• LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Can’t be passed over for the Nobel peace prize if the prize committee is reduced to radioactive slag.

  • neidu3@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Lol, Vladdy already tried a nuclear test. Was it last year? This year? I forget… Either way, it failed.

    • humorlessrepost@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      Are you sure you’re not thinking of a test of a nuclear-powered thruster for a non-nuclear weapon?

      That’s an important distinction.

      • Doomsider@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        You mean a dirty nuclear bomb/rocket that can easily swap out a conventional warhead for a nuclear one.

        That is not an important distinction. It was a nuclear test.

        • remon@ani.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Testing a nuclear reactor (which happens all the time, all over the place) is very different from testing a nuclear bomb.

          The distinction literally couldn’t be fucking more important.

          • Doomsider@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            OP said nuclear test, not a nuclear bomb. It was definitely a nuclear test.

            Furthermore, this is why Trump is asking for nuclear testing as a reaction to Russia’s big bad new weapon. Also, the whole spend more money on the military angle that the US is obsessed with.

            So there is no distinction because you are just wrong at this point on multiple levels.

  • TheFeatureCreature@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    On the plus side: Building and maintaining a nuclear stockpile is extremely expensive. This will serve as yet another open, gushing tap on Russia’s finances as they haemorrhage money from the war.

    • gigachad@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      I don’t think this is a good deal for the US. It costs them equally much, and China will also gain the “official” opportunity to make nuclear tests, a field where they don’t have as much experience as the US the the regional power Russia.