CapricornNoble

No. There's a number of reasons for this. #1 is Israel's policy of "strategic ambiguity" and #2 is that it might be illegal to even mention it in Israel. Israel prosecuted a whistleblower nuclear scientist for leaking state secrets, for example.

> And who have they blackmailed with the nukes?

The US, for one:

"Similarly, in the 1973 Yom Kippur War, IDF was again outnumbered by the invading Arab armies. Then Israeli PM Golda Meir authorized a nuclear alert and ordered that nuclear warheads be readied for launch from missiles and aircraft. The Israeli ambassador to the US, Simcha Dinitz, met with Henry Kissinger to inform President Nixon of “Very serious conclusions” if the US did not airlift arms supplies to the IDF. Nixon complied with this demand due to the threat of the use of nuclear forces. This was the first successful use of the Samson option as a threat and tantamount to nuclear blackmail."

from: https://thesvi.org/deconstructing-israels-samson-option/

I also recommend: https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/wait-why-is-israel-allow...

The Samson Option enables Israel to blackmail the entire Middle East, and do so silently. Turkey or Egypt can't afford for Hezbollah to overrun Israel, because Ankara and Cairo might get nuked, even if they had nothing to do with contributing to Israel's existential crisis. It basically forces the whole neighborhood to keep each other in check out of sheer self-preservation. Credit given where credit due, it's a smart approach on Israel's part.

https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2026/02/10/how-iran-gained-the-ab...

If China didn't anticipate the US attacking Iran after Maduro was deposed and the resulting impacts on their oil supplies, then they are asleep at the wheel.

Israeli nukes are the main reason we haven't had regime change in Tel Aviv at the hands of a Turkish/Egyptian/Saudi/Iranian coalition. Israeli nukes are why Iran has had to settle into a pattern of slow, distant, annoyance via proxy forces (which lack a capability for existentially challenging the IDF).

Well, if the Chinese are smart, they will capitalize on this opportunity. They can prop up the Iranian regime with intelligence, weapons, and financial support the same way US & EU prop up Ukraine. The purpose would be to bleed US munitions stocks even faster than they already are, as well as increase attritional losses in platforms and personnel. China's stranglehold on rare earths and their export restrictions are making it more difficult for the US to restore its weapons stockpile. I'm sure China can crunch some numbers to identify the point of maximum weakness if the US is forced to sustain an anti-Iran air and naval campaign 30/60/90+ days. Then Xi can try to overlap that window of weakness with one of the two invasion windows against Taiwan (mostly due to weather in the Taiwan Strait). I don't think the PLA is dumb enough to try a full amphibious assault, but they could definitely initiate their blockade then.

So can we say that this collapse is a fallout from the easy money availability at the height of COVID? What was leadership thinking going on a such a buying spree though?

> If you thought all of that was bad, things got worse, as First Brands then sued its founder, Patrick James, alleging that he had pilfered at least $700 million from the company’s coffers.

......oh.

FT, Oct2025: The secretive First Brands founder, his $12bn debt and the future of private credit ( https://archive.is/jxn99 )

Guess I won't be putting a StopTech big brake kit on my Supra someday...

>> How's your gestapo crackdown going?

Same shit, different day when you are black. We're just looking at the white liberals who are now getting shot by The State's goons like "Oh, first time?"

I think your response is below the threshold of quality commentary for HN, but I didn't downvote it. It's better that it is as visible as possible, to serve as an artifact demonstrating the combined arrogance and ignorance that so often spews forth out of the mouths of Europeans.

https://aerospaceglobalnews.com/news/2025-fighter-jet-delive...

Re: rockets.....well we don't want to judge by tonnage lifted, where SpaceX dwarfs the entire planet's efforts. Still it appears Europe struggles to put even a handful of new rockets up, so I'm not sure why you are characterizing that as "plenty" either:

https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/03/20/1113582/europe-i...

> Europe is already great. It's why hundreds of thousands of Americans moved here in 2025.

HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS? Citation needed please. A migration of that scale would have journalists writing about it. Accurate data seems hard to come by but one expert puts TOTAL US expat numbers in Europe around 1.1 million.

https://aaro.org/living-abroad/how-many-americans-live-abroa...

> As for being a vassal: Trump was warned of the consequences of invading Greenland and he backed down immediately. Some vassal.

Yes sometimes vassals oppose their suzerain's most egregious overreaches of power successfully. King John of England's barons pressured him to create the Magna Carta. Afterwards...they were still his vassals, as they were before it.

Just ask Mark Rutte: https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2026/01/29/rutte-is-right...

A relevant opinion piece from a European: https://www.dailysabah.com/opinion/columns/nothing-more-than...

For certain niche subjects, Reddit comments have some good links (specific sub-reddits for a tech framework of interest, military subs with a more mature crowd like r/warcollege, etc...).

I guess I'm not at a point in my life where I'm doing a lot of discovery of "new" stuff, where I need constant exposure to new cutting edge tech or philosophical writers, or whatever, so HN mostly satisfies my needs.

I picked up a few shares, but I haven't checked if Palantir's growth has been unique or part of a general military-industrial complex melt-up.

Remember when we bombed Yemen and in the Signal chat they laughed about killing a High-Value Target while he was visiting his girlfriend? Sounds like this section would apply for her.

Bin Laden found in Afghanistan? Invade and occupy the whole country.

Bin Laden found in nuclear-armed Pakistan? Quietly sneak in with a handful of SOF operators to shoot him in the face then GTFO.

Putting her in charge just means that the country will get looted by the Western Parasite Capitalist class instead of the South American Socialist Mobster class.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMt1TDA848M

If they want it they can have it. Not that Russia makes enough babies to have the manpower necessary to achieve their megalomaniac dreams. Most Americans are quite isolationist; I rate Woodrow Wilson as the worst US President ever because he violated the Monroe Doctrine and dragged us into Europe's problems...which still costs us blood and treasure a century later. We have the advantage of geography: two gigantic oceans protect us East/West, a frozen forest wasteland to the North, and a stretch of desert to the South. Our homeland is unassailable by conventional means (especially if we keep our Navy well-funded) and we can also sit behind our nuclear arsenal.

>Asia would be divided with China, with countries like the Philippines and Australia left for China to invade and take over

This is a good indication someone isn't a serious thinker and is likely stuck in a WW2-ish mental framework when populations were much smaller and it was easier to "paint the map". Nobody in their right mind would genuinely attempt to invade the Philippines in the 21st century, with its population over 100 million and a history of violent insurgencies. The juice isn't worth the squeeze.

I'm familiar with the basics of Dugin's ideology but I haven't read his work yet. As I understand it, all the English translations are unofficial but I suppose they are better than waiting for a formal one.

>Arguments like this clearly show that you have been consuming Russian propaganda without pulling out a globe and a ruler to check whether there is any actual credibility to the prepackaged narratives.

I would challenge you to do the same. Not once in this discussion have you made any critical analysis of the US's actions, statements, or motivations. NOT. ONCE.

>The Romanian ABM sites lies on the direct flight path between Iran and large US military bases in Germany and makes perfect sence that the US would want to have ABM site there. The missiles at the Romanian site are unable to reach Russian missile launching sites, nor are they on their flight path.

So ABMs in Romania make perfect sense to you based on a forecast future threat of Iranian nukes (which they don't have) on Iranian missiles with ranges of 3,000km+ (which they didn't have at the time). This was a proactive, preventative measure for the US.

ABM sites in Romania could also, forecasting into the future, be home to hypersonic missiles which could engage Russian launch sites with little or no warning and completely destabilize their MAD capability. Very similar to when we stuck missiles on their doorstep in Turkey in the 1960s....ya know, that stupidly provocative decision that led to the Cuban Missile Crisis? That is a far bigger security concern for Russia than the destruction of bases in Germany is for the US. So applying your logic for justifying the US action, why shouldn't the Russians ALSO take proactive, preventative measures against that?

Here's a simple sanity check:

Does the US have legitimate national security concerns? Does Germany have legitimate national security concerns? Does Romania have legitimate national security concerns? Does Russia have legitimate national security concerns?

If your answer to the first three is "Yes" and your answer to the fourth is "No", you probably think everyone who disagrees with you is a Russian propagandist.

