TaylorTRoom
1,000+ Posts
In other words, if that woman weren’t dressed so provocatively, while walking those neighborhoods at night, she wouldn’t have been assaulted?
Russia attacking Ukraine 2/16?
- Thread starter Seattle Husker
- Start date
Stalin cut the deal with Ribbentrop because he rightly feared Hitler was planning to attack him. He thought this would buy time and Hitler might be sated with Poland. But the situation was similar to today in that he had a loon next door with a big army. But thanks for pointing out the weak slat under my bed. No analogy is perfect except as a broad comparison
OUBubba
5,000+ Posts
Which party is that? I think we on the left feel like Putin caused this war. His reuniting of mother Russia has a timeline and his age is pushing that timeline.
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
"Blame America First" crowds exist all across the political spectrum. It's odd that the QAnon and Libertarians landed there with this invasion. You expect it from the Internet Research Agency (aka Russia internet propaganda arm).
Duck Dodgers
1,000+ Posts
In other words, if you’re the leader of a country, your job is to avoid your country being invaded and your people killed. To which, he’s done a terrible job.
You can realize this and think Russia should not have invaded Ukraine, if you have more than a comic book understanding of the world.
And yes, if a women told me she had to walk west from U Houston at night by herself, I’d say
don’t do it!
If you must, leave the high heels at home and wear combat boots, jeans, jacket, and a shotgun over your shoulder.
Last edited:
Cue AOC
"The Democratic Socialists of America’s view that U.S. imperialist expansionism through NATO fueled Russia’s invasion"
Socialists’ Response to War in Ukraine Has Put Some Democrats on Edge
Duck Dodgers
1,000+ Posts
A blast from the past.
Remember, when King Barry and Shillery got into power, their overriding foreign policy view was that the Bush administration ruined the relationship with Russia, which was still in the good graces of the Democrat party, from their shared commie history.
Their plan, as such, was to give a red button to the Russian foreign minister as a reset button, and the kiss *** for help around the world.
Remember, when King Barry and Shillery got into power, their overriding foreign policy view was that the Bush administration ruined the relationship with Russia, which was still in the good graces of the Democrat party, from their shared commie history.
Their plan, as such, was to give a red button to the Russian foreign minister as a reset button, and the kiss *** for help around the world.
Ok, I’ve withheld any comments about these alleged bio-labs in Ukraine, because it sounded too outlandish.
However, yesterday, our very own United States Undersecretary of State—Victoria Nuland, testifying under oath before The Senate, when under heavy questioning by Rubio, appeared to confirm the secretive bio-labs in Ukraine…???!!!
I still don’t know enough to say what’s what on this stuff, or who’s behind it or funding it, but at this point it definitely merits a serious and earnest independent investigation. And it most definitely does not deserve quashing an investigation and serious inquiry and discussion, through ridicule, cancelling, censorship, or dismissal.
So interestingly enough, it may be that the “kooks” were right all along on this point…. I don’t know yet, but I hope we find out the truth. Why would Nuland perjure herself to prop up a supposedly “kooky” theory that her superiors apparently don’t like.
[of course, whatever comes of these bio-labs, none of this changes the fact that Putin is a real SOB, is not our friend, and is waging an aggressive expansionist, unnecessary, bloody war against a neighboring sovereign state]
However, yesterday, our very own United States Undersecretary of State—Victoria Nuland, testifying under oath before The Senate, when under heavy questioning by Rubio, appeared to confirm the secretive bio-labs in Ukraine…???!!!
I still don’t know enough to say what’s what on this stuff, or who’s behind it or funding it, but at this point it definitely merits a serious and earnest independent investigation. And it most definitely does not deserve quashing an investigation and serious inquiry and discussion, through ridicule, cancelling, censorship, or dismissal.
So interestingly enough, it may be that the “kooks” were right all along on this point…. I don’t know yet, but I hope we find out the truth. Why would Nuland perjure herself to prop up a supposedly “kooky” theory that her superiors apparently don’t like.
[of course, whatever comes of these bio-labs, none of this changes the fact that Putin is a real SOB, is not our friend, and is waging an aggressive expansionist, unnecessary, bloody war against a neighboring sovereign state]
Neither of us know what’s up with those secret bio-labs, but the Undersecretary of Defense just nervously admitted to their existence under penalty of perjury. Hopefully there’s nothing all that dangerous within them, but there may be….? And frankly, it’s not Russia’s place to invade another nation’s sovereign territory to supposedly check them out.
