r/AlternateHistory • u/Titanicman2016 • May 13 '24
The Samson War (aka the insanity ending) - what if Netanyahu went off his rocker after the US withdraws support from Israel 2000s
275
u/CodAfter937 May 13 '24
Worst thing is that Sunak is still somehow in power
148
u/Titanicman2016 May 13 '24
I put that down because I’m not British and so didn’t realize that the election can happen at the latest the day before the Israeli attack, oops.
36
22
u/Grunti_Appleseed2 May 13 '24
Biden also may or may not be in office by January 28th, 2025
27
u/SalaryIntelligent479 May 13 '24
Trump starting the war is even less realistic
15
u/Grunti_Appleseed2 May 13 '24
Trump doesn't like Bibi very much, plus if he decided to strike Rome and Athens (????????) I don't think Trump would have much of an issue with flexing American exceptionalism in the region
→ More replies (2)5
u/mynameis4826 May 13 '24
If Trump were president during this, he might have the US support Israel unofficially. He's arguably the most Israel friendly president in the 21st century
→ More replies (5)2
20
May 13 '24
[removed] — view removed comment
8
u/KarlGustafArmfeldt Sealion Geographer! May 13 '24
Imagine the UK had a Dutch election scenario, and Reform UK suddenly became the largest party in parliament the day before the election. Then, the Conservatives and Labour formed a coalition, managing to just stay in power with Sunak as PM.
Is that more crazy than Israel nuking Europe?
145
u/Titanicman2016 May 13 '24
I must preface that I'm entirely aware this is unrealistic, I just made this as a thought experiment of the "worst possible ending" (aka the insanity ending) for the ongoing conflict.
But as for actual context, immediately before and after the 2024 US election, the US slowly begins to withdraw support from Israel in the face of mass pro-Palestine demonstrations. This eventually leads to a diplomatic breakdown, and the US finally supporting sanctions against Israel in the UN. Naturally, Netanyahu is furious at this, and viewing this as the beginning of the end for Israel, states that if the sanctions aren't withdrawn within a week, Israel will bring the rest of the world down with them. After no one takes them seriously, Israel executes the most insane variation of the so-called "Samson Option" (named after the Biblical story of Samson, who destroyed the pillars in a temple he was being held in, killing himself but also his captors), destroying the city of Rafah in Gaza, but also major religious centers and capitals of nations hostile to Israel in the past or present, or even those of NATO members, despite the obvious wrath this would bring down upon them. Of course, the wrath is brought upon them, the existing government is removed, Netanyahu and his allies are tried and executed, Palestine is formally established, and a perpetual NATO presence in Israel is established, both to ensure radical Zionists like Likud (now banned) never come back and to discourage other powers from attacking Israel themselves.
119
u/Mando177 May 13 '24 edited May 13 '24
You just nuked the centre of both the Muslim and Catholic faiths, Israel even existing anymore would be an instant no even from those not consumed by pure hate and bloodlust
55
u/Noietz May 13 '24
Yeah. I honestly cant see judaism as a whole surviving this scenario. A single nation that lost a war was enough to wipe half of their population, youre gathering up 70%+ of the two biggest world religions against them in this scenario. The amount of pogroms and persecution that would suceed is horrifying, and there wouldnt be an external force to intervene and stop it
41
u/SweetPanela May 13 '24
The worst part of it all is that it somewhat fits the doomsday prophecy of Islam and Christianity
Which would lead to the nut jobs leading into it
40
u/Mando177 May 13 '24
Not to mention Adolf Hitler has now been vindicated and his image likely rehabilitated. There will be a massive shift in how future generations see both Nazism and the Holocaust, it’ll be a dark future
4
u/EntertainmentOk8593 May 13 '24
You are mi minimizing the lobby in usa
23
u/enxziye May 13 '24
Do you think aipac in and of itself will have any control in how this situation plays out? I imagine orgs like aipac will finally get listed as foreign agents by the US government and subsequently get banned.
43
u/typyash May 13 '24
But why russian support (secretly)? I mean, Russia will more likely to observe this hell from the sidelines, preaching about "rotten west" and "zionist super government" than anger their quite substantial muslim population by being anywhere near Israel when shit hits the fan.
21
u/HGD3ATH May 13 '24
Or risk angering someone like Iran who is providing them with materiel against Ukraine.
31
u/TheBloperM May 13 '24
I just cant see anybody agree with this.
