this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2025
377 points (99.5% liked)

World News

50042 readers
2607 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

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.

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 !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

In Japan and South Korea there is deepening concern over the reliability of long-time American security guarantees – whether the U.S. will come to their aid in the event of a war. This has been turbo-charged by Donald Trump’s tough treatment of traditional U.S. allies, which has some in Tokyo and Seoul calling for a reassessment of their non-nuclear policies.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] F_State@midwest.social 29 points 2 days ago (1 children)

As an American, I don't trust Trump to come to America's aid. I'd be sweeting bullets if I was Korea and Japan.

[–] hanrahan@slrpnk.net 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Well the US did promise to come to Ukraine's aid if they gave up their nukes...and here we are.

[–] F_State@midwest.social 5 points 2 days ago

If Trump had still been president in 2022, I highly doubt we would have come to Ukraine's aid in any substantial way.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 47 points 3 days ago (2 children)

You know who really needs the bomb? Canada needs the bomb. It has a hostile authoritarian military superpower on its border with 10x the population, hostile trade relations, and a stated intention by national leaders to invade and conquer core Canadian territories. Canada is in the exact situation where a nuclear deterrent is most justifiable. If nukes are ever justifiable, they're justifiable for small powers facing potential invasion by aggressive larger ones.

Canada needs the bomb.

[–] Smokeless7048@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

That's the difference between Obama's stance of "we won't use the bomb if you don't have it" and trump/Putin's "we won't take you seriously if you don't have the bomb"

One encourages disarmormebt. The other armorment

[–] F_State@midwest.social 3 points 2 days ago

The worst part of the Trump regime is knowing we're in the Fallout Timeline

[–] myfunnyaccountname@lemmy.zip 55 points 3 days ago (1 children)

After the UN ramble yesterday, no one should rely on Trump and the US for anything. Every country should be looking for alternatives to US guarantees.

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I didn't watch and haven't seen anything on it. Was it Normal 2025 Trump bad, or something extra special?

[–] finitebanjo@piefed.world 13 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Bla bla bla immigration is the root of all evil bla bla bla we should be shooting down Russian jets bla bla bla

Average mixed bag dementia patient enabled by unknown drug cocktail.

[–] BigDaddySlim@lemmy.world 12 points 3 days ago

Also him whining about the building because he didn't get the contract to renovate the place or some dumb shit. "Eeerg the escalator broke" bitch shut up they just became stairs move your bloated legs once in a while

[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago (2 children)

It's very incoherent. Either Donald has become the usual "old man yelling at the sky", or he's genuinely unhinged long time ago. People say Donald used to be more sane decades ago but it could've been an act back then. Anyway, sorry for making comparison with Hitler again but Hitler also did the same on his book Mein Kampf; a lot of it is just rambling.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Watch the videos. There are interviews in the 80s or 90s where there is a clear train of thought and a logical progression to his statements. His phone interview after 9/11 is less coherent, but not too bad from a grammatical and logical standpoint. These days, he can't string together 2 or 3 complete sentences about a single topic. Note that none of this is related to the truth or accuracy of his statements.

[–] Mirshe@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

If you watch something like the Charlie Kirk service, sometimes he can't even string a complete sentence together without losing his train of thought, or at least forgetting the words he wants to use. He sounds like my granddad before he died - he'll talk coherently for a minute or two, but if he has to talk for more than 2 or 3 minutes at a stretch, he starts falling apart and can't string words or concepts together.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] grte@lemmy.ca 86 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Hey Canada...We should be thinking about this, also.

[–] BurgerBaron@piefed.social 20 points 3 days ago

I've been saying that since 2008 as a teen but man was that an unpopular opinion. We're a very naive country imo.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 7 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (3 children)

I wish but.. Do you think they won't invade us at the whiff of nuclear armament?

[–] grte@lemmy.ca 35 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I don't trust them not to invade us without that protection, anyways.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 8 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Agreed. I just think that would make it certain.

If we could get nukes secretly I'd be all up for it.

