What's new

The Triangular Poles: CHINA - RUSSIA - USA :: Syria As The Showcase

Let me ask you one question.

How do you turn a Bomb into Shrapnel?

Let me give you a hint, something of a 9 letter words start with E and end with N

E_______N

There are something called Semtex or any military grade explosive inside a CONVENTIONAL bomb (which is exact term the Russian use). And I have not even tough the High Pressure Blast wave that can do to chemical....

Are you kidding me with another nonsense? The explosion turns a bomb into shrapnel. The heat occurs in the center of explosion while shrapnel and blast wave can travel hundreds of meters damaging anything on his way.
 
.
Are you kidding me with another nonsense? The explosion turns a bomb into shrapnel. The heat occurs in the center of explosion while shrapnel and blast wave can travel hundreds of meters damaging anything on his way.

Dude, conventional bomb detonate when impact, that is when shrapnel start flying out.

When the superheated gas detonated the bomb, the Shrapnel will then be SUPERHEATED. Everything it touches will melt. So when you purported these "Shrapnel" puncturing the outer case of these Sarin container, those Sharpnel will still be red hot and since Sarin does not have high boiling point, they will be incinerated by the SUPERHEATED SHARPNEL. We are not talking about 1600C Plus Napalm fire, a normal explosion would have do as Sarin have a boiling point below 160C. Shrapnel coming out of a normal explosion can go as high as 500-600C

Your case will only make sense if the container is hit by a cold shrapnel that's below the Sarin Boiling point. Which is impossible. Have you ever heard of Shrapnel coming out of a bomb cold?

Geez, I don't think I need to explain to you how bomb works.
 
.
Remember, "chemical attack" killed (reportedly) 70 people, which warranted 50+ missiles on Syria.

Also, was it not true that, several days before the recent alleged attacks, US had killed some 200 civilians, and Pentagon simply said "we are doing our best to minimize civilian casualties."

Perhaps, Pres. Assad is doing their best to minimize civilian casualties but when several countries attack you (including your neighbor) with proxy terrorists imported from elsewhere, and without precision strike bombs like the US enjoys using on others in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen and elsewhere, it is a bot difficult to ensure civilian safety.

***

US Strikes Again in Syria — This Time Hitting a Coffee Shop Full of People

At least 15 civilians killed in US airstrike in western Raqqa.

RI Staff
22 minutes ago | 715 Comments
Someone make slides for Nikki Haley

A US airstrike in western Raqqa has killed at least 15 and injured dozens, according to multiple reports.

"The airstrike devastated an internet coffee shop in Hanedah town in western Raqqa countryside. The airstrike killed more than 20 civilians and injured dozens more," according to Al Masdar News.

Time to convene another emergency Security Council meeting?

Breaking: US airstrike kills 20+ civilians in west Raqqa. Many children among the dead.

— Leith Abou Fadel (@leithfadel)

April 8, 2017

Syrian Observatory says air strike kills at least 15 people near Raqqa https://t.co/wJbB04XFSD

— Reuters Top News (@Reuters)
April 8, 2017

Will Donald Trump now launch 60 Tomahawk missiles at the US air base in Kobani? Think of the children.

pic.twitter.com/1YuGyGAuRA

— Nikki Haley (@nikkihaley)
April 7, 2017
 
.
Putin Responds: Syria Strikes "Cripple US-Russia Relations"; Deploys Missile Warship To Syria

ZeroHedge - Apr 7, 2017 8:12 AM

Responding to Trump's unexpected military attack on Syria in which 59 cruise missiles were launched (of which only 23 allegedly hit their target), Russian President Vladimir Putin "regards the strikes as aggression against a sovereign nation,his spokesman Dmitry Peskov said, noting that the president believes the strikes were carried out “in violation of international law, and also under an invented pretext.

The Kremlin spokesman insisted that “the Syrian army doesn’t have chemical weapons,” saying this had been “observed and confirmed by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, a special UN unit.”

BN-SW172_31fGV_M_20170407022219_0.jpg


The Russian president said he sees the US missile strikes as an attempt to distract attention from civilian casualties in Iraq, Peskov added.

This step deals significant damage to US-Russian ties, which are already in a deplorable state,Peskov said and added that the US has been ignoring the use of chemical weapons by terrorists and this is dramatically aggravating the situation, in Putin’s opinion.

