126
submitted 11 months ago by floofloof@lemmy.ca to c/news@lemmy.world
all 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] TheTimeKnife@lemmy.world 60 points 11 months ago

Because we need to replace and maintain the ones we already have. People have been talking about doing this to our aging stockpile for decades.

It makes sense to reduce our arsenal, but the nukes we do have need to be maintained for safety and reliability.

[-] Cocodapuf@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago

That sounds awfully legit.

I hate to think that the government is doing exactly what they've said they'd do in a sensible timeframe. What is this nation coming to?

[-] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 5 points 11 months ago

People on the internet like to pretend that if the US just stopped making weapons then everyone else would also stop making weapons.

[-] Madison420@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

This, lifecycle renewal only goes so far and old plutonium is still very useful for things like breeder reactors.

[-] e8d79@feddit.de 38 points 11 months ago

Perun made a quite interesting video about this. Basically the US, after the end of the cold war, stopped pit production and relied on the many pits they still had laying around. Now they are worrying that old pits might become unreliable and unserviceable which could weaken the US' nuclear deterrence. Because of that the US is seeking to restart pit production.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 31 points 11 months ago

Because, despite us removing the lead from the air, the world is going fucking crazy.

[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 16 points 11 months ago

Oh, it’s still in the air… and in the water.

[-] reddig33@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

~~Jet~~ Some planes still use leaded fuel unfortunately.

[-] SheeEttin@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Jets do not. They usually use Jet A, basically kerosene. It's piston engines that use leaded gasoline (avgas).

[-] nomecks@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Maybe if you're posting from 1990.

[-] gmtom@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Because we're coming up on cold war 2 : Chinese boogaloo

Edit: cold war 2: big trouble in little China.

[-] remus989@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 months ago

I think for this one it would be Big Trouble in Big China.

[-] gmtom@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Well Taiwan is also known as the Republic of China, so the trouble would be in the little China

[-] remus989@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 months ago
[-] anon_8675309@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

For the Russian takeover. Putin has let his weapons deteriorate so he’s telling his minions here to get prepared for him.

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 6 points 11 months ago
[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 4 points 11 months ago
[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 4 points 11 months ago

Will it be an escalation of the Russia/Ukraine war? Or will the Israel/Gaza war spill over into the wider region? Or will America try to start some shit over Taiwan? Who knows!

Clock is ticking, though.

[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 7 points 11 months ago

The correct phrase is, “will China start some shit over Taiwan”

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

China doesn't really do military conflict. They're not like Russia who has had several military conflicts in just the past few decades; China hasn't really done anything like that for over 40 years. If they decide to do anything they'll probably do something that's partially economic and partially political. If anyone is going to start a war over Taiwan it's going to be America - they've been signaling it pretty hard.

My guess? China starts restricting trade or infrastructure or energy or something to put pressure on Taiwain, America decides it's time to liberate them from "the yolk of Chinese tyranny" and introduce some Freedom^TM^, and then it's WW3

[-] Whattrees 10 points 11 months ago

That's a pretty wild guess given how China keeps doing military drills involving amphibious landings and flying into Taiwanese airspace/going into Taiwanese waters. You wouldn't practice amphibious landings to prepare a defense against the US, you'd do that to prepare for an invasion. China talks a lot about not using its military outside its borders, which has been mostly true, but they see Taiwan as within their borders so it doesn't really tell us much.

If China wants to limit imports of goods from Taiwan they absolutely could, and it would be difficult for the US/Japan to respond to, but if by "restricting trade" you mean a blockade then that is an act of war that the US/Japan would respond to much more aggressively. Just like China would respond if we blockaded them.

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 months ago

Maybe it would look more like a blockade.

How come it's an act of war if China blockades Taiwan, but it's not an act of war when America does the same thing to countries it sanctions?

[-] Whattrees 4 points 11 months ago

By definition, a blockade is an act of war, regardless of who does it. I'm not sure why you'd think I wouldn't call the US blockading some country and act of war (although I have a guess), just as much as I'd call Israel blockading Palestine as an act of war.

The reason other countries don't respond to a US blockade with all-out war is because we get other countries to agree to the blockade first and then do it as a block, which means the blockaded country would have to be prepared to fight the US plus its allies. Given the relative size of the countries' militaries involved, the blockaded ones usually decide not to fight.

Agreeing with the US's decision to support Taiwan against China is not the same as support for all US military decisions, or even most of them.

[-] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 5 points 11 months ago

This is Tibetan deletion. Something China knows quite a bit about, I guess.

[-] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 5 points 11 months ago

Maybe it's because the other major nuclear power keeps making new nuclear threats every week and just withdrew from a major nuclear proliferation treaty?

[-] Jenntron@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

We also need to arm all of the new B-21 raiders. I believe I read they're going to start off with producing 100 of them.

this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2023
126 points (100.0% liked)

News

23296 readers
2855 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS