Spyke
sopuli.xyz

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

85
BingBongreply
sh.itjust.works

The labs which design, test, and build them are not furloughed. Only the federal oversight.

24
lemmy.world

You mean the labs funded by Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation money? That just got raided to pay the troops?

6
lemmy.world

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.

71
jballsreply
sh.itjust.works

Some Americans voted for him 3 times!

Seriously, imagine how fucking dumb you would have to be to fill out three separate ballots over nearly a decade voting for a failed reality TV star.

18
lemmy.ca

Is he unstable enough for the 25th amendment yet? Asking for a friend.

45
lemmy.world

Can someone just tell him no one else has nuclear fusion power stations yet but (china|EU|Russia) are close and how much money it would make.

41
Wispy2891reply
lemmy.world

It would make money at a country level, but does it fill his personal wallets like the oil industry?

So it's worthless for him

15
tmyakalreply
infosec.pub

It only matters if it makes money for him. Someone wealthy and interested in cracking nuclear fusion would need to be giving him a payout.

10

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.
38

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

33
lemmy.world

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.

33

No doubt but it would not include a detonation test. I think 1000 tests was enough.

6
D_Creply
sh.itjust.works

It's supposed to say alleged, now it's censored to say aged.

I think it's a good play on words, tbh, as the alleged part is mostly used to legally cover what is widely known. An innocent person wouldn't cover up the Epstein list as voraciously as he has.
And he is very very old, therefore aged.

9

supposed to say alleged, now it’s censored to say aged

Thanks! And "No ██king" does the same. Kinda funny, kinda clever.

3

This comes up every time they post this stupid image.

There's way better Epstein memes

3

It's wrong to say alleged, and aged fits better for this wrinkly orange

1
lemmy.world

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.

32

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

9

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

Twice!

For "Research Purposes" (TM)

2
lemmy.world

And who, exactly, is going to get paid to do that? Last I saw 75% of them were furloughed at the moment.

27

Don't worry, there will be a company popping up tied to some Republicunts who'll do the testing for "cheap".

11
feddit.org

doG help us all:

the US Department of Energy (DOE) launched an application for interested parties to apply for access to a maximum of 19 metric tonnes — a little under 42,000 pounds — of weapons-grade plutonium, which has long been a key resource undergirding the US nuclear arsenal.

One of the companies anticipated to receive shipments of the fissile isotope from the DOE is Oklo, a “nuclear startup” backed — and formerly chaired — by OpenAI CEO Sam Altman.

He really is hellbent on literally destroying America for money.

However

As the FT reports, we won’t know for certain until December 31

So I hope this makes the rounds and steps are taken against it soon.

6
Cethinreply
lemmy.zip

Look, I hate the guy too. However, this probably isn't bad. Nuclear energy is incredibly safe, and clean. If he wants to use some of his money to build out nuclear power then I'm fine with that. It will almost certainly never make up for the damage done by "AI" but it's better than not having it.

-1

We get that. But instead of controling the process he's literally selling off weapons grade plutonium to shady, megalomaniac tech bros as I stated before.

1

He's literally selling off weapons grade plutonium to shady, megalomaniac tech bros. That leaves very little wiggle room for concern trolling and you're way off the mark.

But the article implies that it isn't a done deal until the end of the year (I'm not sure I got that right though), so it's not too late to protest, raise awareness.

2

I'm NGL If my job put in the position to be the one testing nukes it would be very tempting to do so even without pay just on a 'oonga boonga big boom' basis. Unfortunately I'm educated enough to know how awful that is for the environment, also not a nuclear test engineer or whatever the job title even is.

4
lemmy.world

Unless I'm mistaken Russia has way more nukes than the US still.

20
-RJ-reply
lemmy.world

Why would any country need that many? I mean having any is stupid because it will always end in mutually assured destruction but with that many, you could kill us all if you were on the verge of one hitting you.

13
Rakonatreply
lemmy.world

Stupid, legacy calculus but calculus none the less. During the Cold war both sides recognized that a direct or near direct hit on a launch site could potentially negate any chance for retribution or follow up attacks in an otherwise limited/not all out scenario. So they counted the delivery mechanism they could identify, did some multiplication to account for misses and defenses and came up with a number. Then the other side noticed the build up, comes up with same general calculus and runs the same general math to decide how many they need. And this the goes back and forth for decades where each side is building up counters to their rivals counters. And the numbers we have now are actually a reduction from the peak of the Cold war build up.

19

thankfully we at least halted that trend for a while with early warning systems: no longer launch all your nukes and you might take out all of theirs… launch all your nukes and by the time they arrive the retaliatory ICBMS will be 5min from hitting their own targets; likely right on top of you… launch an ICBM and you’re fucked

4

It is mutually-assured destruction. The idea is that there are enough nukes to end all life on earth. Because if there are that many nukes, then nobody would ever use them.

That’s how the US and USSR came up with these figures when they were disarming at the end of the Cold War.

8
suciusreply
lemmy.world

does anyone know how many of those are operational?

3

No, and we probably never will. The Russian government certainly doesn't. When the invasion of Ukraine proper started, a lot of their equipment failed or was missing, and the military wasn't aware. It had been sold off or just not maintained by the people in charge of it.

I'm certain the same thing has happened with the nuclear arsenal. The only time it will be used is if you already lost, so what's the point in spending money on keeping it operational over just having the appearance of it being operational. Your enemy can't know the difference (especially if you don't) and it'd be bad to bet on it failing, so it serves exactly the same purpose regardless.

4

Yes but in what condition? AFAIK most of them are from Cold War times and the Kremlin deliberately suppresses any information on the state they're in.

So, America can destroy earth 100-fold, but Russia can destroy it 110-fold - at least until one of them backfires.

