13 reported dead, 300 injured, after blast rocks busy Chinese port

a reply to: roadgravel

That's really interesting, thanks for sharing. I guess that shows that those chemicals shouldn't have been stored in such close proximity? Not really sure how you can use water and chemical powder at the same time, unless at differing parts of the site.

Looks more and more like human error.......and definitely time to be glad you aren't senior management at the company concerned......

originally posted by: Flavian
a reply to: roadgravel

That's really interesting, thanks for sharing. I guess that shows that those chemicals shouldn't have been stored in such close proximity? Not really sure how you can use water and chemical powder at the same time, unless at differing parts of the site.

Looks more and more like human error.......and definitely time to be glad you aren't senior management at the company concerned......

So I have a question do you honestly believe that all of the chinese believe it was just some accident, that some may be suspicious thinking it was a covert attack? Do you think they may have some think tanks that may be considering that this may have been a covert attack?
Even if it was a real bonafide accident that doesnt mean that everyone will believe it to have been a simple human error. Human nature isnt very trusting, and some military chinese may suspect foul play when considering things like mass death especially in the areas of supercomuter manufacturing.

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

given the track record of Chinese safety (sub) standards and its ability to regulate it..

an accident due to negligence is the most likely situation.

originally posted by: Ir0nM0nkey

originally posted by: asen_y2k

originally posted by: sputniksteve
a reply to: asen_y2k

Here is a work safe link to a jpeg of the thread.

i.imgur.com...

WOW fascination, there is definately something going on that we dont know about.

Let me put in a quote from the post in 4Chan:

I dont know now, but I think I need more time for the new explosions. Dont try to find me, my life is worthless, I AM GOING TO DELETE ALL IN MY NEXT STEP, EVEN MY LIFE, check the news hour by hour.

It's fake - the picture is cropped to leave out what looks like a News watermark...

Original News Pic

Regards,

Not so fast, this is just one screen grab of the thread there are others floating around that I have seen on reddit. I saw another that was just the original post and no replies.

originally posted by: choos
a reply to: FormOfTheLord

given the track record of Chinese safety (sub) standards and its ability to regulate it..

an accident due to negligence is the most likely situation.

So thats not my point of course it could have been an accident, but my point is no matter what people say there will still be quite a large number of people looking for a reason to disbelieve the official story, and suspect covert espionage of some sort because its human nature to do so. In a world where we all love and trust each other that wouldnt be the case, however we arent in such a world. We are in a place where people dont really trust each other, hell most dont people even trust thier coworkers or neighbors much less people overseas in China.

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

At this stage, i see no reason to suspect foul play but obviously the investigation is only at the earliest of stages so who knows what will later crop up? I do though believe it is telling that Chinese Government sources have only stated that "the entire senior management have been detained" - that is a direct quote as well. This suggests they already have an inkling of what is to blame.

It also isn't the first incident of its kind, indeed there was a big one last year that killed over 150 workers (different city though). These incidents aren't as common in the West basically because we have been doing it longer - our Health & Safety has improved following our own incidents, hence the greater security regarding storage. For example, there are prohibitions in place to prevent chemicals being stored next to each other that would need differing methods of extinguishing. I don't know nearly enough about the protocols in place in China to specifically comment, except to say that i think they will be tightened following this incident.

As to your specific question, in all honesty Intelligence and Security think tanks wouldn't be doing there jobs if they didn't at least consider it as a targetted attack. That is, after all, the whole purpose of said think tanks. Every time there is a huge disaster, think tanks pose the "what if this was targetted?" execrcise, not out of belief but to terst responses, etc, if it happens in future.

Will these think tanks also consider that a alien UFO did it.

I am surprised that no UFO pics have turned up yet.

originally posted by: asen_y2k
a reply to: Navarro

The problem with the book "Art of War" is that, every Tom Dick and Harry has read it. When only the Chinese had it, it was an advantage, not anymore.

The PRC has repeatedly demonstrated that they may have a superior understanding of modern warfare than the Americans have. I believe the difference in doctrine between the two powers may be the same difference as was between Britain and the American colonies during the Revolutionary War.

