• ☆ 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
      24
      ·
      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
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days 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
              ·
              1 day 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

                • LaughingLion [any, any]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  9 hours ago

                  this platform was absolutely under the auspices that bombing iran to prevent nuclear proliferation was part of it

                  they are two separate things and were always presented this way by the trump camp

                  HE ALREADY BOMBED IRANIANS IN HIS FIRST PRESIDENCY i cannot stress this enough and also said he would do so again this was no secret and his base absolutely knew he was going to do this fuck on my street they set off fireworks when he bombed iran all the little trump flaggers were out with bottle rockets and sparklers

                  • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    9 hours ago

                    Again, it’s very clear that his base wanted isolationism, and they’re now very upset at him for bombing Iran. I don’t know why you’re unable to acknowledge this basic fact of the situation.