this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2023
220 points (87.4% liked)

NonCredibleDefense

6633 readers
1739 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
 
all 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 70 points 11 months ago (2 children)

The problem is that everyone wants shells now, and nobody wants shells in 10 years.

Nobody is going to build a new production line in a new factory just to mothball it in a few years when demand falls off.

[–] Fisk400@feddit.nu 74 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Sounds like a business that shouldn't be privately owned but just be a part of the military.

[–] Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Either by paying up and shutting up or by owning the factories themselves you’d lose a bunch of money, so not sure that’s the way to tackle it

[–] Fisk400@feddit.nu 36 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I mean, paying billions for things that will probably never be used in any meaningful capacity is not a foreign concept to the military. They do it all the time.

[–] ikapoz@sh.itjust.works 25 points 11 months ago (1 children)

That is literally the BEST case outcome for military spending.

[–] Fermion@feddit.nl 8 points 11 months ago

It's second best. The best is not paying and never needing it.

[–] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 11 months ago

With climate change related conflicts (especially water conflicts) rising exponentially, I don't think there's going to be a shortage of demand for ammunition any time soon.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 49 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It isn't as easy on the American side. The US military owns most of the facilities that make munitions, even if it outsources operations. There was some slack in the supply chain to make more, but that slack is gone and you need an act of Congress to increase from there.

[–] Rekonok@sh.itjust.works 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Just give money to that Congress guy

[–] Ummdustry@sh.itjust.works 21 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Do you want europe to make artillery shells like the old days?

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 24 points 11 months ago (2 children)
[–] Death_Equity@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

I think we can all agree that Europe drastically increasing the production of artillery shells is great for the environment in the long-term.

[–] Vant@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago

I’m sorry about your head injury.

[–] Echo5@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago

You skipped the step where they have to restart the whole factory and renew the contract (which will take at least a couple weeks) before simply receiving more artillery shells. Navigating MIC contracts is hell.