[–] grte@lemmy.ca 11 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

If Japan and South Korea go through with this perhaps we could purchase some from them (or elsewhere, UK, France, hell, even China) to cover us while we work on a domestic program.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 13 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Buy a loaded submarine on the hush-hush and sail it to Vancouver? I like it.

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 22 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Building nukes is like unionizing; ideally you don't go public until you already have your nukes/union

[–] Typhoon@lemmy.ca 8 points 3 days ago

Gonna be tough to hide when all our computer systems run on Microsoft, Google, or Amazon platforms.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Do what isreal did and lie about it while building one

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 10 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I don't think we could realistically hide it from their agents but yeah, totally. That'll probably be the way if our gov't decides to do it.

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

I want to joke "oh, like Iran!" but I don't want to make razad explode

[–] frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone 31 points 3 days ago (11 children)

I can't blame them for wanting to do it. Same with a whole lot of other countries right now.

I'd also like to point out that this will necessitate a new round of nuclear weapons tests. We're giving up on a hard won success:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-background_steel#Present_day

World anthropogenic background radiation, caused by atmospheric nuclear testing, peaked at a level 0.11 mSv/yr (4%) above the natural 2.40 mSv/yr. It began to fall in 1963, when the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty was enacted, and by 2008 it had decreased to only 0.005 mSv/yr above natural levels. This has made special low-background steel no longer necessary for most radiation-sensitive uses, as new steel now has a low enough radioactive signature.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] wetbeardhairs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 42 points 3 days ago (7 children)

This is going to result in some really confused Akira spinoffs

[–] redsand@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 3 days ago

Oh God(zilla)

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] rezad@lemmy.world 27 points 3 days ago (3 children)

it seems that only my country (iran) having nukes is bad.

[–] BurgerBaron@piefed.social 22 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Wrong Abrahamic DLC is all it takes.

[–] rezad@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago (3 children)

jewish isis already has, so....

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] a4ng3l@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago (13 children)

Apples & oranges honestly. Best would be no one resorts to that strategy. 2nd best is extreme regimes - especially vindicative and religious ones - don’t have such weapons.

[–] frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 3 days ago (8 children)

Honestly, I trust Iran to behave like a rational actor a whole lot more than I trust Trump. Yes, they're run by religious nutjobs, but they have been proven to show some restraint on international policy.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)
[–] F_State@midwest.social 3 points 2 days ago

I think Israel having Nukes is worse than Iran having Nukes but really any country having nukes is "bad"

[–] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 14 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Japan having nukes is gonna be PR nightmare given their imperialistic history lol.

As for South Korea and ROC/Taiwan, sure thing. UK ot France should sell them some nuclear armed submarines lol.

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago (1 children)

what if they launch them out of gundams? that seems like it wouldn't be quite so much of a PR nightmare

[–] Mirshe@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

No no, the nuclear-armed Gundam doesn't come until after the war with Zeon.

okay how about a naval cruiser that can also turn into a space ship

[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 6 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I mean, not really. Barely anyone is alive who remembers these things viscerally, and people don't pay attention to history at all, if they even know the broad strokes

[–] F_State@midwest.social 4 points 2 days ago

There's still alot of animosity from South Korea towards Japan. The threat from China and American unreliability has driven them together politically but the animosity still remains on an individual level.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mlg@lemmy.world 9 points 3 days ago

Japan actually has the technology and know-how to rapidly spin up a nuclear weapons program because they were already doing it before signing up on their non-nuclear policies with the US.

The real question is which country is going to be the first to actually jump ship. I'm fairly certain like 95% of the UN is just going to wait out Trump's term and hope the next president will undo all his insane plans, because no one wants to lose longstanding ties with the US, even as the rug pull of 70+ years of American influence going under gets closer to reality.

[–] BakerBagel@midwest.social 16 points 3 days ago (2 children)

My understanding is that Japan is de facto an nuclear armed state, they simply haven't made an warheads. They have the all the necessary technology and fuel enrichment, so they could quickly arm if they thought it would be necessary in the near future.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

Don't be silly, the US will be happy to sell weapons to South Korea and Japan. Also, they will sell to whoever attacks them!

load more comments
view more: next ›