General Discussion

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)

115. uh actually no it wont...

Wed Sep 4, 2013, 11:49 PM

Sep 2013

In 2002, the Navy announced that it was developing the weapon and pairing it with bombs designed to penetrate fortified buildings. The Navy described it working this way: after bursting into a storage bunker, the warhead would spray copper plates at high speeds to tear into tanks containing toxic chemicals. Material within the warhead would burn so hot it would vaporize the chemicals that escape. A byproduct that explosion would generate chlorine gas, a disinfectant.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/08/29/syria-chemical-weapons-attack/2723251/

'Intense heat'
For years the United States has been seeking to develop warheads that could be used to destroy chemical weapons stocks without the dangers described above.

So-called "Agent Defeat Weapons" are probably available to US commanders. They operate in various ways but the essential feature is intense heat - it is like a super-incendiary bomb - that destroys the chemical or biological agent in situ.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23946071

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

170 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

350 children die from malnutrition every hour. Let's bomb Syria! [View all] MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 OP

are you saying we don't do anything about that at all? VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #1

It's not nearly the big deal that Syria is. MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #4

I'll settle for a War on Greed (and the greedy :) - nt HardTimes99 Sep 2013 #153

Certainly we could use the same resources... Blanks Sep 2013 #160

No, he's saying we could do MORE with the money we waste on throwing missiles at people Scootaloo Sep 2013 #6

we aren't planning on "throwing missiles at people" to my knowledge.... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #8

Syriasly? Scootaloo Sep 2013 #10

Unlike Assads chemicals VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #12

Non-human targets? Scootaloo Sep 2013 #15

I refer to Syrian fighter planes...etc..as targets... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #18

I'm talking about a sustained barrage of missile strikes against Syria Scootaloo Sep 2013 #23

You have NEVER heard me use the phrase "bomb them back to the stone age" VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #24

No, but I did just get done speaking with a 35k+ poster who advocated exactly that Scootaloo Sep 2013 #26

No I didn't "cheif" VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #29

While that's interesting (and IMO, unlikely) Scootaloo Sep 2013 #30

the operative phrase &quot;IMO&quot; VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #31

Of the dollar the entire world spends for the military, WHEN CRABS ROAR Sep 2013 #38

actually its more than that.... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #54

Oh, I don't doubt the "incinerating chemical weapons" part Scootaloo Sep 2013 #39

But of course VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #56

It's not a question of knowing more, it's a question of knowing enough Scootaloo Sep 2013 #63

Apparently you DIDN"T know about that till I showed you.. VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #65

Really, are you having this much difficulty understanding the principles of physics? Scootaloo Sep 2013 #73

YOU are the one that is denying the science... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #74

That's rich Scootaloo Sep 2013 #81

Yea it is isn't it? Who is denying science and thermodynamics? VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #116

Go back. Read my posts Scootaloo Sep 2013 #121

No you read my newest! VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #123

As i said, I don't doubt their incendiary capabilities Scootaloo Sep 2013 #127

Excellent words, friend, excellent words. marew Sep 2013 #128

Same Military...with a CiC that didn't give a shit about collateral damage... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #129

Ummm...chlorine gas is not just a "disinfectant" Maedhros Sep 2013 #159

As a matter of fact...here is another article...this time from USA today: VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #68

I spent a couple of hours discussing this with VR last night, the poster Dragonfli Sep 2013 #41

You don't have to believe...I just gave an article from the BBS to back up my claim... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #58

as I told you before, lovely dream where weapons are destroyed and no one killed, Dragonfli Sep 2013 #67

oh so now we cannot do anything....if even one person might die... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #69

Many will die, it's what military actions do, kill people. Dragonfli Sep 2013 #79

Assad...overall goal to attempt to kill hundreds if not thousands... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #140

killing hundreds if not thousands more will not change his mind, it will escalate to more killing Dragonfli Sep 2013 #143

the goal is not to convince anyone of anything. bvar22 Sep 2013 #154

Clearly, but you would think they would do their work without appearing so silly and stupid.... Dragonfli Sep 2013 #163

Appearing silly and stupid doesn't matter anymore. bvar22 Sep 2013 #165

I always equated "Pro War" with the conservatives. I would hope Democrats would rhett o rick Sep 2013 #138

How about bombing to eliminate chemical weapons... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #141

syrian rebels bombing to eliminate questionseverything Sep 2013 #147

They are in a Civil War...it says "regime held" VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #151