“The main thing, Putin believes, is that this move [by the U.S.] doesn’t draw us nearer to the end goal in the fight with international terrorism and on the contrary, deals a serious setback to the creation of an international coalition in the fight with it,” Peskov said.

* * *

Other Russians took the opportunity to opine as well, led by Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov who said the US missile attack on a Syrian airbase is an act of aggression under a far-fetched pretext and is reminiscent of the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Quoted by Tass, the top Russian diplomat said "It is an act of aggression under a completely far-fetched pretext. This is reminiscent of the situation in 2003, when the US and the UK, along with some of their allies, invaded Iraq without the consent of the UN Security Council and in violation of international law."

"When speaking about the military intervention in Iraq many years after it happened, Tony Blair (who served as the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1997 to 2007) acknowledged that they had misled everybody," Lavrov emphasized. "Now they did not even bother to provide any facts referring only to photos," he noted. "They indulged in speculations on children’s photos, on evidence provided by various non-governmental organizations, including the so-called White Helmets, which staged various 'incidents' to instigate action against the Syrian government."

Moscow will demand truth of Idlib events, Lavrov stressed. "It is regrettable that all these causes do more harm to the already damaged relations between Russia and the United States. Hope remains that these provocations will not entail irreversible effects," Lavrov said.

Russian lawmakers also took to the microphone on Friday, warning that the U.S. airstrikes in Syria could lead to an escalation of conflict in the Middle East and dash any plans for a U.S.-Russian coalition against terrorism.

“It’s a new round of escalation in the Middle East. These ill-judged, irresponsible actions don’t contribute to global security, security in the Middle East,” Andrei Krasov, the first deputy head of the defense committee in the Russian lower house of parliament, told state news agency RIA. “Other military conflicts, an expansion of military conflicts, are entirely possible,” he added.

Russian Senator Konstantin Kosachev said the airstrikes meant the possibility of a broad antiterror coalition in Syria “bites the dust before it was even born.”

He said the aim of the U.S. strike was to “rubber stamp” responsibility on Mr. Assad’s for the chemical attack in Idlib province on Tuesday. “‘The walls of Trump’ are multiplying. And everything started so well. It’s a real shame,” said a post on the Facebook page of Mr. Kosachev, head of the international relations committee in Russia’s upper house of Parliament.

Another lawmaker, Mikhail Emelyanov, warned against the risk of clashes between Russian and U.S. forces. “The U.S. is being dragged into the war in Syria in the full knowledge that Russia is supporting Syria and our troops are there, which means it’s fraught with direct clashes between Russia and the U.S. and the consequences could be the most serious, even armed clashes and exchanges of strikes,” Mr. Emelyanov told Interfax news agency.

* * *

In immediate response, Moscow suspended its memorandum of understanding on flight safety in Syria with the US following the missile strike, calling the attack “a demonstration of force.” The Russian military has supported the Syrian government’s version of the events in Idlib, saying that Damascus attacked an arms depot where chemical weapons had been stockpiled by Islamic State and Al-Nusra Front militants.

“Without bothering to investigate anything, the US went forward with a demonstration of force, a military confrontation with a country that is fighting international terrorism,” the Foreign Ministry’s statement reads.

“Obviously, the cruise missile attack was prepared beforehand. Any expert can tell that the decision to strike was made in Washington before the events in Idlib, which were used as a pretext for a demonstration,” the statement reads.

The Memorandum on air safety was signed in October 2015, after Russia came to Syria to fight international terrorism at the invitation of the country’s government. The document of understanding was designed to prevent possible mishaps between the Russian and US Air Forces operating independently in the region.

Russia’s Foreign Ministry has condemned the attack as an example of the “reckless attitude” that has only worsened “existing world issues” and created a “threat to international security.”

* * *

Additionally, according to Tass, in response to the strikes, the Russian frigate Admiral Grigorovich armed with Kalibr cruise missiles will be deployed to the Tartus naval base in Syria. The Russian Black Sea Fleet’s frigate The Admiral Grigorovich, currently on a routine voyage, will enter the Mediterranean later on Friday, a military-diplomatic source in Moscow told TASS, adding that the ship would make a stop at the logistics base in Syria’s port of Tartus.

