Time to Get Real About Ukraine

(from post #906)

Listen to what's said about the use of depleted uranium tank rounds at the 11:00 time mark of this video.

Scott Ritter: "Russia IS INVADING FAST, THIS IS FATAL" in Exclusive Interview



Here's some stuff about DU from another thread.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/are-conspiracy-theorists-ever-right.586948/


More info here...
https://www.youtube.com/@RedPilledTV/videos

 

I'm not interested in what that child molester has to say.

But this is interesting:

The AMX-10-RC: the French tank on its way to Ukraine • FRANCE 24 English

 

How about what this guy says?

Talk - Dr. Doug Rokke - Depleted Uranium (DU)

 

Doug Rokke is a crank and conspiracy theorist obsessed with depleted uranium conspiracy theories. He claims to have been a researcher and major with a Ph.D. in Health Physics in the 3rd U.S. Army Medical Command's Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical research team as a scientific expert on depleted uranium[1] The Department of Defense states he was helping administrate the US Army Chemical School on Fort McClellan (with a Ph.D. in Education Methodology) and logistical support for Army Munitions and Chemical Command (special equipment purchasing) until being fired.[2] Rokke's experience in physics, from his own admission during talks, comes from a BS in general physics and his office being located in the physics area while completing his doctorate. Rokke has also stated depleted uranium was completely unknown to him before 1991.[3]

Rokke appears to have become one of the number of people that went completely insane because of 9/11.[note 1] Rokke is currently an obstinate crank on depleted uranium, very frequently along side (or used as a reference of) Leuren Moret. Rokke frequently appears along side fringe elements of the anti-nuclear movement, including Alex Jones[4] and 9/11 conspiracy theorists.[5]

Rokke and Moret use a combination of credential bullying and lying to make their claims.

Doug Rokke - RationalWiki

 

What makes you so sure that this isn't sophistry written by professional sophists who are paid by the government? His credentials look pretty good to me.
https://www.thepowerhour.com/~thepowg2/bio/Dr.DougRokkeBio.pdf


Here's another one. The viewers can decide for themselves.

Time Out: Dr. Doug Rokke DU Update (2014-11-21)

 

Sup Durandal .. having trouble figuring out that Depleted Uranium is responsible for loads of Birth defects in Fallujah ? Serbia had issues as well. No need to rely on Doug Rokke Pokie .. I am right here for you D.. ask what ever questions you like

 

You seem to have made your mind up about this, but the evidence suggests otherwise. I'm sure depleted uranium in the quantities used is most certainly going to be a contributory factor, but the overall toxic load is overwhelmingly caused by the lead, mercury and the non-stop burn-pits.

Birth Defects and the Toxic Legacy of War in Iraq - MERIP
"Between 2002 and 2005 alone, the US armed forces expended 6 billion bullets—roughly 200,000-300,000 bullets per individual killed in Iraq.[11] This number of shells, full of lead and mercury, does not include larger ordinances or other metal remnants from after 2005, or from previous wars: the Iran-Iraq war (1980–1988, the First Gulf War (1990–1991), the sanctions era (1991-2003) and the 2003 occupation’s instigation of a further decade of militia warfare. The most recent military intervention in Iraq was accompanied by unprecedented waste abandonment and waste burning: discarded vehicles, excess weapons, discarded clothing and much more were all left in Iraq’s land, water or air."

Regarding the burn pits:
"Burn pits are also linked to US veteran illnesses and sit at the root of campaigns for veteran healthcare.[18] For Iraqis living near burn pits, serious consequences for their long-term and intergenerational health continue to emerge. For example, some Iraqi babies born near Tallil Air Base were found to have neurological problems, congenital heart disease, paralyzed or missing limbs and elevated thorium in their bodies. The closer to the base, the higher their levels.[19]"

 

What makes you so sure that your favorite cranks are right and basically everyone else who is better qualified is wrong? What do you actually know about depleted uraniaum?

It's a consistent theme that you seem either unwilling or unable to discern good sources and information from rubbish.

Depleted uranium (DU; also referred to in the past as Q-metal, depletalloy or D-38) is uranium with a lower content of the fissile isotope 235 U than natural uranium.[2] Natural uranium contains about 0.72% 235 U, while the DU used by the U.S. Department of Defense contains 0.3% 235 U or less. The less radioactive and non-fissile 238 U constitutes the main component of depleted uranium. Uses of DU take advantage of its very high density of 19.1 grams per cubic centimetre(0.69 lb/cu in) (68.4% denser than lead).

