(no subject)
Jul. 2nd, 2007 01:55 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
drewkittyAs someone who knows something about terrorism, I've been a little puzzled about the hoopla about the two "car bombs" discovered in London. Now according to the information I've dug out, the "car bombs" were made of gasoline, propane and boxes of nails.
Gasoline is a volatile fuel. Propane isn't that bad either, but is transported in fairly safe containers and the current valves are good as well. It's noteworthy that when the Columbine shooters tried to rig propane bombs at their school, they didn't go off.
An explosion consists of an intense rate of combustion (meaning a lot of air and a lot of fuel; or if you prefer a lot of oxidizer and a lot of combustible), typically in an enclosed space that maximizes the effect.
I couldn't think of a way to make a car explode with any force using gasoline or propane, especially not with a mix of the two. Not enough air, and not enough oxidizer. Now you can set a car on fire, quite handily, and perhaps set a nearby person or two on fire, but you get a wet Hollywood looking FPWOOMPH! of a fireball and not much actual explosive power. Certainly not enough to move nails out of their cardboard boxes.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/07/02/terror_idiocy_outbreak/
I refer you to this article by a former UK bomb squad tech, who confirms what I've heard in every description of the devices.
They couldn't have worked as intended.
"There are ways to get a killer blast out of nothing more than fuel and air, but you need a lot more air than there is inside a car for a decent bang and you need to mix the two ingredients thoroughly and in the right proportions."
"We used to be constantly disappointed, on the bomb teams, at the consistently rubbish efforts of the ordinary bomber. Many people seem to think that any kind of fire or loud noise will become deadly if you add nails."
On the one hand, I'm pleased that terrorists have once again demonstrated themselves to be totally incompetent boobs.
On the other hand, I'd really rather that they not keep trying. They might just accidentally get it right, and that would suck.
Not least of which, because of the massive over-reaction that would take place. A car bomb that blows up 1200 people would suck, a lot, and be a human tragedy. It would not endanger Western civilization.
Only we could do that, by over-reacting to the fleabites of rabid fanatics.
And once again, the world news media hysterically over-reacts.
Gasoline is a volatile fuel. Propane isn't that bad either, but is transported in fairly safe containers and the current valves are good as well. It's noteworthy that when the Columbine shooters tried to rig propane bombs at their school, they didn't go off.
An explosion consists of an intense rate of combustion (meaning a lot of air and a lot of fuel; or if you prefer a lot of oxidizer and a lot of combustible), typically in an enclosed space that maximizes the effect.
I couldn't think of a way to make a car explode with any force using gasoline or propane, especially not with a mix of the two. Not enough air, and not enough oxidizer. Now you can set a car on fire, quite handily, and perhaps set a nearby person or two on fire, but you get a wet Hollywood looking FPWOOMPH! of a fireball and not much actual explosive power. Certainly not enough to move nails out of their cardboard boxes.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/07/02/terror_idiocy_outbreak/
I refer you to this article by a former UK bomb squad tech, who confirms what I've heard in every description of the devices.
They couldn't have worked as intended.
"There are ways to get a killer blast out of nothing more than fuel and air, but you need a lot more air than there is inside a car for a decent bang and you need to mix the two ingredients thoroughly and in the right proportions."
"We used to be constantly disappointed, on the bomb teams, at the consistently rubbish efforts of the ordinary bomber. Many people seem to think that any kind of fire or loud noise will become deadly if you add nails."
On the one hand, I'm pleased that terrorists have once again demonstrated themselves to be totally incompetent boobs.
On the other hand, I'd really rather that they not keep trying. They might just accidentally get it right, and that would suck.
Not least of which, because of the massive over-reaction that would take place. A car bomb that blows up 1200 people would suck, a lot, and be a human tragedy. It would not endanger Western civilization.
Only we could do that, by over-reacting to the fleabites of rabid fanatics.
And once again, the world news media hysterically over-reacts.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Re: You're moving the goalposts.
Date: 2007-07-03 11:09 pm (UTC)I would argue that we should try to identify the political changes wanted by the terorists, then act to promote the opposite political changes. In other words, a good response to Islamic terrorism would be to ramp up support for Israel, or for women's rights in the Mideast. Then we should publicly state that this is in response to the terrorist actions -- that all they have achieved is to get what they didn't want.
In their face, in other words.
Yes, 1000 people dying is grisly. That's less than the number of people that died from HIV in 2002 in Texas, California, Florida, or New York individually, with several more states close behind that figure.
The differences are that:
(1) these deaths are on top of any that resulted from other causes, and
(2) unlike a disease, terrorism is malevolent -- if left untouched, it will come up with deadlier forms of attack.
And if they are thusly ignored, much like a child throwing a tantrum, it's possible (and I believe likely) that they will lose interest in trying at a certain point.
And while we're "ignoring" them, what about justice? Don't the victims, or their families, have a right to expect that their government will act to strike against the perpetrators?
A democratic regime which fails to do so won't stay democratic very long.
Re: You're moving the goalposts.
Date: 2007-07-03 11:55 pm (UTC)But sure as hell track down each individual act as far as the trails allow, prosecute and arrest as needed.