Horn2RunAgain
2,500+ Posts
Just a couple of days ago Blinken's caddy said the thought of bio labs in Ukraine was conspiracy stuff and "you shouldn't print that". Now we know he flat out lied, probably had his reasons to do so (promote the admin's narrative)
Nuland's testimony Wednesday should be a reminder to us all that what we're fed isn't truth oftentimes. When I read bubba or SH poke fun at some posters here about so called Q anon stuff on things that cannot be proven by either side, I just roll my eyes now. They DON'T know themselves if something is a conspiracy or truth or fiction until all facts are in.
Just let it play out (as well as other issues like voter fraud). Like today, the facts come out eventually. When a "conspiracy" turns out to be true, the doubters look like fools.
TaylorTRoom
1,000+ Posts
The Ukraine leader can’t be held accountable for Putin’s idiocy. Putin has put Russia on a course for ruin and subjected the Russian people to a generation of disdain and rejection. Ukraine and NATO didn’t force him or entice him to make that choice. It was all his.
For such can’t be proven/can’t be disproven things, it’s best not to take a stance until more complete info is available. That’s how I was with these bio labs. But when the State Dept—under oath—contradicts previous Biden Administration statements and now admits they exist, then it’s time to ramp up a full blown investigation. In the immediate future, get any hazardous stuff out of there, to a safe place where it won’t be spread to the population, and away from the invading Russian horde.
OUBubba
5,000+ Posts
The distance between “Ukraine may have had some bio labs” to “Putin is saving Ukraine and the world from nazi ownership of bio labs” and “Russia has secured 30 bio labs” is significant.
TaylorTRoom
1,000+ Posts
The bio lab is a big misdirection but Russia, propaganda. This is what Jim Geraghty explains:
https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morn ... ue-reading
From a Ukrainian presentation at a 2011 conference, organized by the U.S. State Department’s Biosecurity Engagement Program:
What high-containment biological (high BSL) laboratories exist in your country? What are the facilities’ main goals and priorities?
There are over 4,000 registered microbiological laboratories in Ukraine, but only 2 of them have a permit to work with microorganisms of the first pathogenic group, 402 laboratories have a permit to work with the microorganisms of the second pathogenic group, and all others are allowed to work only with microorganisms of the third and forth pathogenic groups. Here it is necessary to note that the classification of pathogenic organisms and therefore classification of the laboratories in Ukraine differs from the international one. It is inverted (i.e., in Ukraine “one” is the highest risk and “four” is the lowest risk) and also has some additional differences. . . .
According to the available data, there are no laboratories in Ukraine that fulfill BSL-4 requirements. One of the laboratories that has a permit to work with the microorganisms of the first pathogenic group did, however, recently undergo an international audit as a BSL-3 laboratory and received a preliminary positive evaluation.
Even biosafety-level-two laboratories work with some nasty stuff — e.g., hepatitis, HIV, salmonella. Biosafety-level-three laboratories work with microbes that can cause serious or deadly diseases through inhalation — e.g., Covid-19, tuberculosis, yellow fever, SARS, West Nile, some strains of influenza. Biosafety-level-four laboratories work with the most dangerous pathogens that carry the highest risk of infecting lab personnel — e.g., Ebola, Nipah, Marburg.
Ukraine does not have a level-four lab today. Just as it did a decade ago, Ukraine has thousands of labs, but only a handful work with airborne, potentially deadly pathogens, and a few hundred work with “moderate-risk agents.”
Still, the security of those labs and what’s in them is something worth worrying about when they’re in an active war zone. During a Senate Committee on Foreign Relations hearing Monday, Senator Marco Rubio of Florida asked a question of Victoria Nuland, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs:
Rubio: Let me ask you, does Ukraine have chemical or biological weapons?
Nuland: Ukraine has biological-research facilities, which, in fact, we are now quite concerned Russian forces may be seeking to gain control of. So we are working with the Ukrainians on how they can prevent any of those research materials from falling into the hands of Russian forces, should they approach.
Rubio: I’m sure you’re aware that the Russian propaganda groups are already putting out there all kinds of information about how they’ve uncovered a plot by the Ukrainians to release biological weapons in the country with NATO’s coordination. If there is a biological- or chemical-weapon incident or attack inside of Ukraine, is there any doubt in your mind that 100 percent, it would be the Russians that would be behind it?
Nuland: There is no doubt in my mind, Senator. And it is classic Russian technique to blame on the other guy what they’re planning to do themselves.
