292
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2024
292 points (97.7% liked)
NonCredibleDefense
6600 readers
579 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
- !militaryporn@lemmy.world
- !forgottenweapons@lemmy.world
- !combatvideos@sh.itjust.works
- !militarymoe@ani.social
Banner made by u/Fertility18
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
didn't everyone run out, two years into the war (1915/6?) for the exact same reason that US/Russia/Europe recently did?
It took them years of intense warfare to run out. NATO stockpiles would last a few months. That's not indefensible because NATO doesn't intend to fight an artillery war, but the limited industrial capacity is still concerning. I suppose that many other factories would be refitted for the production of weapons if a major war actually broke out, but I do worry that Western Europe has gone soft after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Again, that's not indefensible because spending vast amounts of money on weapons in the absence of any enemies that would pose a serious threat is not prudent, but rearming now seems like the wise course of action.
(Not noncredible enough? Too noncredible? I'm only qualified to comment because I played StarCraft a lot.)
Maintaining idle production capacity is expensive. Really expensive, for such specialized tooling. And war has changed a lot since 1918, artillery is no longer a lone fighting force like it once was. Countries have chosen to tool for different types of armament in a lot broader strokes.
I'm sure, if the need arose, plants could retool a lot faster than you realize.
We didn't expect to fight a war against a country with an army straight out of WW2.
We're trying to help a country fight a war with 60 year old gear. Give them real tech and let them roll the idiots.
Considering that's what the only two militaries that could challenge NATO are...
Don't leave me in suspense, who does number 2 work for?!?!
No military could challenge nato. If China tried they would suddenly have the largest fleet of permanent submarines in history, like Russia has been.
That's great, but they still conquered all of mainland Asia!
Just need a deep tank line to deal with the Russian zergling rush