452
top 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Freefall@lemmy.world 14 points 3 hours ago

Fox news is desperately pushing this and signal boosting their true leader constantly.

[-] josefo@leminal.space 35 points 8 hours ago

My bet is, if Putin dares to drop a single nuke, he will get assassinated. Lot of secret service agents, and other enthusiasts are straight up going to try that. During war that's allowed right?

[-] EldritchFeminity 30 points 6 hours ago

Mutually assured destruction is still a thing. We may not be at Cold War levels of insanity, where between the US and Russia there were enough nukes to glass the planet like 150 times over, but plenty of nations have arsenals (especially in Europe), and the best way to make enemies of the entirety of the world would be to be the first one to launch a nuke. Dropping a nuke would signal to every leader in the world that no country is safe from becoming an irradiated wasteland.

I think if Putin dropped a nuke, his allies would drop him faster than it would take NATO to declare all out war with Russia.

[-] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 7 points 3 hours ago

You say that, and yet Exxon-Mobil have proven that actively trying to destroy the world does nothing to turn world leaders away from trying to buddy up with you.

[-] Vendetta9076@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 hour ago

When you exon does it, it's slowly and for money. So there are "winners". Nukes have no winners.

[-] Teppichbrand@feddit.org 3 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

I read this book and it changed my opinion a little. Every scenario ends in a nuclear apocalypse, no matter who started with how much.
There might be a hero or two refusing to launch down the command line. But should we rely on that?

[-] josefo@leminal.space 4 points 5 hours ago

My point was, the assassination goal would be him not being able to drop a second one. Also slay the first 100 people in the chain of command and leave them headless.

Cool thing is that nuclear winter will fight global warming

[-] skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 3 hours ago

nuclear winter is not a thing

[-] Klear@lemmy.world 5 points 2 hours ago

Patroling the Mojave almost makes me wish it was though

[-] EldritchFeminity 3 points 4 hours ago

Unfortunately, nobody would be able to take him out that quickly. Russia still has plenty of nukes, and they could fire them all before anybody has time to react. If that nuke is an ICBM, though, as soon as it leaves the silo the world would know, and the counter barrage of nukes would be firing up before it even lands.

I originally meant that dropping a nuke would have the entire world declare war on Russia, even his former allies because no one wants to rule over a pile of radioactive rocks, but thinking about it, his allies would probably be the ones most likely to try to have him assassinated in that situation. A maniac with a big stick is only useful so long as you don't have to worry about him smacking you with it, too.

[-] sunstoned@lemmus.org 17 points 8 hours ago

I think if you're assassinating a public figure you're a little past caring about what's "allowed"

[-] josefo@leminal.space 2 points 7 hours ago

I was taking about like, it's considered a war crime? Skipping the soldiers dying and straight up killing the dude.

[-] p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 6 hours ago

Well once the nuke is dropped, anything related to Geneva Conventions or any other Conventions go out the window.

[-] josefo@leminal.space 1 points 5 hours ago
[-] Kalkaline@lemmy.zip 70 points 11 hours ago

The tankies aren't going to like this meme.

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 47 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

If they browse NCD they'll be mad a lot. People on here have the normal take on whether the North Koreans are secret Wakanda good guys, and it comes up constantly.

[-] SomeAmateur@sh.itjust.works 109 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

In my experience people who are against more Ukraine aid think that the dollar amount we send is actual cash that can be spent in other places, rather than pallets of munitions that don't keep forever anyway.

[-] slaacaa@lemmy.world 15 points 4 hours ago

It’s literal economic stimulus, US sends them old shit, and buys new and more expensive shit from local military suppliers. This is the “creating jobs” thing the right likes so much, except when it’s against Russian interests

[-] Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

Yes, but it is really inefficient. If we simply ignore the nuke threat it would probably take the US a month of bombing to restore pre 2014 borders.

[-] Valmond@lemmy.world 54 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

And a part of that is old stuff that would be decommissioned so the cash is to make the new products. Or so I have understood it.

[-] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 48 points 11 hours ago

nah that's right. we've sent ukraine a shit ton of basically decommissioned shit. and even then we've been weirdly stingy, and unresponsive to their non military aid requests (their biggest ask is glass)

[-] mkwt@lemmy.world 18 points 11 hours ago

And we're also saving a bunch on disposal costs for the old stuff.

[-] taladar@sh.itjust.works 22 points 11 hours ago

Even for new weapons and ammo it is usually just spending on the local weapons manufacturers so basically just supporting your own economy.

[-] verity_kindle@sh.itjust.works 3 points 8 hours ago

Good point. Chuck Norris-style thumbs up.

[-] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 2 points 11 hours ago

This is the most obscene attempt to understate the US’s involvement in the war in Ukraine I’ve ever seen.

[-] Valmond@lemmy.world 42 points 11 hours ago

Da comrade, USA always fault. Very fault.