Civilian uses include counterweights in aircraft, radiation shielding in medical radiation therapy and industrial radiography equipment, and containers for transporting radioactive materials. Military uses include armor plating and armor-piercing projectiles.​

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium

You think something that is used in a medical setting to shield against radiation is itself dangerous? Can you offer an explanation in your own words instead of linking some garbage somewhere that you think is true and accurate?

 

Ukraine could threaten ‘vulnerable’ Crimea within months in ‘biggest blow’ to Putin

“The Russians will have think about how far they’re going to push this war because if it would cost them Crimea, then clearly the war would be massively counter-productive.”

Ukraine could be in a position to “threaten” Crimea within the next few months in what would be the “biggest blow” to Putin, Professor Michael Clarke tells #TimesRadio.​

 

Ukraine War: Forthcoming 'fighting season' could be final chapter in conflict -

 

Lots of negativity in there about Ukraine's chances for victory and about western support. I don't know how many really feel that Ukraine "can't win" this, but I'm sure they're wrong. We're watching as Muscovy's quality of men and material deteriorates while Ukraine is gaining at least in material quality if not in manpower. I do agree that Ukraine's counteroffensive needs to achieve rapid results, though, since Ukraine is indeed not in a good position weather a sustained conflict for too much longer. But we should be prepared to give them everything they need for it and not keep tying their hands by, for example, refusing to deliver ATACMS and western aircraft. Delivering earlier what we've finally begun to deliver now could have saved many lives and allowed for much greater Ukrainian gains in battle by now, I feel.

 

We still have the issue over what is a Ukrainian win. It cant be under the premise that Russia just quits and walks away, or hopefully this happens in Russia domestically or that. Its just unlikely that they can recover all the territory they have lost, they will run into all the issues Russia has when you go on offensive in heavily fortified positions. Understand Ukraine could not accomplish this for like 8 years before Russia proper even showed up, so why would you assume they can do it now?

They really need to invade Russia if they really want to win and defeat Russia, but even Western countries openly admit that the defeat of Russia is not the goal, only the weakening. That's why they are not getting all the material needed even to attempt that goal.

 

Bakhmut Battle Fog of War Update


Very informative and comprehensive analysis!

 

In reality, it's difficult to account for all of the complexities involved and make accurate predictions. I suppose the counteroffensive(s) this summer will help tell the tale of what to expect. I would be surprised if the Ukrainians do not make significant territorial gains as we have seen them do previously, especially with the superior weapon systems coming in on their side and Russia running low on their more modern systems. It is still very much a war of technology, after all.

Of course, such gains are only part of the story. Russia can continue to rain destruction and terror on Ukrainian civilians and the Ukrainian economy, and this does require either striking deep into Russia or reaching some kind of ceasefire agreement. It has been suggested that threatening Crimea could move the Russian leadership to finally rethink their position, as the loss of Crimea would apparently be a significant blow to them domestically, so it's something they might be motivated to negotiate to avoid. I don't know how the Ukrainian public would react, but I imagine Zelensky would be better off in this scenario than Putin would be if Crimea were retaken.

 

We shall see.

 

Burn pits do not explain the elevated number of Birth defects overall .. it is possible there were other contributors ... may be able to separate these out .. Mercury is going to cause different birth defects than Depleted Uranium.

but in general .. there are enough folks with credibility saying Depleted Uranium is a problem ... for me to take that side..

 

You side with Muscovy and anti-western kooks on every issue, pure and simple.

 

Who is the "anti western kook" in the room .. the one who hates essential liberty .. and does the Nazi Orc Cheer. Who is the idiot who thinks because someone happens to believe the Truth -- and someone in Russia happens to believe the same truth .. that this person is siding with Russia. .. that would be quite the moron would it not ... someone who has no clue what logical fallacy would you not say ?

 

Who is this person who assumes he believes the "Truth" with an odd use of capitalization based on unsupported claims from kooks and Muscovite propagandists?

 

Here's some stuff you should check out.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/american-imperialism.371897/

Outside of the US people are aware of this. They seem like kooks to people who think the US and England defend freedom and democracy in the world.

 

Check out this info:


He mentions Scott Ritter, so you'll love it.

 

You don't seem to think the info I posted is very important. Do you think it should be considered in the overall assessment of the situation? Do you have an opinion on it?

 

You well represent the Kremlin perspective.

 

A long drawn out war of attrition favors the larger power. Also, I am not sure rapid progress can be achieved in the South as long series of defensive fortifications, tank traps, and mine fields. All of that is designed to slow and blunt an offensive.

With enough effort fortifications can be over come but how quickly?

 

You first. All I ever get from you about what I link is "how do you know it's not paid propaganda?"