Lemmy get this straight. The Trump admin was fine with satellite data being shared for all these years and then they commit a warcrime where the data is used to verify it indeed was a warcrime and now they want satellite data banned.
HMMMMMMMMMM
And? Who gives a fuck. I would expect China and Russia to help Iran. Why wouldn't they?
I do give a fuck. I'm glad they do because the only way I see for long term stability in that region, which affects my and my family's life in multiple ways, is for the US to lose the war as badly as possible.
I think were pretty screwed either way. If they ramp down, Iran sees them as an existential threat and ramps up nuke capability, but now with less sanctions and more money. Iran with nukes makes Israel more twitchy as they see it as an existential threat.
If USA ramps up, we're in for a long protracted war and instability.
So we're screwed either way.
I think middle east would be much much safer with iran having nukes
Lol, no. The world is safer with less nukes. Allowing Israel to get nukes was a failure of the international community.
Allowing Ukraine to face repurcussions for giving up their nukes was another failure.
No. Look at DPRK
Iran must have nukes for stability and safety of the region
The world is safer with less nukes.
The world is safer with no nukes and infinitely unsafe with infinite nukes. It's appealing to extrapolate from this that less nukes -> more safety, but that's an unjustified leap of logic. For example take the case of one nuclear state vs two nuclear states. If there's only one it can force its will on other states, but if there are two they can keep each other in check and drastically reduce the possibility of nukes actually flying.
Yes, I agree with your logic. However, Iran is a fundamentalist regime. They appear rational next to trump. That doesn’t make them rational. Otherwise there would have been an end to sanctions years ago. And an end to murdering dissidents and protestors.
I hate to defend Iran, but the Iranian regime is in fact very rational. This is easily apparent when you strip away the religious aspect and look at what they actually do. In all direct confrontations with Israel or the US (at least during Khamenei's rule, I'm not so sure about Khomeini), Iran has responded with measured actions aimed at de-escalation while saving face domestically and internationally and discouraging further aggression. Your image of Iran seems to be built on Western propaganda more than reality (again, I am not saying this to defend the Iranian regime).
Otherwise there would have been an end to sanctions years ago.
Uh... the sanctions are for daring to control their resources contrary to Western capitalist interests. Iran could be the most secular, most democratic country in the world and Western countries would still find a reason to sanction it. Besides, remember JCPOA? It was the US (and by extension the West) that reneged on that deal. Hell, remember the reason the Islamic Republic exists in the first place? Iran, quite rationally, wants to be an independent regional power not subordinate to anybody's interests (and, again quite rationally, especially not Western interests). This directly contradicts the Western (especially US) demand that all Middle Eastern states be subordinate to their interests and pro-Israel. There can be no reconciliation between these positions (yet Iran tried anyway, see: JCPOA), so securing its position by force is the only realistic prospect, and frankly you can't argue with results.
And an end to murdering dissidents and protestors.
Here you seem to be conflating rationality with morality. The Iranian regime is evil as fuck, but it's rationally evil. Murdering challengers to one's power is very rational from the perspective of a regime primarily concerned with its own survival. See also: the CCP.
You're looking at only the last few weeks. Historicallu, not so much. They have rejected monitoring. Rejected negotiating. Rejected reasonable terms that led to sanctions at multiple points.
Silencing dissent is logical but not creating martyrs in a culture that idolises them.
Clamping down on women for wearing what they choose with violence is not logical. It's consistent with their ideology, which is my point. The ideology supersedes logic.
In the case of ideology overriding logic, that could lead to use against Israel. Or even the suggestion could cause Israel to strike first as happened this time.