Yes, Ukraine has biological-research facilities. A “biological-research facility” is not the same as a biological-weapons-research facility. (Although it is worth noting that a lot of research into dangerous pathogens is dual-use; the more you know about how to fight dangerous viruses and bacteria, the more knowledge you could theoretically apply to weaponizing viruses and bacteria.) When state-owned Russian media such as TASS breathlessly echo a Russian official’s statement that “In Ukraine, a network of more than 30 biological laboratories was created,” they really want your mind to insert the word “weapons” in between “biological” and “laboratories.”
Any major university or major hospital/medical center is going to have a lab that, at minimum, will have samples that may include dangerous or contagious pathogens collected from patients, etc., separate from any labs doing medical research on these kinds of viruses and bacteria.
It is not a shock or surprising that “the U.S. government is concerned about preventing any of those research materials from falling into the hands of Russian forces, should they approach,” as Nuland put it. We’ve already seen Russian forces reckless enough to fire shells at Europe’s largest nuclear-power plant, hitting the training center . . . and then follow it up by firing missiles at a radioactive-waste facility near Kyiv and shelling a nuclear-research facility producing radioisotopes for medical and industrial applications. The invading Russian forces have already proven to be spectacularly irresponsible; God knows what could happen if a bunch of hungry, young, poorly briefed Russian conscripts were to go traipsing through a biological-research lab with samples of who-knows-what in vials and petri dishes in its sample fridges.
While theoretically anything is possible, I would be surprised if anything Ukraine was doing in its biological-research facilities constituted a secret biological-weapons program. Ukraine has ratified the Biological Weapons Convention and the Chemical Weapons Convention. For Ukraine, a secret biological-weapons program would represent enormous risk for very little reward; if such a program were revealed, it would instantly alienate Ukraine’s Western allies and wipe out their chances of joining the European Union or NATO someday.
What’s more, if Ukraine had a secret biological-weapons program, it would be one that was researching or producing weapons that the Ukrainians left unused on the shelf as the Russian army came storming across the border. And if you’re not going to use your secret biological weapons when 200,000 heavily armed Russian troops are knocking on your door, either you’re never going to use them, or you never had them in the first place.
By contrast, the Soviet Union’s biological-weapons program “was by far the largest and most sophisticated such program ever undertaken by any nation,” with stories that will horrify you — including accidental leaks that killed innocent people, with the true cause of the disease covered up by an authoritarian regime. When the Soviet Union collapsed, the Russians pledged they would get rid of all that toxic, dangerous stuff of nightmares — but Moscow never quite satisfied the U.S. with its reports of its inventory. The Russians blocked inspections of certain facilities that had been used to create and store biological weapons in the past.
As for modern Russia, the U.S. government’s annual review of arms-control and nonproliferation treaties published last year concluded that:
The Russian Federation maintains an offensive [biological weapons] program and is in violation of its obligation under Articles I and II of the BWC. The issue of compliance by Russia with the BWC has been of concern for many years. . . . While there were no specific expert level consultations in 2020, on August 27, 2020, the United States added the 48th Central Scientific Research Institute, Kirov; 48th Central Scientific Research Institute, Sergiev Posad; and 48th Central Scientific Research Institute, Yekaterinburg — the key military biological facilities previously referenced — to the Entity List. These three entities have been determined by the U.S government to be acting contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States. Specifically, the United States has reasonable cause to believe these institutes are Russian Ministry of Defense facilities associated with the Soviet and Russian biological weapons program.
https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morn ... ue-reading
From a Ukrainian presentation at a 2011 conference, organized by the U.S. State Department’s Biosecurity Engagement Program:
What high-containment biological (high BSL) laboratories exist in your country? What are the facilities’ main goals and priorities?
There are over 4,000 registered microbiological laboratories in Ukraine, but only 2 of them have a permit to work with microorganisms of the first pathogenic group, 402 laboratories have a permit to work with the microorganisms of the second pathogenic group, and all others are allowed to work only with microorganisms of the third and forth pathogenic groups. Here it is necessary to note that the classification of pathogenic organisms and therefore classification of the laboratories in Ukraine differs from the international one. It is inverted (i.e., in Ukraine “one” is the highest risk and “four” is the lowest risk) and also has some additional differences. . . .
