this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2023
32 points (97.1% liked)

NonCredibleDefense

6629 readers
623 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
[–] DarkGamer@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We should send more ships from NATO countries. If Putin tries anything against them it would put a swift end to this conflict.

[–] Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Chances are things would go nuclear. That would NOT be good at all

[–] DarkGamer@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I would suppose that depends on what NATO's response is. They could swiftly disable Russia's conventional forces in Ukraine and the Black Sea without creating an existential threat to Moscow, which is what I expect it would take to provoke nuclear warfare.

[–] Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

To disable Russian forces in ukraine youd have (my opinion, truth is probably more complicated and I’m definitely not an expert) probably to invade Russia and encircle the Russian forces. You could also drive the Russian forces through ukraine which would probably be a lot more costly when it comes to losses. Either one might make china compelled to aid Russia in some form or anotehr which wouldn’t be great

[–] Bobert@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ukraine is on its way to pushing Russia out without even getting close to the bleeding edge of NATO technology. The argument is whether or not NATO would even need boots on the ground to push Russia out. And then the next step of argument is whether the boots on the ground need to be anything but advisory.

As a certified Internet expert on a shit posting sub, I honestly wonder why they haven't taken the opportunity to declare Ukraine a no-fly zone.