Trump in his first term warned Europe about sucking on the teet of Russian natgas, and those "traditional allies" laughed in his face. He told Europe to meet its NATO treaty obligations and increase military spending, and they dragged their feet.

Now Europe's industry is struggling under substantially-increased energy input costs, and has been caught flat-footed with its armories empty while trying to subsidize the largest land conflict on the continent since WW2. An economic and quasi-military bloc with 500+ million people is begging 350 million people on another continent to protect them from a mere 140 million drunk & corrupt Russians.

....and you don't understand why Trump, who has a fragile ego and is well-known for holding grudges, is antagonistic to the feckless idiot empty-suit bureaucrats who manage Europe? He's a thin-skinned bully and now he's gonna walk all over Europe to do whatever is most advantageous (in his perception) for the US....but it's only possible because European leadership is just as weak as he thinks it is.

Plus he's trying to dump The Ukraine Problem in their lap because the US doesn't really have the capacity to square off against China and manage...well, possibly ANY other additional conflict. If our actions to counter China don't make any sense or seem incongruent, that's because most of the administration is simply too incompetent to get the results needed, even if they understand the nature and scope of the problem.

Expecting Russia to ever become a "normal European state" is the main mistake. My entire point is to accept that Russia is authoritarian. Consider the examples of Turkey, Egypt, and Pakistan, especially Egypt: nobody preaches liberal democracy as the solution to getting Egypt to do what we want. Instead we came to an understanding with the military elite, who we've essentially bribed (via foreign aid and other ways) to keep a lid on their population and avoid direct conflict with Israel. Figure out what the KGB-military elite want, and give it to them in exchange for a shift in their security posture. The Soviet dinosaurs want to suck the Baltic states dry? Go for it....but we want them to step up their mobilization exercises in Siberia for the next decade. And we want them to start doing joint US-Russian nuclear submarine patrols in the East China Sea. Otherwise we can't be friends....and the last time we weren't friends, it didn't end well for Russia. More carrot, less stick...but still some stick.

If it gets us one step closer to Russia's nuclear arsenal (the largest in the world with the most capable ICBMs) possibly pointing at Chinese cities instead of the West, it's worth it. The price might include "fluffing the Russian national ego". Instead US think-tankers and statesmen have done their best to trample on it....with predictable results.

One of the best opportunities for improving US-Russian relations was 9/11 and especially the 2004 Beslan school attack: there was recognition of a mutual problem of "Islamic terrorism", and coordinating to fight it was a part of thawing the adversarial relationship between the security apparatuses of the two powers. Read the joint statement from Bush and Putin from 2002:

https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/joint-declaration-...

then read this piece by F William Engdahl from 2006, skip to the section on US nuclear primacy:

https://apjjf.org/f-william-engdahl/2256/article

then finally read Putin's speech from the 2007 Munich Security Conference (which is when the window for improving relations closed):

http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/24034

> For them, challenging the US and expanding Russia through coercion and war to the full territorial extent of the former Eastern Bloc is the endgame.

The former Eastern Bloc should have been Finlandized: economic intermediaries between Russia and Western Europe, with just enough domestic military capability to discourage Russian hard power, but no actual US military alliance integration to keep the Russians from getting jittery either.

> They don't give two shits about China.

Which is why after the Sino-Soviet split Russia and the Soviet Union before it always kept high-readiness divisions on the Chinese border. The Russians know that China isn't really their friend. Russia is a European country, they shouldn't be bosom buddies with the Far East.

> They want a return to the privileged heyday of the KGB-military elites in the 1970s

They were on that path, printing money selling natgas and oil to Europe.

> Antagonism toward the US lies at their very core, and no amount of buttering will change that. The possibility of cooperation is merely an illusion they sell you to blind you to the next move they make against you.

The Russians didn't unilaterally pull out of the ABM Treaty in 2002, the US did. Then we went and followed that up by announcing we wanted ABM sites on Russia's doorstep to protect Europe from "errant Iranian nuclear missiles" which was obvious bullshit.

https://www.realinstitutoelcano.org/en/analyses/americas-abm...

