First, is it even possible?
The answer is yes, absolutely. There is enough (non-weapons grade) spent civilian nuclear reactor fuel to get enough radioactive materials. Much more importantly, there is plenty of “know how” amongst Ukrainian scientists and engineers. Besides, bringing in radioactive materials or specialists is something the AngloZionist Hegemony could do. Did I mention plenty of starry-eyed Ukronazi politicians daydreaming on camera about how to nuke Russia and kill as many Russians as possible?
https://thesaker.is/a-few-thoughts-about-the-dirty-bomb-thesis-and-the-role-of-hatred/
I'd like to say a prayer that no innocents are harmed in whatever bs plan they've hatched to draw attention to themselves.
Amen
Amen to that.
With a "dirty" bomb scenario, the land will be un-inhabitable for decades...and the people suffer...these scenarios are JUST that and ONLY that...PROPAGANDA and I pray the Ukrainians get rid of Zelensky post haste!!! AND KICK THE AMERICAN CONTRACTORS OUT!!!!!!!!
The Russians would never do this. This is an area with a high number of ethnic Russians. Not that they would do it to Ukrainians either, or the land.
The Russians have avoided civilian infrastructure for months, even in Kiev. They've only hit some of it recently to slow down troop movements.
The Americans ( under cabal control ) would have flattened cities immediately like they have done in the past in Syria and Iraq.
FTA: Right now, NATO simply does not have the forces needed to attack Russia with any hope of success.
And on top of that, we're going into winter, and what does Mother Russia do to foreign troops in the winter? Just ask Napolean and Hitler.
FTA: But if past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior, I would submit that there will always be enough doubleplusgoodshitheaters in the Hegemony to believe literally anything no matter how self-evidently stupid and preposterous that anything is.
If we truly only have 25 days of diesel fuel left, by the end of November the doubleplusgoodshitheaters, and pretty much everyone else in the US, will have their own problems to contend with and what's going on in Ukraine will, for the most part, fall off the radar. People will be stirred up alright, but it won't be about Ukraine. I wonder if that thought has even crossed the minds of the DC doofuses.
Russia will never need to repel another land invasion. They are more than willing to nuke their entire western front if need be. Better yet, nuke the countries between them and the threat. If someone wants to drive over the nuclear wasteland to try and get to Russia, they are free to do so, but Russia will pick them off easily. And even if they "win", what have they won? A nuclear wasteland that extends across 1/4 of the earth.
The only threat that Russia faces, in reality, is full-blown nuclear war. They know this. Everyone knows it. Lining up troops on the border is ridiculous and stupid and pointless. It's not even posturing. It's just absurd.
If we are serious about fighting Russia, then we would announce that we are going to nuke their military sites starting three hours ago. But guess what? THEY DO NOT HAVE THE NUKE CODES FOR THE US ARSENAL. And that's why they are moving the 101st in to the borders of Ukraine.
Russia knows that the Biden is fake. Russia knows who the real president is. Russia knows that they can eat their lunch in Kiev if they are willing to pay the price in blood -- mostly Ukrainian blood. Instead, what have they done? IN EVERY CASE THEY HAVE TRIED TO DE-ESCALATE AND SAVE LIVES. In EVERY SINGLE SCENARIO.
Russia is the good guys, and anyone who knows anything can see it, plain as day.
WHY ARE WE SO INTERESTED IN PROTECTING UKRAINE? WHY DO WE CARE? WHAT ARE WE TRYING TO HIDE?
No one dares answer that question!
I've always felt that zelenskyy is blackmailing them for cash because he helped with the impeachment phone call hoax and has knowledge (and participation in) various deeply illegal activities in Ukraine. Possibly election related, bio weapons, money laundering etc.. its a "cash or we go public" situation...
It's the only thing IMO that's makes sense..
What Russia has done in the past is lay waste to the land, so that there is no food or shelter for hundred of miles, and retreat. The enemy follows and then General Winter takes care of them.
People will be stirred up alright,
...that is what the dark state has wanted all along....
"Sum of all Fears"
...truth....
The UKs new PM is a dirty Bong.
A true poo-in-the-loo through and through.
