10 ms·

So let's see we've allowed all the arms control treaties to lapse, every single major power is investing more in armaments including nuclear delivery systems.

So let's see we've allowed all the arms control treaties to lapse, every single major power is investing more in armaments including nuclear delivery systems. There is a huge active conflict in Ukraine, right in Europe, the Middle East and many other places like Africa. Many more conflicts are brewing like in Latin America, China, India/Pakistan etc. There should be alarm bells going off. People aren't aware of just how massive and devastating this threat is. In the 1980s there were huge protests about jucelar weapons that actually resulted in detente and a relaxation of tensions. Right now tensions and conflicts are rising. Many people think the threat of nuclear weapons went away after the cold war. They never did. Where are the peace movements? There has to be popular pressure to institute arms control, make peace and ultimately dismantle these nuclear weapons.

mschuster91 1y ago
> Where are the peace movements? A lot of the "peace movements" of the past were financially and ideologically supported by the USSR and Russia [1]. There's nothing bad per se to say against pacifism, to the contrary - but the public image of pacifist movements these days has been heavily tarnished by both the obvious Russia-apologetism regarding the Ukraine war [2] and outright glorification of the horrors done by Hamas on Oct 7th. [1] https://www.swr.de/swrkultur/wissen/wie-russische-einflussnehmer-die-deutsche-friedensbewegung-unterwanderten-102.html https://www.swr.de/swrkultur/wissen/wie-russische-einflussne... [2] https://www.br.de/nachrichten/bayern/zuviel-verstaendnis-fuer-putin-friedensbewegung-in-der-krise,UxEk6No https://www.br.de/nachrichten/bayern/zuviel-verstaendnis-fue...
- tclancy 1y ago
  This is some fine astroturfing. They don’t exist anymore because they were commie-funded and also they exist and are cheering for Hamas to kill Israelis. Yes, peace movements are famous for that.
  - mschuster91 1y ago
    > They don’t exist anymore because they were commie-funded I don't claim they don't exist any more, I claim they lost political relevance. > and also they exist and are cheering for Hamas to kill Israelis AI and HRW have a serious anti-Israel bias [1]. [1] https://www.cfr.org/blog/why-amnesty-international-suspended-its-israel-branch https://www.cfr.org/blog/why-amnesty-international-suspended...
    - litenboll 1y ago
      That article has no real arguments for the bias. And if you are trying to make a point, at least to to cite a somewhat neutral source, Elliott Abrams is very pro-Israel. You could also argue that for such as small country Israel has managed disproportionate amounts of suffering and should be treated thereafter. I'm so sick of people taking the Israeli side as if they are some innocent nation being harassed by Hamas. They are ruthlessly killing Palestinians and the world is mostly acting as if this is a proper response to a single incident killing just a fraction of people. What Hamas did on the 7th of October 2023 was terrible, what Israel has done since then is way way way way worse, not even comparable. And going back in history it looks the same. AI and HRW is taking a stance against these terrible crimes, while the rest of the world is cheering on.
      - mschuster91 1y ago
        > What Hamas did on the 7th of October 2023 was terrible, what Israel has done since then is way way way way worse, not even comparable. Legally, Israel would have had the right to wipe Palestine off the map as a response to this factual declaration of war until Hamas declares surrender.
        litenboll 1y ago
        According to what law exactly?
    - cholantesh 1y ago
      As per the very unbiased CIA influence launderers at the CFR.
- coldtea 1y ago
  So, 80 years of occupation, displacement, and killings didn't tarnish them, nor 2 years of bombing civillians enclosed in a walled off plot of land, with 100,000 dead and genocide - but a single day attack where most people just died from friendly fire under a "allow no hostages" doctrine did?
hnthrowaway0328 1y ago
I think people are aware but we are powerless.
- JohnFen 1y ago
  We are not powerless. History (even very recent history) makes this point abundantly clear. "A common way people give up their power is by thinking they don't have any." -- Alice Walker
- bediger4000 1y ago
  I agree. If 5-7 million person No Kings protests are ignorable blips, and the House of Representatives is only technically in session, what's left, legally?
  - thechao 1y ago
    Voting.
    - hnthrowaway0328 1y ago
      You can't vote away the people behind the curtains and the kingmakers. Quoting Sir Humphrey Applyby: "British democracy recognises that you need a system to protect the important things of life, and keep them out of the hands of the barbarians. Things like the Opera, Radio Three, the countryside, the law, the universities ... both of them." You only vote for which lunatic to run the asylum. And I agree that there are differences among the lunatics, but what about the people who run the asylum?
    - nineplay 1y ago
      If you are talking about voting in the US than you haven't been following all the efforts to manipulate voting in the US. Turns out the party in power has all they tools they need to make sure that the people who don't like them can't vote.
    - bediger4000 1y ago
      We get to vote for president once every 4 years, and that single election has the Electoral College mediating it. The EC can be and is gamed.
stopbulying 1y ago
The Obama administration negotiated a number of arms control agreements with various nations (including Russia), and won a Peace prize before they even had anything signed. Other nations are subject to the penalties of the NTBT. I hope that we all hope that fusion research will displace hazardous waste in energy production. Peace movements are sponsored by lots of people in lots of nations. Nixon, for example, worked to smear the pro-Peace antiwar folks as drug user hippies who couldn't figure out free booze at presidential parties who thus deserved to be incarcerated (without conjugal visits, rights over their bodies and their health, library books, or the right to vote) and marginalized. People voted to cancel saboteurially-wasteful Reagan-Bush cold war star wars bs and invested in free trade and Peace. The US is the only NATO member state that claims immunity for War Crimes before the ICC International Criminal Court. The US just bullied other NATO nations into committing to spending 5% of GDP on defense spending by ~~2030~~ 2035 IIRC. Defense ETFs are up since this administration took office in January, and AI datacenter and AI spending are up, but we are now otherwise lacking in economic growth and we've stopped creating new jobs. All nations suffer the opportunity costs of war; things we could have paid for instead like healthcare, infrastructure, and education will be underfunded due to zero-sum allocation of the proceeds in the coffer to fights that don't net Peaceful returns.
- FooBarBizBazz 1y ago
  [flagged]
- cafard 1y ago
  Obama got a Nobel Peace Prize for not being George W. Bush. (I wasn't GW Bush, either, but somehow they overlooked me.)
  - cosmicgadget 1y ago
    Were you elected president?
  - stopbulying 11mo ago
    Actually many US Presidents have been recognized by the Nobel Peace Committee which honors the contributions of Alfred Nobel. List of heads of state and government Nobel nominees https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_heads_of_state_and_government_Nobel_nominees https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_heads_of_state_and_gov... List of individuals nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize (2000–present) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_individuals_nominated_for_the_Nobel_Peace_Prize_(2000%E2%80%93present) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_individuals_nominated_... For example, W Bush and Blair were nominated for Nobel Peace Prizes in 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005 (while occupying Iraq and Afghanistan with ___ % civilian casualty rates (and while they were not paying the bill for the multi-trillion dollar debt-financed discretionary wars with Tax Cuts))
graemep 1y ago
I think there are several things happening here. 1. People feel "we won the cold war, so the threat of nuclear war is past". I do not think they are entirely wrong (the risk is still much lower) but its complacent to ignore it. I think it is worsened by people clinging to "end of history" theory. 2. Campaigning against nuclear weapons was far easier when the west was winning the cold war and dominated the world economy. 3. People who are worried about existential threats as now focused on climate change. People seem to be able to worry about only one big threat at a time. There are a number of others (space weather is another, pandemics were until we got a rude awakening) that get ignored.
- card_zero 1y ago
  They also look for a new big threat when necessary, to ensure they never run out of threats. I read of "the problem of overpopulation, the gravest of all social problems of our time," in a book written in 1977.
wakawaka28 1y ago
It is amazing that people only now start talking about this. You'd think that fighting Russia "indirectly" and launching drones and missiles at Moscow would have caused concern up to 3 years ago.
- cosmicgadget 1y ago
  There was a missile strike on Moscow?
  - wakawaka28 1y ago
    Idk if any landed, but there have definitely been attempts to fire missiles into Russia. Many drone attacks on Moscow have succeeded. My search tools are not cooperating with me but Russian officials have made public statements saying they know we must operate the toys we're giving Ukraine, so we are at war with them essentially. Ukraine has also destroyed some Russian nuclear bombers and early warning radars. What do you think the Russians think of that? Nevermind who you think is more responsible for starting this war... Isn't it a bad thing for it to continue down this road? HIMARS, Patriot, ATACMS, Tomahawk, Storm Shadow, Taurus, F-16's and other jets... Is there any end to it?
    - cosmicgadget 1y ago
      > attempts to fire missiles into Russia I was asking about Moscow. > Russian officials have made public statements saying they know we must operate the toys we're giving Ukraine Ah yes, in line with their leader's propaganda that Ukraine has no culture of its own and should embrace conquest. I forgot about all the American soldiers and pilots that have been captured by Russia while operating F-16s and Javelins and Patriots. > Ukraine has also destroyed some Russian nuclear bombers and early warning radars. What do you think the Russians think of that? Probably whatever state television tells them to think. > Isn't it a bad thing for it to continue down this road? Clearly Putin doesn't think so or he'd withdraw. Let's just copy his homework and keep it going.
      - 1y ago
incomingpain 1y ago
>Where are the peace movements? There has to be popular pressure to institute arms control, make peace and ultimately dismantle these nuclear weapons. The current peace movement likes nuclear bombs. Which is odd, the old peace movement didnt, but it has been extremely effective difference. But this distinction has essentially made nobody acknowledge them as a peace movement. Which is crazy, we finally have a peace movement that's successful and they dont get credit.
- cindyllm 1y ago
  [dead]
- 1gn15 1y ago
  I'm confused. Which peace movement are you talking about?
pogue 1y ago
The peace movements of the 60s/70s/80s grew up "in the shadow of the mushroom cloud" [1] not only aware of their legacy from WW2, but it was constantly drilled into them that there might be a nuclear attack against them at any second of any day. That threat hasn't existed since 1991. That same generation was also very cognizant of nuclear disaster, as both the Three Mile Island & Chernoybl disasters had just happened. So, they weren't only well aware of what the steaks were, it was figuratively drilled into them from childhood. I'm sure most people now don't even consider a realistic concern, but just more posturing by two authoratative world leaders. In Putin's case, I'd be mostly inclined to agree with that position, considering he's in a stalemate in Ukraine and has basically reached his "wunderwaffe" stage of the war, where he has essentially nothing left to use to fight an entrenched war with and the only way he sees his position to get anything out with through any sort of diplomacy is via fear. Presumably, he knows it's not a tactic that could ever work. Perhaps it's more for his domestic audience than anything else. [1] Hammer to Fall by Queen https://genius.com/Queen-hammer-to-fall-lyrics https://genius.com/Queen-hammer-to-fall-lyrics [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wunderwaffe?wprov=sfla1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wunderwaffe?wprov=sfla1
ivape 1y ago
The language that came out around the middle of the Ukraine war was the possibility of a "targeted low-yield tactical nuke". It was almost being talked about as if that's better and fine to do. Orwell lives on, misuse of language is such a thing toward all kinds of bad. Nuclear testing just means it's game-on. Every other country will need to do testing to match the show of force. This is insanity. None of the doom-sayers were hyperbolic, voting in an idiot is truly dangerous. Former Apprentice Star Donald Trump wins the US Presidency and re-enables nuclear testing What the fuck is going on?
TiredOfLife 1y ago
Ukraine war is a direct result of your peace movements. Like disarming Ukraine https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_79035.htm?selectedLocale=en https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_79035.htm?selectedLo...
DANmode 1y ago
Has an armed society not been a polite society? Genuine question.
NedF 1y ago
[dead]
sbuttgereit 1y ago
> In the 1980s there were huge protests about jucelar weapons that actually resulted in detente and a relaxation of tensions. Really? Yes there were protests, in the west (that sort of thing was generally frowned upon in the Eastern Bloc countries), but they didn't do much. What I recall happening was that one of the principle parties started to suffer from a worsening economy and could sustainably maintain the spending the cold war demanded. When that party became much more conciliatory, progress on arms control resulted. Didn't end up saving them in the end.