Their support of multiple factions in multiple neighbouring countries targeting than working constructively is also illogical and inflammatory
I think Israel, without unlimited weapons backing of the US (a condition I think would occur if the US loses badly) would stop casual strikes against Iran. They would know they risk a barrage of missiles that they don't have the interceptors for. And if Iran gets the nuke, then MAD would be in effect. Israel seeing Iran as an existential threat now, not in the future would sit tight and perhaps even open a dialogue. The problem today is they consider Iran a threat in the future. And mind you they don't consider them a threat so much to Israel today than to their plans for expansion in Lebanon, West Bank, Syria and so on.
I think it's that they realize peak oil is over. The middle east is a geopolitical strategic position for energy, as the world is now finding out via Iran closing the SoH.
Israel realised that that is on the wane. Along with the next generations attitude towards their relationshipnwith Israel. Israel is going hard in now as they have a larger support from the USA. I fully expect that to naturally wind down due to internal US political change and global moves away from carbon fuel.
Sure, oil shocks would still bite, but nowhere near to the same level. It's why the other oil production states are desperately trying to pivot to other industries. Iran has screwed that by making them unsafe. America doesn't realize that by not protecting their allies there, in the same way they protect Israel, that they will lose them. Edit:typos
Short term stability for sure, but I don't think Russia has been able to provide any more long term stability to anyone better than the US can. China maybe, but we haven't really seen this version of China show their true colors to a nation they don't consider part of their original borders.
Oh I'm considering this from the perspective of the regional reason for instability which for a while now has been Israel. For long-term stability, Israel should face mutually-assured-destruction from Iran without the promise of unlimited weapons and interceptors from US. Israel should also face existential threat from Iran if they expand in to neighbouring countries, like they're currently doing in Lebanon. If the US-Israel military command causes significant economic pain in the US, I think the US public opinion would force the US to break from Israel, which should usher the conditions I'm envisioning - of Israel facing Iran and the region alone, and perhaps even without unlimited US weapons. Def not the only possibility, but the one I think would make things a lot less explosive over the long haul.
E: I think China might push Iran to settle with the US in order to halt the economic destruction that would affect them too, possibly in exchange for greater economic China-Iran cooperation despite US sanctions.
The USA already doesn't have a win condition, but the only way for longterm stability would be something like Iran getting EU membership which isn't on the table. The solution with the least harm would be for the USA and other NATO allies to help the Iranians overthrow the despots and cut ties with China. The worst possible outcome is like 40% of Iranians die, Israel claims land, and the IRGC stays in power, which is pretty close to your idea of the best outcome.
The solution with the least harm would be for the USA and other NATO allies to help the Iranians overthrow the despots and cut ties with China.
Disagree. A democratic Iran with 90 million population, and presumably no sanctions, is a growth powerhouse that produces loads of things, among which loads of weapons. For Israel's security apparatus, that's a country one "bad" election away from launching a lot more weapons at them. That's something which Israel will not let stand. Which is also why they are so obviously not going for regime change but instead for inducing a failed state that's ungovernable, can't organize production, won't have sanctions lifted, would perpetually have insurgency that can be bombed at will, or in technical terms mow the lawn.
There's no outcome other than diminished US or Israeli power, or both, that would produce stability in the region given Israel's ambitions and US interests in the region.
As for the Iranian people, their only hope for better life can come from internal struggle against their gov't over time that would be made a whole lot easier if their economic situation is made better through lifting of sanctions, or if sanctions remain - through massively increased trade with China. (Cause the more resources people have, the more they have left to organize as change does not come through magic and spontaneous revolutions are a fantasy.) If the EU is smart, they would drop their sanctions against Iran. Which is actually plausible if more shit keeps hitting the fan and their oil supply does not resume, which could force them to break ranks with the US on this.
help the Iranians overthrow the despots
The time to do that was before bombing hundreds of Iranian children. And civilian infrastructure. Way too late now.
Are you expecting me to defend the Trump Admin? It's never too late so long as the IRGC holds power, but yes he's made it a lot harder for us to accomplish positive change.
No I'm just saying you might as well give up on that dream - the regime will have more support than ever, now.