"The Russian ship armed with cruise missiles Kalibr will visit the logistics base in Tartus, Syria," the source said.

1165686.jpg


The Admiral Grigorovich is currently near the Black Sea straits. It is scheduled to enter the Mediterranean at about 14:00 Moscow time. The ship left on a voyage after replenishing supplies at Novorossiisk and taking part in a joint exercise with Turkish ships in the Black Sea. Tass's source said the frigate’s presence off Syria’s shores will depend on the situation.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...-russia-relations-deploys-cruise-missile-frig

Remember, "chemical attack" killed (reportedly) 70 people, which warranted 50+ missiles on Syria.

Also, was it not true that, several days before the recent alleged attacks, US had killed some 200 civilians, and Pentagon simply said "we are doing our best to minimize civilian casualties."

Perhaps, Pres. Assad is doing their best to minimize civilian casualties but when several countries attack you (including your neighbor) with proxy terrorists imported from elsewhere, and without precision strike bombs like the US enjoys using on others in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen and elsewhere, it is a bot difficult to ensure civilian safety.

***

US Strikes Again in Syria — This Time Hitting a Coffee Shop Full of People

At least 15 civilians killed in US airstrike in western Raqqa.

RI Staff
22 minutes ago | 715 Comments
Someone make slides for Nikki Haley

A US airstrike in western Raqqa has killed at least 15 and injured dozens, according to multiple reports.

"The airstrike devastated an internet coffee shop in Hanedah town in western Raqqa countryside. The airstrike killed more than 20 civilians and injured dozens more," according to Al Masdar News.

Time to convene another emergency Security Council meeting?

Breaking: US airstrike kills 20+ civilians in west Raqqa. Many children among the dead.

— Leith Abou Fadel (@leithfadel)

April 8, 2017

Syrian Observatory says air strike kills at least 15 people near Raqqa https://t.co/wJbB04XFSD

— Reuters Top News (@Reuters)
April 8, 2017

Will Donald Trump now launch 60 Tomahawk missiles at the US air base in Kobani? Think of the children.

pic.twitter.com/1YuGyGAuRA

— Nikki Haley (@nikkihaley)
April 7, 2017


"Also, was it not true that, several days before the recent alleged attacks, US had killed some 200 civilians, and Pentagon simply said "we are doing our best to minimize civilian casualties."


Vladimir Putin hinted at that:

"The Russian president said he sees the US missile strikes as an attempt to distract attention from civilian casualties in Iraq, Peskov added."

Pentagon calls it COLLATERAL DAMAGE... had any other country done the same "mistake" news would have flooded every mainstream media (MSM) and been amplified at the highest. However, The Empire has its own impunity to kill... until possibly the blowback time one day...

---------

"We only have to kill a few more people and then everything will be fine again" - Probably close to the last words of many empires.
 
Last edited:
.
Dude, conventional bomb detonate when impact, that is when shrapnel start flying out.

When the superheated gas detonated the bomb, the Shrapnel will then be SUPERHEATED. Everything it touches will melt. So when you purported these "Shrapnel" puncturing the outer case of these Sarin container, those Sharpnel will still be red hot and since Sarin does not have high boiling point, they will be incinerated by the SUPERHEATED SHARPNEL. We are not talking about 1600C Plus Napalm fire, a normal explosion would have do as Sarin have a boiling point below 160C. Shrapnel coming out of a normal explosion can go as high as 500-600C

Your case will only make sense if the container is hit by a cold shrapnel that's below the Sarin Boiling point. Which is impossible. Have you ever heard of Shrapnel coming out of a bomb cold?

Geez, I don't think I need to explain to you how bomb works.

OMG another bunch of nonsense. Do you have even slightest clue about school course of physics? The hot pieces of shrapnel will pierce through containers with chemicals and indeed because of high temperature can destroy some fraction of this chemical material prone to heat. But these shrapnel pieces so small that most of chemicals will be released freely into the air unaffected by any heat. Are you 7 years old or something?
 
.
Dude, conventional bomb detonate when impact, that is when shrapnel start flying out.

