408
this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2024
408 points (92.1% liked)
World News
39011 readers
3114 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I always wonder when people post this: how exactly would this go down?
Say when Iran sends troops/ships/whatever to support Hezbollah and get into a fight with the US, which other parties with significant military power would side with them? Russia is tied up and probably incapable, North Korea would be unlikely to want to commit suicide by using their nukes over this, ...
Perhaps Erdogan would be the most realistic one but I don't think their military would be very eager to follow those orders
When Iran joins the war in full capacity, the US needs to give them full attention. That leaves Taiwan open for grabs. Which they also need full attention for. Then there's still Ukraine and Russia making plays. I imagine if Russia ever wins in Ukraine, and there are wars happening in the Middle East, Taiwan, elsewhere, then they might make a play on the Baltics for instance. So US now has 3 fronts to deal with against multiple nuclear powers. And that is of course as long as the US stays the course and doesn't end up isolating from the rest of the world.
World wars happened because of a series of alliances pulling multiple countries into a large, singular war. Israel provoking multiple of their neighbors by attacking them and commiting genocide can absolutely draw the world into a war.
Even if your crazy scenario would play out (Europe giving up the Baltics? The US fighting a conventional war against China?), how would you put that on Israel for responding to Hezbollah's attacks? Iran tying up the US who you seem to see as 'World Police' and not those other countries just itching to attack their neighbours?
If you think 2024 exists in a vacuum and that Israel has no part in the "tensions" in the region, then there isn't much to talk about.
Sure. On the other hand: if your bottom line position is that Israel should dissapear and 'everything goes' until that happens, a) there are a lot of other countries where that case can be made and b) I don't think everyone killing everyone would be the thing that prevents WW3
Turkey is a NATO member, they might talk a good game, but they aren't going to act against US interests. The blowback would be catastrophic for Erdogan and Turkey.
Israeli expansion draws a bigger fish into the conflict. Perhaps they start attacking Syria or Iran more directly. Perhaps they start bombing into Saudi Arabia or Jordan. Perhaps we see another collapse of the Egyptian military dictatorship due to unrest, and the replacement government isn't nearly as Israel-friendly as the current regime.
Then the US has to intercede. But as the US intercedes in the Middle East, it draws in more countries - fighting breaks out in Iraq to expel what remains of the US military presence, fighting breaks out between Greece and Turkey again as US naval assets are withdrawn from the region, Russia capitalizes on US arms assets slowing down in Ukraine and makes a big push into Kiev. The US has military bases all over the world, so you don't have to travel far in order to pull off a USS Cole style bombing.
You can see this spiral into a global conflict easily enough. We're already seeing low-key upheavels all through the central African states, the disputed territory of Kashmir, and the Chinese/Japanese contested ocean territories. When the Primary Imperial Power is engaged in too many fronts at once, that creates a lot of room for the various minor powers to reassert themselves.
Idk why you're getting downvoted, the risk of regional escalation is very well understood even in the US state department.
Israel has already fought multiple wars with its neighbors, and the US never interceded (if by that you mean "sent US troops"). In fact, the whole purpose of arming Israel is partly so their soldiers do the fighting instead of Americans. I think the US expects Israel to handle Iran as it did Egypt, Jordan, Syria etc.
The US doesn't really care about Central Africa or Kashmir, it has no strategic interests in those regions. So any wars fought there (and again, there have already been a few) will be mostly ignored by the US.
The US cares a lot about China, so this is the only place it might send its own US forces. But those will mostly be US Navy, since it doesn't need to occupy new territory. And the Navy isn't really needed elsewhere.
The US has been sending military aid, military advisors, and military assets into the region around Israel for over 80 years. The US has stationed two different carrier groups to support the Israeli invasion of Gaza.
Right, which is why I specified "send US troops". That's not going to happen, so they remain available for a potential conflict with China.
The US sent two carrier groups in October. Both have already returned home.
Who do you think is manning those carrier groups?
They're on rotation. The USS Lincoln is set to replace the Roosevelt, which was replacing the Eisenhower.
Saudi Arabia is an enemy of Iran in the region, and Jordan even helped Israel intercept Iranian missiles. Why would Israel ever attack its allies in that conflict?
And Israel has been expanding into the West Bank since like '67. What changed that that would suddenly 'draw in bigger fish' now?
China's been brokering peace negotiations with them for some time as part of its Belt & Road Initiative.
And Israel repaid the aid by bombing a Jordanian hospital in Gaza. Its a very one-sided relationship, heavily predicated on Jordanian security services being in bed with the IDF.
Not since the '48 Nakba has Israel been this aggressive with its expansion. This is in no small part thanks to the flood of Ukrainian and Russian refugees serving as fodder for settlements.
So what you're claiming is they first tricked Jordan in helping them intercept those Iranian missiles, and then went back in time a couple of months to spray some bullets towards that hospital without Future-Jordan being aware? That just sounds too incredible for me. Even if they have that technology there are a million better uses for it
Yeah you might want to look at the expansion after the '67 war first before you proclaim a couple of settlements are the most dramatic thing since '48, going to trigger WW3
No
Probably China over estimating itself in Taiwan and hoping the US is too bogged down in Israel/Ukraine.