Brother, there is your sign they have no idea if they should crap or go blind.
Brother, there is your sign they have no idea if they should crap or go blind.
Deborah Rosenbaum, the assistant secretary of defense for nuclear, chemical, and biological defense programs, told the House subcommittee on Intelligence and Special Operations on Friday that “I can say to you unequivocally there are no offensive biologic weapons in the Ukraine laboratories that the United States has been involved with.”
In a fact sheet produced March 11, 2022, the U.S. Defense Department admitted to working with biological weapons facilities in Ukraine [LINK]. “The United States … has invested approximately $200 million in Ukraine since 2005, supporting 46 Ukrainian laboratories, health facilities, and diagnostic sites.”
As the current story is told the U.S. government was coordinating with the Ukraine government on biologic research facilities, many of which were left over from the former Soviet era. In/around the time the Russian invasion was feared, they worked quickly to destroy the pathogens, because they were worried what might happen if the Russians took control of the facilities.
This begs the obvious first question, if the U.S. Defense Department was working with Ukraine since 2005, and they could destroy the deadly pathogens in a few days before the conflict, why didn’t the Pentagon destroy them in the preceding 16 years?
The second question targets the issues that are more opaque. The DoD says the U.S. has not been involved in “offensive biological weapon” creation in Ukraine. Technically, all of the weapons in the U.S. military are classified as “defensive” weapons, ergo the Department of Defense. Every weapon is defensive until it is used; then, depending on the circumstances, the use of the weapon changes its classification to offensive. Why would biological weapons be any different?
By the current standard of Defense Department definitions, all of the biological weapons they might be working with Ukraine to develop would technically be classified defensive weapons. As a result, saying “there are no offensive biologic weapons” is a rather moot and irrelevant point.
Deborah Rosenbaum, the assistant secretary of defense for nuclear, chemical, and biological defense programs, told the House subcommittee on Intelligence and Special Operations on Friday that “I can say to you unequivocally there are no offensive biologic weapons in the Ukraine laboratories that the United States has been involved with.”
In a fact sheet produced March 11, 2022, the U.S. Defense Department admitted to working with biological weapons facilities in Ukraine [LINK]. “The United States … has invested approximately $200 million in Ukraine since 2005, supporting 46 Ukrainian laboratories, health facilities, and diagnostic sites.”
As the current story is told the U.S. government was coordinating with the Ukraine government on biologic research facilities, many of which were left over from the former Soviet era. In/around the time the Russian invasion was feared, they worked quickly to destroy the pathogens, because they were worried what might happen if the Russians took control of the facilities.
This begs the obvious first question, if the U.S. Defense Department was working with Ukraine since 2005, and they could destroy the deadly pathogens in a few days before the conflict, why didn’t the Pentagon destroy them in the preceding 16 years?
The second question targets the issues that are more opaque. The DoD says the U.S. has not been involved in “offensive biological weapon” creation in Ukraine. Technically, all of the weapons in the U.S. military are classified as “defensive” weapons, ergo the Department of Defense. Every weapon is defensive until it is used; then, depending on the circumstances, the use of the weapon changes its classification to offensive. Why would biological weapons be any different?
By the current standard of Defense Department definitions, all of the biological weapons they might be working with Ukraine to develop would technically be classified defensive weapons. As a result, saying “there are no offensive biologic weapons” is a rather moot and irrelevant point.
(post is archived)