While Americans were beginning to exercise cover, concealment and ambushes, the British were continuing to utilize skirmish lines with poor effect. Now consider modern Chinese strategy. On several occasions now American carrier battle groups were conducting exercises at sea. One single PRC submarine hid on the ocean floor, avoiding detection by sonar. When the moment was right, the crew surfaced the boat with the carrier in their crosshairs. The Chinese went undetected until they had a point blank firing solution on the American carrier. Elegant, efficient and absolutely destructive.

There's many additional evidences of the Chinese posessing superior military doctrine. In each instance, their methodology is simple, subtle and effective. "The Art of War" has evolved, and we may be at a severe disadvantage.

originally posted by: Navarro

originally posted by: asen_y2k
a reply to: Navarro

The problem with the book "Art of War" is that, every Tom Dick and Harry has read it. When only the Chinese had it, it was an advantage, not anymore.

The PRC has repeatedly demonstrated that they may have a superior understanding of modern warfare than the Americans have. I believe the difference in doctrine between the two powers may be the same difference as was between Britain and the American colonies during the Revolutionary War.

While Americans were beginning to exercise cover, concealment and ambushes, the British were continuing to utilize skirmish lines with poor effect. Now consider modern Chinese strategy. On several occasions now American carrier battle groups were conducting exercises at sea. One single PRC submarine hid on the ocean floor, avoiding detection by sonar. When the moment was right, the crew surfaced the boat with the carrier in their crosshairs. The Chinese went undetected until they had a point blank firing solution on the American carrier. Elegant, efficient and absolutely destructive.

There's many additional evidences of the Chinese posessing superior military doctrine. In each instance, their methodology is simple, subtle and effective. "The Art of War" has evolved, and we may be at a severe disadvantage.

They may have a better doctrine but the USA spends more money on its military, so they are playing catch up, notice they are only copy cats, they have zero ability to make thier own stuff.

Why would armed police be at the scene?

Here is an interesting perspective...www.jsmineset.com... thinks the finacial war has gone HOT with the use of a tactical nuke.

a reply to: cavtrooper7

Doubt it was a nuke. With all those chemicals in one place, a nuke wasn't even needed. The PEPCON explosion was even bigger than this one.

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord

originally posted by: Navarro

originally posted by: asen_y2k
a reply to: Navarro

The problem with the book "Art of War" is that, every Tom Dick and Harry has read it. When only the Chinese had it, it was an advantage, not anymore.

The PRC has repeatedly demonstrated that they may have a superior understanding of modern warfare than the Americans have. I believe the difference in doctrine between the two powers may be the same difference as was between Britain and the American colonies during the Revolutionary War.

While Americans were beginning to exercise cover, concealment and ambushes, the British were continuing to utilize skirmish lines with poor effect. Now consider modern Chinese strategy. On several occasions now American carrier battle groups were conducting exercises at sea. One single PRC submarine hid on the ocean floor, avoiding detection by sonar. When the moment was right, the crew surfaced the boat with the carrier in their crosshairs. The Chinese went undetected until they had a point blank firing solution on the American carrier. Elegant, efficient and absolutely destructive.

There's many additional evidences of the Chinese posessing superior military doctrine. In each instance, their methodology is simple, subtle and effective. "The Art of War" has evolved, and we may be at a severe disadvantage.

They may have a better doctrine but the USA spends more money on its military, so they are playing catch up, notice they are only copy cats, they have zero ability to make thier own stuff.

I'll have to disagree with you there. The US military is more costly than the rest of the worlds militaries combined, but that isn't to say it's more powerful or effective than the combination of all the worlds militaries. I suspect we're likely looking at the effect of gross mismanagement of resources rather than evidence of power. I find it difficult to believe that the United States could take on the entire world simultaneously and come out on top, yet the DOD budget would suggest otherwise. DOD claims the US military is built for conducting warfare in only three theaters, after all.

