1235
Anon finds a plot hole
(sh.itjust.works)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2025
1235 points (100.0% liked)
Greentext
8214 readers
316 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Nuclear facilities are very very tight on security. Domestic terrorism is a terrible reason to not build them.
And if you are a part of a war? With or without the Nuclear plant you are going to have massive problems.
Weird excuses to not build them if you ask me.
A nuclear plant is not a nuclear bomb. And 5000 years is outta your ass.
And, the most important thing - military targets are usually protected worse than nuclear stations and big industrial plants. A nuclear station doesn't move anywhere, it just sits on one place armored so well that it'll likely survive the town being nuked (pun intended).
There are pollution dangers and complex logistics of rare and expensive materials. And the stations themselves are very expensive. But the danger of a nuclear station giving out a nuclear explosion is nonexistent.
Yeah, remind me how long it took for Hiroshima to be habitable
You have a higher chance of being struck by a falling wind turbine blade than you do of being victim of a failure due to a bombed nuclear power plant.
You gave an example of the Zaporizhzhia plant being bombed in Ukraine, wheres the explosion or nuclear fallout? And thats a plant from the 80s.