this post was submitted on 13 Oct 2024
295 points (98.4% liked)

NonCredibleDefense

6549 readers
306 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
 
top 44 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] eestileib@sh.itjust.works 59 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Nobody's gonna mention that this is an F-16B cockpit and Ukraine got single-seater F-16MLUs?

Can't even enjoy this any more, I'm like sandpaper atm.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 5 points 2 days ago

I think it's just reposts from Reddit?

[–] Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 37 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Those dates are a little unfair, the su34 is basically two decades older, but got put on Ice. And the newer models F16 are a huge leap up from the original 70s model.

[–] Cornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

It's not like the Ukrainians are getting new block 70s. Thery're almost certainly old block 40s on the verge of retirement.

[–] Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago

True, but the MLU/block 50 version is also from the mid to late 90s.

[–] Rednax@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

Also very relevant is the missiles in use. Those certainly are not from the 70s.

[–] nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm more interested in knowing how Lauren Phillips feels about being an F-16 in this meme.

I'm sure she's flattered as a true patriot. I know she is. I've seen her in patriotic wear.

Not, like, a LOT of patriotic wear by square inches. But enough.

[–] MossyFeathers@pawb.social 31 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I should inform you that the search term you're looking for is "aeromorph".

You're welcome.

[–] Thcdenton@lemmy.world 28 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Nope. That's definitely not what I was looking for.

[–] MossyFeathers@pawb.social 18 points 1 day ago

Wdym? Aeromorphs are pure NCD. Living aircraft. You telling me that isn't something NCD would come up with?

[–] nuke@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Yeah right? Why would I need to search for it? Like I don't already have multiple TBs of material.

[–] notthebees@reddthat.com 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Those words are not in the bible. Or Quran. Or any holy book.

You sure? I could have sworn it was in that one passage in Hezekiah.

[–] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago

And thus a-ok

[–] wizzor@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 day ago

That.. certainly was something.

[–] Someonelol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 2 days ago (5 children)

I dislike Russian aggression as much as the next non tankie but can we agree the Su34 looks fucking amazing?

[–] nuke@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 day ago

It's only natural to be curious. We're human after-all. Just remember you can look but don't touch. I'll never forgive you if you cheat on F35-chan and break her heart.

[–] HootinNHollerin@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Sukhoi sure makes beautiful planes

[–] Godric@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Too bad for them their competitors make effective planes.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Hey, they're at least a top five maker, of the five companies that can make a jet from the last forty years.

Not if you include any kind of joint warfare roles or even information warfare. The airframe and powerplant are sufficient but the onboard computing, radios, jamming capabilities, lock detection and radar are all far behind western manufacturers.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 18 points 2 days ago (3 children)

IMO basically every Soviet / Russian jet has looked better than American jets.

I like the look of the MiG-15, the 21, etc. But, IMO the jets really got beautiful right as the Soviet Union was collapsing.

The SU-27 is a beautiful plane, the MiG-29 too. It just seems like with some of these jets, the American equivalents were designed by computer and manufactured precisely to spec. While, it feels like some of the Soviet planes involved guys with hammers trying to make a beautiful curved surface.

It also helps that the Russians often use colourful paint jobs, while the US uses flat boring grey that shows every flaw.

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

F-86 is a work of art, and the Mig-15 looks like a 3D printed copy found on Etsy.

[–] Jumi@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Luckily the rule of cool doesn't apply IRL

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Don't get me wrong, nearly every fighter plane looks cool. But, it's just different varieties of cool. Like, a lot of the US planes look Lamborghini-cool, with hard surfaces and so on. The Russian / Soviet planes just look more sculpted.

And, if the rule of cool doesn't apply, then why did P-40 fighter planes have shark's mouths?

[–] Jumi@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Because Americans are kinda like W40k orcs and think painting something makes it stronger, although it actually works for the orcs.

/jk

It works for America too. Confidence is a hell of a drug.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

The raptor definitely looks better than the felon imo, but for 4-4.5 gen, yeah, I’d agree in terms of looks for the most part. Though there are a couple exceptions - the F-104 looks cooler than the MiG-21, imo.

Edit: surprised nobody called me out for citing 2nd gen jets lol

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago

I dunno. The nose of the MiG-21 looks weird, but I really like the look of the delta wings, the rudder and the ailerons. The F-104 with nothing mounted on the wingtips looks like a dart, which is cool I suppose. With the typical big fuel tanks on the wingtips it looks like some kind of catamaran.

[–] JoYo@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 day ago

im more of an assman, myself.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 2 points 1 day ago

I'm not sure about the different colour on the beak.

[–] slaacaa@lemmy.world 24 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (5 children)

By the way, does anybody have a credible take on the current status/outlook of the war?

I hear nothing about the Kursk offense now, but mainstream news mention recent Russian successes in the East. I understand striking deep into Russia with US weapons would be critical, but I think that is unlikely to happen before the elections.

I am (again) worried for Ukraine, and to our Western politicians f*cking this up.

[–] nuke@sh.itjust.works 60 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

I love yall but yall gotta stop doing this in NCD. Is there a more credible community yall can have these discussions in? We're here for jokes and shitposting. Real, honest, fact-based discussions (especially involving politics) really don't belong here. !ukraine@sopuli.xyz might be a better fit.

[–] skulblaka@sh.itjust.works 31 points 2 days ago (1 children)

No answer received here should be trusted regardless how credible it sounds anyway, you may as well ask ChatGPT how the war is going, you'll get a similar level of trustability

[–] taladar@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago

To be fair that is also true of the other online communities that take themselves more seriously.

Yeah, nuke that serious post from orbit!

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 12 points 2 days ago

Good mod post

[–] Mr_Blott@feddit.uk 16 points 2 days ago

This was not the

By the way does anybody

I was hoping for

[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 16 points 2 days ago (2 children)

You can sign up for ISW’s newsletter, they do a good job of reporting what’s going on from a fairly dry, but western perspective. Last I saw they were reporting that Russia is aggressively counter attacking in Kursk to attempt to dislodge the Ukrainians before the fall mud sets in. It’s not looking great on the front but there are quite a few indications that the Russian attacks are not sustainable long-term. That said, I’ve seen reports saying that for a while now and the grinding attrition has continued.

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago

Incredible. 74 sources on their latest piece and almost all Telegram, and some Facebook.

Key takeaways (@slaacaa@lemmy.world):

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

People have been saying that basically from day one yet the Russians keep coming. Obviously this isn't sustainable long term but nobody knows how long they can keep going.

[–] InverseParallax@lemmy.world 14 points 2 days ago

The Russians are throwing everything at the salient, it's brutal and costly and the Ukrainians probably won't be able to hold too long.

But it also did it's job: it was a target Russia HAD to take back, and it bought a few months for the American equipment to come online.

What is really needed is Russian territory authorization, and the election to be over so there's less doubt of continued supply, and new weapons packages can be drawn up.

[–] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I dont actually know how trustworthy this site is, but it is nice for getting a visual view of the front lines. https://liveuamap.com/