The new UK prime minister is Klaus Schwab.
They’re up to something dog.
...initiating a "trigger event"....
Real nukes are ridiculously hard to get to ignite. It's easy to blow up nuclear material, hard to get it to do fission and turn that small explosion into a big one.
When Ukraine left Russia, they took with them all of the military assets that Russia had deployed on the frontlines with Germany. That meant a lot of nukes. However, Russia had the nuclear codes, and the nuclear scientists, who knew how to make those nukes go "boom". Ukraine did not have that.
You may think figuring out how to get a nuclear bomb to go "BOOM" is pretty easy. I can tell you, as someone who studied physics, that yes, on paper it looks really easy. I have my suspicions that they do not publish the real numbers or real information you need to build a real bomb. The data they do have will make it look like you are building a bomb when in reality you are building a very expensive bomb-shaped device.
...this has nothing to do with a conventional nuclear weapon...
No, a dirty bomb doesn't.
I don't even know if dirty bombs are real. Like, we hear about them in the newspapers, but so much of what we heard about during the Cold War was smoke and mirrors. It's all lies and propaganda.
Would a dirty bomb have the effect predicted? My training says "No." Spreading a bunch of nuclear material around will probably make people healthier.
"Dirty bombs" are as real as you want them to be. There is not much military purpose in having one, so not much effort has gone into actually making them. The active ingredient is a bunch of highly-radioactive isotopes that can be wrapped around a chemical-explosive core. The detonation will expel the isotopes in a cloud of particles, which will settle down over everything as radioactive contamination. If people stay away from the contamination, they will probably be okay. (Hormesis might indeed make them better, but there is no control over this environment.) The scanty utility lies in the disruption of normal civilian activities and the peskiness of clean-up afterward. The military value is low to the point of being negative (more trouble than it would be worth), so it could only be a terror weapon or sabotage play.
With what we learned from Chernobyl, exposure to medium levels of radiation has no effect. There were zero net deaths due to Chernobyl, aside from the firefighters who were exposed to an insane amount of radiation.
At first read, that sounds ludicrous, to the point people would question your sanity. It sounds insane to me, honestly. But then there are pictures of the Chernobyl elephant's foot. So it leads one to wonder, how much of everything we've been told is a lie?
I was in college studying physics in the 90s. At the time, the physicists explained that we have lots of good data on low dosage (harmless, and sometimes even beneficial) and lots of good data on high dosage (you're going to die, usually) but no good data on medium dosage. Physicists were asked to predict what would happen, and since the possibilities were "harmless" to "mostly harmless" to "you're going to die", governments chose "you're going to die" to be on the safe side.
So if you ever got exposed to more than a little radiation, the government would put you in a category of people who should not be exposed to any more, which means we get no data on people who get medium doses of radiation.
The great part about the Chernobyl disaster is we not only had a lot of new medium dosage patients, but we got to see what fallout really does. See, in Japan, fallout did almost no damage. This was surprising, but physicists were cautious and warned that it could just be a fluke. Maybe the seaweed that Japanese people eat protected them or something.
But now we know. Medium dosage is harmless. You will not get more cancer. You will not grow a third eye. Your children will be perfectly normal. You will not become sterile.
In the event of nuclear war, nuclear fallout will not create a wasteland. Those who survive the initial blasts will live long and healthy lives. Some of them will get exposed to high levels of radiation and will suffer for it. The rest will be ok.
Yes, you were not programmed from birth by the media to believe that nuclear radiation is harmless. Yes, there is a conspiracy to prevent us from building nuclear reactors -- the SAFEST and MOST ECONOMICAL form of energy, and with ridiculously low levels of CO2 emissions to boot!
Personally, I find it funny that nuke reactors are just really expensive water boilers.
I understand. And there were less than expected problems from Hiroshima and Nagasaki (actually recognized in retrospect; there was no going-in experience). But the problem with a dirty bomb is that it would be too easy to walk into a dangerous area unless the blast deposition pattern had been mapped out for safety. Waiting also helps, as the worst isotopes tend to have short half-lives. Gamma emitters, however, are the real problem, since the alpha and beta radiations can be stopped by clothing. There is also the problem of the chosen isotope being biologically active, like iodine or strontium. Don't want to ingest any of that.