Sure trust us this time Charlie Brown. We are only going to use bombs for goodness. nm rhett o rick Sep 2013 #150

Stop that sanity, you'll confuse several of the others on this thread! Scuba Sep 2013 #152

It still is. RC Sep 2013 #164

Hahahaha, AWESOME come-back! beerandjesus Sep 2013 #145

1. you are ignorant of the targets MNBrewer Sep 2013 #22

Um no I am not... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #25

Well I hope they're a bit more discriminate than they were in Libya. polly7 Sep 2013 #32

Oh really.... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #35

And the people living next to them? WHEN CRABS ROAR Sep 2013 #40

All efforts will be made to minimize that impact... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #46

Why does it have to be we who do something? Are we the world's policeman? totodeinhere Sep 2013 #85

because we are the only ones with the technology to neutralize chemical weapons. VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #86

lmao. What a pile of crap. nt. polly7 Sep 2013 #92

Oh really? VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #94

Yup. They've been shoveling a lot of it lately haven't they. n/t totodeinhere Sep 2013 #118

But taking out their chemical weapons will require boots on the ground. totodeinhere Sep 2013 #114

uh actually no it wont... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #115

Since you ignored my previous link here are some more. totodeinhere Sep 2013 #117

How the hell would THEY know about all the secret technology we have... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #120

Let me turn that question around. How the hell do you know? totodeinhere Sep 2013 #130

because I read...alot VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #131

I'll see your Defense one link...and raise that with one of my own VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #122

That would be quite an operation if they attempted to pull it off. Note that the quote specifies totodeinhere Sep 2013 #135

List the targets, since you know them! MNBrewer Sep 2013 #33

Here is a nice article from the Beeb on it.. VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #36

yea Cryptoad Sep 2013 #75

Of course they didn't if you happen to read...you will see that much is available through sat images VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #77

There are satilite Cryptoad Sep 2013 #80

Assad has been moving military assets to civilian areas. It won't be possible to hit his military totodeinhere Sep 2013 #64

Oh really VanillaRhapsody Sep 2013 #72

Syria dismisses US decision to hold off on strikes, moves troops and weapons to civilian areas totodeinhere Sep 2013 #84

"we plan on actual non human targets".........and the day after ?.... then what ? NM_Birder Sep 2013 #142

I've posted this on other threads, but it looks like it needs to go here as well. Maedhros Sep 2013 #158

with all the 'syria gas attack' heaven05 Sep 2013 #50

Then I would dare say your knowledge is lacking. rhett o rick Sep 2013 #136

+1000 !!!! orpupilofnature57 Sep 2013 #126

Are you saying that we are? nm rhett o rick Sep 2013 #134

Are you one of those that feels that feeding kids is "playing God?" Renew Deal Sep 2013 #2

I think it's "playing decent human being" nt MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #5

This message was self-deleted by its author MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #3

Well, see, feeding starving children will not line the pockets of the banks and contractors. PDJane Sep 2013 #7

we do give a lot in humanitarian aid , but the problem is often the politics JI7 Sep 2013 #9

So why don't we blow *those* people to smithereens? MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #11

because it's not because they are trying to starve people to death JI7 Sep 2013 #13

Assad doesn't want to kill people MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #17

would you compare republicans denying Sandy aid JI7 Sep 2013 #21

Idunno. MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #53

You know Assad personally? ProSense Sep 2013 #27

It's interesting MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #55

who is starving someone to death ? JI7 Sep 2013 #57

Your argument was the same as mine MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #88

that's a strange comparison JI7 Sep 2013 #89

Wonder about what? MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #90

Are you now or have you ever been a Hyena? Dragonfli Sep 2013 #99

Oh, man MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #101

That was yesterday Dragonfli Sep 2013 #104

Day-um MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #107

Truthfully, the US spends less that 1% of the GDP on humanitarian aid. PDJane Sep 2013 #16

No, we really don't. What we mostly do is label corporate welfare humanitarian aid. Egalitarian Thug Sep 2013 #19

Why not feed the children and bomb Syria? William769 Sep 2013 #14

What, you mean like feed the children with the bodies of our dead bombing victims? Dragonfli Sep 2013 #87

Feed The Future ProSense Sep 2013 #20

There Is No Profit In Feeding The Starving... Bombing The Innocent... Oh, Yeah... WillyT Sep 2013 #28