[-] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 3 points 11 hours ago

Not always, but it’s the fault of the USA far more than it should be. Like a pants shittingly stupid amount of the time. Almost as pants shittingly stupid as Americans who pretend that isn’t the case.

[-] ShadowRam@fedia.io 38 points 11 hours ago

It's USA's fault Russia annexed Crimea? and now attempting to annex more?

How's that?

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 22 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

Eaglestan has been known to start weird unnecessary wars, but this is not one of them.

(I personally can't really comment on surplus vs. new in detail, though)

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 18 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

Man, I wonder if those Russian propaganda guys ever wish they had more non-bullshit to spew. Like, they have to keep up appearances, but it's usually easy to tell which statements are for the public, and which ones they might actually mean (like the threat to do proxy wars of their own), so it's just a lot of wasted words.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 24 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

Fox has been pumping up the Russophobia since Putin started saber-rattling, most likely to justify Trump’s incoming “peace negotiations” that will result in sacrificing Ukrainian territory.

[-] Freefall@lemmy.world 3 points 3 hours ago

They need Biden to go easy on russia until the fat orange can get in power and come save daddy putin.

[-] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 5 points 10 hours ago

Can someone explain to me why it's ridiculous to take them seriously? Genuine question.

[-] skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de 20 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

that's because MAD still works and things like sending ATACMS are nowhere close to actual nuclear threshold, which would be nuclear attack or overwhelming conventional invasion threatening existence of country. nobody would be even thinking of nukes until Ukrainian tanks roll to Moscow lol. if you have a spare hour https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWKGYnO0Jf4

[-] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 1 points 2 hours ago

But what about tactical nukes which wouldn't trigger MAD?

[-] PlzGivHugs@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 hour ago

There has been some debate over the response to tactical Nuclear weapons - notably NATO threatened a conventional response to the use of nukes (likely meant to be read as, "We will end this war, no nukes needed.") but it would depend massively on their usage.

[-] TheDorkfromYork@lemm.ee 14 points 9 hours ago

When your enemy has strategic nukes, the extreme ways to respond are:

A, not taking the nuclear threat seriously.

B, give up.

Saying we shouldn't arm Ukraine because of nukes is close to option B.

Nukes may go off, but if arming Ukraine is the trigger, than we were likely to witness nuclear war because we wouldn't accept option B, rather than any weapon system giving Ukraine an advantage. If that is the case, nuclear war has most likely already been decided.

The real game is to make those in Russia believe that backing down works towards their goals. If they hope in 20 years the US will fall apart, they may wait, or maybe someone will kill Putin and take over Russia, being rewarded by less sanctions.

Long story short, nuking Ukraine don't benifit Russia more than it will hurt it.

I am not an expert

[-] Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 hours ago

And where do you stop appeasement? Kyiv? Warschau? Berlin? Amsterdam? London?

[-] samus12345@lemmy.world 3 points 9 hours ago

No need to use them now that Trump will withdraw support.

[-] obre@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago

Add a soyjak with an ushanka in the bottom frame next to the chud for extra accuracy

this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2024
452 points (100.0% liked)

NonCredibleDefense

6647 readers
860 users here now

A community for your defence shitposting needs

Rules

1. Be niceDo not make personal attacks against each other, call for violence against anyone, or intentionally antagonize people in the comment sections.

2. Explain incorrect defense articles and takes

If you want to post a non-credible take, it must be from a "credible" source (news article, politician, or military leader) and must have a comment laying out exactly why it's non-credible. Low-hanging fruit such as random Twitter and YouTube comments belong in the Matrix chat.

3. Content must be relevant

Posts must be about military hardware or international security/defense. This is not the page to fawn over Youtube personalities, simp over political leaders, or discuss other areas of international policy.

4. No racism / hatespeech

No slurs. No advocating for the killing of people or insulting them based on physical, religious, or ideological traits.

5. No politics

We don't care if you're Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Stalinist, Baathist, or some other hot mess. Leave it at the door. This applies to comments as well.

6. No seriousposting

We don't want your uncut war footage, fundraisers, credible news articles, or other such things. The world is already serious enough as it is.

7. No classified material

Classified ‘western’ information is off limits regardless of how "open source" and "easy to find" it is.

8. Source artwork

If you use somebody's art in your post or as your post, the OP must provide a direct link to the art's source in the comment section, or a good reason why this was not possible (such as the artist deleting their account). The source should be a place that the artist themselves uploaded the art. A booru is not a source. A watermark is not a source.

9. No low-effort posts

No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title. Put these in weekly Matrix chat instead.

10. Don't get us banned

No brigading or harassing other communities. Do not post memes with a "haha people that I hate died… haha" punchline or violating the sh.itjust.works rules (below). This includes content illegal in Canada.

11. No misinformation

NCD exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don't be an idiot.


Join our Matrix chatroom


Other communities you may be interested in


Banner made by u/Fertility18

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS