66
General Discussion Thread - Juche 115, Week 11 (thelemmy.club)
submitted 6 months ago by [M] to c/genzedong@lemmygrad.ml
200 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Welcome again to everybody. Make yourself at home. In the time-honoured tradition of our group, here is the weekly discussion thread.

☭ Matrix homeserver and space
☭ Theory discussion group on /c/theory@lemmygrad.ml
☭ Find theory on ProleWiki, marxists.org, Anna's Archive

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 14 points 6 months ago (15 children)

What is the difference between dropping tens of thousands of conventional warheads vs dropping a few nukes?

The atom bomb is a paper tiger which the U.S. reactionaries use to scare people. It looks terrible, but in fact it isn't. Of course, the atom bomb is a weapon of mass slaughter, but the outcome of a war is decided by the people, not by one or two new types of weapon. -Mao

A nuke or even ten cannot win the war. The missile launchers and depots are all over Iran and most of them are made to withstand penetration bombs and nukes don't do penetration. All nukes would do is convince the world to destroy america before america destroys the world.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
    •
  • [–] 16 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    I think it's also important to mention that Iran is trying to liberate Palestine. Dropping a nuke on the occupied territories would poison the land for decades or even a century. In this way, Iran's possession of a nuclear deterrent is a paper tiger. I believe this is why they've committed themselves to building up their military capacity with conventional weapons instead.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago* (1 child)

    I think the power of nukes comes from not having an opportunity of using them. It does not mean that the country will be free from wars or other means of conquest, but acts as a deterrence to other nuclear attacks and prevents escalation of war. Let's remember that when Israel was being smoked by a coordinated attack from Syria, Egypt and Jordan, during the Yom Kippur war, the threat of nuclear escalation made the US to broker an agreement with Israel's neighboring states. However, nuclear deterrence does not prevent other forms of war, like assassination, sabotage, precision strikes or proxy wars.

    Iran is very close to having the ability of manufacturing nukes, though. It has advanced missiles, Uranium enrichment facilities, and abundance of stocks of enriched Uranium. What Iran may lack is technology for miniaturizing the nuclear payload (or not, if they got it from another country or if they stole the tech through espionage).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago

    They also lack an ICBM capable of striking the USA. They have the expertise to develop one though. This could deter the ghouls in Washington, but Tel Aviv I'm not so sure.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (4 children)

    Mao made that quote in 1946 when nukes were much, much less powerful and numerous then the ones that exist today. What Mao said was true for back then and it's possible using nukes might ultimately backfire on the US but I think it's still important to keep sober with reality, nukes are serious business and every country that cares about sovereignty should be seeking them, immediately. If Cuba and Russia were smart Russia would be stationing nuclear missiles in Cuba RIGHT NOW before the fascists yet again take advantage of their opposition hesitating and vacillating against their aggression and fearing/seeking salvation from an international community that does not exist rather then taking concrete action.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 14 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Sanctions cause over 550k deaths every year. That's as much as dropping the biggest nuke ever tested on a city.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago*

    True but having nukes or a nuclear weapons program isn't the bar for having devasting sanctions placed on you by western nations these days, merely not being a vassal is. Cuba has no nuclear weapons program and has done absolutely nothing to the United States for decades and the US is still starving them anyway just for being communist.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Russia stationing nukes in Cuba would absolutely cause a Cuban missile crisis Pt.2

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

    Yes, it would, but the alternative is the US invading and taking over Cuba with minimal consequences. The US government and military establishment have spelled it out in a crystal clear fashion they are on global crusade to purge socialism militarily and they should be taken at their word as much as Hitler should of when he wrote his thoughts about the bolsheviks in Mein Kampf. And it pains me to say it but Nuclear weapons are truly the only viable defense in Cuba's case. Cuba doesn't have the robust ballistic missile and drones manufacturing that Iran has and a committed attack by the US would be extremely one sided. We can talk about the Bay of Pigs and Vietnam but the factors aren't identical. The Bay of Pigs was a suicide incursion done by rabid Gusanos that the US merely supported rather then an actual US military campaign, Vietnam had a steady stream of supplies and support from China and the USSR to keep them fighting into perpetuality. The best leverage Cuba has would be to strike shipping and oil assets in the Gulf but again they lack the missiles and drones to do that like Iran can.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 6 months ago (6 children)

    It would kill millions of Iranians and irreversibly effect Iran on a ecological, societal, and economic level.

    The rest of the world doesn't yet have the capacity to destroy the US, so what exactly would they do in fear of a US weilding nuclear weapons?

    Honestly I think I might develop a genuine irreconcilable hatred of the white race if the US nukes Iran. I don't mean meme "unlimited genocide on the first world" I mean I will refuse to interact with white people at every opportunity and cuss them out if they try to be cordial.

    I'm fucking terrified for my family's life in the events of a nuclear strike.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago* (5 children)

    It would kill millions of Iranians and irreversibly effect Iran on a ecological, societal, and economic level.

    How is this any different than if they use conventional weapons?

    The rest of the world doesn’t yet have the capacity to destroy the US,

    They do in a nuclear war. This is the whole concept of M.A.D.

    Like yes it would be horrible but only as horrible as what they already have done to Gaza.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (3 children)

    How is this any different than if they use conventional weapons?

    My fear is that if the US runs out of conventional weapons or if they want to keep some stockpiled for a future altercation with China, a nuclear weapon would be the "solution" to that problem.

    They do in a nuclear war. This is the whole concept of M.A.D.

    Russia, and China have the capacity to bring about mad, the rest of the Global south has no defense against an atomically reckless US.

    Like yes it would be horrible but only as horrible as what they already have done to Gaza.

    I don't want my family members to have to go through what Gaza has, nor do I want anywhere to be like Gaza again.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 12 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Russia, and China have the capacity to bring about mad, the rest of the Global south has no defense against a atomically reckless US.

    Yes they do. Russia and China are the defense. A first strike is the only defense for Russia and China against a belligerent usa that is willing to use nukes. It forces their hand no matter who the target is because of the usa's proven track record of antagonism against China and Russia.

    If someone screams over and over that they are going to kill you but they don't because you have a gun pointed at them and then you see them pull out a gun and shoot someone else are you going to wait for them to face you or shoot them right away?

    You are dooming for no reason. The results of a nuclear strike are horrible for everyone but they are markedly worse for israel and usa. You are worrying about people doing something that would hurt themselves more than it would hurt anyone else. Even a psychopath wouldn't do that. They do not believe the armageddon tripe that some jar heads are spouting. There is no up side to them and all they care about is the upside.

    It is a waste of energy worrying about something that is very unlikely to happen especially when there is nothing you can do to stop it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago

    "How is this different from conventional weapons."

    If Iran stops 50% of conventional weapons, that's a great victory despite the damage

    If Iran fails to stop 1% of nuclear weapons, entire cities are gone and land and air is poisoned for decades, if not centuries depending on the bomb used.

    The US would have to drop hundreds to thousands of MOABs to do equivalent damage of one nuke

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent