"Give nuclear weapons to Ukraine. I'm saying that as a leftist." -Slavoj "The Jester of the Empire" Zizek

I refuse to believe the europeans are so stupid to go to war with Russia. By their own admission the armed forces of basically all of NATO countries are in such a bad state that it will take decades to recover. No european NATO country has the military industrial capacity to compete with Russia, let alone win. And what little they have in stock already has been transfered to Ukraine. Specially in the case of Germany and the UK. What are they going to do? Fight Russia with the old Soviet and Warsaw pact equipment, run out of it the first week and then buy sone more from Russia? Chauvinism is no replacement for armor and ammo. Why would they think they can fight? Just because the gringos are cheering on them?! I do believe Europe has an enormous debt to the global south, but not to the point of continetal suicide and global catastrophe.

I don't know what I hate more: Orwell or the cult around him.

Unlimited genocide on golfers

Will Russia have it in a few years?

Lmao, Avdeevka was a full on route, soldiers were abandonig their positions contrary to their orders. This could end in a few months, and at this rate could even be a few weeks (tho I doubt so but you never know)

Today on The Internet™ I saw someone critizicing China for the zero COVID policy because it "harms the working class" and then someone critizicing China for lifting the zero COVID policy because it "harms the working class." So, China bad I guess 🤷

This is really interesting, because I too always forget Apartheid SA had nukes. The question then is why didn't they use them? What forces or situations prevented that from happening?

Without going much into the history of said war, I think we can take Russia as a model for what to expect in regards of when can nukes be used, as russian nuclear doctrine is basically only use nukes if the state existence itself is threatened from outside. Nukes have always been a deterrent to prevent the existence of a given state from being threatened by another. During the fall of the USSR the nukes were not an option since the existential threat was from the inside. The question then is: was Apartheid SA existence as a state threatened by the defeat during the war or only its territorial conquest? The end of Apartheid came from both international and domestic pressures, no war to destroy the SA state needed, so the nukes were not an option. So, the russian model still stands: In Ukraine, the state is in an existential threat but they have no nukes and the russians have nothing to fear in regards of the position of the RF state, so no nukes needed.

When we get to West Asia is when things get complicated and dangerous. The question is: Is there an existential threat to the state of Israel? Could a regional war between Israel and the arab countries escalate to the point where the existence of the state of Israel is threatened? In the event of a regional war we won't be seeing a repeat of the 6-days war. The conditions have changed. The entire region may be dragged to the conflict and as many people have said in the arab-english speaking media: this may be the final battle against Israel. I've seen comparisons being made to Saladin or the Battle of Khaibar. Judging by this admittedly skewed vision, the arabs are seeing this conflict as existential to themselves and, even though no one really wants that, if they are forced to go to war they might be willing to go so far as to destroy Israel as a state once and for all. That is a war Israel cannot win, not with the current state of affairs, and that leads us to the nukes.

Since they officially deny they have nukes, we don't really know how many they can wield at any time. They can have just some tens of nuclear warheads, just enough to target strategic places without escalating further. Winning the war by nuclear means (or at least trying to, it may not even be a sure way to end it). Although the consequences of this would be another story. If they have nukes in the hundreds, they might be able to target places further out, like Pakistan, which could spark nuclear Armageddon, so it would all depend if they are willing to do so. This all boils down to if Israel has the need to use the deterrence card. I hope they don't, that cooler heads prevail and a war is avoided, but given the latest US movements (deploying troops and aircraft carrier battle groups to the Mediterranean), it seems the tensions are only going up.

So, to answer you questions:

Is there a way that Iran can aid Hamas without a risk of being nuked?

Clandestine ways I guess.

Is the only way to engage a nuclear-armed state guerilla war waged by internal dissidents?

Currently, most likely. Only internal pressures seem to me to be the most effective in this regard.

I honestly believe that regardless, we are looking at the opening salvos of the Third World War. I hope I'm (and I'm most likely are) wrong about all of this.

Well, he's a very smart man, so I'm pretty sure he knows a lot of stuff we don't lol. About the conflict in Palestine tho? Maybe this is just rhetoric

From what I've seen about the status of the war in Ukraine, the russians have been pushing in some important areas, so I wouldn't be surprised if what happens is a sudden collapse of the front lol

Don't get me wrong, but I don't really think that being a communist or not depends on identity. Wether or not a majority of the people in China identify themselves as a communist is somewhat irrelevant. In most places, specially in countries where communists hold power like China or Cuba, being a communist usually implies being a member of the communist party or some communist organization. That doesn't mean there is no people who identify as communists, just that it is usually not something being thought of as an identity category, and probably a lot of people would say "No, I'm not a communist. I'm not a member of the party".

It is NOT a minor event. Niger is the main source of uranium for France, the US has military bases from which they can project to the Sahel, like the other coup governments in the region it seems they are close to Russia, the threat of a military intervention by the ECOWAS in behalf of the west has the potential to drag most of west african states into a bloody war. You may not agree with the coup, you don't have to agree, but you should not dismiss it. It has the potential to provoke a major conflict in Africa in which Russia, France and the US may be involved just like in Syria or Ukraine.