Something that happened or was uncovered recently anywhere in the world. It doesn't have to have global implications. Just has to be informative in some way.
Title format
Post title should mirror the news source title.
URL format
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefix
Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. No social media posts
Avoid all social media posts. Try searching for a source that has a written article or transcription on the subject.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
Isn't China one of the countries that already has enough nukes to glass the entire world multiple times over?
What difference does it make if they have even more?
...or is that stat bullshit? I've heard it parroted pretty much my entire life, but never actually thought to fact check it until now.
The idea is that you scatter them around so that it couldn't be taken out with a single attack, and you also want more than a few per location as various countermeasures diminishes the chances of them actually hitting.
But yes, it's kind of pointless as if we ever reach the point of nuclear war, it will be total destruction as everyone will use their full arsenals to avoid giving any other country an advantage post nuclear winter.
“The results found that 100 nuclear warheads are adequate for nuclear deterrence in the worst case scenario, while using more than 100 nuclear weapons by any aggressor nation (including the best positioned strategically to handle the unintended consequences) even with optimistic assumptions (including no retaliation) would cause unacceptable damage to their own society.” -- source
You had the same reaction I did. Seems like once you have enough nuclear weapons to destroy humanity, you have more than enough.
True, but I think it’s more psychological than practical. Nuclear warheads have had a bit of a mental version of the inverse ninja law. The reality is that two nuclear weapons have been used in real world conflict and they were catastrophically devastating enough to stop a nation that was potentially willing to fight to the last dead civilian. Those weapons were also small, weak, and easily disrupted compared to today’s. We’re not really good at understanding that France can destroy life on earth just as effectively as the US and China so when someone has thousands they’re scarier than someone with 200, even though 200 would do more than enough damage to everyone
Why does Xi always look like he's bored and doesn't want to be there? It's like he's in a work training, and they're 3 hours into a powerpoint on checking personal emails on a work computer during business hours. He's one slide away from rolling his eyes.
These are propably the weapons of mass destruction the US never found in Iraq