Like. If Bibi decided to go anywhere close to this far it would probably lead to a civil war within Israel.
3
u/Brilliant-Bug-4982 May 14 '24
Yeah I mean the public almost went to a civil war over a change in the judicial system (yes I'm aware this is a massive understatement) and bibi has already got approval rates on the ground with people begging for a reelection, don't see people sticking around after bibi adds to that by throwing a couple of nukes around (which let's be honest would also kill israelis in the blast range)
14
u/xkmasada May 13 '24
Bibi would also nuke Gaza City and Khan Yunis in Gaza and Hebron and Ramallah in the West Bank. And much of Lebanon.
17
u/rycomo1992 May 14 '24
The whole point of the Samson option is that Samson knew that he would die, but he decided to take all of his captors and enemies with him. If the modern version is ever realized, it would be far worse than what OP has presented us. Frankly, anything within a thousand miles of Jerusalem would be a radioactive ruin. Israel has dozens of nuclear weapons at least, probably more than that- why are they only targeting like ten cities?
If I were certain that my nation was facing extinction, I would go all out and fire everything I had at every half decent target I could think of. Every oil field, every geographic choke point, every major resource within range would be nuked to oblivion. The results would be nothing short of apocalyptic, with tens of millions dead immediately and a whole lot more following soon after, once all the fallout rains down and poisons everything it touches.
THAT is a real 'worst case scenario'.
3
u/xkmasada May 14 '24
Exactly. In practice, there wouldn’t be a single Palestinian left alive in the entire Middle East, and Iran, Syria, Lebanon and Qatar would also be wiped out.
I don’t think they’d bother with Europe.
It goes without saying that Israel as a state will be gone.
The only real question is how many Jews in the rest of the world will die from reprisals.
4
→ More replies (6)1
u/RationalPoster1 May 13 '24
Considering Americans have fairly consistently seen 80-20 majorities in polls supporting Israel over Hamas, Biden is probably sinking his last slim chance of winning in November.
129
u/Visionary_Socialist May 13 '24
Russia would not back Israel in any capacity. A crisis like this would be the perfect opportunity to decapitate US power in the region because Israel is America’s biggest power base there and even if they did such a heel turn it would still be seen as their mess because they let it get so out of hand. Russia would help Iran and also use their forces in Syria to help their government and would back a campaign against NATO by the absolute tidal wave of insurgencies this scenario would set off.
→ More replies (1)
91
u/Time-Bite-6839 🤓 May 13 '24
Mandatory Palestine 2: Electric Boogaloo
44
u/Titanicman2016 May 13 '24
Initially, kinda I guess. The long-term occupation is reserved for Israel only; NATO withdraws from the territory granted to the Republic of Palestine shortly after its creation.
39
u/Mando177 May 13 '24
Ngl I think Palestine will be an afterthought even to the Palestinians, the fallout (literal and metaphorical) from nuking Rome and Mecca will be the defining moment for the next millennia
11
u/SweetPanela May 13 '24
Which ironically fits both of the respective religious doomsday prophecies
→ More replies (2)6
81
u/Naive-Wonder-6959 May 13 '24
Nuke dropping on Mecca gonna make the Islamic world gone mad. Not surprising if the anti semitism sentiment raise among the Muslim.
48
u/Mando177 May 13 '24
It would break any practicing Muslim’s psyche. All rationality would go out the window, and it’ll likely mean the end of the Jewish people as well
20
u/ZanezGamez May 13 '24
I would assume the permanent NATO force is to prevent that.
33
u/Mando177 May 13 '24
Then it would be NATO forces fighting Muslims for several centuries at least. I don’t see appetite for a forever war like that being high with American taxpayers, considering how sick they were of Afghanistan and Iraq
17
u/ZanezGamez May 13 '24
Yeah I don’t think there is any situation where Israel still exists in the long run. Could see the Jewish people fleeing to America or something.
18
u/SweetPanela May 13 '24
Not including the Catholic areas maybe not even any of LatAm too. Israel just would have nukes the centers of Catholicism/Christiandom and Islam.
→ More replies (3)13
→ More replies (1)3
u/MiddleeastPeace2021 May 13 '24
hahhaha you think nato accaully cares
4
u/ZanezGamez May 13 '24
Why would there be a permanent force otherwise? It’s not like a demilitarized Israel would do anything other than be crushed.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (2)17
u/McBabwe May 13 '24
It’d be like the fall of Nazi Germany, from both perspectives.