10 million Americans per year can't pay their medical bills. DirkGently Sep 2013 #34

Dwight D. Eisenhower Bluenorthwest Sep 2013 #37

. amerikat Sep 2013 #60

Does Justice not apply to Assad????????? nt Cryptoad Sep 2013 #42

This has nothing to do with justice for anyone. nt. polly7 Sep 2013 #44

Very interesting Cryptoad Sep 2013 #78

Obama is not a judge, and certainly not a "judge Dredd" figure responsible as jury and executioner Dragonfli Sep 2013 #47

you still didn't address the Question nt Cryptoad Sep 2013 #76

I most certainly did. Dragonfli Sep 2013 #82

World court ,,,, you jest Cryptoad Sep 2013 #83

I JEST? It is literally legally not our place to play "Judge Dredd" no matter how sexy the costume. Dragonfli Sep 2013 #97

Well ,,,, Cryptoad Sep 2013 #125

Take it to mean what it means - rule of law applies to all, EVEN US as well as him. Dragonfli Sep 2013 #139

And what happens to the women in Syria if our new best friends take over? dflprincess Sep 2013 #95

Can I take that as a Cryptoad Sep 2013 #124

the rebels you wanna prop questionseverything Sep 2013 #148

Do you find it easier to ask question like this than actually make a statement? rhett o rick Sep 2013 #137

I know where I stand Cryptoad Sep 2013 #144

No one is defending the use of WMD without repercussions. Some disagree on rhett o rick Sep 2013 #149

bush is that you? noiretextatique Sep 2013 #155

The lust to kill outweighs the desire to save lives? Where one puts one's money indepat Sep 2013 #43

At the very least, can we as a group stop taking about reducing the military budget? AnotherMcIntosh Sep 2013 #45

I agree, we must avoid more of these "punitive strikes" they feel they need to use Dragonfli Sep 2013 #49

What do dying children have to do with protecting petrodollars? valerief Sep 2013 #48

POVERTY is a Weapon of Mass Destruction. n/t Beartracks Sep 2013 #51

WAR WAR WAR blkmusclmachine Sep 2013 #52

Yep.... Owl Sep 2013 #70

Why? another_liberal Sep 2013 #59

It's immoral to feed starving children Aerows Sep 2013 #61

No money to be made on starving kids... polichick Sep 2013 #62

because we actually live in a crazy culture gate of the sun Sep 2013 #66

K&R MotherPetrie Sep 2013 #71

Hey ... I know of someone who might know where Sudan is... L0oniX Sep 2013 #91

She should move to Minnesota's 6th Congressional District MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #93

Oh Manny, give us a break. dflprincess Sep 2013 #98

But the word salad thing is very, very difficult to get just right MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #102

Well, you do have a point there. dflprincess Sep 2013 #108

I used to work with someone who lived in that district MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #110

They're just nuts dflprincess Sep 2013 #111

I don't know. We do what we can. jazzimov Sep 2013 #96

Food aid has its own problems. joshcryer Sep 2013 #100

Good idea. Let's end food stamps. MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #103

That's different from what USAID does. joshcryer Sep 2013 #105

Since I never mentioned USAID, MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #106

By what other mechanism does the US provide food aid? joshcryer Sep 2013 #109

I don't know, but that's not the point. MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #112

Fixing the distribution network costs nothing. joshcryer Sep 2013 #119

I thought dead was dead? treestar Sep 2013 #113

Also, inevitable: ProSense Sep 2013 #132

No money to be made feeding starving kids workinclasszero Sep 2013 #133

I don't think bombing malnourished children instead of Syria will help any. hughee99 Sep 2013 #146

We can do better that that, Manny... Jeff In Milwaukee Sep 2013 #156

Why? DeSwiss Sep 2013 #157

Oh I like Terrance, I've just begun rereading "True Hallucinations" as I found my original copy Dragonfli Sep 2013 #166

As do I. DeSwiss Sep 2013 #167

You have shared Dedroidify with me in the past and it has since displaced most of the Dragonfli Sep 2013 #168

I thought so, but wasn't sure.... DeSwiss Sep 2013 #169

Thanks, and I resemble that old and cranky remark as well /nt Dragonfli Sep 2013 #170

But to feed all those starving children for a year would cost almost a billion dollars! tclambert Sep 2013 #161

Lots of Death And Suffering Here And Elsewhere colsohlibgal Sep 2013 #162