120
submitted 11 months ago by floofloof@lemmy.ca to c/news@lemmy.world
all 45 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] TheTimeKnife@lemmy.world 61 points 11 months ago

Because we need to replace and maintain the ones we already have. People have been talking about doing this to our aging stockpile for decades.

It makes sense to reduce our arsenal, but the nukes we do have need to be maintained for safety and reliability.

[-] Cocodapuf@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago

That sounds awfully legit.

I hate to think that the government is doing exactly what they've said they'd do in a sensible timeframe. What is this nation coming to?

[-] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 5 points 11 months ago

People on the internet like to pretend that if the US just stopped making weapons then everyone else would also stop making weapons.

[-] Madison420@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

This, lifecycle renewal only goes so far and old plutonium is still very useful for things like breeder reactors.

[-] e8d79@feddit.de 39 points 11 months ago

Perun made a quite interesting video about this. Basically the US, after the end of the cold war, stopped pit production and relied on the many pits they still had laying around. Now they are worrying that old pits might become unreliable and unserviceable which could weaken the US' nuclear deterrence. Because of that the US is seeking to restart pit production.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 27 points 11 months ago

Because, despite us removing the lead from the air, the world is going fucking crazy.

[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 15 points 11 months ago

Oh, it’s still in the air… and in the water.

[-] TWeaK@lemm.ee 0 points 11 months ago

Friendly reminder that Flint, Michegan still doesn't have clean drinking water.

[-] Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago

That hasn’t been the case in years now. Why parrot bullshit?

[-] TWeaK@lemm.ee 5 points 11 months ago

Because my last impression was that things hadn't changed. Why did you just downvote me, rather than actually provide a source to back up your claim? That isn't really conducive to a productive conversation. You've come at me in an inherently hostile manner, which is disrespectful.

Nonetheless, I'll do your work for you:

An extensive lead service pipe replacement effort has been underway since 2016. In early 2017, some officials asserted that the water quality had returned to acceptable levels, but in January 2019, residents and officials expressed doubt about the cleanliness of the water. There were an estimated 2,500 lead service pipes still in place as of April 2019. As of December 8, 2020, fewer than 500 service lines still needed to be inspected. As of July 16, 2021, 27,133 water service lines had been excavated and inspected, resulting in the replacement of 10,059 lead pipes. After $400 million in state and federal spending, Flint has secured a clean water source, distributed filters to all who want them, and laid modern, safe, copper pipes to nearly every home in the city. Politico declared that its water is "just as good as any city's in Michigan." However, a legacy of distrust remains, so residents often refuse to drink the tap water.

Furthermore:

As the criminal investigation progressed, more than a dozen state and local officials were indicted on a raft of charges, including obstruction of justice, lying to police, and involuntary manslaughter. While prosecutors were able to secure misdemeanor convictions against seven defendants through plea bargains, the most-serious charges were dropped in 2019.

So it is perhaps understandable that people think things were by and large brushed under the rug, and are still distrustful.

Earthworm Jim would be ashamed of you. He had far more modesty.

[-] speff@disc.0x-ia.moe 13 points 11 months ago

They don’t have any obligation to do the legwork for you. It’s good that you put your homework here for others to reference, but no-effort comments get no-effort replies. And as you found out, they were ultimately correct.

There are way too many bad faith statements on lemmy.

[-] elbarto777@lemmy.world -5 points 11 months ago

no-effort comment

That's a bad characterization of a fact.

"Reminder that climate change is still happening."

"BULLSHIT! SUCH LOW EFFORT COMMENT!!!!!!!!"

[-] speff@disc.0x-ia.moe 4 points 11 months ago

??? Are you a bot? Did you read the part in the comment chain where it was shown that it wasn’t a fact?

Also please learn some self awareness if you’re going to use bad characterization while accusing me of doing the same thing

[-] elbarto777@lemmy.world -4 points 11 months ago
[-] Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

Your last impression was outdated by years because YOU never did even a cursory google to back up YOUR claim.

You didn’t do my work for me. You finally did your own work that you never did lol.

[-] reddig33@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

~~Jet~~ Some planes still use leaded fuel unfortunately.

[-] SheeEttin@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Jets do not. They usually use Jet A, basically kerosene. It's piston engines that use leaded gasoline (avgas).

[-] reddig33@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago
[-] TWeaK@lemm.ee 4 points 11 months ago

Furthermore leaded gas is currently being phased out of general aviation also, at least in the US (others will likely follow).

[-] nomecks@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Maybe if you're posting from 1990.

[-] markr@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago

Perhaps the plan is to reach sustainability by eliminating 90% of the population over a short period of time?

[-] SangersSequence@lemmy.world 13 points 11 months ago

TFW your domestic policy makes Thanos look like the reasonable one.

[-] elbarto777@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago

I don't know, man. Thanos was way worse. Earth is what, 0.00000001% of the universe population?

[-] msage@programming.dev 2 points 11 months ago

But what if it isn't? What is Earth is really the only planet carrying self-aware species in the transportable distance?

[-] elbarto777@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Then yes. Thanos would be a more reasonable creature.

[-] wabafee@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Would we consider nuclear annaliation a green project?

[-] Fosheze@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

How else do you think the US is planning on meeting its climate goals? Certainly not by holding corporations accountable.

[-] gmtom@lemmy.world 13 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Because we're coming up on cold war 2 : Chinese boogaloo

Edit: cold war 2: big trouble in little China.

[-] remus989@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 months ago

I think for this one it would be Big Trouble in Big China.

[-] gmtom@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Well Taiwan is also known as the Republic of China, so the trouble would be in the little China

[-] remus989@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 months ago
[-] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 months ago

Maybe it's because the other major nuclear power keeps making new nuclear threats every week and just withdrew from a major nuclear proliferation treaty?

[-] trackcharlie@lemmynsfw.com 2 points 11 months ago

This. How do people not pay attention to this stuff.

[-] anon_8675309@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

For the Russian takeover. Putin has let his weapons deteriorate so he’s telling his minions here to get prepared for him.

[-] Jenntron@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

We also need to arm all of the new B-21 raiders. I believe I read they're going to start off with producing 100 of them.

this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2023
120 points (94.8% liked)

News

23259 readers
2891 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS