No.85
Getting a rifle and learning to shoot is not lifetsylism, it is a necessity as a communist.
No.86
>>85I was playing at how they're both famous Russian weapons (iirc)
No.315
Found this album on Italian fighters in WW2 and I thought I'd share it.
https://archive.md/CWWul No.321
>>84You know, anon. Real firearms might be illegal, but you can practice basic marksmanship with air rifles (PCP kind is best analogue). You could also shoot small game. It's an interesting and relaxing pastime.
No.1556
https://www.lostarmour.info/armour/ There's another site like this that has a map. it's on sturgeon somewhere
No.1592
The thing about nukes is you destroy everything in one indirect rough area hit. Fuck you don't even need to hit a target just airbust it. Think of how much work goes into the hyper-sonic cruise missiles to fire, control, directly precisely hit a single building.
The cities that are "ruined" have taken thousands of artillery shells, rockets, drones, jet airstrikes, chopper attacks, cruise missiles, mortars, shoulder fired rockets, tanks, grenades, MLRS strikes to just turn some buildings into rubble.
With a nuke, you just land a hit roughly around the area and everything is destroyed. Water, sanitation, food, farming, houses, apartments, energy, government buildings, television, hospitols, stores, pretty much everything is absolutely fucking burned to shit, and then covered with lots of nuclear fallout continuing to burn everything for years. the air is unbreathable, water undrinkable.
There is no winning for any nation that gets into a nuclear war. All heavily armed nuclear superpowers have emergency doomsday contingency plans so even if a first strike is effective against them, they have enough firepower hidden to launch retaliatory strikes from submarines, even nuclear torpedoes, possibly shipping containers smuggled into ports with nukes inside of them. Even without the nukes they have enough radiological materials to wage a horrific dirty bomb war with radioactive materials in conventional weapons.
There is no winning with nuclear war. It would destroy all nations involved, and in the case with Israel, they vow to use a Sampson option to destroy every city they can in the entire middle east and take them all down with them.
Mutually Assured Destruction was supposed to be a deterrent, not a scenario to enact.
No.1675
>>1592>low effort lounge>posts thisalso nukes aren't real