Pentagon Funded Bio-Weapons Labs in the Ukraine?

a reply to: quickflash

A U.S. bioweapons lab in Ukraine is not outside the realm of possibility. It is also not farfetched to think that there is one inside an inconspicuous warehouse in the heart of a major U.S. city, or tucked away in the mountains, or even in a remote rural coastal town.

originally posted by: tamusan
a reply to: quickflash

A U.S. bioweapons lab in Ukraine is not outside the realm of possibility.

Neither is Spiderman.

And there is ZERO evidence that either one exists.

a reply to: PatriotGames4u

And there is ZERO evidence that either one exists.

As it should be.

a reply to: tamusan


Because neither actually exists.

a reply to: PatriotGames4u

I'll admit that I have seen zero evidence of a bioweapons lab in Ukraine. It wouldn't make much sense to me for us to have one there either. We have far better places to put them.

originally posted by: tamusan
a reply to: PatriotGames4u

I'll admit that I have seen zero evidence of a bioweapons lab in Ukraine. It wouldn't make much sense to me for us to have one there either. We have far better places to put them.

Almost anywhere on the planet would be a 'better place.

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2
Could it be that the sanctioning of Russia diverted to a strategy to take hostage over nuclear plants so he can blackmail energy dependent countries to stop the sanctions or to transfer money to Russia so he can maintain this war ?

Not saying its impossible, we do have people in DoD dumb enough to green light a bio-lab in Ukraine, but on the face (without more data points) this is kind of like the claims by china back at the beginning of Covid that the US army released covid in china.

Possible yes, but its close to the extreme edge of credible, why do it so close to a nuclear armed potential adversary when you could do it in Africa where most people dont care what happens, or the middle east where the leaders dont care if their people get hurt. (probably some countries in SE asia would take the money and ignore the risks)

a reply to: 0bserver1


Hostages yes.

For negotiating the live release of the 100,000 russian soldiers currently trapped and at the complete mercy of Ukraine.

Hostages wouldn't affect foreign energy companies at all.

Of all the places the US could have biolabs, why Ukraine? For Putin to easily grab them?

Then again Hillary and her handlers really seemed to try to instigate a conflict with Russia before Trump was elected, so I guess they could have used it to try and egg him on. But it still sounds pretty dumb.

a reply to: tamusan

ua.usembassy.gov...

All the PDF's are wiped.

This seems to relate but is a lot to unpack and can't verify the source.

dilyana.bg...

I've been trying to use pieces of a Georgian contract to see if I can find any matches for a DOD contract related to one of the cooperative labs in Ukraine

I've seen this covered a few times, I believe there has been some admittance to their existence, but stated purposes seem to differ.

a reply to: TheLead


There ARE labs in Ukraine.

There are NOT U.S. funded bio weapon labs in Ukraine.

Not a single one.

And certainly not the 100 that russia and russia supporters have been claiming.

a reply to: MrCrabs3000


Pee tape dumb.

Same people created (and supported) both lies.

a reply to: MrCrabs3000

There have been a lot of simulations and postulations related to using organic mechanisms for bioglogical weapon spread.
The cost to casaulty figures are rather remarkable if they are to be believed. I'm not excited about this prospect, but I'm sure we can all imagine those that are.

originally posted by: PatriotGames4u
a reply to: and14263


Sure.

You found the proof of these imaginary of U.S. bio weapon labs.

Wanna share?

Don't be moronic.

I said I saw a couple of maps that I didn't know if they were real or not.

You want them, go search Twitter for them.

a reply to: and14263

So we have an invasion over some maps that could be fake. Makes sense.

a reply to: and14263


I'm very familiar with the maps in question.

I can create maps too.

Wouldn't be any more true than these russian propaganda maps.

a reply to: PatriotGames4u

I've only heard 11 to 15.

I know that was what was said, thats why I said stated purposes seem to differ.

I also know we've recently been caught lying about not funding a dangerous contagion in another country to try and obscure that fact.

I know a lot that we label defense is offensive or has offensive capabilities.

I just deal in possibilities and potentialities. Not saying it's true, just saying that most that will say that it's not, most likely are not in a position to know for sure.

I think that they should nuke those bio-weapons labs so none of what they are working on will ever get out into the world. It wouldn't require a very big nuke, just something that would incinerate anything in them and for a few blocks around them at very high temperatures. Maybe it should be a world law that all these places should be nuked making bio-weapons. Those little nuclear warheads do not give off that much radiation I guess. Maybe an incinerator bomb would be better.

a reply to: TheLead

I took a look at your link to ua.usembassy. It is talking about biosecurity or more specifically, disease surveillance. There is nothing nefarious about that. Countries need to know what kinds of pathogens and toxins are within their borders in order to detect and report outbreaks. It also says the labs are biosafety level 2. If that is accurate, there were not any bioweapons being developed there. 

As for the second link, that's a well-put-together presentation, but I will have to refrain from giving much of my thoughts or opinions on the points made by Dilyana Gaytandzhieva. I think the best I can do is to say "yep, that kind of stuff probably happens".