• ieatpwns@lemmy.world
    4·
    1 day ago

    This dumbass couldn’t tell you what nuclear testing was if you explained it to him like he was 5

    • pigup@lemmy.world
      2·
      1 day ago

      “I don’t give a fuck, something racist, several n words. It’s gonna help me stay in power and that’s all I care about and the only thing that matters.” - child rapist president dump

    • smeenz@lemmy.nz
      11·
      2 days ago

      Orange Don wants to make sure he can launch them the next time someone calls him names, without anyone being able to stop him

  • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
    32·
    2 days ago

    This is horrifying. Like, mind-bogglingly bad.

    It’s also a blatant lie. Other countries are not testing nuclear weapons, they’re running simulations. We didn’t do that in the 60s because it wasn’t possible, but the US (and presumably China/Russia) literally have giant supercomputers for this purpose now.

    …And we would know if they were doing real testing because it would show up on seismographs.

    But who cares about truth? Or sanity? No, all my relatives (even scientifically minded ones) won’t even bat an eye, lest some Democrat steal their retirement, ugh.

    • nekbardrun@lemmy.world
      2·
      1 day ago

      Good time to remind that, in all History, only one country used nuclear bombs in a war.

      Twice!

      For “Research Purposes” ™

    • smeenz@lemmy.nz
      9·
      2 days ago

      Trumplethinskin is too stupid to understand any of that . He desperately wants to to be the one to trigger a spectacular overreaction and turn another country into glass.

      #smallcarrotproblems

  • Pyr@lemmy.ca
    7·
    2 days ago

    Are they trying to figure out what the expiration date is on nuclear warheads? The fuq are they still needing to test for?

    Let’s just blow up our arsenal for the heck of it boyz, it will make for a good twitter post!

  • rayyy@piefed.socialEnglish
    33·
    2 days ago

    Just shows he is desperately trying to create many more distractions from the Epstein files to see what works.

  • paperazzi@lemmy.world
    69·
    3 days ago

    He’s been itching to nuke something since his first term. Hurricanes, he suggested at one point. And Americans voted him into office twice. Fucking morons.

  • skozzii@lemmy.ca
    1·
    1 day ago

    We call this an eye for an eye approach and it will continue until the whole world is blind…

  • Gork@sopuli.xyz
    84·
    3 days ago

    And he’s doing this while the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) is furloughed… 🧐

  • TigerAce@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    38·
    2 days ago

    Ah, the “I had no choice!” argument for scaling up world tension. Yeah, we’ve never heard that one before. Hitler also “had no choice” but to invade Sudetenland, Austria and Poland.

    The “we had no choice” argument is always used to take the victim role as an excuse to justify anything you like. Whether it is joining wars because they sank your illegal weapons shipment hidden in an ocean liner, invading a country because you made it look like they sank your ship, invade a country because a few terrorists attacked your country, invade a country because you claim there might be weapons of mass destruction, send troops and chemical weapons to a dictatorial regime because the freedom fighters threaten your overseas naval base, invade a country for denazification, commit ethnic cleansing, genocide and other horrible war crimes because some terrorist extremists attacked your country after years and years of oppression and apartheid, etc etc etc. There are so many examples in history where this tactic has been used. The entire cold war thrived on this bullshit argument “look at them, I have no choice”.

    “I’m going to do something bad, so I find a way to justify it.”

    • every dictator, agressor, war criminal in history.
  • RattlerSix@lemmy.worldEnglish
    33·
    2 days ago

    One can never be sure what President Brain Worms is talking about but I’m pretty sure Obama started a ten year plan to modernize our nuclear forces early in his presidency.

  • DarkAri@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    181·
    2 days ago

    A giant waste of money. 800 nukes is plenty for pretty much anything and launching 100 would probably mean the end of life as we know it on planet earth. If you wanted to blow a bunch of money on the military there are better ways to do it.

    • ameancow@lemmy.worldEnglish
      51·
      2 days ago

      100 would probably mean the end of life as we know it on planet earth

      It would alter the course of human history for sure, but it wouldn’t actually end human civilization. Just being annoyingly pedantic after growing up in the cold war and learning about such cheerful topics as fallout patterns and blast wave radius and how to fashion air purifiers from an early age.

    • Seefra 1@lemmy.zip
      3·
      2 days ago

      True, but don’t tell them that, it’s better if they waste money on useless nuclears than genocide technology.

    • Zink@programming.dev
      2·
      2 days ago

      If you wanted to blow a bunch of money on the military there are better ways to do it.

      Ohh we got you fam.

    • Fenrisulfir@lemmy.ca
      14·
      2 days ago

      Do you mean 100 all at once? Because we’ve been averaging 26.5 per year for the last 80 years

      • DarkAri@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        11·
        1 day ago

        Hmm I don’t think so. If it is true those are over the ocean or something. I mean an attack with 100 missiles would destroy nearly any country. Russia is especially vulnerable because they only have a couple of cities with any population in them. Modern nukes are 50-75x the yield of the ones they dropped on Japan. There are all kinds of externalities. They can poison the ground water for generations. They can kill any life feeding in the area. They can cause fallout which is like a radioactive dust cloud covering everything. It isn’t good.