Exotic weapons aim to destroy chemical weapons ???

[RKP5637]

Just posted fyi, interesting article.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/08/29/syria-chemical-weapons-attack/2723251/?csp=eMail_DailyBriefing_41258295

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon has spent more than a decade trying to develop weapons to neutralize chemical weapons, the threat that has the United States poised to launch a missile strike on Syria, according to military planning documents and officials.

The weapons, which would be attached to a bomb dropped from an aircraft, are supposed to neutralize chemical weapons where they are produced or stored. U.S. and western officials accuse Syrian President Bashar Assad and his government of unleashing chemical weapons on civilians.

The Air Force has two Agent Defeat weapons, CrashPAD and the Passive Attack Weapon (PAW), according to Jennifer Cassidy, an Air Force spokeswoman. Instead of explosives, these relatively low-tech weapons use metal rods or fragments to pierce containers holding toxic chemicals, allowing them to escape.

To be effective in densely populated areas, an Agent Defeat bomb must destroy toxic chemicals without dispersing them.

In 2002, the Navy announced that it was developing the weapon and pairing it with bombs designed to penetrate fortified buildings. The Navy described it working this way: after bursting into a storage bunker, the warhead would spray copper plates at high speeds to tear into tanks containing toxic chemicals. Material within the warhead would burn so hot it would vaporize the chemicals that escape. A byproduct that explosion would generate chlorine gas, a disinfectant.

If successful, analysts say, the weapon would represent a significant step in the fight against chemical weapons. But destorying only part of the toxic chemical agents and spreading the rest would be a failure.

[el_bryanto]

1. I think exotic weapons do 2d4 damage while chemical weapons do 1d12. nt

[Javaman]

2. but you have to roll for crit hit with your 20.

[Oakenshield]

3. 10 bucks says....

10 bucks says these exotic weapons leave some nasty fallout of their own. What would be the best course of action then? Fuck if I know. Disarm or otherwise get rid of Assad and you still get yourself a bunch of violent factions fighting for control of the country. There's no happy ending to be found here folks.

[RC]

4. Yeah there is.

Humanitarian aid. Food, medical supplies, shelter.
Stop setting up scenarios where we then have a excuse, no matter how flimsy, to bomb the shit out people in other counties.

[Oakenshield]

5. Whoah slow down.

I was arguing nothing good would come from bombing them. I made no mention of humanitarian aid. I'm all for that.

[RC]

6. Suggestions for helping, instead of killing then in whatever way, seems to be in short supply.

Not knocking you or your post. But we as a country, have a punishment mindset. Doing empathy based responses seems to be beyond so many people. We as a country just don't seem to care that we cause most of the worlds strife.

[RKP5637]

7. We have a paradigm in this country that, as you said, "a punishment mindset." Of course,

the US is not alone in that, humans seem to generally seek it as a solution, and it is so regressive and primitive ... somehow, the world needs to reverse that paradigm. I have no idea how that will happen, but the present model is so destructive and in the big picture will probably do us all in, eventually.

And, much of it is fueled for some sectors as war is big $$$$ to those on the take.