bigger man" without losing any face.

Real leaders - real manly men - real strong people of any stripe - those are the people who have the strength to forgive and compromise.

[–] crusa187@lemmy.ml 8 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Israel bombed their embassy first, full stop. What are you on about? Iran had a right to defend itself.

Bibi, who has never shown a modicum of restraint when there’s potential for bloodshed, isn’t going to change course until the US forces him to by withholding funding. Considering how Zionist Biden and 2/3 of Congress are, that ain’t happening, so buckle up for some real shit “leadership,” Jack.

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works -1 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Was that first? The embassy bombing was certainly before Iran's counter attack but if you're searching for justification then it's not like Iran and Isreal were buddies before this. Iran has repeatedly funded Hezbollah launching rockets into Isreal and funded the Houthi rebels attacking shipping.

My point was that constantly retaliating is an unhealthy cycle and your take away was that "But actually it's okay if it's in retaliation." Wut.

[–] crusa187@lemmy.ml 3 points 7 months ago

And Bibi funded Hamas, his (now realized) end-goal being to destabilize the region and provide cover for further Israeli violence and land grabs from the indigenous people.

I agree with you on tit-for-tat bringing about undesirable results, but you lost me on “Iran’s bullshit aggression.” Israel is 6mo+ in all-out genocidal warfare on innocent Palestinian civilians, and still maintains this stems from their “right to defend themselves.” Iran on the other hand exercised immense restraint, coordinated with western powers, and executed a highly telegraphed counter-offensive focused exclusively on military targets in Israel as an overly nice way to say “please don’t bomb our stuff.” In this way I think Iran’s counter-attack was in fact beyond justified. Unless you meant it was bullshit in that it was entirely orchestrated, but I doubt that was your intent.

Netenyahu, being the absolute child that he is, had to strike again anyway. This is in fact unjustified and unprovoked, but to use your own terminology it appears Iran will be the “bigger man” and doesn’t plan on further hostile action. Again highly coordinated with the west, in order to walk on eggshells around the unhinged Israeli government.

The fact of the matter is this: Bibi is a far-right war mongering zealot who needs to be deposed immediately. The US is despicable for providing him cover the way they have. Despite who’s in charge in Israel, they at least offer their citizens basic social safety nets like universal healthcare and paid family leave. America doesn’t have these things, yet it can afford to send Israel 10s of billions to continue murdering brown children?! Israel are warmongers, and America is shameful for backing them.

[–] Eyck_of_denesle@lemmy.zip 0 points 7 months ago

Bombing consulates and embassies is a nazi move.

[–] AMDIsOurLord@lemmy.ml 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

"Iran's aggression"

Another day another banger from sh.itjust.works

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works -4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

Iran was aggressive in their retaliation - how the fuck else would you describe launching rockets into another country?

Whether that retaliation was justified is separate from the fact that it was aggressive.

[–] Eyck_of_denesle@lemmy.zip 4 points 7 months ago

It killed 0 unlike the Israeli attack. Pls zip it back up after you are done.

[–] AMDIsOurLord@lemmy.ml 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Au contraire, it was defense and very mild at that. If Israel can kill 40,000+ people because "wE hAvE a rIgHt tO dEfEnD oUrSeLvEs" Iran absolutely can volley some missiles in response to Zionist actions

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works -4 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] AMDIsOurLord@lemmy.ml 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

No, it is extremely justified to respond to an attack on an embassy

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works -1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It's also extremely justified to respond to someone launching missiles at you. Are you really that much of an idiot that you can't see how this ends or are you just arguing in bad faith?

[–] AMDIsOurLord@lemmy.ml 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

No? If you start the aggression and get a response can you actually fault the other party????

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works -4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Yea so about half a century ago Iran started some aggression against Isreal, or maybe Isreal's existence was an aggressive move against Iran?

I don't know, which one was at fault originally?

[–] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Not sure about Iran but it certainly was aggressive to Palestinians

[–] DoomBot5@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

It's certainly not 300 drones and rockets.