I believe instead the Chinese are more efficient and reasonable in their expenditure, but not necessarily less capable. You say they stole their technologies; I say they acquired the same technologies as us, but at a fraction of the cost. That, in fact, is in line with "The Art of War." Why expend resources on a thing when you can more simply let your enemy create it for you?

originally posted by: Navarro

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord

originally posted by: Navarro

originally posted by: asen_y2k
a reply to: Navarro

The problem with the book "Art of War" is that, every Tom Dick and Harry has read it. When only the Chinese had it, it was an advantage, not anymore.

The PRC has repeatedly demonstrated that they may have a superior understanding of modern warfare than the Americans have. I believe the difference in doctrine between the two powers may be the same difference as was between Britain and the American colonies during the Revolutionary War.

While Americans were beginning to exercise cover, concealment and ambushes, the British were continuing to utilize skirmish lines with poor effect. Now consider modern Chinese strategy. On several occasions now American carrier battle groups were conducting exercises at sea. One single PRC submarine hid on the ocean floor, avoiding detection by sonar. When the moment was right, the crew surfaced the boat with the carrier in their crosshairs. The Chinese went undetected until they had a point blank firing solution on the American carrier. Elegant, efficient and absolutely destructive.

There's many additional evidences of the Chinese posessing superior military doctrine. In each instance, their methodology is simple, subtle and effective. "The Art of War" has evolved, and we may be at a severe disadvantage.

They may have a better doctrine but the USA spends more money on its military, so they are playing catch up, notice they are only copy cats, they have zero ability to make thier own stuff.

I'll have to disagree with you there. The US military is more costly than the rest of the worlds militaries combined, but that isn't to say it's more powerful or effective than the combination of all the worlds militaries. I suspect we're likely looking at the effect of gross mismanagement of resources rather than evidence of power. I find it difficult to believe that the United States could take on the entire world simultaneously and come out on top, yet the DOD budget would suggest otherwise. DOD claims the US military is built for conducting warfare in only three theaters, after all.

I believe instead the Chinese are more efficient and reasonable in their expenditure, but not necessarily less capable. You say they stole their technologies; I say they acquired the same technologies as us, but at a fraction of the cost. That, in fact, is in line with "The Art of War." Why expend resources on a thing when you can more simply let your enemy create it for you?

We dont really know is my point, and even if there is an offical story there will always be those who dont believe it.

As to the military:
I think our military/USA is has a contingency for taking on not only China but taking over every nation on earth if the need arises, even doing it all at the same time. There are secret programs for that type of stuff should the need ever arise. So no the rest of the world may be considered obsolete in terms of technology we may have stuff 50,000 years ahead of them, from various means.

But all that is moot, my point is if they may think it was a covert attack then we may be in for a counter covert attack.

In the covert unseen realm may be where th next wars are fought, we will see or we may not.
However dont be mistaken they have spies and so do we, we will see what happens in times to come.

On Google Earth, check the historical pictures and go to 23.11.2011, exactly where the crater is now after the explosion, to me it looks like there is a big hole in the ground and a huge drill standing next to it, would not be surprised if there was also an illegal toxic waste disposal site or something else located..

According to google maps many people live close to the explosion site.
Coordinates 39.042973, 117.737274

Watch the next week, they will start telling you there was a disgruntled employee or someone like that, started a fire which sparked the explosions. I already showed you that someone put this all up before it happened and showed the picture of the original fire. Check my posts on last page.

In case you don't know, 4chan has a history of people posting there before they go and do things like this and mass shootings literally telling everyone exactly what they are going to go do.

a reply to: MeanMinistry

I think the explosion occured in between your markings of "parked cars" and "area of initial explosion" (the area you marked is mercedes or another brand, its cars at least), which would also be the location of the Warehouse all media talks about.

originally posted by: Drazzl
a reply to: MeanMinistry

I think the explosion occured in between your markings of "parked cars" and "area of initial explosion" (the area you marked is mercedes or another brand, its cars at least), which would also be the location of the Warehouse all media talks about.

Yes, i think youre right. My source of information tells not to exactly, maybe they werent sure in the beginning:

www.theguardian.com...

To point at another problem regarding news coverage;
This area was going to be a, considering the heavy industrial size, wonderful area to live, a real show up.. but now.. it may be completely toxic polluted