Post #1377008

2026-04-07 18:13 UTC

As has been pointed out elsewhere in the thread, there wasn't direct coercion involved, but the circumstances surrounding South Africa's denuclearization require an extremely friendly interpretation to interpret as well-motivated. The Angolan war abruptly ending, Botha getting chased out of office, de Klerk scrambling to rescue what influence he could, the unbanning of the ANC, Mandela's freedom, and denuclearization all happened in the space of like a year. Shit was happening and the Apartheid fucks could see they were running out of road. So, given the timing, did they decommission because they thought it was the right thing to do, or to keep the bomb out of the hands of the people they'd been oppressing for generations? CC: @davep@infosec.exchange

Replies (2)

@pixx@merveilles.town 2026-04-07 18:15

@khm @davep Gee, I wonder. Musta been because it was the right thing to do, because clearly it was the _democratic thing to do_. Yknow, to keep it out of the hands of democracy. For the sake of democracy.

Open ##1377009
@passenger@kolektiva.social 2026-04-07 19:16

@khm @pixx @davep The answer you get within South Africa, at least, is that we initially built the nukes to blackmail the Americans into continuing to support Apartheid; and when the Americans finally got fucking sick of us and didn't want to put up with our shit any more, we had to get rid of them. Which is fair, you know. I am also sick of pro-Apartheid South Africans' shit. I have read that the Russians think that Soviet pressure also had something to do with it, and they might be right. I have also read that the French think they have something to do with it and the Israelis think they had nothing to do with it. I do not know what the American story is.

Open ##1377010