You want to worry about nuclear, it's happening

[pbmus]

Last edited Sat Mar 12, 2022, 01:29 AM - Edit history (1)

Link to tweet

[DemocraticPatriot]

1. That is a bad situation,

but it is not 'nuclear war', by definition.


You seem anxious for escalation. I presume you live far from any targets, have a fallout shelter in your basement, and food stocks to last you for many years?


How many?


More than the rest of us, I'll wager.

[CrackityJones75]

2. Agreed

[pbmus]

5. Absolutely NONE of your assuming is true...

Your complacency is my anxiety and I’ll wager you carry the same belief that others do on this board…’it’s not me there bombing’

[DemocraticPatriot]

10. but you avoided my questions...

[pbmus]

11. You make an assumption that is WRONG..

And then you ask two questions based on your incorrect assumption…NFT…

[DemocraticPatriot]

12. What assumption was that, warmonger?

You are the one who is wrong.

[pbmus]

14. Listen to Michael Mcfaul on Maddow tonight

You just might learn something and calling me a name is alert worthy…be careful who you call names

I have sat in a bunker shooting at an enemy while rockets and mortars are exploding all around me, so take your war monger bullshit and stuff it….

[DemocraticPatriot]

16. Prove me wrong.

Are you calling for "aggressive war" by the United States, or am I somehow mistaken??


I can handle a "hide" but I suspect you would lose the vote, in this instance.

[pbmus]

17. I am calling for NATO to do what they were formed to do...

Defend Europe and Democracy..

[DemocraticPatriot]

20. Defend NATO members. That is what they were formed to do.

Unfortunately, Ukraine is not a NATO member. Questions ???

[MarineCombatEngineer]

35. NATO is doing what it was formed to do,

you know, defend NATO members against aggression, Ukraine isn't a NATO member.

[DemocraticPatriot]

18. It would appear that you learned nothing from that experience...

"I have sat in a bunker shooting at an enemy while rockets and mortars are exploding all around me, so take your war monger bullshit and stuff it…."


Stuff it yourself.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

34. +100.

If only we could rec. individual posts.

[Celerity]

6. +2

[58Sunliner]

8. Anxious for escalation for pointing out the truth? False equivalency.

[DemocraticPatriot]

9. "Truth" ? Questionable.

[58Sunliner]

13. Putin attacked a country and then attacked their nuclear power plants. Intentionally.

Knowing the risks. Is it the same as sending a nuclear bomb? Not immediately, but it could have easily accomplished the same goal in a different time frame. There is no question about the reality of endangering a country through such toxic sabotage.

[Gore1FL]

15. And ratcheting up the body count helps how? nt

[58Sunliner]

37. Hoist that petard.

[Gore1FL]

38. You'll have to explain. It's also spelled "petard" nt

[58Sunliner]

39. No, I really should not have to explain why Putin wants to kill. Have a nice day.

[Gore1FL]

40. That made even less sense in context.

Should you decide you want to make a point, I'll be around.

[EndlessWire]

26. "Anxious for escalation"

I didn't take it that way at all. At the UN meeting today, the speaker for some unit of the UN in charge of safety also mentioned the two nuclear reactors that were possibly compromised. They are aware that Chernobyl is offline with limited power. This poster is doing nothing but offering useful information that has also been offered by those in authority.

I think it is unfair that you accused this poster of wanting a nuclear war or escalation of an already bad situation. And, you don't know what dog they have in the hunt. I have two loved ones in London; that isn't all that far from any potential fallout. Would you also accuse me of wanting to escalate, just because my body is in the US while my heart is in the UK?

[FM123]

3. Scary thought.

This morning on Chris Jansing's show, a guest explained that the unguarded and unshielded spent nuclear fuel pools holding hot radioactive waste is the real vulnerability. If a shell hits one of those then, disaster, because unlike the reactors which have protective and containment vessels, they do not.

[EndlessWire]

27. That's right.

The Chernobyl reactor is of an older design than the second reactor that was taken over. When this first happened, I read up on what the actual danger was in regards to the second reactor.

It was funny; the article spent most of the article explaining how unlikely it was that the thing would pop off. Then, at the very end, it took it all back by saying that, of course, if it were damaged in this spot or that spot, it could go off. Remember how the Russians were alleged to have surrounded this facility on three sides and shot the crap out of it? You know, the one that had the fire in the outbuilding? Doesn't that just scare you silly? How stupid are the Russians, anyway?

