Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Russia Detonates Worlds Most Powerful Bomb


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

This bomb is scary. It creates a vacuum over a huge area.

A quote from the Guardian:

"Doubts raised over legality of urban warfare device with impact of a tactical nuclear weapon"

"The technology was developed by the US which used "fuel-air" bombs in the 1991 Gulf war. They were designed as a replacement for napalm, widely used in Vietnam."

An American army study found that weapons of the kind used by the Russians in Chechnya could have the effect of a tactical nuclear weapon without the radiation.

It said those far outside the blast site would experience crushing injuries, concussion, multiple internal haemorrhages, collapsed lungs, ruptured eardrums, and displacement of the eyes from their sockets

:(

Link to post
Share on other sites
This bomb is scary. It creates a vacuum over a huge area.

A quote from the Guardian:

"Doubts raised over legality of urban warfare device with impact of a tactical nuclear weapon"

"The technology was developed by the US which used "fuel-air" bombs in the 1991 Gulf war. They were designed as a replacement for napalm, widely used in Vietnam."

An American army study found that weapons of the kind used by the Russians in Chechnya could have the effect of a tactical nuclear weapon without the radiation.

It said those far outside the blast site would experience crushing injuries, concussion, multiple internal haemorrhages, collapsed lungs, ruptured eardrums, and displacement of the eyes from their sockets

:(

Yadayadayada, it's a death machine. Did they use thge nukes in the 80's?

Link to post
Share on other sites

They started out as napalm in the sixties and have now been developed close to nuke strength over the years :

According to a 1993 study by the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency:

The [blast] kill mechanism against living targets is unique--and unpleasant.... What kills is the pressure wave, and more importantly, the subsequent rarefaction [vacuum], which ruptures the lungs.… If the fuel deflagrates but does not detonate, victims will be severely burned and will probably also inhale the burning fuel. Since the most common FAE fuels, ethylene oxide and propylene oxide, are highly toxic, undetonated FAE should prove as lethal to personnel caught within the cloud as most chemical agents.(8)

According to a separate U.S. Central Intelligence Agency study, "the effect of an FAE explosion within confined spaces is immense. Those near the ignition point are obliterated. Those at the fringe are likely to suffer many internal, and thus invisible injuries, including burst eardrums and crushed inner organs, severe concussions, ruptured lungs and internal organs, and possibly blindness."(9) Another Defense Intelligence Agency document speculates that because the "shock and pressure waves cause minimal damage to brain tissue…it is possible that victims of FAEs are not rendered unconscious by the blast, but instead suffer for several seconds or minutes while they suffocate."(10)

:(

Link to post
Share on other sites
You're getting the angle all wrong - that Russian guy in the uniform said that it was an effective environmentally friendly replacement for nuclear bombs. What's wrong with you guys? Your glasses are always half empty.

Yep, if I gotsta have my eyeballs sucked out of my head by a bomb, I want it done in an environmentally friendly way. This bomb gets my thumbs up!

Nice to have a bit of good news for a change :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fing is, with the economy in ruins and western investment pulled out as Russian stockmarkets close they must do someting and for years the Soviet economy was based on weapons building. Its just them returning to the old pattern. Hegel was right, Endless repetition of past behaviour.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You're getting the angle all wrong - that Russian guy in the uniform said that it was an effective environmentally friendly replacement for nuclear bombs. What's wrong with you guys? Your glasses are always half empty.

As long as it's organic and made from fair trade explosives...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Fing is, with the economy in ruins and western investment pulled out as Russian stockmarkets close they must do someting and for years the Soviet economy was based on weapons building. Its just them returning to the old pattern. Hegel was right, Endless repetition of past behaviour.

Scary indeed with Russia, we've seen Russia become increasingly bullying, chucking around oil wealth to generate influence. With oil going down, commodities heading down, Russia will find itself far less wealthy. In turn, that reduces the financial influence that Putin can wield. His appeal in Russia is based on being a strong leader, and if he can't be strong with finance, then he can be strong with weapons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Difference between this and a nuke is that you can claim the land right away. With a nuke you've got to wait 50 or so years for the radiation to disappear.

With this bomb you can blow the hell out of every other country in the world and then move straight in!

Link to post
Share on other sites
You're getting the angle all wrong - that Russian guy in the uniform said that it was an effective environmentally friendly replacement for nuclear bombs. What's wrong with you guys? Your glasses are always half empty.

Except that it means that it is more likely to be used (not necessarily on another superpower, granted).

It is the Nuclear Winter/Fall out that accompanies normal nukes & the effect that would have on the whole of the World that has prevented their usage.

Link to post
Share on other sites
What can we do to help Putin get over his inferiority complex?

Inferiority complex?

There is a strong argument that a power counterweight against the U.S. & Britain (it's junior partner) would be beneficial to world peace.

It would have been much harder for us to invade the middle east if Russia was still the Soviet superpower it once was.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Difference between this and a nuke is that you can claim the land right away. With a nuke you've got to wait 50 or so years for the radiation to disappear.

With this bomb you can blow the hell out of every other country in the world and then move straight in!

Not sure that is the reason modern warfare is carried out.

America has plenty of land, since they annihilated the Native American population over the centuries following the original invasion (ahem, I mean discovery) of the Americas & it's so much cheaper to protect power & privilege at home by installing puppet regimes abroad to protect capital export flows.

Based on your reasoning a bomb would need to be invented that kills everyone on this scale, but leaves their real estate right where it is, intact.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Skint Academic

Are the Americans going to have to rename their MOAB now? It's impressive though. 4 times larger explosion than a MOAB and weighs less.

Yeah so it causes all these horrific injuries. But then war is nasty. Do you think there was ever a nice way to die on a battlefield? The sooner the politicians understand this the better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.