"All of Vlad's forces and all of Vlad's men, are out to put Humpty together again." (1 Viewer)

[WARSPITER]

Fukushima is a good example of a properly built nuclear power station. Although there was an earthquake, a large Tsunami, a diesel driven water
pump to supply backup cooling that failed as the fuel tank was washed away, the plant itself did not give off any radiation due to having a proper dome system.

No deaths from the plant have been recorded, unlike Chernobyl which was built mainly to produce Plutonium and had no dome.

The older type of reactor - light water cooled, only uses about 4% of the fissile material. The newer types which reuse material and can be fed older waste
as well are far more efficient which means less waste.

I too would prefer a working solution in the form of fusion but the reactor would itself be a problem as it fuses itself while reacting - slight problem to solve.

Also, when waste is looked at - radioactive waste is around 250,000 tons worldwide but can be reused in newer type reactors which is a good thing.

Compare this to the production of solar panels where Lead, Cadmium, and Pure Chromium are fused in which all degrade over time and cannot be
dumped into landfill when they are no longer usable. Japan has estimated this will give them 800,000 tons of toxic waste over time - remembering that
the half life of lead and cadmium is a fair while.

 

[RogerdeLluria]

Some drone action.

That is what i call precision bombing, or just lucky shot, lol.


Ukrainian drone doping grenades on a T72, until it gets blasted away by tank exploding.


Of couse Russians also use drones, aparently with less stellar results.

 

[Snautzer01]

not give off any radiation

You joking right? Fukushima nuclear disaster - Wikipedia

 

[Admiral Beez]

Some drone action.

That is what i call precision bombing, or just lucky shot, lol.


Ukrainian drone doping grenades on a T72, until it gets blasted away by tank exploding.


Of couse Russians also use drones, aparently with less stellar results.

Again you're just posting unsubstantiated war porn from Twitter. If you read the comments under those tweets you'll see some credible analysis that these are fakes. Why are you taking these at face value and proliferating them online? Are you just trolling for Likes and Winners?

Here's a tip, question everything you see, hear and read, always ask why am I seeing this, what did the poster intend? I want them to win, but the Ukrainians (and their supporters) are just as good as the Russians in making fake vids, twisting the story to support their positions, etc.

The best vids to post are those from the established media, as they're responsible for confirming the accuracy of what is being portrayed. I think we've heard this before….

How to avoid falling for and spreading misinformation about Ukraine

 

[WARSPITER]

You joking right? Fukushima nuclear disaster - Wikipedia

As in levels seen at Chernobyl.

 

[special ed]

Although way off topic, Re: the shortages in V.N., one day I went to a small one man shop where I had bought old magazines (WW2) and found the man sitting on the floor packaging .22cal. rifle cleaning kits from Sears and he was surrounded by bundles of black socks. This was early in the war when the M-16 rifle was introduced with out cleaning gear as it was "unneeded". Then some Pentagon genius changed the ammunition and a pull through cord cleaning device was issued to prevent the carbon/crud build up. The shop man's younger brother was in country and his squad was plagued with jams. He was sending 13 .22 cal kits and 13 bundles of socks per his brother's request.

 

[syscom3]

By using the pronoun we I understand you are a US citizen. Here is a gentle reminder for my fellow Americans.
View attachment 668862

Stupid.

 

[buffnut453]

It's Monday so it's time for the weekly plethora of whiny-bitchism from Putin and his cronies...and the usual litany of unsubstantiated claims.

First up is Putin talking about Ukrainian biological weapons development. Naturally, none of these documents have been published so there's no way to verify the claims. Interestingly, this seems more like a retroactive statement to justify Russian actions to-date rather than any new claim that Putin might use as justification for further escalation or, worse, employment of more extreme measures in Ukraine.

During Russia's invasion of Ukraine, Moscow had obtained "documentary evidence of components of biological weapons being essentially created" near Russia's borders, he told the summit of the Russia-led security bloc CSTO.
He added "possible methods and mechanisms of destabilising the epidemiological situation in post-Soviet space were being worked on".
The BBC is unable to independently verify those claims.
Putin added the CSTO was planning a "series of joint exercises in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan in the autumn".


Then there's Peskov whining about Finland and Sweden potentially joining NATO:

Kremlin spokesperson, Dmitry Peskov, has said Russia was closely watching Sweden and Finland's bids to join Nato, adding that he was convinced that their accession would not strengthen the security of Europe.
"This is a serious issue, an issue that raises our concern, and we will follow very carefully," he said.
Peskov also pointed out that in comparison with Ukraine, Russia did not have any territorial disputes with Finland or Sweden.
Earlier, Russia's deputy foreign minister said Sweden and Finland's plan to join the military alliance is a mistake that would have far-reaching consequences.
"They should have no illusions that we will simply put up with it - and nor should Brussels, Washington and other Nato capitals. The general level of military tension will rise, predictability in this sphere will decrease," Sergei Ryabkov told the state RIA Novosti news agency.
Sweden is expected to make a formal decision on its application to join the military alliance today. The country's parliament is currently debating the potential membership bid. Finland has also confirmed it will apply to join Nato.


Interestingly, Putin's comments about Finland and Sweden seems more nuanced. He's talking about "expansion of military infrastructure on their territory" which may offer some room for the West to use similar language to assure Moscow that incorporation of Finland and Sweden into NATO won't represent an increase in threat to Russia. For example, if no non-Finnish forces deploy into Finland, then NATO can claim that they haven't expanded military infrastructure. I do think this is a case where we need to listen to the actual language Putin is using and respond accordingly.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has said Russia has no issue with Finland and Sweden, but that the expansion of military infrastructure on their territory would demand a reaction from Moscow.
Speaking about Nato expansion at a summit of the Russian-led Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO) in the Russian capital, he says it is a problem for Russia and is in the interest of the USA.
He also says Russia needs to pay additional attention to what he says are Nato's plans to increase its global influence.