mschuster91 1y ago

> Where are the peace movements? A lot of the "peace movements" of the past were financially and ideologically supported by the USSR and Russia [1]. There's nothing bad per se to say against pacifism, to the contrary - but the public image of pacifist movements these days has been heavily tarnished by both the obvious Russia-apologetism regarding the Ukraine war [2] and outright glorification of the horrors done by Hamas on Oct 7th. [1] https://www.swr.de/swrkultur/wissen/wie-russische-einflussnehmer-die-deutsche-friedensbewegung-unterwanderten-102.html https://www.swr.de/swrkultur/wissen/wie-russische-einflussne... [2] https://www.br.de/nachrichten/bayern/zuviel-verstaendnis-fuer-putin-friedensbewegung-in-der-krise,UxEk6No https://www.br.de/nachrichten/bayern/zuviel-verstaendnis-fue...

tclancy 1y ago
This is some fine astroturfing. They don’t exist anymore because they were commie-funded and also they exist and are cheering for Hamas to kill Israelis. Yes, peace movements are famous for that.
- mschuster91 1y ago
  > They don’t exist anymore because they were commie-funded I don't claim they don't exist any more, I claim they lost political relevance. > and also they exist and are cheering for Hamas to kill Israelis AI and HRW have a serious anti-Israel bias [1]. [1] https://www.cfr.org/blog/why-amnesty-international-suspended-its-israel-branch https://www.cfr.org/blog/why-amnesty-international-suspended...
  - litenboll 1y ago
    That article has no real arguments for the bias. And if you are trying to make a point, at least to to cite a somewhat neutral source, Elliott Abrams is very pro-Israel. You could also argue that for such as small country Israel has managed disproportionate amounts of suffering and should be treated thereafter. I'm so sick of people taking the Israeli side as if they are some innocent nation being harassed by Hamas. They are ruthlessly killing Palestinians and the world is mostly acting as if this is a proper response to a single incident killing just a fraction of people. What Hamas did on the 7th of October 2023 was terrible, what Israel has done since then is way way way way worse, not even comparable. And going back in history it looks the same. AI and HRW is taking a stance against these terrible crimes, while the rest of the world is cheering on.
    - mschuster91 1y ago
      > What Hamas did on the 7th of October 2023 was terrible, what Israel has done since then is way way way way worse, not even comparable. Legally, Israel would have had the right to wipe Palestine off the map as a response to this factual declaration of war until Hamas declares surrender.
      - litenboll 1y ago
        According to what law exactly?
  - cholantesh 1y ago
    As per the very unbiased CIA influence launderers at the CFR.
coldtea 1y ago
So, 80 years of occupation, displacement, and killings didn't tarnish them, nor 2 years of bombing civillians enclosed in a walled off plot of land, with 100,000 dead and genocide - but a single day attack where most people just died from friendly fire under a "allow no hostages" doctrine did?

hnthrowaway0328 1y ago

I think people are aware but we are powerless.

JohnFen 1y ago
We are not powerless. History (even very recent history) makes this point abundantly clear. "A common way people give up their power is by thinking they don't have any." -- Alice Walker
bediger4000 1y ago
I agree. If 5-7 million person No Kings protests are ignorable blips, and the House of Representatives is only technically in session, what's left, legally?
- thechao 1y ago
  Voting.
  - hnthrowaway0328 1y ago
    You can't vote away the people behind the curtains and the kingmakers. Quoting Sir Humphrey Applyby: "British democracy recognises that you need a system to protect the important things of life, and keep them out of the hands of the barbarians. Things like the Opera, Radio Three, the countryside, the law, the universities ... both of them." You only vote for which lunatic to run the asylum. And I agree that there are differences among the lunatics, but what about the people who run the asylum?
  - nineplay 1y ago
    If you are talking about voting in the US than you haven't been following all the efforts to manipulate voting in the US. Turns out the party in power has all they tools they need to make sure that the people who don't like them can't vote.
  - bediger4000 1y ago
    We get to vote for president once every 4 years, and that single election has the Electoral College mediating it. The EC can be and is gamed.

