Massive Donetsk Ukraine Explosion

They do exist in the US arsenal. When Bush was in office he backed off the treaty and started making new ones. Especially the Nuclear bunker busters.a reply to: DeadSeraph

a reply to: jrod


I agree it is sad that in today's world we all can't get along and all over greed.

I just think if it was a nuke either side would use it as propaganda to justify their side.

It only seems to be getting worse...

Not good at all, even if it's an accident, it needs to be put into perspective, this does not happen every day.

According to Gen Alexander Rushkin, the Russian deputy chief of staff, the new bomb is smaller than the MOAB but much deadlier because, due to nanotechnology, the temperature at the epicentre of the blast is twice as high.

"Test results of the new airborne weapon have shown that its efficiency and power is commensurate with a nuclear weapon," he said.

"The main destruction is inflicted by an ultrasonic shockwave and an incredibly high temperature," ORT added.

"All that is alive merely evaporates."

Despite its destructive qualities, the bomb is environmentally friendly, Gen Rushkin said.

Sept-2007 - Russian army 'tests the father of all bombs'-
OBSERVATION:

So this one doesn't have to be 'Nuclear' to appear ... 'Nuclear'.
.

a reply to: thesaneone

You are likely right about that.

With the unrest around the world, I feel like it is just a matter of time before one of those lost nukes finds its way to the battlefield.

a reply to: jrod

When the civil unrest peaks and the governments can't keep us in line then that's when one will turn up and not necessarily on a conventional battlefield.

a reply to: noeltrotsky
Looks like a factory that makes things which go boom or possibility an oil refinery or some such got hit. I heard there has been somewhere around 3,000 deaths so far in this little conflict in the Ukraine. Though its not so much a conflict as more of a corporate take over for now, eventually its likely to get bloody, so we will see. Anyways, I doubt it would be a mini nuke even though there low yield, I mean why bother using it when conventional fire power would do.

a reply to: FarleyWayne
Everybody from Russia to the US to China to even India says its not an arms race...

Yet!...they do seem to have been steadily arming for as long as arms and such fire power has been around.

I f we could get a scale we could start playing around with numbers. That looks pretty far away and the aftershock breaks glass. That tells me we have something huge that went off. I used to carry a card on me in the army that showed the distance to be away from a bomb by how much it weighed. Of course it was just a generic card and didn't go into detail on explosive types but to me that looks like quite some distance. However It is hard to tell.

Or video statement
we are willing to use unconventional weapons..
regardless
One large smokeless blast without secondaries = not a arms factory or fuel depot
very likely a tactical artillary size nuke detonation.

a reply to: noeltrotsky
Actually looking at it again you can probably rule out chemical plant or oil refinery exploding. After the initial lightshow it pretty much disappears and gets dark again, and then the shockwave comes in. If it was a chemical plant or oil refinery you would likely still see it burning in the distance. Even if it was far away you would likely see something as the plant would still be burning after, but it goes completely dark after.

If its a missile its a pretty big missile as that looks like a pretty big explosion and does not look all that close to the people filming it, and you know there were smaller explosions before the big one which made them all start filming in that direction. I am quite sure we will be informed what it was in due time, every side no doubt has a story to tell us.

What if those videos are planted to take our eyes off the real possibilities.

What if they used some kind of low-yield nuke?

Low-Yield Earth-Penetrating Nuclear Weapons

Can we really trust anything being reported?

a reply to: xuenchen


Why use a nuke when this is much easier and leaves no nasty aftertaste?
Fuel-Air bomb.
en.wikipedia.org...

for comparison, here is footage of a night time nuclear test.
notice the length of time the bright flash, and the distance.
at the 46 sec mark notice how it resembles the video shown in the op and the others.

Seems it was a chemical plant going up .

www.9news.com.au...

originally posted by: all2human
Or video statement
we are willing to use unconventional weapons

One large smokeless blast without secondaries = not a arms factory or fuel depot
imo a tactical artillary size nuke detonation.

I was thinking the same honestly.

In a normal explosion within moments the smoke obscures the light.

This light lasted, then rose slowly as the heat carried it up.

Maybe thermobaric though, Russian version if the MOAB( thermobaric means heat and over pressure).

If it was a nuke the world will know soon.

The radioactive signature will even be able to be traced back to the country if origin, the reactor it was enriched in, and potentially the mine it was dug out of.

They leave an unmistakable fingerprint.

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
for comparison, here is footage of a night time nuclear test.
notice the length of time the bright flash, and the distance.
at the 46 sec mark notice how it resembles the video shown in the op and the others.

The scales are different, the nuclear artillery round fired from " atomic Annie" was nothing like that.

Smaller nukes are much less impressive...by thousands of times.

Nuclear does have to mean big, they come in pop and bangs and booms.

That one in ukraine potentially being a pop.

a reply to: infinityorder

Read my link above . It was a chemical plant going up after being hit .

Well not read . lol .

originally posted by: hutch622
a reply to: infinityorder

Read my link above . It was a chemical plant going up after being hit .

Well not read . lol .

Coorilation does not equal causation.

Just because a chemical plant was destroyed doesn't make it the cause of the destruction.

I am not saying it was a nuke, I am just not saying it wasn't.

Don't rush to judgement.

We will know without a doubt by noon today.

Because the evidence will come forth.

If it was a nuke there will be vast amounts of evidence.

If it wasn't there will be vast amounts of evidence.

I am simply reserving my judgement until we have more than a big explosion and damage reports to go on.

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: jrod

Interesting how many computer chair experts are quick to say it does not look like a nuke.

Same can be said about those who believe its a nuke. If it was a nuke which I highly doubt this would be plastered everywhere because you never let a good crisis go to waste.

Except if it was fired by Pro-West groups.