earlier this year an American arms dump was attacked by insurgents in Iraq and burned for hours but there is one explosion that can only be described as a nuclear blast. Please go to the following website http://www.letsroll911.org and click on the link at the top of the home page (COMMENTS APPRECIATED)
2006-10-16 09:53:13 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
It' does look like some sort of small tactical nuclear weapon detonated...kinda scary. They have a smaller blast, however there is still risk of radiation poisoning for those in the immediate area surrounding the detonation. I think this was close to Nasiriyah--hopefully that is not where my husband ends up when he is deployed next summer, since our troops are at risk as well.
* for those of you that cited EMP blasts...if it is a small tactical nuke, the emp blast range would be smaller, and being that that was an arms dump, I am almost positive that they would have it VERY far away from any city, or populated area, because the risk of anything exploding is exponentially higher in a war zone. In the video it is impossible to tell how far away the explosions are from the populus, but I am sure that any emp's would have been confined to within a 2 mile radius, which is at least how far they would keep an ammo dump, I would imagine.
* though Iraq and the U.S. would not have detonated this possible nuclear weapon...that doesn't omit any other terrorist organization supplying such a weapon.
*P.S. I don't think that it IS a nuke, just that it is POSSIBLE
2006-10-16 10:05:38 · answer #1 · answered by Katie 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Guessing you have no experience or any knowelge of explosives. The "shape" of an explosion ie the mushroom cloud is not indicitive of what caused the explosion. First....the shape is determined by the temperature of the explosion. As the temp goes up within the explosion, cold air rushes in at a rapid rate. The further the distance, the less heat involved and thus the less amount of force rushing in. Combine distance from the center, pressure and rising of heated gases gives you that classic mushroom cloud shape.
Second, how far away are the explosions? Looks like maybe five, ten miles? Do you want to guess: How huge a nuke cloud is? How hot the blast flash is? How far it goes?
No, that is conventional weapons.
2006-10-16 17:24:52 · answer #2 · answered by mymadsky 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Do you know that the glare from NORMAL bomb blasts look a lot larger because they are the only light source in the night that make enough light to counter the sun? If it was a nuclear blast, it would be all over the news, and half that city would be gone from the face of the Earth (plus the camera would be terminated). Also, there would be nuclear waste material infesting that area for thousands of years afterwards. So why is that area not radioactive? Why isn't anybody getting sick from radiation poisoning left by nuclear waste?
Simple answer: It was just a normal bomb.
2006-10-16 20:01:36 · answer #3 · answered by High-strung Guitarist 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I seriously doubt that it was a tctical nuke. As far as I know in 1970 there was a treaty signed by almost every nation that banned the use of nuclear weapons. The U.S. signed it as well as Iraq. Seeing how Iraq didnt have a neuclear program that would mean that it would have had to be one of the Nato nations weapons. Whay would a NATO nation take weapons of mass destruction to a nation that we didnt want to have them and then put it in a munitions dump. Especially considering the cost and effort to make such weapons. The flash of light is most likely brighter due to the angle of the blast tword the camera.
On a side note the treaty mentioned before was signed by Korea who withdrew in 2003 to start thier own neuclear weapons program.
2006-10-16 17:14:52 · answer #4 · answered by Cameron T 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
A fairly large explosion of munitions was observed in the distance and not all mushroom clouds have a nuclear origin.The Len's aperture was open and so we have a blinding light flash but the area effected is much to small to have been a tactical nuke .
2006-10-16 17:01:50 · answer #5 · answered by playtoofast 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The US has moved on from the MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) to NUTs (Nuclear Use Theories).
Its probable that the US has "tactical" mini nukes in the area, but not sure what the film shows.
2006-10-17 08:52:34 · answer #6 · answered by Nothing to say? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wouldn't suprise me, the conservatives and Islamic extremists better hope that there is life after death, or hey, they just screwed humanity over for absolutely nothing. Heaven is not a certain thing, but our life here is, live today as well as you can, because you don't know if tomorrow will exist, an dyou don't know that heaven exists, just enjoy your life and be a kind, caring person.
2006-10-16 16:57:33 · answer #7 · answered by locomonohijo 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Do you think that our coalition troops out there would be standing around if it had been a tactical nuke, with all the fallout that would be in the air they would surely be wearing protective clothing etc. It is just the Arab propaganda in motion.
2006-10-16 18:59:03 · answer #8 · answered by hakuna matata 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No don't it was a really big bang but I don't it was a nuke because the lights in the city were still on. The EM pulse would have knocked them out
2006-10-16 17:00:55 · answer #9 · answered by Ben 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
no, I'm pretty sure a nuke, even a small tactical nuke, would have created an emp strong enough to destroy that camera. plus i don't believe the firing mechanism on nuclear weapons can be easily affected by fire.
2006-10-16 16:58:59 · answer #10 · answered by pip 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