Comments by "Black Cat Dungeon Master\x27s Familiar" (@blackcatdungeonmastersfami5311) on "Worst Is Yet To Come, Just The Start - Ukraine War Map u0026 News Update" video.

China's manufacturing output exceeds the USA's and Europe's put together. At the end of the Second World War, the USA had half of the world's manufacturing output just on its own but those days are long gone. As for depleted uranium - it definitely causes huge health problems. Look into Fallujah where birth defects and still births went through the roof. Also much higher in Serbia after NATO used DU there. The main problem is the chemical toxicity, not the radioactivity.
5
@scubaspears Yes there is definitely in breeding in Iraq but you can compare the rate of still births before and after and the rate of birth defects. Also compare Falluja with Iraq overall. There is also evidence from Serbia where NATO used D.U and inbreeding is not a factor. So yes there is hard statistical evidence.
4
@giovanni-ed7zq Eighty years ago, a large Western country went down the road of dehumanising and underestimating the Russians. They called them Untermenschen rather than orcs but the meaning is similar. It didn't end well for that large Western country. If you're Italian as your name suggests, you should have learned a few lessons from that war too.
4
@Ungood-jl5ep facts are facts and I've shown you why you're wrong. No mental gymnastics necessary. Also check out medical studies on places where DU has been used particularly Falluja. It's pretty awful. Still births and birth defects through the roof.
4
@Ungood-jl5ep LOL I provided some facts which show some of what you said is indisputably wrong and you don't know what you're talking about. For example you said "It is radioactive, but only beta emissions." You're wrong. Cope harder.
4
@rezcon The main problem is alpha radiation which is a huge problem if ingested - as it will be if farmland is sprayed with uranium particles. And it won't just disappear after a few years. Radiation is not the only problem, the chemical toxicity is (apparently) a greater health risk than the radiation. There are hundreds of academic papers published on this, there's not really a debate to be had about whether it's dangerous. Saying it's not dangerous is as incorrect as saying smoking is not dangerous.
3
@Silent824 The Russian army is successfully fighting a war against a major country armed by the whole of NATO. It's no mean achievement.
3
@bik3r230 What kind of nuclear energy worker are you? A security guard? You're certainly not a physicist are you! A solid lump of DU creates a lot of alpha radiation but that radiation doesn't get inside the human body. Once it's vaporised and spread all over Europe's primary wheat producing region, then yes it does become a huge problem. And the chemical toxicity is potentially an even bigger problem than the radiation.
3
Yes, it's well documented, it's a huge problem that is not going to disappear in just a few decades.
2
@ericp1139 Apparently a bare bones T72 is half a million! And the Amata is around 5 million. Russian tanks might not be better than Western tanks but they're certainly cheaper.
2
@RomanVarl People have been predicting the tank is about to become obsolete for over a hundred years now :P The only place on the battlefield more dangerous than in a tank is outside of a tank.
2
@redscope897 wikipedia says half a million for a brand new T72 in 2011 but no doubt you know better.
2
@andreasfjellborg1810 Yeah fair enough it's a base price. Still a lot cheaper than $30 million!
2
@Ungood-jl5ep You obviously don't understand this stuff at all. The half life is around six times longer than U235, nobody suggests that's negligible so why would you claim a sixth of that is practically on existent? That makes no sense whatsover. When U238 decays it decays with an alpha particle. So it's wrong to suggest it's "mainly a beta emitter". It emits both particles at the same time. The alpha one is approx two thousand times more dangerous so that's the one we care about. As for vaporising, the density is irrelevant. It vaporises around 4000K and you get way hotter than that in the stream of a shape charged anti-tank round. Dude, stick to what you know and it ain;t nuclear physics.
2
@Ungood-jl5ep Does it hurt to be humiliated by a lady? Or has it been happening your whole life so you're used to it?
2
@ohmightyzeus6135 There are studies from Iraq and Serbia, especially Falluja where birth defects and still births shot up after the war.
2
... "to the last Ukrainian"
2
@carlosandleon Lead and DU are not comparable in toxicity. DU used as anti-tank ammunition gets vaporised; in addition to its radioactivity which lasts practically forever, it's chemically far more toxic than lead. Google Falluja birth defects.
1
@SFHFWill You're wrong about depleted uranium, the radioactivity is dangerous when vaporised because it's an alpha emitter which gets inside your intestines when you eat food grown on polluted farmland. Also, it's chemically highly toxic. There are hundreds of studies published on this. Please look into them. Yes it is slightly safer than enriched uranium. That doesn't mean it's safe.
1
@dreambadger It is proved beyond doubt that depleted uranium is an ongoing health hazard to the population of any area where it's used in war for generations after the war is over.
1
@rezcon Firstly, don't even bother paying attention to what the WHO says after all the lies it told us over Wuhan, the origins of the virus and China's handling of it. Check out the studies from Serbia and Falluja. It's irrefutable this is some nasty stuff
1
@rebelmango2141 Glad you find cancer funny - check these two studies Jia G, Belli M, Sansone U, Rosamilia S, Gaudino S. Concentration and characteristics of depleted uranium in water, air and biological samples collected in Serbia and Montenegro. Appl Radiat Isot. 2005;63:381–399. Duraković A. On depleted uranium: gulf war and Balkan syndrome. Croat Med J. 2001;42:130–134.
1
@rebelmango2141 The war was over 2 decades ago! If you want to find more recent studies, you can google just the same as me. Mate there is zero doubt at all, tons of evidence uranium is dangerous. Vaporised uranium is way more dangerous than solid uranium. DU is 40% less reactive than natural uranium. It's just ignorant to argue DU isn't dangerous. It's like arguing smoking isn't dangerous or mercury isn't dangerous.
1
I don't know this for sure but if I had to bet, USA and Germany accusing Ukraine is a distraction from the actual culprits - and Seymour Hersh told us who they are. It goes without saying that elements within German intelligence and the German government were onboard with the sabotage.
1
@mormacil DU is 100% radioactive. Every single atom of DU is radioactive. Every single atom of DU will eventually release a highly dangerous alpha particle - highly dangerous if it's inside your body because it's been vaporised hitting a tank on farmland then used to grow food.
1
I'd put it higher. 0.1%
1
It's not true that the radioactivity is weak. The rate of decay is very slow so the amount of gamma coming off a lump of metal is small but when munitions are vaporised on farmland, it gets inside the human body where even a tiny amount of alpha radiation is dangerous because it's such a heavy particle.
1
@tonydevos The "Ukrainians" didn't decide to have their children, grandchildren and great grandchildren poisoned generations into the future. A small group of men who will probably not even stay in the country after the war is over decided.
1