🙏🙏 (idk if this is real)

  • BilboBargains@lemmy.world
    11·
    1 day ago

    You’re not going to beat the mosquito or rotavirus when it comes to environmentally friendly killers. Lethality, prodigious. Carbon footprint, minimal (small amount of flatulence, don’t worry about it). This comment was sponsored by Gnawed VPN.

      • Rusty@lemmy.caEnglish
        61·
        2 days ago

        Average person’s carbon footprint is 7 tons CO2 per year. Killing just one person will make a bomb environmentally friendly.

      • jollyrogue@lemmy.ml
        1·
        1 day ago

        Bombs from Raytheon are environmentally friendly. Making war environmentally friendly is what Raytheon is all about. Raytheon a green company! 👍🏽

  • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
    60·
    2 days ago

    It’s satire. Original tweet was about an environmentally friendly radar system from Raytheon

    The fact that so many people actually fell for it is worrying not just because reality itself has become satire but because this post should be painfully obvious. Ain’t nobody marketing missiles to anyone who cares about the carbon footprint.

    • drunkpostdisaster@lemmy.world
      141·
      2 days ago

      Not going to lie. I believed it and thought ‘wow between this and the knife missile that greatly reduces civilian casualties Rathiyon are probably most morally upstanding war profiteirs of our era’

      now I am just disappointed

      • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
        16·
        2 days ago

        The knife missile was actually kinda awesome in its own way tbh. Ridiculous precision for super long distance murder with as few casualties as possible.

        It’s also frightening that it exists.

        • The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.netEnglish
          9·
          2 days ago

          the knife missile is so emblematic of the entire military industrial complex. can’t stop engaging in unnecessary resource wars due to unnecessary casualties. instead, the military industrial complex will develop and sell a product to allow the killing of specific people in public spaces. and the more you think about the idea of being at a produce stand and someone standing next to you turning into a fine red mist, never to exist in physical space again, the more distopian it seems.

          it reminds me of the episode of star trek where they encounter a planet that has eliminated war via coordinated computer simulations and voluntary genocides.

          • _apokalipto_@lemmy.world
            2·
            2 days ago

            Knife missiles are real things?? Scary stuff. I’m about half way through the Culture series at the moment, never heard of them before…

            • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
              3·
              1 day ago

              It’s the Hellfire AGM-114R-9X

              A while back it was used to kill some dude without the other people in the same house being collateral damage, so it got meme status for a while.

              • MBech@feddit.dk
                3·
                1 day ago

                Question. Are the knives really needed? I feel like getting hit with what is essentially a 5 foot long, 7 inch wide bullet, travelling at mach 1 would prove to be equally efficient at killing single targets, as strapping knives to it.

                • AnyOldName3@lemmy.world
                  2·
                  1 day ago

                  There have been times it’s been used against a whole carful of people, and cars are bigger than seven inches.

                • The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.netEnglish
                  2·
                  1 day ago

                  it reduces the risk of missing because the target bent over to pick up a quarter, or stepped to the side because they saw something interesting. the knives in question are basically swords that deploy radially from the missile body like an umbrella.

      • rumba@lemmy.zipEnglish
        3·
        1 day ago

        probably non-cancerous cooling sytsem or some shit like that, maybe lower RF emissions

  • MoribundMurdoch@lemmy.worldEnglish
    61·
    1 day ago

    This reminds me of Jeremy Kauffman’s ad, “War is Gay,” which advocated for making militarism as gay as possible. The point is that militarism, or zabernism, is considered acceptable and even encouraged as long as DEI quotas are met within the military. https://youtu.be/kdfym6LKpQ0

    • rumba@lemmy.zipEnglish
      2·
      1 day ago

      I would argue against having military, but that’d be pointless. If we’re going to have it, it should be as representative of the population as possible. It might save the lives of underrepresented citizens when we’re invading.

      • MoribundMurdoch@lemmy.world
        32·
        1 day ago

        So you actually believe a military should have quotas based on arbitrary characteristics such as race or gender, tied to the population it is meant to protect? That is, if the population is around 50% women, the military should attempt to have 50% women in all positions? And that any disparate outcome would be evidence of racism or sexism? Would that be your position taken to its extreme, while your actual position has the same essence but is much more sensible in degree? Or what do you think?

        • rumba@lemmy.zipEnglish
          9·
          1 day ago

          *edit: please don’t downvote mori on this, those are absolutely valid questions and a chance to clarify without angry rebuttal is always welcome

          So you actually believe a military should have quotas based on arbitrary characteristics such as race or gender

          Not arbitrary at all. I think the makeup should exactly mirror the population distribution as closely as it can. We invade places, it’s hoards of guys and it’s a lot of rape and pillage and less worry about illegal orders. I think a proper distribution would help that out a lot.

          And that any disparate outcome would be evidence of racism or sexism

          Nope, don’t give a shit about that at all. I just think they should try to have our military not being 99% white men covering each others asses doing shit they shouldn’t. DEI isn’t just about combating racism/sexism, it’s making sure that the staffing matches the population. A team with 20% minorities will be less likely to be overzealous on minorities. A team of 50% women will be less likely to rape or allow the rape of women in action zones.

          Would that be your position taken to its extreme, while your actual position has the same essence but is much more sensible in degree? Or what do you think?

          Not quite sure I grasp that series of questions. I don’t think they should force minorities/women into the military, but they should try hard to be representative and mix everyone together. Nothing beats sexist/racist views in individuals like working closely with people of other races/sexes. Hell it might even drive out people that should have power over other people.

          It’s obviously not without issue. But we need more mixing of culture/race/sex on the daily basis or we’ll be in this while male superiority complex society forever.