Finally, even Lukashenko's joining the conversation:

Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko has urged other members of a Russian-dominated military alliance to stand united.
He also accused the West of hoping to prolong the conflict in Ukraine in an effort to weaken Russia.
Lukashenko, speaking at a summit of the leaders of the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO) in Moscow, said "hellish sanctions" against his country and Russia could have been avoided if the group had spoken with a united voice.
"Without a united front, the collective West will build up pressure on the post-Soviet space," Lukashenko said in televised opening remarks, addressing Russian President Vladimir Putin and the leaders of Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan.

 

[Glider]

Personally I am still trying to get my head around this part
He added "possible methods and mechanisms of destabilising the epidemiological situation in post-Soviet space were being worked on".
I admit to not understanding what this is on about, any ideas anyone?

 

[Snautzer01]

As in levels seen at Chernobyl.

Dude...plse do some reading on the subject.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Stupid.

It'd be nice if you gave a substantial answer to the replies to your previous post.

For instance, I pointed out that if we take your point at face value, then what you are saying is that a country has the right to dictate the foreign policy of a weaker nation, under the threat of invasion. Is that actually something you'd support?

Ukraine has the right to determine its foreign policy for itself. NATO hasn't (yet, lol) extended an invitation for Ukraine to join, and indeed had agreed to Ukraine remaining non-NATO. So -- how exactly is this NATO's fault?

If you pull a gun on me and demand my money, and I refuse, does that give you the right to shoot me?

I find your view, uh, curious, to say the least.

 

[Jagdflieger]

Personally I am still trying to get my head around this part
He added "possible methods and mechanisms of destabilising the epidemiological situation in post-Soviet space were being worked on".
I admit to not understanding what this is on about, any ideas anyone?

Working on Bio-genetic developments to create additional or to increase infections onto known/existing diseases.
IIRC that article or similar "news" also appeared in the media (worldwide) in regards to Covid-19

 

[WARSPITER]

Dude...plse do some reading on the subject.

I have and the radiation levels were not high enough to be considered dangerous. Nuclear power is shunned by many but is cheap to run
and relatively safe.

My point in all this is Europe needs to start now on reliable alternatives to power requirements and nuclear should be on the list.

 

[Jagdflieger]

If you pull a gun on me and demand my money, and I refuse, does that give you the right to shoot me?

From the viewpoint of the hardworking and fair assailant - yes sure.
After all he was fair enough to give you an option - another will shoot you first and then take your wallet and your lizard skin Cowboy boots. (Sorry I just couldn't resist)

 

[Admiral Beez]

My point in all this is Europe needs to start now on reliable alternatives to power requirements and nuclear should be on the list.

I skipped all the bickering above but this comment I agree with. Really, Europe doesn't have a choice, as they don't have domestic energy reserves to otherwise breakaway from Russia.

 

[buffnut453]

Norway, Iceland and Denmark express support for Sweden and Finland. This follows on from Britain's agreement to provide collective defence support to Finland and Sweden in the interim until their NATO membership is confirmed:

Norway, Denmark and Iceland issued a joint pledge to their "Nordic neighbours", offering them support should they come under attack before their respective applications have been processed.

Jonas Gahr Stoere, Norway's prime minister, said in a statement: "Together with Denmark and Iceland, Norway stands ready to assist its Nordic neighbours by all means necessary should they be the victim of aggression on their territory before obtaining Nato membership."

 

[Greg Boeser]

One bright spark told me a while ago that instead of killing whales we should just tranquillise them and then use liposuction to make
it a renewable resource operation.

We could use that technique on Walmart shoppers.

 

[GrauGeist]

So was Sonoma County.

Fort Ross, California - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Not Sonoma County, just Fort Ross - the area of modern Somona County was actually part of Imperial Spain's Alta California territory.

 

[syscom3]

Then why does the USA have nuclear weapons? It's to stop the bear attacking it.
If we follow your logic, the risk is too high so why not just surrender.

If you lived in Sweden or Finland and had seen Russian break every agreement its ever signed, attack every civilian target with almost every weapon at its disposal, lay waste to major cities, terrorise the people in the area's its captured with every conceivable atrocity and know that the same could easily happen to you. What would you do?

If Russia or China decided to take a shine at Hawaii, or Alaska would you think the risk of nuclear war is to high, we can just sign something and avoid world devastation. Or would you defend what is metaphorically the line in the sand?

I like to think

It'd be nice if you gave a substantial answer to the replies to your previous post.

For instance, I pointed out that if we take your point at face value, then what you are saying is that a country has the right to dictate the foreign policy of a weaker nation, under the threat of invasion. Is that actually something you'd support?

Ukraine has the right to determine its foreign policy for itself. NATO hasn't (yet, lol) extended an invitation for Ukraine to join, and indeed had agreed to Ukraine remaining non-NATO. So -- how exactly is this NATO's fault?

If you pull a gun on me and demand my money, and I refuse, does that give you the right to shoot me?

I find your view, uh, curious, to say the least.

Dont go looking for a war. The Ukraine only had to agree to be neutral. That would have been the end of it.

 

[swampyankee]

QdI understand whale oil is renewable.

So was passenger pigeon meat until they were hunted faster than they could reproduce.