Why doesn't china just spend like 10 years building the most advanced bunker system EVER, nuke MuriKKKa and it's cronies to dust, hunt down any surviving KKKracKKKers with advanced AI drones and then repopulate earth with people from Laos, Cuba, China, DPRK, Vietnam and the global south?

Imagine Europe and the Americas without the KKKracKKKers

  • Dirt_Owl [comrade/them, they/them]
    ·
    edit-2
    19 hours ago

    Because they aren't evil.

    Nuclear weapons are horrific. They scar the Earth for 1000+ years. They should only ever be used as a way for communist countries to deter the US from meddling.

  • BodyBySisyphus [he/him]
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Hello, yes, food-eater here with an important food-related message: Injecting massive quantities of soot and radioactive dust into the atmosphere is bad news for food! Food is a necessary component for sustaining not only human life but also many forms of animal life.

    Please do not do ecocide to own the libs and also remember to "rainbow your plate" with at least 5 servings of fresh fruit and veggies per day!

  • Infamousblt [any]
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Why would they? Destroying your biggest trading partners is a bad idea, plus nuclear fallout is devastating, plus why murder a bunch of innocent people, plus the West would nuke back. What advantages do China gain by triggering total global destruction? It makes literally zero sense.

      • Infamousblt [any]
        ·
        18 hours ago

        Better way to own the libs is to just win economically and societally, which they're already doing. Why do something devastating when you can just keep doing what you're already doing and achieve a better outcome anyway?

  • Frank [he/him, he/him]
    ·
    19 hours ago

    The US second strike would flatten most of the country. The US has, like, 2,000 nukes and that's more than enough to flatten all of China's cities and infrastructure. The only winning move is not to play.

  • miz [any, any]
    ·
    19 hours ago

    that would be against their No First Use policy that has been in place since the 1960s, and the parliamentarian says it can't be changed.

  • Philosophosphorous [comrade/them, he/him]
    ·
    18 hours ago

    they would need a shitload of nukes, nukes are powerful but it takes a lot more than like 1 or 2 to destroy a country as big as america, especially with so much of our military spread around the world (our f35s and probably our older jets can carry nuclear weapons without necessarily being as obvious as an ICBM). even if they used hypersonic missiles to deliver a shitload of nukes they had been somehow building in secret for decades, it is likely we would be able to fire at least some of our own much larger arsenal of slower ICBM nukes before our launch facilities etc. are completely annihilated, and as we have seen in israel and ukraine, intercepting even conventional missiles is a lot harder than it might seem. that's not even getting into impacts on global weather/agriculture and loss of major economic trading partners, even before all that you have to account for the basic concepts of 'mutually assured destruction', we will nuke them back if they nuked us in a way that didn't completely destroy our nuclear capabilities. China might be able to make one or two surprise nuclear attacks with hypersonics but i doubt they could stealthily hit all of our launch facilities, nuclear submarines, and aircraft carriers and airbases with one wave of attacks.

    we basically need like aliens with miraculous stealth technology to simultaneously infiltrate all american (maybe all world) nuclear facilities and equipment to deactivate/destroy it like a giant metal gear mission.