Your problem here is that you think that "we" can accomplish any positive change. Only Iranians can do that. What "we" want to do is further our imperial domination of the globe.
For the moderate wing of the imperial powers (i.e. your "we"), that means toppling the state and replacing it with a pliant comprador regime which will privatize resources and reduce labour protections and the social safety net, enabling greater profits to flow back into the imperial core and to western companies. As a side benefit and for PR, this would also entail some opening up in terms of social liberties, which would be the "positive change" you're talking about, but it's both entirely optional and only at the expense of looting Iran.
For the extreme wing of the imperial powers, which is to say Israel, the goal is to completely destroy the Iranian nation and turn it into a fragmented, forcibly deindustrialized basket case that has no ability to threaten the goal of Greater Israel.
In short, while you probably don't realize it, you're articulating a position which is still ultimately hostile and detrimental to the Iranian people and to the middle east as a whole - just not as much as the faction that's aiming for the destruction of Iran. A neoliberal comprador regime in Iran would be friendly with Israel, so the Greater Israel project would remain unopposed except by scattered resistance groups which could be dealt with piecemeal, and the overthrow of the Iranian state would therefore usher in genocide and forced displacement across the region.
Thus, the only moral and rational position is full support for the Iranian state, in spite of its flaws.
The solution with the least harm would be for the USA and other NATO allies to help the Iranians overthrow the despots and cut ties with China.
Only if you don't take into account harm for Iranians in your idea of "harm." What you're describing is basically what happened in Libya.
Wait until ABC finds out where all of Iran's guns and munitions are made.
I don't know how much they have left of what Ronald Reagan sold them, oops, sorry Oliver North
Horrors. China is doing something the USA thinks only they are allowed to do.
US is learning the hard way what "soft power" means, and what it means to lose it.
They’re close to the “learning” part but, if the news is any indicator, they’re still a ways off.
Something about horses and water.
Tbf the US never had that much power, soft or otherwise, over China. The US is (very fortunately) hemorrhaging soft power, but even if they weren't China would be jumping at this opportunity.
I don't think it's so much about US having soft power over China. I agree they have always been highly resistant to it. The important bit is that Chinas soft power is growing faster than probably any nation's has since post WW2 US while US hemorrhages what little they have left in the coffers.
I don't present this as a good thing uniformly, because China is certainly capable of becoming fascist in a single generation too. I think this sort of power in general is problematic.
The ABC has been briefed on the intelligence by a source inside US defence, who says the images are endangering lives.
I see. The images are endangering lives. Not the moronic decision to start a war, no no.
"Only we can kill!"
"Endangering lives"? Iran striking US bases will almost certainly lead to fewer lives lost.
For people who don't know, china doesn't have satellite imagery with the same spatial resolution as the private companies like planet labs (the one recently prohibited to publish imagery from the war region) do , but they have been investing a lot into super-resolution technology to compensate. This is much more interesting than it can look at a first glance.
Super-resolution as using generative models to "enhance" subresolution images with enough of the right training data?
Oh, that kind of super-resolution has been gaining media attention, but there's much more beyond the "ai". There are several mathematical methods, based on inverting a point-spread-function, statistical methods, super-resolution based on extracting subpixel information from a sequence of low resolution images, and several other methods and approaches, including the use of machine learning, but not in the generative way. It's a very diverse and complex field of research
super-resolution based on extracting subpixel information from a sequence of low resolution images
So basically DLSS for spy satellites. Kinda neat.
No, not exactly. More like how astrophotographers will stack images to compensate for imaging defects. After all, the Hubble was a variant of an NSA spy satellite.
Well thats too bad.
Everyone had a nice easter? I hope you guys have monday off as well. I'm eating some crisps and watching DankPods
Breaking news: Iran's allies help them against an invading force.
"You're fighting back against our aggression? Hey, no fair!"
e: typo
common China W
Oh no! Anyway...
A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
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.
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 OCTOBER 19 2025
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.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/