ISIS/ISIL conflict in Syria/Iraq (No OpEd, No Politics)
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Jura The idiot
General
Today at 9:48 AM
There’s clawed excavator north of spot #1 getting an early start on removing debris. That low structure it is facing may be of interest.
related (from that Tweeter-thread):Today at 7:28 AM
actually it's been one of the most bizarre shows in military history:
three buildings, each getting 19 TLAMs on average
according to Department of Defense Press Briefing by Pentagon Chief Spokesperson Dana W. White and Joint Staff Director Lt. Gen. Kenneth F. McKenzie Jr. in the Pentagon Briefing Room ,
and no apparent damage around like trees OK huh?!
So, I got interested in what's still standing at Barzeh after 76 missiles. (Thread)
(if interested, click 'Show this thread' below that tweet, or
here)
There’s clawed excavator north of spot #1 getting an early start on removing debris. That low structure it is facing may be of interest.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Just playing devil’s advocate here, but if the IS believed (which may not actually turn out to be true) that this was a chemical weapons facility, it stands to reason for them to also believe that any chemical weapons laboratory/production facilities be buried deep underground.
It could be that the tomahawks used were deep penetrating bunker buster versions, so the surface damage may not be representative of munitions expended.
Anyone have any pictures of targets that were hit with bunker busters? I am curious to see if there are any obvious telltail signs of the use of such munitions, like craters/mounds/cracks and shifting of surrounding surface structures like roads etc.
I would expect underground explosions to have similar effects on close proximity surface structures, like roads, as earthquakes and similar seismic activity, but cannot see any such signs, so was just wondering how obvious such signs might be as a possible way to rule out the possibility.
Well I do no think there is. I have seen some footage on the BBC (cant find at mo) and it just looks like a not particularly large lo-rise office block with a level ground level.
Here is a picture in a BBC article and clear satellite image that really looks like a flat unbroken ground surface.
I have just remembered what I wanted to ask.
Normally in these strikes, we get plenty of nose cone footage from the Cruise Missiles as they dive towards target.
I have not seen any this time and wondered if anyone else has?
Normally in these strikes, we get plenty of nose cone footage from the Cruise Missiles as they dive towards target.
I have not seen any this time and wondered if anyone else has?
Talk about truth finding, freedom of speech, censorship etc. Look what happens to an ex-General of UK, let alone anybody else. You got silenced. "Oh, time runs out, oh, I can't hear you. oh, how can you prove you are innocent"
This is the poor general
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
You mean claims, Nicky. Claims by Syrian air defence. Data is backed by evidence, claims are unsubstaniated statements.
And if the Blast doesn't kill everything around the location any residual Fuel air compound can be just as toxic. Additional the effects are nasty those in the blast zone are incinerated those around the edges are hit with large concussive force that can rupture internal organs.
It's a rather nasty way to go. ThatsT not to say that the US DOD doesn't have them they do but seem less enthusiastic regarding there deployment and depoyment options. By treaty FAE are not considered WMD IF IF used against military targets. Both the US and Russia have empoyed FAE in some infantry weapons like grenade launchers, mortars and shoulder fired recoiless both also have smaller bombs and missiles like the enhanced blast hellfire.
But for a warehouse loaded with WMD you need something of considerable higher magnitude. And if that warehouse is in a urban areas that means considerable potential for civilian death and maming. Why commit what is basically a war crime to prevent a war crime? It's one thing if the stocks are in the middle of a Army base another in central Damascus.
If those issues don't turn your stomach, there is the issue of delivery. The largest US FAE I know of is the BLU118/B based off the BLU109 gravity bomb. That means that delivery of the FAE would demand a bomber or fighter, the bomb is too large to carry in the weapons bay of a F22 or F35 so it would have to be a B2 or either F15E or F16. That would mean increased risk. Currently I am not aware of any stand off theobaric weapons (IE Cruise Missiles)
The targets are supposed to be manufacturing and development not stockpikes. In order to actually destroy stockpiles of chemical agents like chemical weapons a specialised weapon type has to be used that is a FAE or Thermobaric warhead, and a large one at that. These weapons use the air around them to super heat the blast zone to considerable temperatures. The problem be is using those systems dramatically increase the potential for collateral damage. The size of warhead needed to take out a chemical weapons store is smaller than a small nuke but far more than the normal bomb loads.chemical weapon debries?
without desactivation??
And if the Blast doesn't kill everything around the location any residual Fuel air compound can be just as toxic. Additional the effects are nasty those in the blast zone are incinerated those around the edges are hit with large concussive force that can rupture internal organs.
It's a rather nasty way to go. ThatsT not to say that the US DOD doesn't have them they do but seem less enthusiastic regarding there deployment and depoyment options. By treaty FAE are not considered WMD IF IF used against military targets. Both the US and Russia have empoyed FAE in some infantry weapons like grenade launchers, mortars and shoulder fired recoiless both also have smaller bombs and missiles like the enhanced blast hellfire.
But for a warehouse loaded with WMD you need something of considerable higher magnitude. And if that warehouse is in a urban areas that means considerable potential for civilian death and maming. Why commit what is basically a war crime to prevent a war crime? It's one thing if the stocks are in the middle of a Army base another in central Damascus.
If those issues don't turn your stomach, there is the issue of delivery. The largest US FAE I know of is the BLU118/B based off the BLU109 gravity bomb. That means that delivery of the FAE would demand a bomber or fighter, the bomb is too large to carry in the weapons bay of a F22 or F35 so it would have to be a B2 or either F15E or F16. That would mean increased risk. Currently I am not aware of any stand off theobaric weapons (IE Cruise Missiles)