The report did forget to mention that the minister was suspended for his first statement in November...
I really don't want to defend anyone here but I think it is important to stay as close to the facts as possible
this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2024
147 points (96.2% liked)
World News
32288 readers
610 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
I agree that the article should mention such things.
However from what I read he seems to have only been "reprimanded" or suspended from meetings for it, not actually suspended as a minister.
So does that make him not a minister (an ex-minister?).
If he was suspended and not sacked, then I think he is still minister, but I am no expert on Israeli politics.
AFAIK they have a war cabinet, and this minister's far-right party ('Jewish Power') isn't part of it.
Apparently this story is from november last year, a month after the attacks, and he claimed it was hyperbole after most people in Israel derided him as a lunatic:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amihai_Eliyahu#2023_nuclear_weapons_comments_controversy
Obviously, fascists like to say outrageous stuff to disconcert people, but who knows with these lunatics.
According to your link, he is still a minister.
Yeah, but they have a war cabinet, and have suspended all non-war or emergency legislation. So as far as I can tell he's a lame duck or in some kind of limbo.
so israel confirmed nuclear state?
It's the Schrödinger nukes.
Didn't we already know that?
Not officially.
Biden's support is so unconditional that this still doesn't confirm anything. He would just give them one if they asked.
Too late .... several advocates have already pointed out that Israel have dropped enough munitions in Gaza now to be beyond the level of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima
And risk having nuclear fallout spread in Israel? Are they mad?
Also this would be the first time since Hiroshima and Nagasaki that any nation used a nuclear weapon against another nation.
If they do that, fuck it, I'm siding with everybody else who believes Israel needs to disappear and the land be given back to Palestinians. They would lose the legitimacy of the existence of their nation in my eyes.
If they nuke Gaza they'll lose legitimacy in your eyes?
Prefer your genocides to be more drawn out?
Wouldn't that make it harder to move new people in afterwards?
I mean, Israel is literally right next to it, it would almost certainly make parts of their own country unlivable. Nothing they do seems to be based on logic or morality in any way though, so it's not that surprising.
Depends, modern electronic triggers and airburst munitions can yield smaller nuclear detonations without the fallout of traditional "slap two chunks of uranium together" style nukes.
Not sure exactly how much room a tactical nuclear device would need but it's possible to do it without taking out the entire place, yes.
The question is that if they drop atomic bomb the radiation from some radioactive isotopes has a really long half-life, and not sure if you can create a bomb only with isotopes who have short half-life. I am definitely not an expert and now I am curious if someone managed to achieve that.
For perspective, and don't tell me that dropping nuclear bombs over civilians was the necessary evil to do during WWII. Because if it was, how would you explain this:
The atomic bomb that detonated over Hiroshima used Uranium-235, while the Nagasaki bomb had Plutonium-239. The half-life of U-235 is 700 million years, while that of Pu-239 is 24,000 years. In other words, once on the ground, they will be there for a very long time.
These atomic weapons are not used anymore. We use thermonuclear fusion weapons which do not irradiate the area as much: Fusion, unlike fission, is relatively "clean"—it releases energy but no harmful radioactive products or large amounts of nuclear fallout. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermonuclear_weapon#:~:text=Fusion%2C%20unlike%20fission%2C%20is%20relatively,of%20fission%20products%20and%20fallout.
Edit: I am a bit wrong, a fusion bomb by itself is relatively clean, but these damn bastards make them with extra fissile material for extra boom. Making it still quite radioactive when exploding
To start a fusion reaction you need the energy of a fission bomb. (At least for bombs and stuff)
Well, he chases the largest of two evils.
Indeed.