Jump to content

DPR building dirty bomb with Russian scientific help


Recommended Posts

Very doubtful.  The shootdown of MH17 did enough damage to Russian efforts in Eastern Ukraine.  Detonating a for real dirty bomb would bring the sort of consequences as to make whatever "progress" the Russians had made in dismembering the Ukraine moot.  Also it has very limited military value (it's not like it's a bigger bomb, it just has follow-on area denial aspects and a higher incidence of effectively "died of wounds, 20 years later").  In terms of blackmail it's just...not really enough.  I mean if you irradiated part of Kiev or something I can't imagine the war ending until either full-on Russian intervention (in support of nuclear terrorists because that won't totally and utterly make Russia a North Korea level pariah state), or a field of Russian insurgent skulls on spikes outside of the ashes of Donbass.   

 

It's worth remembering while Russian reporting is fairly devoid of truth, Ukrainian reporting should also be triple checked (especially when asserting fairly out there information).  This is especially true with "big" claims.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The story originated with The Times, which isn't at all in the same category as the Weekly World News. Whether or not The Times scored a scoop or instead glommed onto a "designer leak' I couldn't say, but the Ukraine Security Service is the same as the one which exposed then-DPR CIC Igor Strelkov as Igor Girkin (ex?) GRU/FSB colonel as a Moscow-controlled operative via COMINT from phone intercepts of calls between him and his handler.

 

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/europe/article4514313.ece

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

Edited by John Kettler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is like Mercedes engineers helping Zimbabwe to build their first bicycle. 

 

Welcome to two weeks ago Kettler. This was an obvious fake initiated by creative writers over at SBU and disseminated through the most reliable intel source of modern times - social networks. Western media of course ate it with no questions asked, but just for one day, then dropping it like a hot potato due to its sheer idiocy the general lack of interest. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 Western media of course ate it with no questions asked, but just for one day, then dropping it like a hot potato due to its sheer idiocy the general lack of interest. 

 

Concur with Ian, I've only seen it referenced on this forum, and in no western media outlets worthy of note.

 

Additionally interesting in terms of mentioning western media as a monolithic organization.

On the other hand, enjoy a fun lesson in the dangerous of "intercepted" phone calls (and the importance of good casting)

https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/08/12/propaganda-watch-listen-to-two-russians-badly-impersonate-cia-spies-to-pin-mh17-on-u-s/?utm_content=bufferaf772&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks like this story broke some time ago, but got picked up only recently in certain channels. Newsweek, for example, had not only already published the story, but updated it July 31, 2015. The piece contains a wealth of information far eclipsing what IB Times and The times (to the extent I could read it online) published.

 

http://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-says-rebels-are-building-dirty-bomb-358885

 

InformNapalm, which does some very good OSINT, as seen here, in an analysis of the who, what, when and where of the movement of the Buk TELAR thought to be involved in the MH-17 shootdown, put out a short piece with very specific information on the storage site, including the street address, the name of the concern formerly operating there, a Google Earth overhead, a statement the area is not controlled and a discussion (with a rather alarming pic) showing the factory being shelled, with what appears to be a large secondary explosion resulting.

https://en.informnapalm.org/nuclear-terrorism-and-the-dirty-bomb/

 

On the other end of things, SOTT.net published a withering piece on what IB, The Times and Newsweek had to say. the writer of it is not only not buying the story, but has blasted it as Western propaganda and specifically invokes warmongering.

 

http://www.sott.net/article/299772-SOTT-Exclusive-Dirty-bomb-in-the-making-SBU-uncovers-yet-another-sinister-Russian-plot

 

And, yes, the Russians have repeatedly shown they can be remarkably inept when conducting black propaganda ops. In the case cited, it's clear they didn't watch "Wag the Dog" to gain the proper appreciation for how to do this sort of stuff. 

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could easily be black propganda from Russia/rebels similar to rumours UK put out about 'Burning Seas' from a small acorn of truth in 1940 that bounced around Europe and ended up getting published as consequences of any invasion attempt across the Channel.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_Warfare_Department#Burning_seas

 

All JK is doing is regurgitating disinfo from some quarter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks like this story broke some time ago, but got picked up only recently in certain channels. Newsweek, for example, had not only already published the story, but updated it July 31, 2015. The piece contains a wealth of information far eclipsing what IB Times and The times (to the extent I could read it online) published.

 

http://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-says-rebels-are-building-dirty-bomb-358885

 

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

John this is just another example of what people continue to critique in your ability to parse information.  Newsweek is owned by IBT.  It is the SAME source.  Newsweek's reputation is also just above that of the weekly world news.  Actually a fairly sad story of what used to be a decent publication.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newsweek

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sburke,

 

Thanks for the info! Never having looked into it, I had no idea Newsweek was owned by IBT. Completely agree the tale of Newsweek is pretty sad. I have enough challenges trying not to continue to lose massive ground on just who owns what in the defense sector and maybe add to my knowledge base there. Other than things like the Rupert Murdoch nightmare, I  generally have very little awareness, or frequently interest, in media stuff, barring mega mergers, happily, blocked, of the Time Warner-Comcast sort, of course.

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A real shock when I encountered the headline! If this is true, it is a profoundly negative development.

 

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/pro-moscow-rebels-ukraine-building-dirty-bomb-help-russian-scientists-1513667

 

Did it ever occur to ask yourself why they would use an objectively inferior, but still politically ruinous, dirty bomb rather than just having the Russians sling actual nukes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did it ever occur to ask yourself why they would use an objectively inferior, but still politically ruinous, dirty bomb rather than just having the Russians sling actual nukes?

Either scenario is extremely crazy, Would never happen. Donetsk People's Republic gains nothing from it other then being the second nation to nuke another country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Either scenario is extremely crazy, Would never happen. Donetsk People's Republic gains nothing from it other then being the second nation to nuke another country.

 

Donestsk is neither a nation, nor a dirty bomb strictly a nuclear weapon.

 

 

There is however a certain power in threating to detonate it somewhere to bring about negotiations on "better" terms.

 

 

It also knocks a lot of people off the fence.  There's doubtless some Ukrainians who really don't care what happens in the eastern part of their country and the war indirectly affects them at best.

You place them under threat of all sorts of radiological funtimes, and their opinions will doubtlessly change for the worse.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The US Army term for a dirty bomb would be a "radiological" weapon in that it uses radiation as the primary effect vs a nuclear reaction.  This is now reflected in the change from the old NBC designation (nuclear, biological, chemical) to CBRN (Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear) given the possibility of dealing with dirty bomb contamination.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Either scenario is extremely crazy, Would never happen. Donetsk People's Republic gains nothing from it other then being the second nation to nuke another country.

 

If any significant explosion went off in a Ukrainian city and there was either evidence, or Kiev claims of evidence of radioactive pollution in the blast area, DNR would find themselves on the "Axis of Evil" list. No doubt there would be a flurry of activity in the UN, with motions for intervention, probably by NATO forces, to remove the new international menace. Alternative CMBS backstory ;)

 

The Newsweek story is pure fantasy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...