1

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

11

Even if it wasn't for the other million reasons, this guy's grammar alone should disqualify him from having the nuclear codes.

18
lemmy.blahaj.zone

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.

17

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

3

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

Ohh we got you fam.

2
lemmy.ca

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

-3
DarkArireply
lemmy.blahaj.zone

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.

0

You are misunderstanding what I wrote. I'm aware that setting nukes off over the ocean won't end all life in earth. I never said that tho and you might have me mixed up with someone else. I said that it will end life as we know it and it absolutely will, setting nukes off over cities will cause radioactive fallout, as well as destroy power grids, the internet infrastructure. It will poison the water. You have to also remember that it will short out the hundreds of nuclear power plants potentially leading to meltdowns, unless they are fail safe designs. I don't think most plants are designed to withstand an emp. Either way a nuclear war would likely mean a reset for human civilization. If you don't believe this then I'm not going to waste my time trying to convince you otherwise.

1

All good. Remember that this kind of apocalyptic events should not spread as heresay to avoid things getting twisted, cofused, people claiming its fake. Etc

10

Wow I've never been to truth social before. I had a pop up add for a necklace with sand Jesus walked on, pillows and towels and a trump elf on a shelf.

2
lemmy.world

Choose one...global warming or nuclear winter. I think that is our futures only options.

11

There's always the mass-extinction asteroid option to look forward to.

7
DBT
lemmy.world

Testing for what exactly? Do we not know enough about them already?

11

Primative chest pounding. He has to prove his chest makes a bigger sound. Or his nuke is bigger than their dick.

4
lemmy.world

The real crazy people who would cause a nuclear wae are israel and the usa leaders not Iran

11

I am not simping. Iran isn't seeking nukes by american admission. I never justified Iran human right abuses.

6
kn33reply
lemmy.world

Any suggestion of effective tactics to remove the president are met with removal.

9
kingofrasreply
lemmy.world

I haven’t seen it on .world, but on shitworks they kill any suggestion that violence may be necessary to end the hostile foreign takeover of USA govt.

9
tornavishreply
lemmy.cafe

Donald Trump should be killed by the people of the United States, and that killing is not a crime because it is self-defense. This comment will be removed

14
freebeereply
sh.itjust.works

If there is an impeachment (meaning Congress/Senate actually doing their jobs), followed by imprisonment, meanwhile new free elections and finally a trial... If the trial reaches the conclusion the death penalty is what he should get for his crimes, "the US people killing Trump" would be completely legal in any sense of the word and to any foreign, independent observer. People have gotten legal death penalties for much less and in way more dubious circumstances in the USA in rather recent times...

3
kingofrasreply
lemmy.world

When are the shitjustworks guys going to realise this just doesn’t work. These are all rules we already tried to follow, and he keeps making things worse for everyone, while lying and enriching soulless sycophants daily.

The US democracy doesn’t have that kind of time. The people don’t have that kind of time. The climate and the planet and all of humanity don’t have that kind of time.

He declared war on everything we stand for. At what point do we just say fuck the rules, off with his head, it’s gone too far?

You’re still debating, and intellectualising this. It is not a debate if you’re snatched off the street, an unpaid govt worker, or his political foes.

Think of 3 more really unthinkable borderline illegal things he could do. He will have done 3 of those in the next half year. The incrementalism is how these types win. It must end.

1

I don't follow USA politics to every detail: has there been an impeachment attempt? Problem is not me intellectualising, it's representatives of the people: Congress & senate, not doing their jobs. Their job is not being a yes person to the president. It's representing the people. The culture where they are headless chicken was installed long before trump. Yet they and their institutions are the way to end this properly, cleanly and with enough representative power so it does not lead to civil war. The president needs to seek approval of Congress for policy, not the other way around. Some random murder in the street scenario is a recipe for disaster for everyone. It creates an enormous power vacuum. The Congress way avoids that. It is the least worrying path this can go down...

1

Naturally. Lemmy’s on the hook, but particularly the relevant instances, if someone pops off and it appears poor moderation was the cause. Comment removal after 95% of potential readers have already read it, and no ban? That’s about as good as you can get. This place is plenty militant enough

4

Have you tried posting on an instance that is not hosted in the US?

Maybe not straight up assassination, but there's plenty options that are perfectly legal in most countries. At the very least legal to talk about.

2
lemmy.world

Dumbass probably watched a movie and was like duuuuh that looks cool lolz...

9

He's going to look at one directly, just like he did with the eclipse.

5
thelemmy.club

Are any other countries actually actively testing nuclear weapons?
(I don't think North Korea counts/is.)

7

You have to. He didn't start weapons testing for defense he's going to go into war and take the offensive

1

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!

7
sopuli.xyz

As if nuking Russia would help. They have the Dead-Hand system. No one wins here.

6
ayyyreply
sh.itjust.works

If it’s anything like the rest of their military equipment, I’m not too worried about it.

-6

I used to listen to a podcast from Latvia that reported on the war in Ukraine, I can't remember the name of the show, sorry. The guy seemed to be very knowledgeable about Russia and one thing he stressed was while the Russian military was corrupt and inept, the troops involved with nukes were still highly educated and hand picked and trained by people from within the corps.

2

So you want to play nuclear poker ? Hey can anyone send this guy to Ukraine.

1

That guy is an absolute fud! He sees some other moron do it, and thinks he has to do it too so he looks "alpha"... Talk about your beta bitches, jesus christ.

5

Seeing how he likes to demolish parts of the White House perhaps the first test could be on the West Wing, with him being in the Oval Office?

4
lemmy.world

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

4

"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

2

He’s old and his last bout of formative education predates most of our parents’ lives.

5
lemmy.world

Unfortunately, we do not in fact have the technology necessary to blow up the Moon.

2

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

1