this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2025
46 points (100.0% liked)

askchapo

22980 readers
283 users here now

Ask Hexbear is the place to ask and answer ~~thought-provoking~~ questions.

Rules:

  1. Posts must ask a question.

  2. If the question asked is serious, answer seriously.

  3. Questions where you want to learn more about socialism are allowed, but questions in bad faith are not.

  4. Try !feedback@hexbear.net if you're having questions about regarding moderation, site policy, the site itself, development, volunteering or the mod team.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
PorkrollPosadist@hexbear.net
replaceable@hexbear.net
VILenin@hexbear.net
EmmaGoldman@hexbear.net
SexUnderSocialism@hexbear.net
ZoomeristLeninist@hexbear.net
khizuo@hexbear.net
Sulv@hexbear.net
46
What are the Dumbest Weapons? (hexbear.net)
submitted 1 week ago by GalaxyBrain@hexbear.net to c/askchapo@hexbear.net
70 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I gotta go with nunchuks. Anything you sling around on a chain seems silly to me. It seems like nunchuks are only good weapons against the unarmed. Anyone else has more range, usually something sharp in play and there isn't a limp chain in the middle reducing the force of your strikes.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] D61@hexbear.net 1 points 1 week ago

(been a bit since I checked my replies)

I don't know much about mines but with like gps and drones and shit, wouldn't mines that don't do anything until someone sets em off remotely work pretty good?

That's just a command detonation explosive then. The purpose of large belts of landmines as in (100 meter long by 50 meter wide belts that will have hundreds of mines) are meant to be seen by opposing forces to stop or turn their path of travel where artillery, airstrikes and ambushes can do the work. That a mine in a belt knocks out a vehicle or kills personnel is a secondary purpose.