this post was submitted on 28 Feb 2025
615 points (99.4% liked)
NonCredibleDefense
7049 readers
405 users here now
A community for your defence shitposting needs
Rules
1. Be nice
Do 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
- !militaryporn@lemmy.world
- !forgottenweapons@lemmy.world
- !combatvideos@sh.itjust.works
- !militarymoe@ani.social
Banner made by u/Fertility18
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Easy solution - new defence pact without USA and invite everyone else the Trumpian USA stiffed on defence like Australia.
We (Australia) are already in Eurovision so a defence pact with Europe (and the UK lol) would make sense!
Didn't Australia stiff themselves by trusting trump and cancelling french submarines ? Or are you referring to something else ?
It was with Biden, in 2021. He truly went dark Brandon on that one, Macron and the entire French government learned about it through the news.
Though the Australians did stiff themselves spectacularly. They will have to pay billions to the French with nothing to show for it, then billions more to the Americans for nuclear submarines which they could have gotten from the French if they hadn't told them to design a diesel submarine based on their own nuclear design!! Except now Australia is tied to American nuclear fuel and maintenance, further vassalizing themselves. 5000 IQ move.
Plus now the project is in the hands of Trump and his fox news host of a defense minister so uh good luck with that. By the 2040s I project they'll have been officially integrated in the Russian chain of command and the submarines will be delivered to Australia in the form of perfect replicas of the Moskva.
Our collective terrible singing, worse than the siren of Stuka and more terrifying than the brrt of A-10, will surely deter the both the Americans and Russians.
I'm imagining an A-10 in a Eurovision outfit now...
Have you guys made up with France yet?
Man I'm not even sure we have a government anymore...
Does Australia need EU help in case a Second Emu War breaks out?
Nobody wants to be tossed into that meat grinder.
Not with the drop bears aligned with the emus we are stuffed
Solidarity.
lol no way Europeans will cross half the planet to come to your defense in Emu War II.
Why? Are you worried the US is going to pull everyone into war or something?
My understanding is that people are annoyed at US actions outside of NATO, like positions WRT NATO, Trump/Musk nonsense domestically, etc. But are they worried the US won't defend if a NATO country is attacked?
I understand issues with the US as a trade partner, but you really want the biggest military on your side in a defensive pact.
Haven't you watched the news in the last 5 weeks? How can you expect the USA to defend a NATO country while they themselves are the aggressor?
Wait, has the US attacked someone in the last 5 weeks? From what I can tell, it's just Trump doing Trump things, flapping his gums and trying to get NATO countries to honor their agreements. I'm not a fan of Trump, but I haven't seen any evidence of the US actually attacking anyone, which is surprising because we usually have a war or two going on at all times.
He has threatened Canada that they'll be the 51. US-State, he has threatened Denmark by saying he'll "liberate" Greenland. A war of aggression usually doesn't directly start by invading it, but with unrealisable claims and wrong accusations:
That's how you talk to countries you're planning to invade and not to countries you're planning to protect from invasion.
The US isn't going to invade Canada or Denmark, that's just Trump talking all bravado and trying to get a deal with each. The US wants bases in the Arctic, and Canada and Greenland have land there. He's teasing Trudeau and trying to broker a land deal with Denmark.
The Iraq thing was completely stupid though. It was lumped in with the "War on Terror," but it had nothing to do with terrorism. In fact, Saddam was doing a decent job keeping terrorism in check. I'm still confused about the actual goal there (pretty expensive just for oil...).
The original question was
and I'm pretty sure the current US won't. In fact, here's my prediction on what will happen:
In the upcoming weeks Trump and Putin will split the Ukraine between the two of them. Encouraged by that success, Putin will try to invade Finland in order to reinstate the Russian Empire. Most of NATO will of cause stand with Finland, but Trump (confusing Finland with Denmark, as no true American can tell these nordic countries apart) tries to make a deal: "If Finland wants our support, they must hand over Greenland". As Finland obviously can't do that, Trump will say: "Then we must invade Greenland before the Russians get it". But confusing Greenland with Canada (as no true American can tell these nordic countries apart) he will actually invade Nova Scotia. TBH, I think this orange idiot is so clueless, he might actually try to invade Alaska, believing it to be Canada.
Lol.
If we're going to invade any part of Canada, I vote for British Columbia. We'll tell him it's west Washington DC, but Britain claimed it, so we need to take it back. It's gorgeous up there.
Please don't tell him it was Britain, or he'll be invading France next.
No silly, that's Quebec.
he can try... There is a reason this region was the birth of the french navy commando 😏 . The "fusilliers marin" who gave birth to the "commando marine" has a reputation on never loosing a place they protect even when they are completely surrounded (for example Dixmude during WWI or Bir Hakeim during WWII ^^)
That's also how you talk to countries you're trying to terrify into giving you greater concessions. The "art of the deal" is terrifying the other party with impossible demands and then negotiating down from there to something realistic, letting them think they avoided disaster. It creates an environment of fear and uncertainty, which forces his opponents to be cautious and fearful.
I suppose there's no way to know if he's bluffing or if he's being sincere, but that's the point. He wants people to be afraid.