NonCredibleDefense
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
view the rest of the comments
Don’t they regularly dump perfectly good shit into the ocean on purpose so they have to buy more shit from war profiteers?
Yes, but only in conspiracy theorists minds.
The issue is that recent losses are said to be due to evasive manoeuvring.
Which begs the question on why the carrier felt threatened and why its back up is not intercepting more.
Got it yes I’ve learned more context since I first posted. Sure seems like maybe the rebels destroyed it and the U.S. is covering it up?
Too early to rule out. But threatening a ship is a far greater mid step to admit than shooting down some aircraft.
I think its a mix of things (speculative). Command might be under budgetary pressure. We are at war and spending more cash will make it obvious. In order to save money they might be using manoeuvre instead of expensive intercept missiles. Extended deployment of the crew does not help and creates complacency in procedure.
I’m fairly sure if something dangerous is shot at you, dodging like Neo in the matrix is a normal response, even if you’re confident of shooting it down.
Because what if you don’t?
Its not just the carrier on the defense. Its got other ships watching its back and able to shoot down threats. Its a big question why they are letting the carrier down.
Hmm, also maybe they blew it up while it was parked and they just dumped it?
I don't know where you got that information, but in this case, they literally just missed the landing.
Hmm, I coulda swore it was a thing in the last couple decades…turns out that only applies to certain specific scenarios, where they had to ditch it either way, overweight ballast, stuff in the desert, obsolete (and now illegal) WWI & WWII ordinance, etc. Also turns out that instead of dumping most obsolete equipment into the ocean, they now dump it into the “used” market.
Say, who do you think brokers those deals?
https://corruption-tracker.org/blog/how-to-profit-from-the-global-arms-trade