If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Rebels accuse Syrian government of using "vacuum bombs", Megamaid unavailable for comment   (cnn.com) divider line 6
    More: Scary, opposition groups, Syrians, Sergey Lavrov, Megamaid, LCC, Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, russian foreign minister, international diplomacy  
•       •       •

7596 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 Nov 2012 at 2:13 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-11-01 03:28:10 PM
1 votes:

spelletrader: Using cluster bombs on people is bad enough, but FAE bombs are down right disturbing.


I don't see how one is worse than the other. Either way you end up dead. Kinda like how you're not supposed to target a combatant with a 120mm tank shell. Why not? It's not doing to make him any deader than the coax .50.
2012-11-01 02:45:25 PM
1 votes:

buttery_shame_cave: Bored Horde: Can anyone explain to me how thermobaric devices are any more barbaric then conventional explosive devices? I mean given that the US of A and Israel have both thrown around wooly peter and cluster bombs like so much confetti, what are the Syrians doing that is uniquely evil?

you can take cover from cluster munitions and WP pretty easily.

thermobaric device will kill you no matter what kind of cover you take, you got your choice of thermal dose leading to a VERY painful but swift death, shockwave death which can be spectacularly messy in a super-dave/capt. keneivil sort of way, or the pressure effects killing you righteously quick but leaving an otherwise externally non-cindered/pulverized corpse.

oh and they look like tiny nukes when they go off. it's a little disconcerting.


You can take cover from the initial blast of cluster and WP munitions, but then you have bomblets all over the farking place ready to blow up curious children or inattentive adults. WP starts fires like a motherfarker and is functionally impossible to extinguish in a war zone environment.

Arguing that being able to take cover from a device makes it ethical whilst ignoring the long-term consequences is poor rationalization. I'm reading this as a desperate attempt to bash the war-drums by throwing around scary names. Thermobaric! Ooooh!
2012-11-01 02:45:09 PM
1 votes:

spelletrader: We use thermobaric weapons against hardened bunkers and structures buried deep in mountains, not in the middle of towns and villages.


That's because they're much more effective in that role. For towns and villages we use conventional explosives or simply park a plane with an autocannon above and fly circles.
2012-11-01 02:44:01 PM
1 votes:

Bored Horde: Can anyone explain to me how thermobaric devices are any more barbaric then conventional explosive devices? I mean given that the US of A and Israel have both thrown around wooly peter and cluster bombs like so much confetti, what are the Syrians doing that is uniquely evil?


from the wiki:

"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."
2012-11-01 02:31:33 PM
1 votes:
Can anyone explain to me how thermobaric devices are any more barbaric then conventional explosive devices? I mean given that the US of A and Israel have both thrown around wooly peter and cluster bombs like so much confetti, what are the Syrians doing that is uniquely evil?
2012-11-01 02:25:56 PM
1 votes:

onyxruby: Why isn't anybody arming the rebels? They are clearly fighting a very bad government that has sponsored terrorism for years. Presidents of past, both democrat and republican, would have had these rebels armed long ago, some for Libya. Instead we get a long drawn out fight with a lot more bloodshed and a tyrant still in charge that should have been overthrown long ago.


historically, that's NEVER worked out in our favor. we armed the taliban, and look where that wound up going. we
'assisted' the baath party in overthrowing the legitimate government in iraq, which ultimately led to sadaam hussein rising to power, we funded and armed south american rebel groups, and look where THAT is going...

honestly, rather than arm the rebels, i'm surprised there hasn't been a 'whoopsy' weapons release over the government buildings by the warplanes of one nation or another.
 
Displayed 6 of 6 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report