Two things:

  1. How convinenient that he chose the capitals of the 3 countries that the US has a vendetta against. I’m genuinely surprised he didn’t say Beijing or Gaza.

  2. This is clearly just manufacturing consent because no adult thinks this. Thinks that dropping atomic bombs on civillains will solve everything.

  • ZoomeristLeninist [comrade/them, she/her]@hexbear.netEnglish
    28·
    7 months ago

    picking Gaza would prob mean isntreal has to deal w fallout.

    but yeah, anyone who actually picks three places to hypothetically nuke is fucked up. even if you choose amerika, you mostly kill poor, powerless people.

    related to this, there was this “nuke simulator” website that calculated how many people would be killed or irradiated based on where you drop it, how many megatons the bomb is, whether you detonate in air or on the surface, etc. my friends and i played on this site one time in high school and some other kid we were kind of like acquaintances with joined us and kept picking cities in India. i was like “why do you keep picking India?” and he just said “i dont like them”. we stopped talking to him after that lol

    • relayEnglish
      14·
      7 months ago

      The population density of india is pretty high and you can get high numbers there if that is what you want to see in the simulation.

      FR tho, I don’t see any way to use bombs ethically in general because of civilian casualties. Nuclear weapons are even worse in that regard. However I understand why some countries have nukes to prevent invasions.

    • Ronin_5
      13·
      7 months ago

      I remember that. We kept picking Toronto because it was close to where we lived.