• dead [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    56
    ·
    5 days ago

    The purpose of this CIA Harris video is for him to say that the US has defensive nukes, he says in the video that the US protects it’s allies with nukes. Then he says that Russia, China, India, Pakistan, and North Korea have nukes for unknown and possibly nefarious reasons.

    He doesn’t mention Israel having nukes. During the sponsored, he uses “ground news” to examine whether Iran should have nuclear weapons. He says that Al Jazeera “downplays the threat” of Iran creating nukes and “casting doubt on the international narrative”.

    international-community-1 “international narrative” international-community-2

    Then he pulls up an Israeli news site which says that Iran has the materials to produce 10 nuclear bombs. He says that Israel news “cuts right to the chase” but is only “slightly misleading”.

    He mentions the Cuban missile crisis late in the video. He doesn’t mention that the US deployed nukes in Turkey prior to the USSR deploying nukes in Cuba.

    I think the main purpose of this video is to fear monger Iran having nukes. The video also postures that China is acquiring nukes for nefarious global control.

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      5 days ago

      You’re probably right, but as long as it helps remind people that we’re all fucked if a nuclear war starts then it’s a net positive in my book.

      • LaughingLion [any, any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        5 days ago

        That’s now how people perceive propaganda like this. They don’t stop and think introspectively. They don’t think, “wow, nobody should have nukes” or if they do then they don’t walk away with any plan of action to pressure their own governments in the west to disarm. There is no call to action.

        What is is meant to do is make you scared and impotent. Then when the time comes for action to be taken on your behalf you think, “this is getting rid of some nukes and that’s good.” So you end up saying some lib-ass shit like, “well I don’t support the USA but isn’t ensuring that Iran doesn’t have nukes a net good? That’s why I support bombing them.” In the end this doesn’t make the world safer from the nuclear threat. Instead, it makes us less safe because it ensures that countries understand that acquiring nukes is the only way they can ensure their sovereignty because not even the citizens of the western aggressors will oppose aggression.

          • LaughingLion [any, any]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            It did. And they went on to support the bombing of Iranian nuclear sites, which puts us in greater danger of a nuclear war scenario.

            What I want is something that stops people from supporting western aggression against developing nations who have nukes or could develop nukes. This not only does not accomplish that but actively does the opposite.

              • LaughingLion [any, any]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                18 hours ago

                no, they werent. they voted for a guy who has been virulently anti-iran and has bombed iranian officials and has alluded to bombing iran and surrounded himself with people who are open about the desire to bomb iran. whatever they say about it their actions are absolutely and unmistakably “bomb-iran”. they were 100% for it. and all of that is around the fear mongering over iranian nuclear weapons and preventing iranian procurement of them, something videos like this fuel

  • segfault11 [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    5 days ago

    any country that has used nukes on another country should be permanently banned from having nukes even if it was like 80 years ago, it’s just fair

    • Honestly, every country should be permanently banned from having nuclear weapons. The horror that even one, let alone the tens of thousands in existence today, can inflict is so unimaginable that I don’t think any country can be trusted with them. Especially with how fallible humans and humanmade systems are— the likelihood of a purely accidental apocalypse is larger than is healthy to think about. I know it’s an idealist position as nuclear powerhouses will never disarm and the US would probably do a second Manhattan project if there was no fear of nuclear reprisal.

          • GalaxyBrain [they/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            5 days ago

            It was a rhetorical question, but yeah. Nukes exist and while there is literally any global tension whatsoever nuclear disarmament is an absolute fantasy. Until then the world is safer the more countries developed nukes cause America’s allies have em or may as well. Deterrence works, evidence is that the Cold War is over and Noeth Korea remains un-invaded. But speaking of Korea, McArthur really really wanted to nuke them and the option wasnt even on the table for Vietnam cause America could get nuked back.

            I don’t like em, they’re devastating beyond imagination, but without actual world peace, nuclear disarmament is a fairy tale. And as the masterpiece film Miami Connextion says: "Only through the elimination of violence can we achieve world peace "

              • GalaxyBrain [they/them]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                5 days ago

                Highest tier of good bad movie. A group of Tae Kwon Do practicing orphans live in a house together and are also in a band called Dragon Sound which has full entire songs in the movie that are genuinely really good new wave tunes despite the subject matter being whatever theyre up to in the movie at that point. They need to contend wirh a coke dealing biker gang led by the brother of one of the members who’s dating another which the biker leader is mad about to a weird level, rival band managers and the ninja gang that ckntrils the drug supply. Everyone in Florida knows martial arts but not acting and its amazing. I have the soundtrack on vinyl and its in rotation, the songs are fucking sick.

                https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLmSLfsef1eCex_BcFoTWLF3gPrDhfsSIr

  • miz [any, any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    when it’s a youtube link, it often helps scrollers to know the channel name or creator:

    Nukes are way scarier than you think | Channel Name

    or something like that, otherwise it means opening in a private window to check

      • miz [any, any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        it would be kinda cool if hexbear itself could display the channel name alongside the post… but I guess we need to get thumbnails working before higher aspirations like that

        • Horse {they/them}@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          edit-2
          5 days ago

          huh, i didn’t know hexbear didn’t do that, we get this:

          on grad
          so you can hover over the channel image to see what channel it is

          • TauZero@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            5 days ago

            Btw, if someone wants to check the channel name to decide whether to open it in a private window, and you don’t have embeds blocked in some way, by the time you see the screenshot it’s already too late and Google knows you were interested in it.

