this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2024
104 points (83.8% liked)
Ukraine
10457 readers
426 users here now
News and discussion related to Ukraine
Community Rules
πΊπ¦ Sympathy for enemy combatants is prohibited.
π»π€’No content depicting extreme violence or gore.
π₯Posts containing combat footage should include [Combat] in title
π·Combat videos containing any footage of a visible human involved must be flagged NSFW
β Server Rules
- Remember the human! (no harassment, threats, etc.)
- No racism or other discrimination
- No Nazis, QAnon or similar
- No porn
- No ads or spam (includes charities)
- No content against Finnish law
π³ Defense Aid π₯
π³ Humanitarian Aid βοΈβοΈ
πͺ Volunteer with the International Legionnaires
See also:
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
no one says hydrogen bomb referring to conventional arms. it's not a thing.
Bold claim, considering you're posting in a thread where the article does exactly that. π€£
fortunately, this stupid thread doesn't encompass the rest of the ENTIRE FUCKING WORLD.
bold claim? pull your head out
To be fair, you did say "no one". Cheer up grumpy-pants!
you're entirely correct, I should have stated 'no one with half a brain or a quarter of an education would make that mistake.'
appreciate the feedback.
I'd also say a majority of people also don't know the term in relation to nuclear weapons either. The average person is extremely uneducated about anything nuclear. They don't know what differences between the original bombs the US dropped and modern nuclear weapons weapons might be. Even post-Oppenheimer film.
Differentiating between Nuclear and Thermonuclear weapons is something pedants in online forums do, not normies in the real world.
I completely disagree with you. A hydrogen bomb has meant nuclear weapons for 50ish years to anyone with a passing familiarity - and a whole shitton of people learned during the cold war that there were nuclear and thermonuclear weapons, they built fucking shelters in their back yards lol.
so no, disagree with you.
Well, for anecdotal proof of the average person... Since that's all we have here... both of my boomer parents that lived through the cold war, and were those children sheltering under fucking desks as of that would make a damned difference, didn't think it was related to a nuclear weapon at all.
It's a Yahoo Autos article for fucks sake, because it isn't a nuke, no one would mistake it for a nuke. Only dipshits online trying to argue because they're incapable of admitting their initial assumption of a headline didn't actually make sense in context.
In the 80s we still did the air raid drills. Lived near a bunch of SAC bases - we basically knew that in the age of thermonuclear weapons and adjacent targets (whiteman, offut, carswell etc), we were fucked.
The reason I dislike the terminology being muddled is that I don't want Russians to have it as a talking point if they escalate. And since Ukraine is taking Kursk at an astounding rate, never underestimate the bullshit RU will spout to justify their panicked responses.
the terminology predates you but it's not esoteric knowledge at all.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermonuclear_weapon