this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2024
367 points (98.2% liked)

NonCredibleDefense

6659 readers
406 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
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ArbitraryValue 34 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (6 children)

It's a bold move but I don't see it changing the outcome of the ongoing war. If Ukraine could build long-range ballistic missiles in the near future, I think they could regain the advantage even without any nuclear warheads. Nuclear warheads would not be useful without those ballistic missiles.

(What would happen if Ukraine did have nuclear-armed ballistic missiles but Russia refused to withdraw from Ukrainian territory? I don't foresee Ukraine actually nuking Russia, even in those circumstances.)

[–] [email protected] 39 points 1 month ago (1 children)

A truck can deliver a nuke. Just pack it in cat litter and drive it onto that bridge in Crimea. Should knock that stupid thing out finally.

[–] nuke 37 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

Man fuck these comments, nuke Russia you pussies. I'll deliver the missiles myself if that's what you need. Strap me to the rocket and fire me at Moscow!

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 month ago

Name checks out?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago

Fuck it, give them a Davy Crocket and then you don't need no stinkin' ballistic missiles.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago (2 children)

While I agree with your second argument that Russia would probably just call them on their bluff, I don't think they'd need long range ballistic missiles. They seem to operate on russian soil a lot, and you could put a big nuke into a larger van easily.

[–] nuke 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

That's why it shouldn't be a bluff. Fucking nook em

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Just package it as a good old gravity bomb or glide bomb?

Or get creative and mount it on a swarm of large drones (with the others being decoys for SAMs). Maybe like a fleet of old prop planes flying very low.

This is very hypothetical though, no one should hope for Ukraine reaching the point of even considering an actual launch of a nuke.