Jews would flock to areas occupied by American and European militaries, like the Wehrmacht, as middle eastern forces captured territory and perpetrated a second coming of the Holocaust.
God forbid they’re then at the mercy of Italians or Greeks.
6
u/Mando177 May 14 '24
Or many Germans, Spanish, or French. I would imagine there would be a lot of enraged Catholics in those country who’ll collectively decide maybe the Swastika waving lunatics had a point
3
u/SupahSang May 13 '24
As if they need more antisemitic sentiment, there's already parades through major Middle Eastern streets with banners saying "the holocaust was only the beginning"
80
u/Zestyclose_Jello6192 May 13 '24
Too few civilians casualties, a nuclear attack on nato by Israel would trigger a nuclear response
22
u/Time-Ear-8637 May 13 '24
I doubt it. If and only if NATO couldn't seize control of the airspace above Israël would they go nuclear.
6
u/expatdoctor May 14 '24
Yeah attack on Turkey alone (second largest army with domestic military industry complex without even trying too hard) alone more than enogh to provoke article 5 immediately.
And add Greece and Italy into that mix you have disaster soup.
And also attack on Greece and Italy means attack on all EU counties.
So USA either going to war with all of EU+ Turkey and Muslim world combined and probably Russia and China too and lost it's power immediately
Or flatten israel force them into unconditional surrender.
69
u/FewKey5084 May 13 '24
Russia has too many interests in Syria to support Israel officially or unofficially
45
u/RandomBilly91 May 13 '24
Let's be honest:
Nuclear attack would most likely answered by nukes. It's not a question of being right or wrong, it's about making sure everyone is absolutely certain that nukes would lead every involved party demise, to some extent.
So, in short, I don't see how Israel uses nukes without getting nuked (they might be able to defend from some, but not all ?)
9
u/SweetPanela May 13 '24
The only restraint would be to succeed Palestinian land after but I don’t see any political/military targets surviving
43
u/RatSinkClub May 13 '24
Israel nuclear strikes landing then only 60k Israeli casualties is the most insane thing about this lol
35
u/Ok_Sympathy5287 May 13 '24
Israel nuking Rome wouldn't end well at all.
They would probably kill the pope.
I'd be interested in seeing more of the aftermath of such an event.
31
u/Noietz May 13 '24
Muslims and Catholics gathering together in endless rage to stomp Israel out of existence
28
u/HGD3ATH May 13 '24
Israel probably gets nuked by France and Pakistan in response.
→ More replies (4)11
29
24
19
u/Real_Ad_8243 May 13 '24
There would definitely be more civilian dead than that. Most of those cities have populations between 5 and 10 millions and Istanbul is about 17 million.
Other than Rafah (official pop ~150k, actual about 1.5 million) the smallest city there is Athens at about 3 million, and they're all dense cities too.
You'd easily be talking 10-13 million civilian dead in such a catastrophe.
6
u/Due-Ad-2144 May 13 '24
Plus deaths from nuclear fallout. I'm particularly interested in whether nuclear explosions near the river Nile could contaminate its waters and potentially harm or kill hundreds of millions.
→ More replies (1)11
u/Real_Ad_8243 May 13 '24 edited May 13 '24
Oh yeah I was pretty focused on the immediate deaths ilmyself (I.e. first week).
Nit just the Nile as well though. You've got the Tigris and Euphrates, as well, and the ancillary deaths caused by infrastructure and communications disruption.
Frankly there wouldn't be many Palestinians left after such a war, and those demographically smaller and more centralised countries such as Greece, where a third of the population lives in Athens, would be harrowed beyond comprehension, which would only be worsened by the attack on Istanbul as well, it's worth noting.
Contrast that with Turkey, which will have just lost maybe 8% of its population and it's most economically vital region, but would still have all the engines of government intact in Ankara? Imagine it's response to such an act?
The horror this hypothetical Samsonite War would unleash really is utterly underestimated by the OP.
3
u/Mando177 May 14 '24
I could easily see the Turks attempting to seize the nuclear weapons at Icrilik air base to rewire and launch towards Israel as soon as possible. I could see the Greeks trying to help them in that endeavour
19
u/DrVeigonX May 13 '24 edited May 13 '24
Why would Beer Sheva be transfered to Palestine? It's a really major Israeli city, one of the largest ones in fact and majority Jewish by a conformable margin. It's like transferring Jenin to Israel.
