Sad when a comedian has more balls than all of NATO combined
this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2024
366 points (98.4% liked)
NonCredibleDefense
6589 readers
649 users here now
A community for your defence shitposting needs
Rules
1. Be nice
Do 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
What the fuck is that artwork?
It’s disrespectful to South Park.
Just need to get a little cancer, Stan
You're making it look like it's Ukraine's choice. They're being forced to the nuclear path by the internal enemies within NATO that are fucking everything up
Ukraine gave up those nukes in exchange for security assurances. If Russia is going to go back on its assurance, then Ukraine should be able to go back to the nukes. Fair is fair.
As a former SSR that held nuclear weapons on its territory before 1968, they even oughta be free and clear with respect to the non proliferation treaty.
I been saying this for years, and it's really nice to see someone say this too while also not getting 1000 downvotes. I shed a tear of joy for the new generation
As a former SSR that held nuclear weapons on its territory before 1968, they even oughta be free and clear with respect to the non proliferation treaty.
Is that true? If the worst comes to pass, I wonder what the UN will say (not that it matters...)
what the UN will say
"Well, they have nukes now, so international law is now more like international suggestions for them"
This is NonCredibleDefense. So it's true if it would be funny if it were true.
In UN
Russia's deligate is beyond furious. Most everyone has an awkward look. China is getting very annoyed with their vassal's war, and someone on the floor:
wringing hands "Well technically its within Ukraine's rights..."
load more comments
(1 replies)
Is that true? If the worst comes to pass, I wonder what the UN will say (not that it matters...)
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.)
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.
load more comments
(2 replies)
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!
Name checks out?
load more comments
(4 replies)
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.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Tankies will be in here supporting nuclear options unironically.
No they won't!
They supported nuclear options only so long as their cock-holster putin was the only one with said option.
Now it becomes 'Everyone has to forcefully disarm a rogue nuclear state for Russia!' or some other bs.
Give them time, their talking points are slow over the weekend.
Why, why Mr. Zelensky, don't you develop nuclear weapons like other nations: in silence?
No development required, I think they can open a drawer somewhere and pick one of several soviet designs. If they want a nuke, they can build one right away.
It would cost them the support of their allies, however, and they cannot afford that.
It's saber rattling.
The support may be dropping away anyway.
Imagine a right wing US/EU election sweep from Zelensky's point of view. They're going to force Ukraine to capitulate, and in a very lopsided manner that cripples Ukraine forever, hence this could be an actual option/last resort more than a threat.
load more comments
(13 replies)
Building a nuke is not difficult. Refining the necessary amount of uranium 235, or acquiring plutonium 239 however...
He's stated they have the material and could have a nuke within weeks I believe.they have reactors so the material isn't hard to come by really
Khajiit has wares, if you have coin
The engineering for plutonium nuke is not trivial. A U235 one is dead simple, but they probably have Plutonium from reactors, not U235 from centrifuges.
And yeah, they undoubtedly have Soviet blueprints under a matress somewhere.
Who do you think designed the Soviet nukes?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kharkiv_Institute_of_Physics_and_Technology
The Ukrainian Institute of Physics and Technology was the "Laboratory no. 1" for nuclear physics, and was responsible for the first conceptual development of a nuclear bomb in the USSR.[3]: 4
Russians are inbred drunk morons, which is why everything they tried since the fall has been disastrous, and why we haven't seen su-57s and t-14s in actual combat while the semhat exploded on the pad and their own bombs rained on their soil.
If the war goes on expect them to nuke Moscow by mistake.
Considering how the world's biggest uranium producer by far is Kazakhstan and Russia seems to be actively determined to tank Russian-Kazakh relations, I'm pretty sure they could acquire some
It can’t be saber rattling at this stage, it’s a promise.
Maybe one that cannot be kept, but I seriously doubt the allies could stop it if the fronts retract and troops from nato countries are not sent?
Maybe the support is not worth losing the war. In "The King and I", the King of Siam has a verse "...If allies are weak, am I not best alone? ...If allies are strong with power to protect me, might they not protect me out of all I own?"
load more comments
(2 replies)
nuclear is neither about having, nor using the weapons … it’s about the fear of future use of weapons
silence isn’t helpful in that endeavour
They only need to get rid of one little coward hiding in his bunker - Putin. It would be a whole different story if he was on the front actually fighting because so many Russians die there.
I wish, but he has lots of people to succeed him, who also piss and shit all over other people's stuff. Can you imagine a female version of Putin? There is one- Maria Belovna, IIRC her name. She is the kamehameha beyotch in charge of stealing children from Ukraine and putting them in "education" camps. Unfortunately she is in her maximum Cartman's Mom years. Not old, not young. I think she, even though a civilian, should be moved up the list for wet work, treated just like a Russian military officer and charged with war crimes in absentia. Car ignition go pop.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Both?
Thanks Obama
Man I thought this was a solid "thanks Obama" use given his weak defense of Crimea brought us directly to this point. Damn.
For real, it was imo the most categorically awful geopolitical play he (and Merkel, to boot) made while in office. Like, Neville Chamberlain-grade awful.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Shit, Ukraine should get both nukes and NATO membership.
view more: next ›