what happened to the großrossiya thread

[I AM I AM I AM MOBIUS]

racist and isolationist

how sputnik will change?

hmm

terror attack wont work

they dont even care about bowling green LOL RIP

[I AM I AM I AM MOBIUS]

blame librul?

hmm

obama secret base in damascus?

MUST STRYK!

[I AM I AM I AM MOBIUS]

defeat parasailing launch facility!

[Broken_Erika]

Yay! I pushed the button! I love pushing buttons! Buttons are Cool!

[Kidlicious]

Russia does not seem interested in defending it's ally.

[Dinner]

Serb should be coming up for air soon. We can expect an alcohol fueled rant soon.

[Geronimo]

I think Russia will not much care so long as the attack against Assad's military is a one-off. Russia may be more pissed off at Assad himself, if indeed Assad ordered a chemical attack without confiding the plans to Russia in advance. In that case the US attack may even be seen to serve Russia's interests if it deters Assad from more such actions that might embarrass them in the future while the US attack would remain far too limited in scope to threaten the overall viability of their strategic ally..

Of course the official public Russian/Damascus account is that Assad possesses no chemical weapons and that rebels had sarin stockpiled at Idlib which was released by a conventional airstrike. Some experts claim sarin is consumed by such attacks and dismiss this account as impossible.

Does anybody know any references that substantially pre-date the attack which support or refute this idea that sarin is largely destroyed rather than dispersed by nearby conventional attacks?

[Aeson]

It's possible that Putin is pleased by both Assad and Trump ... or planned the whole thing. (If this is a one-off) Putin clearly wants Trump as SCOTUS. This makes Trump look strong for the easily swayed American audience by "putting the bad man Assad in his place" with a symbolic gesture, makes people more credulous about a possible collaboration between Trump and Russia, and really doesn't affect much of anything on the ground in Syria.

[Uncle Sparky]

"I bombed Russia's ally! See, I'm not a Russian puppet! Now stop all those terrible time wasting investigations against me, and go arrest Obama and Clinton!"

[BeBMan]

I guess it's pretty clear now that Trump did do this only to please the "Arab Street".

http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-39526653

We shall refer to him only as Abu Ivanka from now

[Ellestar]

Some experts claim sarin is consumed by such attacks and dismiss this account as impossible.

Does anybody know any references that substantially pre-date the attack which support or refute this idea that sarin is largely destroyed rather than dispersed by nearby conventional attacks?

They know that absolute majority of their readers have no clue that it's a lie. Bomb shrapnel or a nearby detonation damages a tanker with sarin, and you got a leak. So, a blast may or may not "destroy" a sarin itself (it can damage a container instead of destroying it). And bomb shrapnel can't destroy sarin, it can only damage a container.

http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/390333-Expert-bomb-expert-radius-needed?s=a002f298c5b2ca07e1c3f565f90aed5d&p=2486842&viewfull=1#post2486842

The effect of blast on personnel is confined to a relatively short distance (110 feet for a 2000 pound bomb).

Fragmentation is caused by the break-up of the weapon casing upon detonation. Fragments of a bomb case can achieve velocities from 3,000 to 11,000 fps depending on the type of bomb (for example GP bomb fragments have velocities of 5,000 to 9,000 fps). Fragmentation is effective against troops, vehicles, aircraft and other soft targets. The fragmentation effects generated from the detonation of a high-explosive bomb have greater effective range than blast, usually up to approximately 3,000 feet regardless of bomb size. The fragmentation effect can be maximized by using a bomb specifically designed for this effect, or by using a GP bomb with an airburst functioning fuze.

So, each bomb hit has a small radius in which it may or may not destroy sarin, and a much bigger radius in which it is likely to damage a container with sarin and cause a leak. Locations of containers and bomb hits are random, so the chances of each event are directly proportional to the square of effective range of each effect. You don't even need to be an "expert" to guess that, general education is more than enough.

Then again, same "experts" (Bellingcat "experts" lol) suggested that a bomb hit looks like this https://017qndpynh-flywheel.netdna-s...onvoy-bomb.jpg
In reality, i gave a link that states that a 500 kg bomb should destroy this entire warehouse by a direct hit, walls included (due to overpressure in closed confinement), with some extra to spare (1000 m^2 of damage).

[Kidlicious]

It's possible that Putin is pleased by both Assad and Trump ... or planned the whole thing. (If this is a one-off) Putin clearly wants Trump as SCOTUS. This makes Trump look strong for the easily swayed American audience by "putting the bad man Assad in his place" with a symbolic gesture, makes people more credulous about a possible collaboration between Trump and Russia, and really doesn't affect much of anything on the ground in Syria.

The best part of this story is how people who don't believe in it are "easily swayed."

[Aeson]

You have to be easily swayed to think Trump is strong because of this bombing ... regardless of what Putin thinks of it. It was an attack with no real impact on even the airfield itself, let alone Assad's regime. Yet that hasn't stopped even much of the mainstream media from congratulating him on being so forceful in response to the chemical weapons attack and standing up to Putin.

You and the rest of the Trumptards are even claiming this somehow put China and NK in their places. Which is silly. NK isn't going to stop missile development because of this, and it's even less meaningful to China.

I don't buy the line that Putin must have disliked it, because there are just as plausible scenarios with dramatically different outcomes in that regard. I gave one of the many that no one had mentioned here. Which is actually true we don't know.

You of course have no idea, yet are perfectly sure your conjecture is the truth.

[Dr Strangelove]

The gassing in 2013 occurred just as an international team of human rights investigators landed in Syria. This gassing occurred the day after the US Secretary of State offered the suggestion that we accept Assad as a political necessity.

[Geronimo]

They know that absolute majority of their readers have no clue that it's a lie. Bomb shrapnel or a nearby detonation damages a tanker with sarin, and you got a leak. So, a blast may or may not "destroy" a sarin itself (it can damage a container instead of destroying it). And bomb shrapnel can't destroy sarin, it can only damage a container.

http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/390333-Expert-bomb-expert-radius-needed?s=a002f298c5b2ca07e1c3f565f90aed5d&p=2486842&viewfull=1#post2486842

So, each bomb hit has a small radius in which it may or may not destroy sarin, and a much bigger radius in which it is likely to damage a container with sarin and cause a leak. Locations of containers and bomb hits are random, so the chances of each event are directly proportional to the square of effective range of each effect. You don't even need to be an "expert" to guess that, general education is more than enough.

Interesting links in that thread. Your reasoning also jives with my recollections that in the first gulf war there were concerns that bombed chemical weapon stockpiles might create a "toxic plume", and I've never heard that Sarin is special in this regard.