          • miz [any, any]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            5 days ago

            image isn’t loading for me, and I can’t seem to upload images right now myself

            I think something’s broken

  • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    Incredibly high quality 3d animations this dude has and not a single credit for any animator or collaborator like you would expect with other channels. I am very suspicious that others are not credited because they would clearly be working in government or have searchable work histories that verify the accusations that he’s working for feds.

    [I am wrong and it was at the end of the video]

  • ea6927d8@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    5 days ago

    *US having nukes all over the world*

    We don’t know why China is increasing its nuclear weapons capabilities so quickly.

  • gay_king_prince_charles [she/her, he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    Something this video doesn’t mention is that most people who join the US military (and probably most other militaries, but I can’t speak to that) are either a bumbling moron, filled with bloodlust, or both. There’s a lot of worry about intentional nuclear war caused by the depraved faction of the military, but not accidental nuclear war caused by the dumb faction. The chance that missiles are launched as a result of radar system malfunctions, early warning software bugs, poor communication, or even clicking the wrong button (I’m serious, if the interface to launch weapons is anything like the interface to warn people about launches, we’re fucked) is higher than anyone would like to admit.

    The fate of humanity is in the hands of a 22 year old Israeli vibecoder, an unsecured bomb, a bomber engine failure, the moon (the US almost ended the world after thinking the moon was a mushroom cloud), a bad radio signal and a dumbass on a nuclear submarine.

    • darkcalling [comrade/them, she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      5 days ago

      (I’m serious, if the interface to launch weapons is anything like the interface to warn people about launches, we’re fucked)

      Good news. It’s not. It requires turning keys which are kept in a locker and a very deliberate sequence of events including correct codes being given. If you mean could a deranged US president or a General Ripper type maniac send in an order for this to happen because they’re a “moron” as you put it then sure but not in the way you might imagine of some scatter-brained chud coming into the launch control room drunk and typing a few things then falling asleep on a big red launch button.

      As to radar system malfunctions. Unfortunately for the world but fortunately for your scenario the US runs the most comprehensive radar net in the world, stations put thousands of miles beyond their borders in layer after layer of radar coverage defense in depth plus space assets constantly surveilling the world. To launch a nuclear counter-attack you can’t just say “ICBM headed for NYC according to radar in Canada” you have to establish WHO it came from to determine who to retaliate and fire against.

      Probably the one thing the US nuclear arsenal has going for it is it’s not modern networked, it runs on ancient systems and hopefully the zionist regime hackers therefore are unable to seize any control of it and cause false alarms as I’m certain they would if they could if their regime was falling.

      So I’m not that worried about accidental nuclear war with the US at least. Now intentional nuclear war with the US trying to get the jump on and destroy an enemy to preserve its hegemony for another century? Absolutely a huge worry and I’m sure they’d do it to Russia or China if they thought they could succeed with acceptable losses on their side.

      • To launch a nuclear counter-attack you can’t just say “ICBM headed for NYC according to radar in Canada” you have to establish WHO it came from to determine who to retaliate and fire against.

        The risk is multiple failures at once. Multiple radars could fail in parallel and give the illusion of misses being launched from a specific target (for example an Icelandic and Canadian radar can fail in parallel and create the illusion of Russian missiles en route to NY). Any failure that severe would be a Swiss cheese failure.

        The risk of American systems being ancient is that legacy systems can fail due to old age, extending them has risk, and they are likely victim to certain issues prevalent when they are created.

        The risk of “Zionist vibecoders” isn’t hackers but their own missiles and early warning radar. Intentional use of nuclear weapons is probably a larger threat from Israel. If their regime starts to fall, they will invoke the Samson Option and attack all nations in the AoR and potentially even their allies as a means to require support, although that is disputed.

        The US military makes plenty of mistakes that rise tensions to DEFCON 2 or 3, (and even DEFCON 1 once due to a faulty radio message). They’ve crashed countless nuclear armed strategic bombers, dropped bombs by mistake, and lost bombs. When tensions are higher, it takes less to launch, and people make more mistakes.

        This is also just talking about US mistakes. Dead Hand could easily have a malfunction, if France loses a bomb around the time of a terrorist attack they’d likely launch at their enemy of the week, Pakistan or India could each have a radar failure and they run at higher alertness than the US, or the DPRK could make a mistake.

        Reported close calls in the US happen relatively frequently, and a period of fewer close calls or a country without any doesn’t mean they they didn’t happen— only that the incident is classified.

        I don’t think that intentional nuclear war would start with the US in the next few decades because a full scale attack would only be a net gain if there was a credible risk of the end of the US, which there isn’t as it stands. The largest intentional danger is Israel because there exists a possibility that the country is invaded or dissolved within the next decade, and their doctrine holds a full scale launch preferable to the end of the Zionist project (see the Samson Option). There’s also a huge risk with India and Pakistan due to how many flare ups there are in Kashmir, although hot conflict also increases risk for accidental launches.

  • Bronstein_Tardigrade@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    5 days ago

    As an elementary school kid in the early 60s, we hid under our desks during drills as protection from a nuclear war. How bad can nuclear weapons be, if a wooden desk is all you need to survive? 😜