SARGE

joined 10 months ago
[–] SARGE@startrek.website 5 points 2 months ago

Here's the thing....

[–] SARGE@startrek.website 16 points 2 months ago

It's great when people on your side of the border hate you because you support human rights, and people on the other side of the border hate you because of where you were born and lived untill recently.

Also simultaneously being told "you should just leave your shit hole country" from one group of people and also "you should stay and fix your own stupid country before you try and ruin others"

Basically "fuck you for existing, now go die quietly so we can get on with our lives"

And don't even get me started on any sort of minority group and how shitty they have it here. Can't even walk to the corner store without looking over their shoulder for ICE or some other thug law enforcement.

[–] SARGE@startrek.website 15 points 2 months ago

Honestly I'm hoping for Rapid Unplanned Disassembly the first time it hauls his dumb ass into the air.

[–] SARGE@startrek.website 13 points 2 months ago (4 children)

And nobody suggested it did.

But the argument of "it's more unsafe" doesn't apply, that was my whole point.

If one thing is less unsafe than another, why the fuck WOULDN'T you want to switch the the DEMONSTRABLY LESS UNSAFE THING

[–] SARGE@startrek.website 10 points 2 months ago (6 children)

The safety aspects alone SHOULD be enough to convince people, yet here we are.

The difference between nuclear-power- related disasters and fossil fuel related disasters is astronomical.

And honestly the amount of radioactive isotopes that get spewed out from burning coal day in day out for decades on end absolutely dwarfs the amount of radioactivity released from nuclear disasters.

[–] SARGE@startrek.website 50 points 2 months ago (1 children)

video posted Jan. 1st 2025

8000000 likes

[–] SARGE@startrek.website 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

generates about a truckload a year (20-30 tons) of spent fuel

Is that spent fuel or just waste in general? I have seen "20 tons" used for both here and there, and there's a big difference between them IMO.

Fuel is much more dangerous than, say, a piece of equipment that was exposed to something, but both will be stored as "nuclear waste". Not that I'm saying the equipment is "safe" but the likelihood of a disaster occurring because a barrel of irradiated equipment busted open vs a barrel of spent fuel....

[–] SARGE@startrek.website 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If we would adopt nuclear power generation at large scale world-wide, we would deplete our scarce uranium probably in a few decades, long before oil

Tell me you don't understand the energy density of nuclear fuel without telling me...

[–] SARGE@startrek.website 85 points 2 months ago (31 children)

A lot of comments here are displaying their ignorance of nuclear technology.

Keep eating up the oil company talking points, I guess. "hey guys remember those nuclear meltdowns from outdated reactors that had all kinds of things going wrong because of poor design and decision making, most of which is no longer an issue? Yeah things blow up so better keep chugging away at those fossil fuels while we sabotage any investments into renewables"

I mean goddamn, the "worst" disaster in the USA was a big nothing burger that was sensationalized by newspapers that knew how to sell a headline, and oil companies that knew how to leverage any sort of negative press to their advantage.

When the fallout from nuclear disasters doesn't come close to the amount of radiation out off by burning and refining fossil fuels, there is no argument.

[–] SARGE@startrek.website 7 points 2 months ago

Oh look, another armchair expert going in about how nuclear is a waste of time and effort, literally using the same argument that oil companies have been using to keep nuclear away.

"oh it's so sooper dooper dangerous, you should invest in renewables" lobbies the shit out of nations to keep wind and solar projects from taking off

[–] SARGE@startrek.website 15 points 2 months ago (1 children)

"I was just doing my job" is an excuse that I thought we figured out, as a planet, was bullshit in the 1940s.

Set a trap for whoever comes to haul things away.

[–] SARGE@startrek.website 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Because men outclass women in almost any physical ability

I have never heard this argument come out of someone who doesn't look like a wet noodle could outclass them in physical ability. It's always a keyboard warrior who hasn't cooked a meal since the Kraft Mac he made in 9th grade when his parents left him alone one evening and wouldn't know what the inside of a gym looks like if it weren't in GTA.

Motherfucker, I knew plenty of cis women who could easily out-class me in physical abilities and I was in the US military

The only people who care what's in the pants of the enlisted person beside them are pieces of shit who don't deserve to be there. Focus on your fucking job, and stop fantasizing about their crotch.

Not once did I ever wonder what a person was assigned at birth while I was in. They wouldn't be there if they couldn't physically do it.

Nobody is lowering qualifications of military personnel because the individual is trans.

view more: ‹ prev next ›