When the superheated gas detonated the bomb, the Shrapnel will then be SUPERHEATED. Everything it touches will melt. So when you purported these "Shrapnel" puncturing the outer case of these Sarin container, those Sharpnel will still be red hot and since Sarin does not have high boiling point, they will be incinerated by the SUPERHEATED SHARPNEL. We are not talking about 1600C Plus Napalm fire, a normal explosion would have do as Sarin have a boiling point below 160C. Shrapnel coming out of a normal explosion can go as high as 500-600C

Your case will only make sense if the container is hit by a cold shrapnel that's below the Sarin Boiling point. Which is impossible. Have you ever heard of Shrapnel coming out of a bomb cold?

Geez, I don't think I need to explain to you how bomb works.

Everything that touches shrapnel melts. Stupidity have its limit.
 
.
FORECASTING ESCALATION SCENARIO OF CONFLICT IN SYRIA

SOUTH FRONT - 2017.04.07

This video was originally released in November, 2016. It depicts the worst-case escalation scenario of the conflict in Syria. The recent US missile strike against Syria showed that this analysis remains relevant to this day.

In terms of the actual failure of diplomatic efforts to resolve the Syrian crisis, the threat of a direct armed conflict between Russia and the United States is becoming more and more of a reality.

In simulating a possible armed conflict between the Armed Forces of the involved countries, we can state with some confidence that it will commence with a series of provocative actions. Possibilities include air strikes of “unknown aircraft” on civilians, the use of chemical weapons, destruction of humanitarian convoys, “shooting” at military aircraft or ships of the coalition forces, and possibly even encompassing their complete destruction. The United States and Western countries will undoubtedly accuse the Syrian or Russian Armed Forces of any such action in this regard.

Furthermore, bypassing all the international organizations and their resolutions, a certain “group of friends of Syria” will declare a decision to establish a no-fly zone over Syria to “ensure the safety of the civilian population” as part of the US “R2P – Responsibility To Protect strategy. After a repeated provocative episode, for example, the use of chemical weapons, there will be an announcement for the beginning of a full scale military operation against the “criminal regime and its ally”

If it is decided to fully implement this power projection scenario, the target of the first strike will be air defense systems and command and control centers of the Syrian army. The US would show their strength and willingness to take extreme measures to offset the Assad regime. In this scenario, the campaign against the media propagandized “universal evil” is to improve the reputation of the United States on the world stage. This strike will be launched with cruise missiles upon the most vulnerable targets, which will be situated in locations with the weakest air defense system. The strikes will be carried out from a safe 500 km distance from the main targets. In this case, the US Mediterranean naval group will be out of the zone of defeat of anti-ship missiles “X-35″ (Range – up to 200 km) and “Onyx” (SS-N-26 Strobile, range – up to 300 km). The Syrian army will not be able to strike back on its own, and Russia may be willing to make significant concessions in the negotiation process. That could relieve the United States from the need to carry out more extensive and costly operations.

However, Russia is likely to act from the position of strength. Qualifying the deaths of several groups of Russian military advisors in the Syrian targeted areas as an act of aggression, Russia can execute a number of various military operations, directly or indirectly. In particular, several American ships in the US Mediterranean fleet could be destroyed by stealthy diesel-electric submarines the Project 636 “Warszawianka”. In addition, US warships can be attacked by Tu-160 strategic bombers. Or US warships, aviation and ground forces and facilities in the Middle East which were involved in the aggression can be attacked by Russian rocket, artillery and air defense systems from Syrian territory and on behalf of Syrian Arab Army. Any such direct or indirect operations will also be framed by the US as an act of aggression. Thus, they will move on to the scenario of a massive attack of the forces of the two fleets

In general, this strike can be executed by more than 1500 cruise missiles. Currently in the Mediterranean Sea there is deployed 4 guided-missile destroyers of the US Navy – USS Ross (DDG-71), USS Carney (DDG 64), USS Donald Cook (DDG 75) and USS Porter (DDG 78). Each of them is equipped with multiple vertical launch systems with no less than 90 start-up cells, each of which can be charged with an anti-submarine, an anti-aircraft or a cruise missile. When the strikes are executed on the ground targets each cell can be charged with a cruise missile BGM-109 “Tomahawk”. The naval combat group would be shadowed with one nuclear-powered Ohio-class sub with more than 150 cruise missiles aboard.

