Comment
The app for independent voices
I just subscribed in order to comment - and it turns out that I also listen to the Jocko Wilink podcasts... In any case, after 10 minutes, you seem spot on, you're saying the same kinds of things I'm saying. At 35 minutes, in talking about the neocons/neolibs, you're saying the same kinds of things I was saying in a discussion club we had in Kansas City in the 1990s - and the neoliberals have had a lock on the NatSecState since 1981 or so it seems, and the NatSecState sets policy. We need to ha…
NATO and the US gave Putin lots and lots of reasons to get in this war - including the bioweapons/"public health" (your choice) labs, some on the Russian border (see https://streamfortyseven.substack.com/p/public-health-or-bioweapons-research)- sheer insanity given the past two years. What were they thinking? Were they thinking? And then there was the feigned prospect of NATO membership, a fake offer without the intent to follow through - conveyed not so much to Zelenskyy but as a threat to Put…
If you believe Putin wanted to invade Ukraine because of these labs, i feel sorry for you mate. Its just political propaganda for the russian people.
The info on the biolabs predates the invasion by four years - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3T9ktfz_FfA is a presentation made 3 years ago, the original article goes back to 2018. At the time I thought it was disinfo, but it has checked out from non-Russian sources - and yeah, I know about the Strategic Culture group of publications and their actual provenance.
the info on the biolabs goes back to 1991. they were Soviet labs. of course a degenerate KGB agent knows about them.
And we could have wound them up in six months, brought the scientists back to universities in the US - they would have jumped at the chance as did so many others from Russia itself, and had the entire operation cleaned out in a year. 1992. There is *no* reason for *any* US-supported, financed, or aided bioweapons lab in Ukraine. None, period. So far as I'm concerned, biological or chemical warfare has no place in society, but that's just me. We should save insecticide for insects.
The worst thin…
There is a reason we didn’t do that. It’s the same reason we funded research that was little more than torture on dogs in Tunisia. The US public actually has really high standards and expectations for their scientists. Labs have to follow OSHA and EPA regulations. All proposed experiments at universities have to go through committees to receive permission and funding and they take such things as public health and needless suffering seriously. There are very few labs in the US that are rated to handle many of these pathogens (like Anthrax) and we aren’t particularly interested in creating more. So what do we do? We outsource our more questionable science to other countries that have lower standards for safety and suffering. Sometimes we just fund the science but other times we provide pretty much everything, it’s simply on foreign soil. A terrible accident on the Ukrainian/Russian border is much more manageable from a PR standpoint than the same terrible accident if it happens at UCLA. Certainly there is foreign collaborative research that doesn’t fall into this category, but it would be best to look skeptically at any science that America is involved in that takes place outside America. The only thing I’m not sure about is if leaving those labs completely unprotected was a blunder on par with arming the Taliban with our Afghanistan withdrawal or if it was purposeful. Frankly I’m not sure which reason is more concerning.