>>18847578 lb
I hope this is not what it appears to be. If so, God help us. I know what's being said is it's an ammo dump with depleted uranium shells. But it looks very much like a tactical nuke.
Really want to be wrong on this, but look at the detonation effects and energy from the cloud as it rises. Even the brisance of the sound seemed different from normal conventional bombs using RDX or the like.
I have a very bad feeling things have just gotten much, much worse.
I'm usually working collab with you MP, but you're laying down friendly fire atm. I said what it looks like, and I stand by that. If I'm right, it's not a psyop to regret the reality on behalf of mankind. Some things must never happen.
I have a professional association with the subject going back to the late 70's through early 80's then peripherally afterwards.
Tell me what's it like to be in an underground nuclear command post when a false alarm almost triggers total nuclear war? I can.
Looks like he started filming shortly afterwards. He would've certainly been exposed to flash (and gamma at the same time) if he'd been actually looking at it. That cloud was not normal. Look at old Army nuclear artillery detonations…they look a lot like this. Maybe it was just an ammo dump. Maybe Beirut was just a pile of fertilizer…maybe the Russian sub dev works was an accidental megablast, maybe, maybe, maybe… I will say it's no secret that the Russians know very well how to make small and very efficient weapons with low yield and fallout because they are more efficient than ours at using their fuel instead of the device scattering it all over as fallout. Air is heavy and if the device was far enough away or a surface or subsurface blast the shockwaves would be lessened in air.
Probably close to a gorillion. Let's knock this off. I'm an OG Anon and have had your back for years. Let's keep it that way and put the knives down.
>Army nuclear artillery detonation
context
Not saying I'm right, just what it look like. It looks like this. That's it.