[FM123]

36. Yep.

Scary alright.

[Liberty Belle]

4. Not so dire now - power is being restored:

https://www.axios.com/russkia-ukraine-nuclear-chernobyl-7337184d-a86a-466c-9858-9d723f443af0.html

[58Sunliner]

7. And don't think Putin didn't plan this.

[gaskinite]

19. Prevailing Winds

Will carry the fall out to mother Russia. What a bunch of dumbasses.

[Slammer]

21. ...is not like the other

The electrical supply is used to recirculate water in the fuel storage pool, which allows the water to cool.

The IAEA is saying there's enough water in the fuel storage pool to allow the heat to dissipate without the need to be recirculated.

There's only one reason they'd be saying that: there's enough water in the fuel storage pool to allow the heat to dissipate without the need to be recirculated.

Now is it great that the power is off? No.

Will the water in the pool eventually evaporate? Sure, but usually new water comes from a water line and not from electrical lines.

The IAEA are nuclear experts.

Dmytro Kuleba is a Ukrainian politician whose upset that his country's been invaded.

I'll trust the IAEA when it comes to spent nuclear fuel storage issues.

[EndlessWire]

28. Just this morning I heard the UN safety expert

express concern over both nuclear reactors. Of course, in this war a lot changes day to day, but I doubt that Kuleba just said that because his country has been invaded. He probably has genuine fear of the nuclear reactor exploding.

My question is, how good are we that we can tell the difference between a horrific accident and a deliberately fired tactical nuke? Because, we might respond in a rather quick fashion...wouldn't we?

[Slammer]

33. 22 years is a long time

"He probably has genuine fear of the nuclear reactor exploding."

Well, since the reactors were shut down in 22 years ago, the spent fuel taken out of them, and stored in the pool the IAEA has been talking about, I highly doubt the reactors are going to explode.

The spent fuel continues to generate heat because of its radioactivity. But there's nothing that could cause it to explode because it isn't physically capable of being explosive. At worst, it would melt through its containers if the Russians were stupid enough to bring in pumps and deliberately remove the water from the storage pool.

And most of the spent fuel has likely already been moved from the storage pools into their new on-site dry storage facility. The spent fuel was to be put into 231 canisters for the new facility and the first of those was transferred over in 2020.

[L. Coyote]

22. You forgot to mention they were repaired YESTERDAY.

[pbmus]

23. Ok, so CBS is making it up...

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ukraine-chernobyl-russia-putin-orders-terrorist-attack-nuclear-plant-kyiv-says/

[EndlessWire]

29. Here is a link to the public discussion held in the UN.

This was something like 15 hours ago:

You only need to listen to the first lady, wearing a white coat. At the end of her remarks regarding biologicals, she addresses the issue of the power plants. She stated that 4 of 7 requirements of the IAEA for safe operation are NOT being implemented. Doesn't sound very safe to me.

[Warpy]

24. Plants were shut down before the Russians got far across the border.

At least that was the announcement about 10 days ago. They have said crews are working massive overtime to keep things safe.

Reactors 1, 1 and 3 were being decommissioned. The article is here: https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Chernobyl-1-3-enter-decommissioning-phase

Not sure what the Russians are doing there, decommissioning was nearly complete.

[pbmus]

25. Not even talking about the 2nd power plant...

https://www.republicworld.com/world-news/russia-ukraine-crisis/chernobyl-zaporizhzhia-under-control-to-prevent-nuclear-provocations-claims-russia-articleshow.html

[EndlessWire]

30. Not even mentioning all

the other sites which Russia is carelessly shelling and handling:

https://www.timesofisrael.com/iaea-reports-second-ukrainian-nuclear-facility-damaged-in-russian-invasion/

[obamanut2012]

31. Your OP isn't even factual

Come on.

This was repaired a day ago, none of this is correct.

[BlackSkimmer]

32. I see these thread titles when I wake up in the middle of the night, and think, "oh no, what's up?"

Last edited Sat Mar 12, 2022, 09:09 AM - Edit history (1)

I wonder what I missed, then I scroll a bit and find a thread about Kim Kardashian chugging merrily along…and I know all is the same, nothing’s changed.