5 Filters

Order Out Of Chaos: How The Ukraine Conflict Is Designed To Benefit Globalists [Russia, China and America all equally bad]

As I understand it, G, from the most reliable peerers through the fog - as they seem to me - Russian forces already have all Ukraine’s nuclear plants under effective control; either actually occupying them, or watching over them continuously with air-cover, with the option to drop speznaz forces into them if any of the nazi loonies appear to be thinking of trying something on there.

To my mind, the very best guarantee that the plants will now be made safe is precisely because the Russians have taken them under control by military force.

The situation with the plants before Russia took over was simply dire, and much more likely to have led to a second Chernobyl-style catastrophe, in the hands of corrupt and chaotic Ukrainians.

An engineer manages risk Rhis…

Some more moot points; "Russia demanded the Americans withdraw those systems, and to withdraw NATO from Eastern Europe. They flatly refused. Ukraine talked of acquiring nuclear weapons and threatening Russia with them. It would take time for them to manufacture but there was nothing to stop the Americans from giving them nuclear weapons, under their control, as the Americans have done with Germany, for instance.

Russia could do nothing, keep the peace, and watch, as the weapons for its destruction were installed and made ready to fire; to commit suicide in other words, or it could defend itself. It warned the US that it would do so, and had the right to do so, the same right the Americans always claim to have, but again Russia was ignored. It had to act or face destruction and subjugation." The Legality Of War « One Voyce of the World article was first published by New Eastern Outlook, March 9, 2022

Furthermore “old-salt” I actually do believe it is equally likely some mad NAZIs will decide it is acceptable to damage a reactor as a guerrilla action…that’s not the point though is it? Without the Russians being there (as is also true of NATO’s presence on Russia’s borders), the excuse does not present itself…an engineer manages risk

an engineer manages risk I don’t get what this is supposed to convey.

At the moment, it appears a conjunction of Ukrainian and Russian engineers are managing the safety of the Ukrainian plants, under overall Russian military control. That looks like the best safety-protection practically available right now.

Someone - possibly guerrilla-style - tried to attack the Zaporozhye plant a few days ago. IAEA affirms that there were no leaks and no damage to actual plant. An ancillary building was set on fire, briefly. A lot of attempt was made by the West’s PBB to shriek it up. But it became clear quickly that it was precisely the hold of the Russian military on the whole plant which assured proper protection - as, in realworld practice - no-one else can just now.

“I don’t get what this is supposed to convey” I would have thought my meaning was abundantly clear even to those who are not engineers…the risk is too great…furthermore (even for those who are not moral philosophers), any major accident is likely not to affect only the combatant nations

Sorry G, still don’t get what you mean. These obscure allusions really screw up my grasp of what you’re driving at. It’s a simple enough matter to make sure you’re taking your reader with you. Just EXPLAIN! :wink:

Is this “obscure” too; "Here’s What You Need to Remember: The U.S. military says depleted uranium ammunition is safe, for the most part. “When fired, or after ‘cooking off’ in fires or explosions, the exposed depleted uranium rod poses an extremely low radiological threat as long as it remains outside the body,” says a U.S. Air Force fact sheet.

Russia is arming its tanks with controversial depleted uranium shells.

While depleted uranium, or DU, is extremely dense and can punch through thick tank armor, many believe that these shells release small doses of radiation, like miniature neutron bombs. The U.S. has used DU shells in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria.

A Russian Defense Ministry bulletin said Russian T-80BV tanks would be armed with these powerful munitions, according to Russia’s TASS news agency. The bulletin noted that “the T-80BVM (the letter M stands for ‘modernized’) features ‘the improved weapons stabilizer and the loading mechanism for the 3BM59 Svinets-1 and 3BM60 Svinets-2 munitions.’”

The Svinets-1 has a tungsten carbide core, while the Svinets-2 uses depleted uranium. according to the Below the Ring armor site, published by a pair of Dutch defense experts. A 2016 post speculated that Russia might have been producing these special rounds for several years as replacements for existing tank ammunition.

The shells “utilize an aluminum sabot with three points of contact - this is rather unique, as most other types of APFSDS sabot use only two points of contacts,” Below the Ring said. “If and how this affects accuracy and barrel wear is currently not known.”

The Svinets-2 is not the first Russian shell to use depleted uranium. The 3BM-32 Vant, designed for Soviet 125-millimeter tank cannon, also contained a DU core. But the new rounds are longer.

“Compared to the 3BM-32 Vant APFSDS with a 380-mm-long [14.7-inch] DU penetrator, the two types of new ammunition have an approximately 79 to 84 percent longer projectile, which should lead to a significant increase in penetration power,” Below the Ring estimated.

The problem is that older Russian tank ammunition has difficult piercing advanced tank armor such as that found on the U.S. M-1 Abrams or Israeli Merkava. “The 3BM-42 Mango relies on an outdated pentrator design, using two relatively short tungsten rods inside a steel body,” according to Below the Ring. “…Steel penetrates armor less efficiently than a high-density heavy metal alloy.”

Thus, the appeal of DU shells as tank killers (you can find a concise scientific explanation of depleted uranium ammunition here). There are 120-millimeter DU shells for the M-1 Abrams and 30-millimeter shell for the A-10 Warthog. Ironically, the Abrams tank uses depleted uranium in its armor plating to stop anti-tank shells.