Look, I understand that everyone in Eastern Europe has a well-earned eternal hatred of the Russians since you are barely a generation removed from their oppression, but do you guys not notice all the ridiculous antagonistic shit we Americans do that is entirely optional?

Here's why I consider this whole issue important, and it has very little to do with self-determination in Ukraine:

China is the greatest adversary the US has ever faced. Greater than the Soviet Union, IMO. We will need help from every major nation on the planet if we really intend to remain the hegemonic superpower. We had a narrow window circa 1999-2007 where we could have integrated an Authoritarian Russia into a security and economic framework that would put China in a vulnerable strategic position. We failed because we went full-bore on the ideological "Liberal democracy uber alles!" agenda, which was doomed to fail in Russia and has now wasted the monumental accomplishment of the Sino-Soviet Split. The Eurasian landmass is now dominated by China-Russia-Iran, three powers with internal lines of communication. Read Zbigniew Brzezinski's The Grand Chessboard, and what we've done is exactly how to LOSE the game.

https://www.cia.gov/library/abbottabad-compound/36/36669B789... Potentially, the most dangerous scenario would be a grand coalition of China, Russia, and perhaps Iran, an "antihegemonic" coalition united not by ideology but by complementary grievances. It would be reminiscent in scale and scope of the challenge once posed by the Sino-Soviet bloc, though this time China would likely be the leader and Russia the follower. Averting this contingency, however remote it may be, will require a display of U.S. geostrategic skill on the western, eastern, and southern perimeters of Eurasia simultaneously.

Well golly-gee-willikers, I daresay we've thoroughly punted that into the stands.

Note that ZBig goes on to prescribe solutions that I heavily disagree with. But he was able to cogently articulate the problem.

https://www.rferl.org/a/1058543.html it specifically calls out amounts paid to organizations in Serbia, Georgia, and Ukraine via the National Endowment for Democracy, which is funded via Congress and the State Department.

>Besides, did you know that the Kuchma government sent Ukrainian soldiers to Afghanistan and Iraq

Yes, I know that. I bring it up anytime somebody says "Ukraine never invaded anybody!"

> Why would the US government want to overthrow a sympathetic regime?

To replace a sympathetic leader they DON'T control with an even more sympathetic leader they DO control. Wresting control of the political apparatus in a state often outlasts any singular "elected" Executive.

Do you think fomenting revolution in Russia's near-abroad sphere of influence was helpful or harmful for turning Russia into an ally?

I highly recommend reading the 1997 US Senate debate about NATO expansion. There were a number of experienced statesmen who vehemently disagreed that NATO expansion was in NATO's interest.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-105shrg46832/html/C...

> A world of where rule of law is the norm and invasions are deterred is preferable.

Except we don't have that world. From Iraq in 2003 to especially the NATO air campaign in Libya in 2011, we've long since demonstrated that there are no rules, and invasions have no consequences.

Here in the First Island Chain we've had Chinese drones buzzing our military installations since before COVID.

In Afghanistan, Yemen, or Somalia, the sound of drones buzzing overhead usually means an entire family is about to get murdered because ONE guy's pattern of behaviors pegged him as a "terrorist" in some computer system.

Europeans are just finally being shaken out of their false sense of security and don't know how to handle it.

I like KDE but I'm still running X11 on Void Linux, partly because I just don't feel like trying to switch over to Wayland and reconfigure my two systems.

The Raid 2; The Night Comes For Us; The Shadow Strays....those should get anyone started going down the rabbit hole.

German manufacturing is in decline because it relied on dirt-cheap Russian energy. It's not cost competitive otherwise.

https://www.energyconnects.com/news/gas-lng/2025/february/ge... Europe has spent three painful years weaning itself off gas from the east with the biggest impact felt in Germany, the region’s biggest economy. German industry was built on cheap Russian gas and rising energy prices have already trammeled growth and forced some manufacturers to move production abroad.

The fate of West Bank Palestinians clearly proves that to be an outright lie.

https://reliefweb.int/report/occupied-palestinian-territory/... Halfway through 2023 at least 156 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli action in the West Bank – more than in the whole of 2022 and the highest yearly total since the end of the second Intifada in 2004. At least 28 children are among those killed and thousands more civilians have been injured.