The US 5th Fleet has another powerful group of warships, which can be deployed in the Persian Gulf and the Red Sea. Currently, in addition to the Aircraft carrier USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN 69), it is composed of four guided-missile destroyers USS Nitze (DDG 94), USS Roosevelt (DDG 80), USS Stout (DDG 55), USS Mason (DDG 87) and two guided-missile cruisers (USS San Jacinto (CG 56), USS Monterey (CG 61). This naval group is reinforced with two guided missile submarines.

The target of the massive strike will be the ships of the Russian Mediterranean fleet, command centers, airfields, air defense systems and electronic warfare. The US and its allies will resort to the force scenario only if they can achieve overwhelming superiority over their stated enemy. In spite of the deployment of air defense systems “Pantsir-S1″ (SA-22 Greyhound), the S-300 (SA-10 Grumble) and S-400 (SA-21 Growler), as well as sea-based air defense systems, the army command and control systems as well as air defense systems of Russia and Syria, would receive irreparable damage in the case of implementation of a massive attack by cruise missiles from a safe distance.

According to military experts, for the assured destruction of one Russian air defense complex, approximately 10 missile launches under the condition of retaliatory fire by the air defense complexes are required. According to some estimates, there are approximately up to 200 air defense systems on permanent combat readiness throughout Syria. However, the destruction of the primary radars can “blind” defense launchers. The only trump card in this scenario could be Russian top-secret electronic warfare systems, which theoretically could disorient the enemy cruise missiles as well as naval vessels. If this does not happen, it is unlikely that Russia will retaliate by means of conventional weapons. It may be sufficient, in one hour of operation, to eliminate the threat to the United States and its allies Air Forces.

In this situation, Russia will be faced with a choice: to abandon Syria, leaving it at the mercy of warring factions, or to respond with a tactical nuclear attack. The US calculation will be conducted based upon the premise that Russia in this situation would NOT dare to take such a step. According to I.27 of the Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation by 2014, “The Russian Federation shall reserve the right to use nuclear weapons in response to the use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it and/or its allies, as well as in the event of aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is in jeopardy”. In this case, the United States and its allies do not use nuclear weapons and do not specifically pose a threat to the existence of the Russian state, although that point could be debated considering the US is continually imposing itself upon Russia’s borders and has played the role of aggressor since the beginning of the New Cold War.

Meanwhile taking into account the approximate flight time of cruise missiles to the target (roughly 40 minutes at missile speeds up to 880 km/h and the distance to target of 500 km), the military and political Russian leadership will have enough time to estimate the scale of the attack and resort to a Predetermined Response Plan. The main Russian counter strike would be executed upon the elements of the missile defense system in Europe. At the same time the concentrated forces of the 5th and 6th fleets will be entirely destroyed by the X-102 missiles from Tu-160 bombers. The US and its allies in their turn will try to launch a retaliatory nuclear strike on the territory of the Russia Federation. So the final step will be a strategic nuclear exchange.

However, considering a more likely the scenario that involves maintaining military parity in the region, the parties may continue negotiations, gradually developing successes on various fronts. After the capture of Mosul and Raqqa the US coalition forces will attempt to gain control over as much Syrian terrain as possible. After the capture of Aleppo, Russia will also move to the center of the country. Thus, Syria will be divided into spheres of influence similar to post-war Germany. The parties then will begin long-term political negotiations on forming a national unity government and resolve the status of Kurdish autonomy. No matter how the situation develops, Russia will continue to ensure the rise to power of a loyal government that is representative of the Syrian people, as well as being a staunch ally, and thus retain the Russian naval base in Syria. The recent win of Donald Trump in the US presidential election likely contributed to this peaceful scenario. Experts expect that with Trump in the White House, the main players in the region – Russia and the US – will have more chances to make a deal to divide the spheres of influence.

WATCH the Analysis Video at following link:
https://southfront.org/forecasting-escalation-scenario-of-conflict-in-syria/
 
.
OMG another bunch of nonsense. Do you have even slightest clue about school course of physics? The hot pieces of shrapnel will pierce through containers with chemicals and indeed because of high temperature can destroy some fraction of this chemical material prone to heat. But these shrapnel pieces so small that most of chemicals will be released freely into the air unaffected by any heat. Are you 7 years old or something?

dude.......You are indeed right if the bomb detonate before hitting the chemical like with a proximity fuse, such as a CBU or an Air Burst round, because the bomb would have not affect the ground zero from the explosion. When the bomb detonate above the sarin casing which simply shower shrapnel on the sarin casing.

