(source)
this post was submitted on 07 Mar 2024
232 points (97.9% liked)
NonCredibleDefense
6608 readers
416 users here now
A community for your defence shitposting needs
Rules
1. Be nice
Do not make personal attacks against each other, call for violence against anyone, or intentionally antagonize people in the comment sections.
2. Explain incorrect defense articles and takes
If you want to post a non-credible take, it must be from a "credible" source (news article, politician, or military leader) and must have a comment laying out exactly why it's non-credible. Low-hanging fruit such as random Twitter and YouTube comments belong in the Matrix chat.
3. Content must be relevant
Posts must be about military hardware or international security/defense. This is not the page to fawn over Youtube personalities, simp over political leaders, or discuss other areas of international policy.
4. No racism / hatespeech
No slurs. No advocating for the killing of people or insulting them based on physical, religious, or ideological traits.
5. No politics
We don't care if you're Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Stalinist, Baathist, or some other hot mess. Leave it at the door. This applies to comments as well.
6. No seriousposting
We don't want your uncut war footage, fundraisers, credible news articles, or other such things. The world is already serious enough as it is.
7. No classified material
Classified ‘western’ information is off limits regardless of how "open source" and "easy to find" it is.
8. Source artwork
If you use somebody's art in your post or as your post, the OP must provide a direct link to the art's source in the comment section, or a good reason why this was not possible (such as the artist deleting their account). The source should be a place that the artist themselves uploaded the art. A booru is not a source. A watermark is not a source.
9. No low-effort posts
No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title. Put these in weekly Matrix chat instead.
10. Don't get us banned
No brigading or harassing other communities. Do not post memes with a "haha people that I hate died… haha" punchline or violating the sh.itjust.works rules (below). This includes content illegal in Canada.
11. No misinformation
NCD exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don't be an idiot.
Join our Matrix chatroom
Other communities you may be interested in
- !militaryporn@lemmy.world
- !forgottenweapons@lemmy.world
- !combatvideos@sh.itjust.works
- !militarymoe@ani.social
Banner made by u/Fertility18
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
What was stopping them from just hucking grenades over to the Germans to begin with? You don't typically have to exploit trust of the enemy on the battlefield to throw a grenade.
It's much more effective if they are grouped together waiting to catch the grenade. It also reveals the position of the soldiers in the trench.
Grenades aren't very effective in trenches, unless the victim is close by. The narrow shape and curves of the trench can shield a person from a nearby blast.
If you're in a trench in wartime and fist sized object comes flying in from the direction of the enemy forces you're going to dive away from it and take cover. But then the thrown object turns out to be a can of food, not an explosive.
So how do you respond to the next thrown item? Do you still dive for cover?
The rational answer is "yes." The starving soldier desperate for a break from the fighting answer was not.
Plus trenches have dugouts and the like. You can imagine that after the first round of corned beef, people were probably waking their mates up, yelling at everyone to get out here and see what's happening.
It's ingenious, in a horrifyingly cruel way.
It's funnier this way
Style points?