Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mossad assassinated Iran’s chief nuke scientist with remote AI gun – report

jpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 180 posts

Re: Mossad assassinated Iran’s chief nuke scientist with remote AI gun – report

#151

Post by joelbluminator »

_etyf wrote: post #78
howmayiannoyyou wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An anti-Semitic, inaccurate trope. Israel had no horse in the Afghanistan fiasco, no interest in seeing Iran consume Iraq's power elite (status quo now), no love for Assad's continued reign in Syria, and zero interest in US interventions in Kosovo, Panama, Grenada, Vietnam or Korea. By contrast, Israeli lives sacrificed in Lebanon & Syria & on behalf of Jordan have spared the US any need to intervene significantly (i…

The influence of the Israel lobby on the 2003 Iraq invasion is not an anti-Semitic trope, it is recorded and acknowledged history. The final decision to invade lay with George W. Bush, and the Israel lobby was far from the only factor in his decision, but their influence was significant and cannot be denied. From the London Review of Books on John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt's "The Israel Lobby": >Pressure from Isra…

You're quoting Mearsheimer as if it's established truth; he is controversial to say the least and is clearly one sided regarding Israel/Palestine.

"Former Director of the CIA James Woolsey also wrote a strongly negative review, remarking that "... Reading [Walt and Mearsheimer's] version of events is like entering a completely different world." Woolsey contends the authors "are stunningly deceptive", and feature a "commitment to distorting the historical record is the one consistent feature of this book", proceeding with a few examples.[53]"

"Benny Morris, a professor of Middle East history at Ben-Gurion University, prefaced a very detailed analysis with the remark: "Like many pro-Arab propagandists at work today, Mearsheimer and Walt often cite my own books, sometimes quoting directly from them, in apparent corroboration of their arguments. Yet their work is a travesty of the history that I have studied and written for the past two decades. Their work is riddled with shoddiness and defiled by mendacity"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Israel_Lobby_and_U.S._Fore...

Re: Mossad assassinated Iran’s chief nuke scientist with remote AI gun – report

#152

Post by sofixa »

joelbluminator wrote: post #151
_etyf wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The influence of the Israel lobby on the 2003 Iraq invasion is not an anti-Semitic trope, it is recorded and acknowledged history. The final decision to invade lay with George W. Bush, and the Israel lobby was far from the only factor in his decision, but their influence was significant and cannot be denied. From the London Review of Books on John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt's "The Israel Lobby": >Pressure from Isra…

You're quoting Mearsheimer as if it's established truth; he is controversial to say the least and is clearly one sided regarding Israel/Palestine. "Former Director of the CIA James Woolsey also wrote a strongly negative review, remarking that "... Reading [Walt and Mearsheimer's] version of events is like entering a completely different world." Woolsey contends the authors "are stunningly deceptive", and feature a "c…

Do you have non-biased ( former director of the CIA? The same guys that lied about WMDs in Iraq? Sure, they're reliable; and a professor of Middle East history in an Israeli university) sources disputing those claims? I haven't read the book in question, just asking.

Re: Mossad assassinated Iran’s chief nuke scientist with remote AI gun – report

#153

Post by sofixa »

deterministic wrote: post #136

Assassinating leaders individually seems to be a much more human solution to resolving conflicts compared with drone killing/bombing civilians or starting wars. Imagine if somebody had assassinated Hitler long before the 2nd World War had started.

Funnily enough, some German officers were planning on doing just that after the Munich conference in 1938 because they thought he was pushing Germany into a doomed war ( the Oster plot), but UK and France's appeasement resulted in a sin for Hitler and explosion in popularity, so the plot never happened.

However, you're failing for the great man fallacy. Hitler dying in 1938/1939 wouldn't have changed that much due to well established power of the Nazis by then, and the presence of men with power such as Hess, Himmler and Göring to take control.

Long before that, and who knows . Maybe the NSDAP would have grown as popular even without him; maybe Strasser would have won; maybe Rohm would have launched his revolution and taken personal control.

Re: Mossad assassinated Iran’s chief nuke scientist with remote AI gun – report

#154

Post by joelbluminator »

sofixa wrote: post #152
joelbluminator wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're quoting Mearsheimer as if it's established truth; he is controversial to say the least and is clearly one sided regarding Israel/Palestine. "Former Director of the CIA James Woolsey also wrote a strongly negative review, remarking that "... Reading [Walt and Mearsheimer's] version of events is like entering a completely different world." Woolsey contends the authors "are stunningly deceptive", and feature a "c…

Do you have non-biased ( former director of the CIA? The same guys that lied about WMDs in Iraq? Sure, they're reliable; and a professor of Middle East history in an Israeli university) sources disputing those claims? I haven't read the book in question, just asking.