stopbulying 1y ago

The Obama administration negotiated a number of arms control agreements with various nations (including Russia), and won a Peace prize before they even had anything signed. Other nations are subject to the penalties of the NTBT. I hope that we all hope that fusion research will displace hazardous waste in energy production. Peace movements are sponsored by lots of people in lots of nations. Nixon, for example, worked to smear the pro-Peace antiwar folks as drug user hippies who couldn't figure out free booze at presidential parties who thus deserved to be incarcerated (without conjugal visits, rights over their bodies and their health, library books, or the right to vote) and marginalized. People voted to cancel saboteurially-wasteful Reagan-Bush cold war star wars bs and invested in free trade and Peace. The US is the only NATO member state that claims immunity for War Crimes before the ICC International Criminal Court. The US just bullied other NATO nations into committing to spending 5% of GDP on defense spending by ~~2030~~ 2035 IIRC. Defense ETFs are up since this administration took office in January, and AI datacenter and AI spending are up, but we are now otherwise lacking in economic growth and we've stopped creating new jobs. All nations suffer the opportunity costs of war; things we could have paid for instead like healthcare, infrastructure, and education will be underfunded due to zero-sum allocation of the proceeds in the coffer to fights that don't net Peaceful returns.

FooBarBizBazz 1y ago
[flagged]
cafard 1y ago
Obama got a Nobel Peace Prize for not being George W. Bush. (I wasn't GW Bush, either, but somehow they overlooked me.)
- cosmicgadget 1y ago
  Were you elected president?
- stopbulying 11mo ago
  Actually many US Presidents have been recognized by the Nobel Peace Committee which honors the contributions of Alfred Nobel. List of heads of state and government Nobel nominees https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_heads_of_state_and_government_Nobel_nominees https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_heads_of_state_and_gov... List of individuals nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize (2000–present) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_individuals_nominated_for_the_Nobel_Peace_Prize_(2000%E2%80%93present) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_individuals_nominated_... For example, W Bush and Blair were nominated for Nobel Peace Prizes in 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005 (while occupying Iraq and Afghanistan with ___ % civilian casualty rates (and while they were not paying the bill for the multi-trillion dollar debt-financed discretionary wars with Tax Cuts))

graemep 1y ago

I think there are several things happening here. 1. People feel "we won the cold war, so the threat of nuclear war is past". I do not think they are entirely wrong (the risk is still much lower) but its complacent to ignore it. I think it is worsened by people clinging to "end of history" theory. 2. Campaigning against nuclear weapons was far easier when the west was winning the cold war and dominated the world economy. 3. People who are worried about existential threats as now focused on climate change. People seem to be able to worry about only one big threat at a time. There are a number of others (space weather is another, pandemics were until we got a rude awakening) that get ignored.

card_zero 1y ago
They also look for a new big threat when necessary, to ensure they never run out of threats. I read of "the problem of overpopulation, the gravest of all social problems of our time," in a book written in 1977.

wakawaka28 1y ago

It is amazing that people only now start talking about this. You'd think that fighting Russia "indirectly" and launching drones and missiles at Moscow would have caused concern up to 3 years ago.