I also think it's far more likely the IDF generals would launch a coup against Netanyahu before any NATO involvement. The IDF is quite autonomous and most of its generals don't like Netanyahu anyway. I can't imagine them approving an unprovoked nuclear strike against the entirety of the Arab world.
15
u/Mando177 May 13 '24
Israel just ripped out the nerve centers of two millennia old religions worshipped by billions. They’ll be lucky to just lose Beer Sheva
2
u/DrVeigonX May 13 '24
It's not about it being too harsh, it's about it not making sense for stability in the region.
12
u/Mando177 May 13 '24
Stability in the region will no longer exist, losing Mecca will essentially gut the Islamic faith and drive millions of its faithful to avenge their beliefs as best they can. It’ll be a never ending holy war until Israel and potentially the Jewish people as a whole no longer exist
→ More replies (5)6
18
u/Alboralix May 13 '24
Nuking Mecca and Rome?? Bro you got yourself a new Djihad but this time the Western power are cheering on, there will be no Israel (demilitarised or otherwise) at the end of this.
Cool scenario anyway, upvoted.
8
u/Mando177 May 14 '24
The Last Crusade/Jihad: a somewhat poetic alliance of Catholics and Muslims waging war against a common foe before their religions falter and fade in the aftermath of the strikes
→ More replies (1)
13
u/GodofCOC-07 May 13 '24
Israel has 60-90 nukes, they would launch most of them on military targets. Meaning the loss for the allies would be close to 500,000 in military deaths alone.
→ More replies (2)20
u/Titanicman2016 May 13 '24
This is a first strike for purely political and egotistical reasons. You don’t drag neutral powers down with you by hitting military bases (also the continental US is out of range of Israeli ICBM’s), you do it by just killing as many people as possible. I see your reasoning, but this is more mutually assured destruction than strategic strikes.
9
u/DankeSebVettel May 13 '24
Does Netanyahu even have that much power? Don’t you think someone down the chain would probably intervene for that?
3
u/MsMercyMain May 14 '24
It really depends on who all are on duty, how desperate the situation is from the Israeli perspective, which with sanctions and an IDF pullout from Gaza might just seem desperate enough, and if this is in line with Israel’s nuclear doctrine. Thereve been rumor for decades this is their nuclear doctrine, but since they won’t confirm they even have nukes, it’s hard to say
4
u/GodofCOC-07 May 13 '24
They will nuke all forces that are intervening in the conflict, and that will cause massive casualties. A single nukes striking at the right place would mean at least 20,000 military casualties and the Americans couldn’t possible move enough patriots to defend the army (without risking the patriots system themselves) as they need them in Ukraine more than in Israel.
So assuming Israel launches 30 nukes at military targets, 2/3 are shot down. Then the allies have just suffered 200,000 military casualties in the least end. And the normal response would launch most of 60 nukes on military targets and a quarter are shot down. That means 500,000 military casualties.
→ More replies (2)
11
May 13 '24
A "Republic of Palestine" wouldn't work without being propped up by external forces. There would be severe human rights violations and war crimes in the Arab/Muslim sectors and it is more likely that the Western nations would just occupy the region themselves.
Also, if Netanyahu went completely off the rocker like that, the IDF would probably depose him themselves. Russia would never support Israel, they have too much invested in Syria, Iran, and Egypt.
3
u/Seared_Beans May 14 '24
Not to mention, Isreal is already on the worldwide shit list in a big way. Nuking other nations in such a fashion would guarantee every nation on the planet becoming an enemy of Isreal.
12
u/oopiex May 13 '24
Assuming Israel is going to fall, why would it nuke Mecca, Athens, Rome? This is a quite insane take (and I assume the fantasy of many pro-pal protestors).
It may nuke Iran to remove its biggest threat and sponsor of its enemies fast, after them its biggest threats are Hezbollah in Lebanon and Gaza - both too close for Israel to nuke it.
Also, had Israel used a nuclear bomb when the situation is not 'either nuke or all the jews in israel will be genocided', this will not result in the occupation of Israel and the formation of Palestine. This will result in the west nuking Israel. They won't allow such a dangerous country to exist.
32
u/AntWithNoPants May 13 '24
Its an intentionally goofy scenario triggered by Netanhyahu's mental health. Its not really meant to be feasable, just one of those "worst case scenario"
9
u/DankeSebVettel May 13 '24
Don’t you think someone down the line would stop him? He’s not invincible, if he gets too whacko I’m sure someone in the govt would make sure this nuclear scenario doesn’t happen.
→ More replies (2)6
u/Additional_Meeting_2 May 14 '24
This isn’t worst case scenario, it’s cartoon villain scenario. Netanhyahu isn’t a absolutist monarch anyway with ability to do this.
12
u/Mando177 May 13 '24
Rome is a designated target under the Samson option. I assume other Western European capitals are as well, but the nukes in this case would likely be shot down before travelling that far
→ More replies (6)3
u/JJNEWJJ May 13 '24
Interesting, considering that Rome and Athens are capitals of NATO countries, which are de facto Israeli allies. Can someone enlighten me on the reason why?
17
u/Mando177 May 13 '24 edited May 13 '24
Because the crux of the Samson option is letting the world know that the Jewish people they won’t go down alone next time, and they’ll drag everyone else down with them. Thus “tearing down the pillars of the temple.” Additionally Israel has prided itself on having a “flexible” foreign policy as much as it can, it won’t be a stretch to assume any dead man’s switch for the nuclear arsenal will include European targets as well
6
u/iceman1935 May 13 '24
I can somewhat understand the rationale of hiting rome (not that I agree with it) but Athens seems odd to me I feel like Madrid and Moscow for historical reasons makes a lot more sense
→ More replies (4)5
u/Mando177 May 13 '24
Athens was close by. The others probably got shot down, a hundred nukes flying isn’t actually a lot when they’re going over NATO’s most heavily monitored and defended areas
3
u/iceman1935 May 13 '24
Still I don't think Samson would hit NATO targets just do the sake of it, it would be for sympolic reasons so I still disagree with Athens
10
u/ianwgz May 13 '24
mecca got nuked? yrah were going to see a LOT of muslim nazis now
11
u/Noietz May 13 '24
Rome too.
Nazism becoming a mainstream political faction in this timeline woud be a question of time honestly
9
7
8
8
5
u/Mg42gun May 13 '24
The idea of Israel nuking USA would make the level of Antisemitism on par with 1930s level
6
u/Critical_Crunch May 13 '24
Ik this is supposed to be a stretch of an event, but why would Israel nuke Rome and Athens? Also, wouldn’t HAMAS simply lose power since they are the core government for the Palestinians at this point, and their goal was to liberate Palestine from Israel (which is essentially what happened, minus the remaining powerless portion of the Israeli state)?
5
u/Epsilon-ZX-007 May 13 '24
Hamas has never been the core government for the Palestinians, they are the government of the Gaza Strip, but not the West Bank which is controlled by Fatah which is the largest political party in the PLO a multiparty organization that is recognized as the Palestinian authority and has observer status in the UN. Hamas is not part of the PLO and is in fact politically a rival of it especially of Fatah, who they fought a bloody civil war with in Gaza with which led to Hamas gaining total control in Gaza, while the 2 have been attempting to reconcile it has been a rather difficult if not unsuccessful process. So in this scenario the PLO/Fatah would be given back control of Gaza.
3
u/Critical_Crunch May 13 '24
I stand corrected. I was misinformed that Fatah had been politically and militarily defeated for the most part by Hamas in both regions.
3
u/Epsilon-ZX-007 May 13 '24
It’s cool, I am not surprised as the news only ever seems to mention Hamas.
2
u/Critical_Crunch May 13 '24
Thanks for being chill about it too btw
2
u/Epsilon-ZX-007 May 13 '24
No problem you were not being hostile, and I simply saw this an opportunity to educate someone, have to put my practically useless AA in history to use somehow. 😋 The fact that I am around a quarter Palestinian Arab (not Muslim, but Catholic) with roots from Bethlehem does help make me somewhat passionate about this general topic.
→ More replies (4)
5
u/iceman1935 May 13 '24
I know that this is alt history but I feel like Israel nuking Madrid or Moscow over Athens makes a lot more sense for historical context (not that I agree with it).
8
u/Sensitive-Diamond353 May 13 '24
If it's about historical revenge, you'd think Berlin would be the most obvious choice.
5
u/iceman1935 May 13 '24
It may be hard to believe I don't think Berlin is on the list, while true Nazi Garmany is responsible for the most grotesque genocide against the Jewish people they have by done the most to acknowledge, reflect and try to rectify there history (*Austria aswell for that matter) then really any other country with a major history of antisemitism. I am speaking for my self here but as a jew I don't believe in modern history most Jews don't have any animosity to the modern Germany or her people which to me says alot.