There's a hole bunch of criticisms in the link I shared from all kinds of people, feel free to read it if it interests you.

Re: Mossad assassinated Iran’s chief nuke scientist with remote AI gun – report

#155

Post by hulitu »

koheripbal wrote: post #34
_fnhr wrote: post #9

So this is a public bragging about illegally putting a gun in a foreign country and assassinating a person, all the while being comfortably sure that no national or international pushback will come. Quite disturbing to read.

There is no world court or legal structure. The word "illegal" has no meaning in international affairs.

Then why are people extradited ? Why is Assange in jail ?

Re: Mossad assassinated Iran’s chief nuke scientist with remote AI gun – report

#156

Post by praptak »

mydeskistoosm wrote: post #105
praptak wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's exactly what Gatling thought of machine guns. They were supposed to automate the military jobs which was supposed to limit casualties and also make humanity reconsider going to war.

Can you direct me somewhere to learn more about Gatling's ethos?

I only have this quote from Gatling himself: "It occurred to me that if I could invent a machine - a gun - which could by its rapidity of fire, enable one man to do as much battle duty as a hundred, that it would, to a large extent supersede the necessity of large armies, and consequently, exposure to battle and disease [would] be greatly diminished."

Re: Mossad assassinated Iran’s chief nuke scientist with remote AI gun – report

#157

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

kingofpandora wrote: post #138
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody lied about the strike, it takes time to confirm you've fucked up, investigate, write a report, brief a general, etc.

Do you believe they would have come clean if the media hadn't challenged their narrative first?

Yes

Re: Mossad assassinated Iran’s chief nuke scientist with remote AI gun – report

#158

Post by throw0101a »

sofixa wrote: post #153
deterministic wrote: post #136

Assassinating leaders individually seems to be a much more human solution to resolving conflicts compared with drone killing/bombing civilians or starting wars. Imagine if somebody had assassinated Hitler long before the 2nd World War had started.

Funnily enough, some German officers were planning on doing just that after the Munich conference in 1938 because they thought he was pushing Germany into a doomed war ( the Oster plot), but UK and France's appeasement resulted in a sin for Hitler and explosion in popularity, so the plot never happened. However, you're failing for the great man fallacy. Hitler dying in 1938/1939 wouldn't have changed that much due to…

> Hitler dying in 1938/1939 wouldn't have changed that much due to well established power of the Nazis by then, and the presence of men with power such as Hess, Himmler and Göring to take control.

Even before then, there are sentiments in the general population that allowed the Nazis to gain power in the first place. And while they were particularly genocidal, it's not like any of the other options were "good" in the absolute sense, only perhaps "less bad" in a relative sense (in hindsight).

No one was particular enamoured of the structure of the Weimar Republic, with the (far) left wanting to go to a Communist/Soviet structure, and the (far) right returning to the authoritarian structure which Bismarck created. AIUI, as the 1920s went on, there were fewer and fewer middle ground parties.

The "stabbed-in-the-back" conspiracy theory had mostly established itself as a "fact", and the Treaty of Versailles with its reparation costs was causing a lot of pain. Of course the treaty was violated by the German military as it sent soldiers to train on tanks and planes to the Soviet Union:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kama_tank_school

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipetsk_fighter-pilot_school

Re: Mossad assassinated Iran’s chief nuke scientist with remote AI gun – report

#159

Post by refenestrator »

throwaway245234 wrote: post #141
refenestrator wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not fricking world war 2, no matter the technicalities.

If a country you're at war with and whose leadership has stated that they intend to annihilate you is on the verge of developing nuclear weapons, the stakes are arguably WW2-tier.

Conversely, American and Israeli politicians constantly talk about taking out Iran, making nukes a necessity for their self-defense.

In both cases it's mostly posturing, but killing scientists and saying we had to, it's self defense is especially disgusting to me.

Re: Mossad assassinated Iran’s chief nuke scientist with remote AI gun – report

#160

Post by Svoka »

yummypaint wrote: post #88
howmayiannoyyou wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is hard enough for the US and Russia to prevent accidental nuclear launch, detonation or loss. Many such incidents over the years. So, before you righteously wish nuclear capability on Iran, you might consider the non-linear increase in risks associated with each new entry into the nuclear club.

Yes, we need to collectively do everything we can to prevent a nuclear tragedy of the commons. That includes continued disarmarment of countries already armed. The more devices exist in the world, the higher the probability that some will fall into the hands of people who are not subject to the same incentive structures as secular governments (i.e. religious nuts) who would eagerly use them. One nuke being unexpected…

Why do people throw term "tragedy of commons" at every problem involving group? This issue has nothing to do with "tragedy of commons" which deals with exhaustible resources, not nuclear weaponry control.

Also, as I remember US bombed major cities using nuclear bombs, world didn't end.

Post reply on HN