The U.S. military says depleted uranium ammunition is safe, for the most part. “When fired, or after ‘cooking off’ in fires or explosions, the exposed depleted uranium rod poses an extremely low radiological threat as long as it remains outside the body,” says a U.S. Air Force fact sheet. “Taken into the body via metal fragments or dust-like particles, depleted uranium may pose a long-term health hazard to personnel if the amount is large. However, the amount which remains in the body depends on a number of factors, including the amount inhaled or ingested, the particle size and the ability of the particles to dissolve in body fluids.”

However, even the Veterans Administration acknowledges that depleted uranium poses health risks to soldiers, such as those who fought in Operation Desert Storm, where DU rounds were used to destroy Iraqi tanks. There are also complaints that depleted uranium contaminates the environment, such as in Iraq. The Pentagon promised that it wouldn’t use DU ammunition in Syria, though it later admitted that it fired thousands of rounds in 2015.

There are several international organizations campaigning to ban depleted uranium shells. Whether the Russian government will heed them is another matter." https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/america-russian-tanks-are-now-shooting-depleted-uranium-bullets-175219?

Nb. At least it’s not “obtuse”!

Quote; "Depleted Uranium; “Cheap War for a Cheap Whore”

Doing what so many (so-called), journalists won’t, looking the truth in the face concerning the perpetration of a hidden nuclear war": https://twitter.com/i/events/1431959459908268038

That’s the stuff, G. Perfect clarity there. I just wish you’d stick with that level, then I can follow what you’re driving at. The DU thing is seriously bad. We seem to be an incorrigible species, anywhere on Earth. Dear god!

1 Like

Btw, G: I don’t recall ever using the word ‘obtuse’, did I? Obscure, sure; I certainly find a lot of your allusions so. But I don’t think you’re obtuse. Sorry to give that impression, bro!

If you listen to the Germwarfare interview with Dimitri Orlov posted eslewhere here, Orlov says that there is no international border between Ukraine and Russia as the Ukies refused to sign the agreement reached as the USSR broke up. Hence (according to Orlov), Russia is completely within internatonal law!

1 Like

Quote; "Zelensky should resign and make way for a collaborationist government that will sue for peace on the following basis:

Recognize that Crimea is Russian territory and always has been since it was purchased by Catherine the Great in 1783;
Permit the separation of the Donbass Republics from Ukraine because the overwhelmingly Russian speaking populations there has been part of “New Russia” for more than 300 years and do not wish to be ruled by the anti-Russian fascists and oligarchs who control Kiev;
Amend the constitution of the rump state of Ukraine to prohibit its joining NATO or any similar western alliance, while reducing its military to a domestic law enforcement agency.": https://original.antiwar.com/david_stockman/2022/03/18/pearl-harbor-my-eye/

Offers the Ukraine nothing and attempts to make it a Russian vassal. Any state has a right to its own military and the world (esp. since “we” are now included in this conflict by dint of exposure to any nuclear contamination from d.u weapons and/or nuclear power stations), has the right to hear the will of the peoples’ of both Crimea and the Donbass under terms which the international community is prepared to accept. I agree that not joining NATO is a reasonable condition, NATO is a pariah and serves only to enslave its member states to the will of the State Dept. Again, though, I maintain that the formation of an East European Union is intrinsic to any solution, quote; “The Wider Europe is NATO’s Europe, Trump is simply reasserting the U.S State Dept.'s interests in the region and demonstrating the true nature of the NATO-ised agenda. I am forced to admit to a certain amount of wishful thinking on my part concerning the withdrawal of NATO from the European Theatre (and “drama” it certainly is now-a-days if not actual soap-opera), but as I am not (and never have been), in favour of the expansion of the European Union I have no interest in continued adherence to the NATO-ised narrative, Macron and Merkel are, however, hoisted by their own petard with regard to this issue as both will find that if they don’t embrace the notion of the formation of an Eastern European Union (“EEU”), the removal of the parasite that is NATO will prove very difficult indeed.
Putin’s involvement in the funding and promotion of separatist and nationalist groups is designed to weaken NATO’s power-base but an EEU would undermine this strategy and lend credence to more moderate patriots (whose voices should be heard), within the Eastern European states who do not feel that it is necessary to resort to fascism in order to protect either their cultures or ethnic identities.”" "Arafel": #PopularVote..Giving the People a Real Choice.. #Brexit #EU #Euromerta #NATO #WiderEurope #TTIP

Quote; “Russia’s behaviour (and that of the westernised arab states), which is similar to that of America with regard to foreign and domestic policy dictates that such should be the case, for just as it is not in N.A.T.O’s interest to encourage stability in the middle east it is not in Putin’s to encourage the formation of an Eastern European economic and political community (whatever did happen to ours?), Russia’s embrace of monetarist values and “laissez-faire” ensures that her foreign policy decisions are taken solely in order to maximise short term profits for a small group of people in just the same way as are those of the member states of N.A.T.O.” "Arafel": "The European "Omerta.""

To be a peacemaker one must be able to offer equitable solutions those offered by David Stockman are not, may I posit that this, “two-term Congressman from Michigan” does not truly appreciate the complexities of either european politics or those of regional/international institutions (esp. being a member of a mono-cultural society -always remembering that; “either/or democracy is the dalliance of the totalitarian”-)?

Pls. see (esp. re: #Euromerta): "Arafel": #Yugoslavia, #NATO, #Brexit, the #EuropeanUnion and the #Euromerta (a response to the dreadful neo-lib/con whitewashing of the sepulchre by #PBS: "#TheBalkansinFlames")