Anonymous ID: 060060 Aug. 15, 2020, 6:52 p.m. No.10302635   🗄️.is đź”—kun   >>2659 >>2698

>>10302464

Expand your thinking. How many near nuclear blasts in the past few years…yet no appreciable radiation at any but the 'Russian missile engine test failure' explosion and that was minimal and short lived locally isolated rads.

 

It would seem that there's a new technology afoot. Kind of like the forties…just without the radiation and better yield management and containment.

 

Remember any booms underground? Maybe a mountain falling on the clown posse in NK? Surely all coincidences.

 

Sticking with my theory. We (or someone) has some scary new toys and likes to play with them.

 

Skip to 1:52 if you just want to see the Russian blast. Supposedly lots of missiles there too…like what's reported to have been in the Beirut warehouse. Probably nothing.

 

Ukrainian weapons depot doing a kaboom…story is a drone dropped a grenade and did it. Pigs also fly from human asses.

 

This however, is what a major ordnance pile explosion actually looks like: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKJvcVM6jvE

 

Our adversaries might keep a secret or two. That's why we're here.

Anonymous ID: 060060 Aug. 15, 2020, 7:02 p.m. No.10302728   🗄️.is đź”—kun

>>10302659

Debating semantics instead of substance won't advance your argument. I stand by mine…'near nuclear' isn't nuclear…it's a scale reference. English. If I wanted to say nuclear, it's easy enough. Kind of like saying something is giant…doesn't it's a giant. We have adjectives and nouns. They go together but shouldn't be confused.