this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2024
165 points (100.0% liked)

NonCredibleDefense

6763 readers
508 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 29 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Interesting

Examining what it would take to realistically build an Imperial Star Destroyer, it was estimated in 2016 that such a vessel would cost $636 billion USD. Using then-current technology and naval vessels as a reference, the ship would weigh 4.44 billion kilograms, generate 146.5 gigawatts of power, and its engines would produce a combined total thrust of 3.5 million newtons. However getting the parts into space to construct the Star Destroyer would require an additional $44.4 trillion USD in launch costs, suggesting that asteroid mining and refining technologies would have to be developed first to make it more economical.[18][19]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Destroyer#Analysis

[–] sugar_in_your_tea 8 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Huh, the current US national debt is around $35T, so we almost could've gotten a Star Destroyer. Priorities people!

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 days ago

Unfortunately the gubberment never spends money on what the people really want, like star destroyers

[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 days ago

I loved that scene in the show. In-universe explanation for why Jaffa can’t aim for shit lmao

[–] [email protected] 16 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Weapons of terror tend to be messy. There were railroad guns that could hit Paris from seventy miles but couldn't accurately target a spot within Paris, so it was used to stomp civilians.

Nukes are terror weapons in that they dont just kill the target but plenty of territory around it as well, which is an exclusion zone for a while.

I can't speak for the Star Destroyer but the Death Star super-laser is clearly a mining tool used to crack open planets to get to the gooey center minerals. It can be used to annihilate a planet, but that's usually a waste of real estate.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

That's not the Yamato tho.

It's the Andromeda, developed years after the human/gamilan war.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 days ago

Yamato is also a Wunderwaffen, where the Star Destroyer is a mass produced system actually meant to wage war and is battle proven by its years of service and the lessons learned from its Clone War predecessor. Too bad they still stuck the bridge on top so it'd still look like the USS Texas though

[–] [email protected] 15 points 4 days ago

"This weapon is OP, it's not fair to the enemy!"

"No. No, it's not. Fire."

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 days ago
[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Yamato is like the child of a death star and a star destroyer

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago

So the Eclipse Star Destroyer