• jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ireland is one of the few western countries that have criticised Israel’s response to the Hamas attacks, so they’re being punished now.

      • Aceticon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        They remember how it is to have your homeland occupied by a neighbouring nation that thinks you are an inferior people.

      • filister@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        They got criticized by Michael D. Higgins. This guy is unreal. He is so charismatic and positive and though I don’t know him personally he looks like an amazing human being.

        • jonne@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          But on brand for Israel. I guess when they say ‘never again’, they’re not talking about genocide in general.

          • Apollo@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Never again to us is what you should interpret it as. A group taking steps to ensure that their near genocide can never be repeated doesn’t burden them with a moral crusade to end all genocide.

  • febra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    And this is what western leaders throw their “unconditional support” at…

  • jet@hackertalks.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    He’s the crazy bully that hangs out with the group, has all the fun sadistic ideas, everybody goes oh don’t listen to him He’s crazy. But they’re really listening to see how other people react to that crazy idea. The crazy outspoken guys testing the water, and if people don’t argue too much…

    It’s like the racist making a joke not joke in a conversation to test you… Schrödinger’s douchebag… Except on a global political scale

  • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    …am I misunderstanding the distance between israel and gaza or am I misunderstanding how nukes work? This sounds like a really bad plan unless I’m wrong about something.

    • jet@hackertalks.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Tactical nukes exist, there would be fallout, but depending on the nuke itself, and the burst configuration, that could be limited, and with favorable winds go out over the sea.

      Not to mention neutron bombs which are “cleaner” and just kill organics.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_bomb

      But none of this really makes sense, given the fact that gaza’s completely surrounded, and total air and military superiority exists there’s cleaner ways to kill everyone.

      One could argue this politician is trying to anchor a really bad idea, so the people agree with a terrible idea that’s not as bad later.

      • skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        (western) neutron bombs were made for single and very specific explicit purpose: to kill crews of soviet tanks quickly while not generating too much fallout over friendly territory (west germany). neutron bombs are still nukes and still have powerful blast and so on; but while everyone outside of tank is fried anyway no matter what nuke you use, neutrons specifically ignore heavy metal shielding. neutrons are however also stopped by things like air, concrete, and especially water, fuel, plastics and such; most importantly, when first DPICM and then antitank PGMs deployable from considerable distance (think CBU-97 or BONUS, not ATGMs) became a thing, these things just stopped being necessary and were withdrawn from service

        against a city you don’t want a neutron bomb. other than tanks, it’s a thing to be used against other nukes, but nuclear anti-ballistic defenses seem a little crazy today so it was phased out too. if you look at actual doomsday arsenals of actual nuclear states, the things stockpiled are plain ol big dirty thermonuclear devices, dial-a-yield from below 1kt to somewhere around 500kt with guidance kit added. even against other nukes neutron bombs aren’t expected to be used today, turns out just bending them out of shape while still in silo seems to be easier

        does israel have neutron bombs? probably, would it be effective against a city? not more than regular nukes, and at any rate, just like you say, tons and tons of PGMs are just simpler, easier to deal with and much safer diplomatically

        • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          See, that’s what I was thinking but you’re a whole lot more technical than “yeah I’m pretty sure that is dumb” like I said lol.

  • SeaJ@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Is Gaza not considered desert? Should they move to the Negev?

  • badbytes@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Prime Minister of reality suggest Israel should move to fuck all. So when someone suggest nukeing Israel and killing every last one, I don’t wanna hear shit.

    • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      …or hear me out, we agree that “nuking them and killing every last one” is something to always decry, regardless of who “them” is. The right response here is disgust, not “alright so antisemites get a pass”.

        • CommanderM2192@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          In that case, I’m assuming you condemn the government that beheads babies and support the government that at least puts in effort to avoid collateral damage and civilian casualties?