HOWEVER, THIS IS NOT THE CASE, as the Russian point to having a conventional bomb Again, a normal BOMB DETONATE ON IMPACT. Which mean the blast is going to crater the area of impact. The pressure suck in the air in the area.

Now, for the container, it either destroy in whole then the sarin gas will burn on impact of the bomb when it detonate (Which is the most likely case) and if the casing did not entirely destroyed by the shrapnel, when the shrapnel is puncturing the casing, the shrapnel will left in place and plugging the casing.

Either way, it will not lead to leaking of the gas

Everything that touches shrapnel melts. Stupidity have its limit.

Do you know how hot shrapnel got? Let me give you for an instant, a internal combustion engine which spark by igniting petrol get up to 600 degree Celsius inside the engine chamber. Bomb explosion would mean burning on ammonium based chemical energy, which amplify the heat generated simply because it burn longer than Petrol. Now tell me, what cannot be melt thru with a shrapnel heated >600 degree?

Yes, stupidity have its limit, and it was you, not mine.
 
Last edited:
.
dude.......You are indeed right if the bomb detonate before hitting the chemical like with a proximity fuse, such as a CBU or an Air Burst round, because the bomb would have not affect the ground zero from the explosion. When the bomb detonate above the sarin casing which simply shower shrapnel on the sarin casing.

HOWEVER, THIS IS NOT THE CASE, as the Russian point to having a conventional bomb Again, a normal BOMB DETONATE ON IMPACT. Which mean the blast is going to crater the area of impact. The pressure suck in the air in the area.

Now, for the container, it either destroy in whole then the sarin gas will burn on impact of the bomb when it detonate (Which is the most likely case) and if the casing did not entirely destroyed by the shrapnel, when the shrapnel is puncturing the casing, the shrapnel will left in place and plugging the casing.

Either way, it will not lead to leaking of the gas



Do you know how hot shrapnel got? Let me give you for an instant, a internal combustion engine which spark by igniting petrol get up to 600 degree Celsius inside the engine chamber. Bomb explosion would mean burning on ammonium based chemical energy, which amplify the heat generated simply because it burn longer than Petrol. Now tell me, can shrapnel heated up to >600 C melt anything?

Dude.. the container with chemicals will be destroyed completly only in case the bomb will detonate somewhere within few meters of the container. In other cases container will get damaged and gas will leak. Small damage will result in small leak. If bomb detonate within close proxymity of the container, but not close enough, the case can be completly destroyed the chemicals will be partially burnt but some even small portion of gas will spread in the air and poison the area. Should i continue to explain you the elementary things?
 
.
Dude.. the container with chemicals will be destroyed completly only in case the bomb will detonate somewhere within few meters of the container. In other cases container will get damaged and gas will leak. Small damage will result in small leak. If bomb detonate within close proxymity of the container, but not close enough, the case can be completly destroyed the chemicals will be partially burnt but some even small portion of gas will spread in the air and poison the area. Should i continue to explain you the elementary things?

Do you know how big is the blast radius of a conventional bomb?

In term of US Bomb, Mk 82 (500lbs) bomb have a blast radius of 100 meters. Everything within that 100 meters will be incinerated and if you are standing in the open within that range, there will not be anything for you to bury. For what you said to have happened, the bomb must have been missed by at least that amount to put the casing OUTSIDE the effective radius.

However, according to the "OFFICIAL REPORT" from Russia, the bomb score a direct hit on the weapon storage facilities and trigger the leak.

Another thing is, Sarin is heavier, A LOT heavier than air (Sarin have a molar mass of 140.28 g/mol, air have a molar mass of ~29 g/mol) , which mean when it was leak, they will not spread airborne, instead, when they are leaked, they will SINK instead of evaporate. If they are leaked instead of intentional release with an air burst to reach maximum disperse, they will be contained quickly but not "Spread in the Air" That is simple Physics
 
Last edited:
.
Do you know how big is the blast radius of a conventional bomb?