Sort of comparable to a "toxic sludge bomb." Messy. Not dangerous if you don't mess with it. A pain in the ass to clean up. Will not produce mutants.
...they are a rather ineffective offensive weapon...
...but given its implementation, it could induce mass panic....
...a larger and more realistic threat are "suitcase nukes" which of last count, more than 80 are unaccounted for...
I doubt "suitcase nukes" are even possible.
That's the goal. Create a problem, then beg the Masters to solve it.
If there is a nuclear war, I plan on going outside and taking deep breaths of the fallout.
When my hair doesn't fall out, I'll laugh in Klingon.
I haven't decided whether i'll loot the deceived or not. Maybe I'll just let them starve while my children repopulate the earth.
When in doubt, do some research, anon. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suitcase_nuclear_device
"The lightest nuclear warhead ever acknowledged to have been manufactured by the U.S. is the W54, which was used in both the Davy Crockett 120 mm recoilless rifle-launched warhead and the backpack-carried version called the Mk-54 SADM (Special Atomic Demolition Munition). The bare warhead package was an 11 by 16 inches (280 by 410 mm) cylinder that weighed 51 pounds (23 kg).
"The W48 nuclear shell is 155 millimetres (6.1 in) in diameter and 846 millimetres (33.3 in) long and weighs 53.5 kilograms (118 lb). It represents the smallest diameter complete, self-contained physics package to be fielded and had a yield of 72 tonnes of TNT (300 GJ). Nuclear weapons designer Ted Taylor has alleged that a 105 millimetres (4.1 in) diameter shell with a mass of 19 kilograms (42 lb) is theoretically possible."
Questioning whether or not "suitcase nukes" exist while assuming nuclear weapons exist as we are taught in school, as we are taught in newspapers, when Nuclear Weapons were placed under Q clearance by Jimmy Carter in 1977, a year Q has highlighted, is missing the forest for the trees.
I'm convinced that "suitcase nukes" are the reason why great things suddenly fade out and go away... like the Supreme Court dealing with election fraud, and the Arizona audit... because somebody will use those suitcase nukes if such things are allowed to go ahead.
So they don't. And we wait.
Maybe this is the specific reason why Israel is last as is mentioned in the Q drops.
Could they be the ones essentially holding us hostage due to the threatened use of suitcase nukes?
Yes, it even has a name - it's the Samson option.
Here is the toned down wiki entry. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option
I think the real thing would be devices already in place in American cities. You know they would do it.
This is said to be a backpack nuke to be used by US special forces.
https://files.catbox.moe/og687u.jpg
...that is a very compelling observation...
...your frontal lobe is producing high value thought processes tonight....
...ty...I think it's all the howling...
...howling frees up one's mind....
I had to chuckle at the construction "conventional nuclear weapon." But I think like that also.
...doggy winks...
...wagging tail stops....
...nose to the sky...
...smells blood on the horizon....
...precisely....
...howls...
...exactly....
...meow...
Is this what it's like to be at a furry convention?
no!!!
...howls...
There doesn't even need to be one, they'll just SAY it, the media with spread it - the "injured civilian" actors will be rolled out again with different make up.
Many will believe it, look at the entire "war" in the Ukraine.
Can a "dirty bomb" fit inside a tractor trailer? If so, it'll slide in like butter.
...absolutely not a problem....
The cat is out of the bag on this and too many eyes are on this topic and the Russians have gotten way out in front on telling the world EXACTLY what the US/NATO/Ukraine Nazi's are up to. They layed it all out so this makes is almost impossible to pull off...almost not totally impossible. If something happens I really don't think the majority will but the "muh Russia did it" just like people are not buying that Russia blew up there own pipeline that cost BILLIONS of dollars to make. This is more of a scare event.
AngloZionist? Do those go together?
...there is only one color...
...dollar bill green....
This was a very good read Ash!! Thank you.
...for the intellectually curious....
Sigh, this world. ..
...I know...
nuclear/radioactive refers to blackmail, not WMDs