hoppeligerHase schrieb am 14.08.2022 20:25:
dissid3nt schrieb am 14.08.2022 20:23:
hoppeligerHase schrieb am 14.08.2022 20:12:
dissid3nt schrieb am 14.08.2022 20:06:
Nach Jugoslawien, Afghanistan, Irak und Libyen auch die Ukraine radioaktiv zu verseuchen, würde zur wertewestlichen Kriegsführung passen.
"Der Arzt und die verstrahlten Kinder von Basra"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwrFRqZKqUwUranmunition zu verwenden, die Gebiete lokal belastet, ist aber schon noch eine andere Hausnummer, als eine unkontrollierbare verstrahlte Wolke, die dann bis weit nach Westeuropa reichen könnte.
Auch der radioaktive Staub, der durch die Tausenden von Tonnen verbrannter Uranmunition entsteht, verbreitet sich unkontrolliert über die Grenzen der überfallenen Länder hinweg:
"Environmental scientists who uncovered the figures through freedom of information laws say it is evidence that depleted uranium from the shells was carried by wind currents to Britain."
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-radiation-jump-blamed-on-iraq-shells-8dnjfm0pxw5Das zeigt mal wieder, dass den NATO-Kriegsverbrechern die Gesundheit der Bevölkerung vollkommen egal ist.
Letzteres bestreite ich nicht. Insbesondere, wenns nicht die eigene Bevölkerung ist. Aber den eigenen Standort finden die durchaus erhaltenswert.
Ich würde nicht darauf wetten. Die NATO-Kriegsverbrecher sind massenmordende Fanatiker.
“We Could Lose Two Hundred Million People [in a Nuclear War] and Still Have More Than We Had at the Time of the Civil War”
http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb580-JCS-chairmans-diary-from-1971-reveals-high-level-deliberations/
"Victory is Possible
by Colin S. Gray and Keith Payne
...
If American nuclear power is to support U.S. foreign policy objectives, the United States must possess the ability to wage nuclear war rationally.
...
Surely no one can be comfortable with the claim that a strategy that would kill millions of Soviet citizens and would invite a strategic response that could kill tens of millions of U.S. citizens would be politically and morally acceptable. However, it is worth recalling the six guidelines for the use of force provided by the "just war" doctrine of the Catholic Church: Force can be used in a just cause; with a right intent; with a reasonable chance of success; in order that, if successful, its use offers a better future than would have been the case had it not been employed; to a degree proportional to the goals sought, or to the evil combated; and with the determination to sparre noncombatants, when there is a reasonable chance of doing so.
...
Small, preplanned strikes can only be of use if the United States enjoys strategic superiority -- the ability to wage a nuclear war at any level of violence with a reasonable prospect of defeating the Soviet Union and of recovering sufficiently to insure a satisfactory postwar world order.
...
The United States should plan to defeat the Soviet Union and to do so at a cost that would not prohibit U.S. recovery. Washington should identify war aims that in the last resort would contemplate the destruction of Soviet political authority and the emergence of a postwar world order compatible with Western values.
...
Strategists cannot offer painless conflicts or guarantee that their preferred posture and doctrine promise a greatly superior deterrence posture to current American schemes. But, they can claim that an intelligent U.S. offensive strategy, wedded to homeland defenses, should reduce U.S. casualties to approximately 20 million, which should render U.S. strategic threats more credible. If the United States developed the targeting plans and procured the weapons necessary to hold the Soviet political, bureaurcratic, and military leadership at risk, that should serve as the functional equivalent in Soviet perspective of the assured-destruction effect of the late 1960s."
http://home.earthlink.net/~platter/articles/80-summer-payne.html
"US-Doktrin: Zerstörung der Lebensgrundlagen eines Staates
Aus dem Vortrag "Krieg gegen Irak - Frieden schaffen mit aller
Gewalt?" von Jürgen Rose, Oberstleutnant der Bundeswehr - gehalten
u.a. am 21.1.2003 in Köln
...
Hervorzuheben ist, daß diese Luftkriegsdoktrin ganz bewußt auf die
Zerstörung der Lebensgrundlagen eines Staates abzielt und
insbesondere auch die Zivilbevölkerung selbst zum expliziten Ziel
deklariert.
...
Andererseits rückt das gegnerische Militär auf der Liste der
Zielprioritäten ganz nach hinten. Die von Warden gegebene Begründung
hierfür ist schlagend: „Contrary to Clausewitz, destruction of the
enemy military is not the essence of war; the essence of war is
convincing the enemy to accept our position, and fighting his
military forces is at best a means to an end and at worst a total
waste of time and energy.“"
http://www.arbeiterfotografie.de/galerie/kein-krieg/hintergrund/index-irak-0003.html