In term of US Bomb, Mk 82 (500lbs) bomb have a blast radius of 100 meters. Everything within that 100 meters will be incinerated and if you are standing in the open within that range, there will not be anything for you to bury. For what you said to have happened, the bomb must have been missed by at least that amount to put the casing OUTSIDE the effective radius.

However, according to the "OFFICIAL REPORT" from Russia, the bomb score a direct hit on the weapon storage facilities and trigger the leak.

Another thing is, Sarin is heavier, A LOT heavier than air , which mean when it was leak, they will not spread airborne, instead, when they are leaked, they will SINK instead of evaporate. If they are leaked instead of intentional release with an air burst to reach maximum disperse, they will be contained quickly but not "Spread in the Air" That is simple Physics

The blast wave spread the chemicals in the air while shrapnel damaged their containers. The bomb exploded too far away from containers to heat up the air around them. Got it? Its not difficult.
 
. .
The blast wave spread the chemicals in the air while shrapnel damaged their containers.

Gas won't escape the container immediately after the casing is damage, unless the casing is completely gone, how far can the gas spread before settle is directly proportional to how big is the hole made by shrapnel.

However, here is the catch, if the hole is big, allow more gas to come out immediately at once, they will be incinerated

The bomb exploded too far away from containers to heat up the air around them. Got it? Its not difficult.

If the bomb exploded too far away and "HEAT UP" the gas, the gas will be evaporated as the gas is heated up, AGAIN, SARIN HAVE A VERY LOW BOILING POINT....

And you do know the two sentence you said is contradicting each other? Right?

The blast wave need to be close enough to pick up the gas, but the bomb need to be far away from the bomb to get heated up without being destroyed by the blast.
 
Last edited:
.
There's something fishy, why SyAAF bombed jihadist weapon storage/making facility with chemical substance as accused by West. What point of that? For me, they only know the target was jihadist weapon making/storage facility, not aware also keeping chemical weapon substance, probably poor intelligence. For jihadist it obvious, keeping such chemical weapon in dense population area benefiting them, if they hit by airstrike, and leak occur they just blamed government, if it not, this was their guarantee against SAA and civils, and again blaming everything on government.
 
.
LOL, DPRK also has their say.

========
Reuters | Sat Apr 8, 2017 | 11:45am EDT
North Korea calls U.S. strikes on Syria 'unforgivable'
By Ju-min Park and Jack Kim | SEOUL

North Korea said on Saturday U.S. missile strikes against a Syrian airfield on Friday were "an unforgivable act of aggression" that showed its decision to develop nuclear weapons was "the right choice a million times over".

The response by North Korea's foreign ministry, carried by the official KCNA news agency, was the first since U.S. warships in the Mediterranean Sea launched dozens of missiles at a Syrian air base which the Pentagon says was involved in a chemical weapons attack earlier in the week.

"The U.S. missile attack against Syria is a clear and unforgivable act of aggression against a sovereign state and we strongly condemn this," KCNA quoted an unnamed spokesman for the North Korean foreign ministry as saying.

"The reality of today proves our decision to strengthen our military power to stand against force with force was the right choice a million times over," KCNA said.

Diplomatically isolated North Korea considers Syria a key ally. KCNA said its leader Kim Jong Un and Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad exchanged messages of warm wishes and pledges of friendship and cooperation between the two countries.

Al-Assad thanked Kim for recognizing the Syrian struggle to "meet such challenges as sinister actions of the world's terrorists and encouraged Syria to successfully weather the crisis without fail," KCNA said.

The exchange of messages came before the U.S. airstrikes, which were U.S. President Donald Trump's biggest foreign policy move since taking office in January in reaction to what Washington says was a gas attack by al-Assad's government that killed at least 70 people in a rebel-held territory.

Syria denies it carried out the attack.

The U.S. strikes came as Trump hosted Chinese President Xi Jinping in Florida to press the leader of North Korea's sole diplomatic ally to do more to curb Pyongyang's nuclear ambitions.

North Korea is believed to be developing missiles capable of hitting the United States and a nuclear arsenal in defiance of U.N. sanctions. It has conducted five nuclear tests -- two since the beginning of last year -- and scores of missile tests.



(Reporting by Jack Kim and Ju-min Park; Editing by Alexander Smith)
 
.
Back
Top Bottom