cosmicgadget 1y ago
There was a missile strike on Moscow?
- wakawaka28 1y ago
  Idk if any landed, but there have definitely been attempts to fire missiles into Russia. Many drone attacks on Moscow have succeeded. My search tools are not cooperating with me but Russian officials have made public statements saying they know we must operate the toys we're giving Ukraine, so we are at war with them essentially. Ukraine has also destroyed some Russian nuclear bombers and early warning radars. What do you think the Russians think of that? Nevermind who you think is more responsible for starting this war... Isn't it a bad thing for it to continue down this road? HIMARS, Patriot, ATACMS, Tomahawk, Storm Shadow, Taurus, F-16's and other jets... Is there any end to it?
  - cosmicgadget 1y ago
    > attempts to fire missiles into Russia I was asking about Moscow. > Russian officials have made public statements saying they know we must operate the toys we're giving Ukraine Ah yes, in line with their leader's propaganda that Ukraine has no culture of its own and should embrace conquest. I forgot about all the American soldiers and pilots that have been captured by Russia while operating F-16s and Javelins and Patriots. > Ukraine has also destroyed some Russian nuclear bombers and early warning radars. What do you think the Russians think of that? Probably whatever state television tells them to think. > Isn't it a bad thing for it to continue down this road? Clearly Putin doesn't think so or he'd withdraw. Let's just copy his homework and keep it going.
    - 1y ago

incomingpain 1y ago

>Where are the peace movements? There has to be popular pressure to institute arms control, make peace and ultimately dismantle these nuclear weapons. The current peace movement likes nuclear bombs. Which is odd, the old peace movement didnt, but it has been extremely effective difference. But this distinction has essentially made nobody acknowledge them as a peace movement. Which is crazy, we finally have a peace movement that's successful and they dont get credit.

cindyllm 1y ago
[dead]
1gn15 1y ago
I'm confused. Which peace movement are you talking about?

pogue 1y ago

The peace movements of the 60s/70s/80s grew up "in the shadow of the mushroom cloud" [1] not only aware of their legacy from WW2, but it was constantly drilled into them that there might be a nuclear attack against them at any second of any day. That threat hasn't existed since 1991. That same generation was also very cognizant of nuclear disaster, as both the Three Mile Island & Chernoybl disasters had just happened. So, they weren't only well aware of what the steaks were, it was figuratively drilled into them from childhood. I'm sure most people now don't even consider a realistic concern, but just more posturing by two authoratative world leaders. In Putin's case, I'd be mostly inclined to agree with that position, considering he's in a stalemate in Ukraine and has basically reached his "wunderwaffe" stage of the war, where he has essentially nothing left to use to fight an entrenched war with and the only way he sees his position to get anything out with through any sort of diplomacy is via fear. Presumably, he knows it's not a tactic that could ever work. Perhaps it's more for his domestic audience than anything else. [1] Hammer to Fall by Queen https://genius.com/Queen-hammer-to-fall-lyrics https://genius.com/Queen-hammer-to-fall-lyrics [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wunderwaffe?wprov=sfla1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wunderwaffe?wprov=sfla1

ivape 1y ago

The language that came out around the middle of the Ukraine war was the possibility of a "targeted low-yield tactical nuke". It was almost being talked about as if that's better and fine to do. Orwell lives on, misuse of language is such a thing toward all kinds of bad. Nuclear testing just means it's game-on. Every other country will need to do testing to match the show of force. This is insanity. None of the doom-sayers were hyperbolic, voting in an idiot is truly dangerous. Former Apprentice Star Donald Trump wins the US Presidency and re-enables nuclear testing What the fuck is going on?

TiredOfLife 1y ago

Ukraine war is a direct result of your peace movements. Like disarming Ukraine https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_79035.htm?selectedLocale=en https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_79035.htm?selectedLo...

DANmode 1y ago

Has an armed society not been a polite society? Genuine question.

NedF 1y ago

[dead]

sbuttgereit 1y ago

> In the 1980s there were huge protests about jucelar weapons that actually resulted in detente and a relaxation of tensions. Really? Yes there were protests, in the west (that sort of thing was generally frowned upon in the Eastern Bloc countries), but they didn't do much. What I recall happening was that one of the principle parties started to suffer from a worsening economy and could sustainably maintain the spending the cold war demanded. When that party became much more conciliatory, progress on arms control resulted. Didn't end up saving them in the end.