According to the available data, there are no laboratories in Ukraine that fulfill BSL-4 requirements. One of the laboratories that has a permit to work with the microorganisms of the first pathogenic group did, however, recently undergo an international audit as a BSL-3 laboratory and received a preliminary positive evaluation.
Even biosafety-level-two laboratories work with some nasty stuff — e.g., hepatitis, HIV, salmonella. Biosafety-level-three laboratories work with microbes that can cause serious or deadly diseases through inhalation — e.g., Covid-19, tuberculosis, yellow fever, SARS, West Nile, some strains of influenza. Biosafety-level-four laboratories work with the most dangerous pathogens that carry the highest risk of infecting lab personnel — e.g., Ebola, Nipah, Marburg.
Ukraine does not have a level-four lab today. Just as it did a decade ago, Ukraine has thousands of labs, but only a handful work with airborne, potentially deadly pathogens, and a few hundred work with “moderate-risk agents.”
Still, the security of those labs and what’s in them is something worth worrying about when they’re in an active war zone. During a Senate Committee on Foreign Relations hearing Monday, Senator Marco Rubio of Florida asked a question of Victoria Nuland, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs:
Rubio: Let me ask you, does Ukraine have chemical or biological weapons?
Nuland: Ukraine has biological-research facilities, which, in fact, we are now quite concerned Russian forces may be seeking to gain control of. So we are working with the Ukrainians on how they can prevent any of those research materials from falling into the hands of Russian forces, should they approach.
Rubio: I’m sure you’re aware that the Russian propaganda groups are already putting out there all kinds of information about how they’ve uncovered a plot by the Ukrainians to release biological weapons in the country with NATO’s coordination. If there is a biological- or chemical-weapon incident or attack inside of Ukraine, is there any doubt in your mind that 100 percent, it would be the Russians that would be behind it?
Nuland: There is no doubt in my mind, Senator. And it is classic Russian technique to blame on the other guy what they’re planning to do themselves.
Yes, Ukraine has biological-research facilities. A “biological-research facility” is not the same as a biological-weapons-research facility. (Although it is worth noting that a lot of research into dangerous pathogens is dual-use; the more you know about how to fight dangerous viruses and bacteria, the more knowledge you could theoretically apply to weaponizing viruses and bacteria.) When state-owned Russian media such as TASS breathlessly echo a Russian official’s statement that “In Ukraine, a network of more than 30 biological laboratories was created,” they really want your mind to insert the word “weapons” in between “biological” and “laboratories.”
Any major university or major hospital/medical center is going to have a lab that, at minimum, will have samples that may include dangerous or contagious pathogens collected from patients, etc., separate from any labs doing medical research on these kinds of viruses and bacteria.
It is not a shock or surprising that “the U.S. government is concerned about preventing any of those research materials from falling into the hands of Russian forces, should they approach,” as Nuland put it. We’ve already seen Russian forces reckless enough to fire shells at Europe’s largest nuclear-power plant, hitting the training center . . . and then follow it up by firing missiles at a radioactive-waste facility near Kyiv and shelling a nuclear-research facility producing radioisotopes for medical and industrial applications. The invading Russian forces have already proven to be spectacularly irresponsible; God knows what could happen if a bunch of hungry, young, poorly briefed Russian conscripts were to go traipsing through a biological-research lab with samples of who-knows-what in vials and petri dishes in its sample fridges.
While theoretically anything is possible, I would be surprised if anything Ukraine was doing in its biological-research facilities constituted a secret biological-weapons program. Ukraine has ratified the Biological Weapons Convention and the Chemical Weapons Convention. For Ukraine, a secret biological-weapons program would represent enormous risk for very little reward; if such a program were revealed, it would instantly alienate Ukraine’s Western allies and wipe out their chances of joining the European Union or NATO someday.
What’s more, if Ukraine had a secret biological-weapons program, it would be one that was researching or producing weapons that the Ukrainians left unused on the shelf as the Russian army came storming across the border. And if you’re not going to use your secret biological weapons when 200,000 heavily armed Russian troops are knocking on your door, either you’re never going to use them, or you never had them in the first place.
By contrast, the Soviet Union’s biological-weapons program “was by far the largest and most sophisticated such program ever undertaken by any nation,” with stories that will horrify you — including accidental leaks that killed innocent people, with the true cause of the disease covered up by an authoritarian regime. When the Soviet Union collapsed, the Russians pledged they would get rid of all that toxic, dangerous stuff of nightmares — but Moscow never quite satisfied the U.S. with its reports of its inventory. The Russians blocked inspections of certain facilities that had been used to create and store biological weapons in the past.