4
u/Sensitive-Diamond353 May 13 '24
Interesting. So do you think Jewish people would be more likely to have animosity toward, say, Spain who forced Jews to convert or be expelled 500 years ago than against Germany who committed the largest documented genocide in history directed against Jews only 80 years ago? From what I understand, Spain has also apologized for its past and even allows for automatic citizenship for Sephardic Jews.
2
u/iceman1935 May 13 '24
It's more how they've gone about how Germany has worked on addressing antisemitism in the present era a lot more better job then Spain, as there's still a lot more antisemitism in Spain then modern Germany atleast from my perception,
expelled 500 years ago
A couple corrections to dates the inquisition lasted from 1478-1834 so it only ended about 200 years ago
2
u/Sensitive-Diamond353 May 13 '24
True, but I was referring to the Alhambra Decree by King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella that specifically targeted Jews.
→ More replies (1)
7
u/AwayDirt7401 May 13 '24
ngl bro just reading this made me antisemitic, keep it up
→ More replies (1)
4
5
u/Stromovik May 13 '24
Damascus and Tehran are nuked ....
* US and their allies are definetly not invading decapacitated Syria and Iran. /s
* Russia has military installations in Syria and they are not going to like nuclear strikes in the vicinity.
* This would more likely turn the whole region into current Libya
6
5
u/Parchokhalq I believe in Wragnel supremacy May 13 '24
the real question is: how would the USA ever stop its support for Israel?
5
u/vincentsd1 May 13 '24
I can still see some American politicians trying to spin this in support of Israel.
4
u/qchisq May 13 '24
Somehow, the least possible thing here is Sunak still being PM of Britain in 12 months
3
3
3
u/ipromiseiwontsleep May 13 '24
Is it wrong I like this timeline?
6
u/ArgalNas May 13 '24
Liking the outcome of establishment of Republic Palestine, expulsion of Hamas, eradication of Likud, and execution of Netenyahu is good. Liking 4.3 million civilians dead in nuclear attacks is not so good.
3
u/Forevermore668 May 14 '24
Nuking mecca would result in a level of violence that have not yet dreamed of.
2
2
2
u/r4nD0mU53r999 May 13 '24
Why would they attack Greece and Italy though?
But realistically destroying mecca would have way more consequences then what OP is portraying in this post.
2
2
2
u/americanistmemes May 14 '24
Did Israel nuke Athens and Rome in this scenario for revenge against the Greek and Roman empires of antiquity?
2
u/Potential-Design3208 May 18 '24
"If you two can't get along, then perhaps a little American radiation will di the trick..."
- Dark Brandon, The Ice Cream Overlord, crica 2023
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/VengefulMigit May 13 '24
I would have to imagine there'd be some type of internal Israeli coup or rebellion against the hardliners by the time it dawns on them that NATO is for real about intervening. 2/3rds of the country hate Bibi as it is right now, I dont see them going down with the ship if he tries to sink it
1
u/DumbFish94 May 13 '24
Even though as of recently they've been loving to dickride Israel, if Saudi Arabia joins the war, Jordan probably would too
1
u/fitzachella May 13 '24
Honestly the second this all starts the glory of Ireland be shun upon Isreal (We'll steal their cat converters)
1
u/Extension_Arm_6918 May 13 '24
2025 and Sunak is still in power? That’s the most unrealistic thing about this.
1
u/DatBoii2297 May 13 '24
I can already hear the extremist right yelling about how "I told you the Jews were bad you should of let us kill them!"
1
1
1
u/RationalPoster1 May 13 '24
A more likely alternate reality would be Iran nuking Tel Aviv. What would the world's reaction be then? Israel's nuking the Middle East is about as likely as Biden's doing it.
1
1
u/DarthKillhoon May 14 '24
This is actually scary to me minus the fact that the missile defense systems in Europe and America could likely get most of not all the Jew Nukes
1
u/-drth-clappy May 14 '24
Shit alternative future. Russia can’t support Israel. Check your historical allegiances.
1
u/SolarSelect May 14 '24
Russia wouldn’t support Israel, they’d be more likely to unofficially support Hamas & Hezbollah
1
1
1
595
u/tankengine75 May 13 '24
Mecca being hit by Israel or any other country for that matter would definitely make Islamic extremism rise