this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2025

103 points (96.4% liked)

News

35703 readers

3718 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.

Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.

7. No duplicate posts.

If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.

All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

JonsJava@lemmy.world

gedaliyah@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

103

US confirms no casualties from Iran’s attack on base in Qatar (apnews.com)

submitted 7 months ago by AcidicBasicGlitch@lemm.ee to c/news@lemmy.world

29 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 30 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] AcidicBasicGlitch@lemm.ee 27 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Pissing contest or most careless game of chicken ever? Both?

Idiocracy prepared me for this to happen, but it also failed me because it made me believe that it would be a lot less serious/more funny than it is.

[–] Anomalocaris@lemm.ee 45 points 7 months ago (1 children)

that movie is BS, Camacho and his cabinet were way more competent than what we have here.

no question.

when they met someone smarter, they listen to the experts and had no ego, just wanted to solve their crisis and step aside.

[–] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 months ago

I mean yeah, but somebody else had to let it get that bad first…

[–] CaptDust@sh.itjust.works 22 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (4 children)

I wouldn't consider it a pissing match. Iran suffered an unprovoked attack on their energy infrastructure, that scenario would call for retaliation from any nation. They appear to be walking a fine line of inflicting damages while attempting to avoid escalation to full conflict. Call it a measured response, I guess.

[–] Bosht@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago

That and the fact their initial response was 'okay I'll block your oil exports then'. Probably bigger hit than any missile strike could do.

[–] Gorilladrums@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

This isn't a measured response. They notified Qatar and the US of the attacks in advance, they only fired 14 missiles, and 13 of them were knocked down. Also these missles didn't carry any notable payloads. Iran did this before when Israel killed Haniyeh in Tehran and Trump killed Soleimani. This is Iran go to way of singling that they want to concede retaliation by intentionally putting out a weak response. They want to deescalate in a way where they can save face.

[–] Opinionhaver@feddit.uk -1 points 7 months ago

unprovoked attack on their energy infrastructure

That's one way of putting it.

[+] fullsquare@awful.systems -9 points 7 months ago (2 children)

ah yes, the completely civilian nuclear program that for last month+ was busy using up 5% enriched uranium (on upper range of enrichment in normal reactors) and 20% (usual in research reactors) to get 60% enriched uranium (no civilian applications)

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 10 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Iran was attacked here. No amount of "what about the WMD's" makes the attacks on them by the US and Israel legal under international law.

Iran had a deal that allowed other countries to control their nuclear sector. The US left that deal. Iran was taking part in negotiations about a new deal. The US bombed them. What has been done to Iran here is a terrible violation of international law, and a terrible violation of their sovereignty.

[–] fullsquare@awful.systems -3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

they were still a party to NPT the entire time, and they didn't meet obligations of that treaty for over 20 years. NPT also includes inspections by IAEA

say what you want, they can't unbomb Fordow so any discussions about future iranian nuclear program are pointless

[–] masterofn001@lemmy.ca 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

And how many treaties have the us violated ?

Daily.

[–] Opinionhaver@feddit.uk -1 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Many. Yet they're still justified in striking a nuclear bomb-making facility in a nation that has more or less said it plans to use it.

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

This is where you're dead wrong. A country amassing weapons is not a justification for preemptively attacking them. Much less so when there's not even consensus that they're amassing the weapons you say they are.

This is just absurd to claim. It's like saying russia was justified in attacking Ukraine because Ukraine wanted to join NATO. It's like saying that you're justified in shooting someone because you think they are going to buy a gun. Just ask yourself: When was the last time Iran launched "preemptive" strikes on Israel, or conducted "preemptive" assassinations on Israeli soil?

If anything, these strikes prove to Iran that unless they acquire nuclear weapons, they will never be able to deter Israel and the US from conducting "preemptive" strikes and assassinations on their soil. I can completely understand the Iranian regime for reasoning that "Whelp, we had a deal, and the US withdrew from it. Then we were actively holding negotiations and they bombed us. It looks like the only way we can ensure they leave us alone is acquiring MAD capabilities."

[–] Opinionhaver@feddit.uk 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Okay, well let me clarify. I think they were justified in doing so. I don't want them or their proxies obtaining nukes because unlike Russia or even North Korea, they're actually suicidal enough to use them.

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Fair enough, you're entitled to your opinion. I'll also agree that Iran definitely should not have nuclear weapons, especially when keeping in mind that they've openly stated that they want to wipe Israel off the map (implicitly saying it could or should be done in a violent way).

However, two wrongs don't make a right, and these attacks remain blatant violations of international law and the UN charter. If "we" want to maintain any semblance of supporting a rule-based world order, as opposed to just "right of the strongest", we can't accept these kind of violations of international law.

[–] Opinionhaver@feddit.uk 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

However, two wrongs don’t make a right, and these attacks remain blatant violations of international law and the UN charter. If “we” want to maintain any semblance of supporting a rule-based world order, as opposed to just “right of the strongest”, we can’t accept these kind of violations of international law.

Legally speaking, I agree. I’m speaking strictly from a strategic or game-theoretical standpoint. I see this as a binary situation: either we physically stop them from building a nuke, or they will build one. I’d much rather we strike preemptively now - so long as it actually stops them - than have to deal with a nuclear-armed Iran in the future, especially given their history of threatening violence, using violence, and funding violence.

Nukes never should’ve been invented in the first place. But we can’t put that genie back in the bottle, so this is the best we can do given the current situation. They don’t have to pursue one - they’re choosing to, knowing full well the potential (now actual) consequences. I’d argue that the tragedy of a nuclear detonation in a major city far-outweighs, by orders of magnitude, the human and geopolitical cost of preemptive strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities. I’d be against it too if the facility were in Sweden or Finland - but it’s not.

[–] masterofn001@lemmy.ca 1 points 7 months ago

And which nation is the only one that actually has used them? (On civilians, no less)

[–] fullsquare@awful.systems -4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

neither. the same kind of propaganda activity targeted at iranian internal audience like after assassination of qasem soleimani. like in 2020, it's pretty obvious that trump takes this offramp

but also, this time international response is wildly different

in 2020: UK and Qatar called for deescalation, Saudis said they stand with Iraq, Turkey offered diplomatic support for deescalation

today, Saudis, UAE, Qatar (obviously), Bahrain, Kuwait, (countries directly impacted) but also Oman, Jordan, Egypt, Morocco, Lebanon, Turkey, Yemen (Aden) and Palestinian Authority all condemned Iranian strikes

today also iranian proxies are much weaker, and we already know how incompetent their air defences were

[–] ReanuKeeves@lemm.ee 7 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (4 children)

I've played fallout 3, new vegas, and 4 so I'm ready for what's to come

[–] ISOmorph@feddit.org 18 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Me too. I'm one of the skeletons surrounded by booze bottles you'll find in one of the subway tunnels.

[–] Palerider@feddit.uk 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

How many bottle caps have you got stashed away?

[–] ReanuKeeves@lemm.ee 2 points 7 months ago

Yes

[–] neuromorph@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

What year do your iodine tablets expire?

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

I stocked up on radaway and have been practicing how to drink out of a toilet

[–] teft@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I’m gonna go bathe in the rads if i see a flash. Either i ghoulify or fry. Either is acceptable for a Fallout scenario.

[–] Big_Boss_77@lemmynsfw.com 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

What's the trick to not going feral?

[–] teft@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

Live in a fridge for 200 years like Billy is my plan.

[–] slaneesh_is_right@lemmy.org 2 points 7 months ago

If the terrorists say so...

[–] msmc101@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 7 months ago

ah they'll get them next time keep trying