As for modern Russia, the U.S. government’s annual review of arms-control and nonproliferation treaties published last year concluded that:
The Russian Federation maintains an offensive [biological weapons] program and is in violation of its obligation under Articles I and II of the BWC. The issue of compliance by Russia with the BWC has been of concern for many years. . . . While there were no specific expert level consultations in 2020, on August 27, 2020, the United States added the 48th Central Scientific Research Institute, Kirov; 48th Central Scientific Research Institute, Sergiev Posad; and 48th Central Scientific Research Institute, Yekaterinburg — the key military biological facilities previously referenced — to the Entity List. These three entities have been determined by the U.S government to be acting contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States. Specifically, the United States has reasonable cause to believe these institutes are Russian Ministry of Defense facilities associated with the Soviet and Russian biological weapons program.
Oh, if you read what I’ve written, you’ll see that I’m not saying Putin is saving anyone from anything, and I oppose this Russian invasion. But, we now have confirmation that these bio labs exist, so this should be taken very seriously. Chem weapons are one thing, but bio weapons might possibly infect millions or even billions. Whatever it is the Ukrainians have in these bio labs needs to be secured and evacuated to safe locations far away from the invading Russian hordes. Hopefully all they’ve got equates to an average university biology department lab—but we don’t know yet….
Last edited:
It does not shock me when the government lies—that’s kinda what they do…
The government has been caught in a lie about the existence of the bio labs—so cast a jaundiced eye on any further statements they release on this topic.
And yes, with or without the bio labs, Putin is still a nasty SOB who is not our friend, and who should not have invaded another sovereign nation.
The government has been caught in a lie about the existence of the bio labs—so cast a jaundiced eye on any further statements they release on this topic.
And yes, with or without the bio labs, Putin is still a nasty SOB who is not our friend, and who should not have invaded another sovereign nation.
OUBubba
5,000+ Posts
I would almost guarantee you that any bad biological was migrated out of Ukraine. We've all seen this invasion coming. It was always the worst case scenario, but it was always an option that was on the table. I think people smarter than those of us posting here took care of that issue.
Monahorns
10,000+ Posts
You can word it or frame it anyway you like. However, are we to ignore the actions of both sides over the last 30 years when trying to understand what is going on today?
Russia is guilty because they started this war. They are savagely marching across Ukraine to take it over. Their end goals at this point at clear. It could be half or all of Ukraine. It could be to take over more former Soviet states. Those are all true statements.
The actions of NATO are all facts too. We in the US don't fear NATO. NATO is the good guys so their intentions are fine to us. Sure. I get it. But the point is how did the Russians interpret those actions? What did they think they had to do in the situation? It doesn't even matter if they were correct in their assessment of NATO.
Anytime there are 2 parties in any situation, you have to deal with the other party as they are and take into consideration what they are thinking. Even if they are incorrect or irrational. You don't have to of course. But even in personal interactions that is a fast way to a shouting argument or a fight. It is unwise. It is wise to understand the viewpoint of the other party and act accordingly. That doesn't mean you lie to yourself or never try to correct or explain what you see as the truth. But to ignore their viewpoint will necessarily cause conflict.
Monahorns
10,000+ Posts
Nuland's testimony proves this isn't true. You can believe it if you want but your heroine has falsified it.
Monahorns
10,000+ Posts
National Review: pushing and justifying war for over 50 years.
TaylorTRoom
1,000+ Posts
That is the logical fallacy of “ad hominem attack”, and not an actual argument (and nonsensical, too. NR is against this war. Only Russia was for it…but I bet now they wish they hadn’t started it).
Monahorns
10,000+ Posts
I think I was more guilty of the non sequitur fallacy, but touche.
The left hand isn't talking with the right hand. Typical of many large, bloated organizations.
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
The Whitehouse PR Secretary is a spin artist. Always has been and always will be. Did you actually believe Sean Spicer's laughable claims from the same podium?
Nuland's role, especially when testifying to congress, is a much more serious role. With that said, the National Review article, if accurate, does paint the picture that they both could be right. Like many issues, context of the question matters. It's not black or white typically.
Piss-Saki is most definitely a spin artist. Nuland had a moment of candor, but if you watch the video, she was squirming and noticeably uncomfortable when giving that answer.
Recent Threads
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
-
President Biden Accountability Thread
- Started by 2003TexasGrad
- Replies: 4K
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
