381–390 of 565 posts
After this strike, the only AWS region in the ME that remains operational is the one in Tel Aviv (a bit ironic if you ask me). UAE has been down for months, Bahrain is now offline, Saudi Arabia is still under construction.
[flagged]
Safe reminder both Israel and Iran, and arguably Iran more so, commit “war crimes”.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What target could the Iranians hit you believe would provoke a nuclear response? Anything existential. (Tehran doesn’t currently have that capability.)
I don't know what you classify as existential. But unfortunately it is drop-dead easy to make a fission bomb and even easier to make (multiple) dirty bombs. Iran has the pieces to do these things many times over. Hell, by now they could have deployed dirty bombs abroad in multiple locations and we'd never know. The only reason the USA doesn't flatten Iran with nukes is that the USA fears Russia will view it as an "al…
That is not the only reason the United States doesn’t flatten Iran with nukes. It’s not even a consideration. How are you even arriving at such a conclusion?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you take that approach, Ukraine is still a special operation.
Russia has officially declared they are at war with Ukraine
https://www.npr.org/2022/03/05/1084729579/russian-law-bans-j...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What target could the Iranians hit you believe would provoke a nuclear response? Anything existential. (Tehran doesn’t currently have that capability.)
I don't know what you classify as existential. But unfortunately it is drop-dead easy to make a fission bomb and even easier to make (multiple) dirty bombs. Iran has the pieces to do these things many times over. Hell, by now they could have deployed dirty bombs abroad in multiple locations and we'd never know. The only reason the USA doesn't flatten Iran with nukes is that the USA fears Russia will view it as an "al…
Nuking Iran was never in the cards. We could have done that in 1979 and any time since. Ukraine has nothing to do with it. The red lines that would provoke a nuclear response from the US are pretty well known -- the US foreign policy establishment hashed out this stuff 75 years ago. Iran could get nuked by the US if it used NBC weapons against the US or our allies. No amount of bad behavior with conventional weapons is going to do it.
People in charge of nuclear armed countries are worried about the end of the so-called "nuclear taboo" which has kept countries from using nukes for 80 years, and they're not going to break it over a third rate power like Iran unless that third rate power actually acquires nukes and makes a credible threat to use them. We didn't use them in Korea or Vietnam. We didn't use them in Afghanistan. We haven't nuked North Korea. All more serious situations than the one in which we find ourselves today.
When somebody finally does break that taboo the world will be a much, much more dangerous place for everyone and planners in places like Washington, Moscow, and Beijing know it. Once a nuclear weapon is used, especially by a country with a large arsenal, every country that could have nukes but doesn't is going to have nukes.
Here's a good video on the topic concentrating on the possible Russian use of nukes in Ukraine:
Despite the destruction, me-south-1 still has more nines than us-east-1
1. Wow this is a headline. 2. It’s expected and war, and while war is not good, I wonder about data backups and succession planning for this. 3. It makes sense they would’ve had a fire drill and reviewed since it’s a capital investment, 6 months of war, at the same time Bahrain is considered stable, so I really wonder about the conversation around this and if there was any disaster planning with this scenario in mind…
The civilization in which you are a part of, this very mass that is greater than you and I, is evolving and changing. How can there not be new unique headlines?
Just talk to me, 10, 20 years ago, there was no true conversation around attacking datacnters.
Just think how much RAM and SSD's were lost. :(
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What would you expect to see if they were? ooc
I would expect them to not launch thousands of missiles at Israel... is that a trick question?
They seem to be correct because Israel has not nuked Iran in responses.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So why is the US bringing all the drama here then? Is it really just for a return to the pre-Trump status quo, only this time with the same deal not cosigned by Obama?
Yes, it's as simple as that, Trump just wants his name on the deal.
There's zero foundation for trust to uphold an international agreement even between US and its closest allies. Iran has no basis to believe any agreement will be legitimate or upheld.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Israelis are the only ones that can, and want, to strike back. Besides no one weeps for missiles falling on Israeli cities, so that doesn’t serve the Iranians at all. Lots of much softer targets for Iranian missiles which can’t do anything to Iran.
Forgive the uninformed question, but doesn't Saudi Arabia also have significant armed forces? Given that Iran has closed the Straights of Hormuz and attacked several other Arab states, and has conducted strikes in Saudia Arabia itself, wouldn't that give Saudia Arabia a solid reason to strike back?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> When the Einsatzgruppen were "cleansing" conquered territory they at least had the decency to do so as humanely as possible. What a grossly offensive and patently false thing to say[1]. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babi_Yar
[flagged]