this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2025
31 points (89.7% liked)
NonCredibleDefense
4279 readers
281 users here now
Militaria shitposting central! Post memes, tasteless jokes, and sexual cravings for military equipment and/or nuclear self-destruction!
Rules:
- Posts must abide by lemmy.world terms and conditions
- No spam or soliciting for money.
- No racism or other bigotry allowed.
- Obviously nothing illegal.
If you see these please report them.
Related communities:
For the other, slightly less political NCD, !noncredibledefense@sh.itjust.works
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The only flaw with this plan is, if you piss someone off badly enough, there is no bunker that will withstand a direct hit from a nuke.
Need a bigger rock
The earth is just a big rock
So just put the bunker on the other side of the big earth rock
what if you put a nuke on the building so that the nuke explodes the dropped nuke and protects the bunker
So like ERA but with nukes?
Could work.
Not really. Nukes are horrific because they target cities. It is incredibly hard to destroy a military with just nukes - too many targets, they're spread out far and wide and mobile. Deep bunkers also work really well against nukes.
That's wrong. You can't get a direct hit on a bunker with a nuke. Also nukes don't hit anything. They burst in the air to prevent all energy from going up.
When you're dealing with megatons of yield, directly above the bunker is a direct hit.
Path of least resistance + air pressure due to there being no where to go resists the explosion.
Resists, sure. Ain't nothing stopping that.