• tal@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    You insinuate you know what it would be used for.

    The phrase “It is not to drop a weapon on Earth but to possibly use against satellites” is not from Wikipedia. It is the subtitle of the article that you linked to; I’m quoting your material and pointing out that there are substantial side effects when using nuclear weapons against satellites.

    • Rapidcreek@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Even if it is part of an article, I wouldn’t believe it. Putting nukes in space is not minor and they may be used for than one thing.

      • tal@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Even if it is part of an article, I wouldn’t believe it.

        Okay, fine, you’re free to do that, but I don’t see why yelling at me is reasonable. You’re the one who provided the material that you’re complaining about. If you disagree with the article, it seems far more reasonable to provide a top-level comment responding to it saying “I don’t agree with the article here and think that the real intent might be to use a warhead directly against the ground”.

        I’m pointing out that even if the intent is as an anti-satellite weapon, which is what your article is saying, it can cause serious collateral damage, not to mention that it is in violation of a treaty to which Russia is party.