SPAM This thread is for random spam!!

Scouse

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
37,905
So, surprised that this "uniquely stupid weapon" isn't making bigger headlines:


A nuclear powered nuclear-tipped cruise missile.

Basically, the "flying chernobyl" moniker is correct. And although I suspect we could shoot it down - if we did we'd be spreading an unshielded nuclear reactor meltdown over a vast area.

Putin has indicated his willingness to use nukes, he's gone ahead and built a weapon that will spread radiation just from firing it - which will contaminate Russia first - killing Russians (which he's happy to do) but also every country it passes over on it's way to it's target or eventual shooting down nuclear disaster.

And people think I'm being stupid when I say the existence of nuclear reactors is a danger to the public in times of war. If we go to war it's inevitable that they will be targets.

So then. Thoughts?
 
Deebs

Deebs

Chief Arsewipe
Staff member
Moderator
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 11, 1997
Messages
9,077,371
Scouse said:
So, surprised that this "uniquely stupid weapon" isn't making bigger headlines:


A nuclear powered nuclear-tipped cruise missile.

Basically, the "flying chernobyl" moniker is correct. And although I suspect we could shoot it down - if we did we'd be spreading an unshielded nuclear reactor meltdown over a vast area.

Putin has indicated his willingness to use nukes, he's gone ahead and built a weapon that will spread radiation just from firing it - which will contaminate Russia first - killing Russians (which he's happy to do) but also every country it passes over on it's way to it's target or eventual shooting down nuclear disaster.

And people think I'm being stupid when I say the existence of nuclear reactors is a danger to the public in times of war. If we go to war it's inevitable that they will be targets.

So then. Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Last time I checked history has shown that war is a danger to the public. Doesn't matter the equipment used to wage war.

Oh silly me, let me get the list of countries that have used nuclear weapons in war, I am sure it will have Russia, China or even North Korea.

Damn got that wrong, the only country in history to have used nuclear weapons in war is USA.
 
Scouse

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
37,905
Deebs said:
Last time I checked history has shown that war is a danger to the public. Doesn't matter the equipment used to wage war.
Click to expand...
I beg to differ.

We use multiple nukes in a global war we're all fucked. Check.

Russia fires a handful of these and nobody bothers retaliating - we just shoot em down? We're sliding-scale fucked.

It's a disastrous weapon and the fact we've made one tells us more about how humanity works than should make anyone comfortable.
 
Last edited:
Deebs

Deebs

Chief Arsewipe
Staff member
Moderator
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 11, 1997
Messages
9,077,371
Scouse said:
I beg to differ.

We use multiple nukes in a global war we're all fucked.

Russia fires a handful of these and nobody bothers retaliating - we just shoot em down? We're sliding-scale fucked.

It's a disastrous weapon and the fact we've made one tells us more about how humanity works than should make anyone comfortable.
Click to expand...
Right, so all wars before WW2 didn't contain nukes, yet millions have died in the wars regardless of the equipment used to kill, the only common factor in every fucking war ever is something called humankind. We are the most dangerous weapon.
 
Scouse

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
37,905
Deebs said:
Right, so all wars before WW2 didn't contain nukes, yet millions have died in the wars regardless of the equipment used to kill, the only common factor in every fucking war ever is something called humankind. We are the most dangerous weapon.
Click to expand...
Yes. But the nature of war fundamentally changed when nukes became available.

Millions dead is now a rounding error.

This new Russian missile is, again, something new. A horrible perversion of a nuke.
 
Scouse

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
37,905
Tom said:
We should be putting more into nuclear propulsion tbh.
Click to expand...
I'm hoping you mean in space?

But it would be good if we could design the reactors in a way that don't spray radioactive shit all over the place when this happens:

1761681675705.jpeg
 
Deebs

Deebs

Chief Arsewipe
Staff member
Moderator
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 11, 1997
Messages
9,077,371
Scouse said:
I'm hoping you mean in space?

But it would be good if we could design the reactors in a way that don't spray radioactive shit all over the place when this happens:

View attachment 51006
Click to expand...
Oooh where can you buy that firework from? Nearly Bonfire night and that would be amazing.
 
Scouse

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
37,905
On the above:

"During police interviews, Rowles told officers he was not racist and that he joined the online groups because he was lonely and had a sexual fetish for role play"

I mean, that's actually plausible, no? Find the most taboo thing possible, that isn't fucking boys, and wank yourself silly to it.
 
Deebs

Deebs

Chief Arsewipe
Staff member
Moderator
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 11, 1997
Messages
9,077,371
Scouse said:
Just fucking ban it already:

www.theguardian.com

Toxin levels in fish lead to calls for UK-wide ban on mercury dental fillings

Exclusive: More than 98% of fish and mussels tested in English waters contain mercury above EU safety limits
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...
@Scouse I know I should not laugh but even though you had good intentions for all the time I have known you you always have been very vocal about our planet and environment. I always picture you like this at Scouse Towers plot 1

1761897875347.png
 
Deebs

Deebs

Chief Arsewipe
Staff member
Moderator
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 11, 1997
Messages
9,077,371
Scouse said:
But but but I thought everyone now had to verify their age? So how is tgis going to stop the poor children seeing choking porn?

www.theguardian.com

Pornography depicting strangulation to become criminal offence in the UK

Legal requirement to be placed on tech platforms to prevent users from seeing such ‘choking’ material
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

Maybe it's not really about the kids?
Click to expand...
It is wrong and a waste of time, all the kids will do is go dark and discover worse stuff than choking porn.
 
Scouse

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
37,905
Deebs said:
It is wrong and a waste of time, all the kids will do is go dark and discover worse stuff than choking porn.
Click to expand...
But they've already brought in age verification - so it's palpably not about kids any more.

It's about what consenting adults are allowed to see.
 
Deebs

Deebs

Chief Arsewipe
Staff member
Moderator
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 11, 1997
Messages
9,077,371
Scouse said:
But they've already brought in age verification - so it's palpably not about kids any more.

It's about what consenting adults are allowed to see.
Click to expand...
Ok, replace kids with adults. Still does not change the fact that it is wrong and the dark web will only gain more visitors. Censorship imo is just wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 6 (members: 0, guests: 6)
Top Bottom