WAR BLOG: A blog that primarily deals with war. Filled with whiny blow hards who are fixated on their stubborn ideas and conspiracy theories. For example, there are countless hours pissed away by conspiracy theorists who think the WTC towers were demolished by bombs planted by the government. These armchair engineers write endlessly about how the physics of the collapse was impossible, how the temperature wasn’t hot enough to melt steel, and how the planes were carrying missiles. Of course, the one thing they don’t postulate is a REASON.
My personal favorite warblog was one that had a flash animation with people who were quoted as saying “it didn’t sound like a plane to me… it sounded like a missile.” Thank you Joe Nobody for giving me your expert opinion on what missile sounds like, because gas station superintendents are usually the best people to ask about the sonic signature of ballistic missile thrust.
u see Reza Pehlwi.. this is why u shouldn't buy all that crap floating around as it's intentionally disseminated for the explicit purpose of targeting later .. pulling a strawman is the oldest trick in the book and those who have something to hide will always rely on it to cover their dirty work..
as for you utd.. let's talk REASON.
why do u think it wasn't controlled demolition.. i've seen them do it and it looked pretty effin close to how the towers fell.. let's hear your pseudo scientific conspiracy theories of jet fuel melting steel..
oh and let's do that without pulling in the strawman of "missile hit Pentagon/Towers" shall we?
come again? steel 'weakens'? .. and please tell us the 'weakening' temperature for steel.. must be documented somewhere..
so the steel on the 80+ levels 'weakened' the same amount at exactly the same time as the bottom few floors and above? from what? the 'raging inferno' was only limited to a couple of floors and that too had died down to just a simmering heat.
not to mention it is a historical anomaly of it's own kind..
here r the wtc towers.. burned only for one hour before they 'collapsed'
[thumb=H]wtc_fires8022_2441138.JPG[/thumb]
Compare that with another steel structure under a much larger and intense fire for 10+ hours and it's still standing!!
PA, was the fire in Madrid feed by massive amount of jet fuel? The WTC was and that in turn caused the temperature of the fire to reach 1,300-1,400 degrees F. well above the average temperature of a normal fire. Steel loses over half it's strength at 1,200 F. The impact of the jets would effect those floors it hit directly causing them to sustain the most damage and highest heat levels thus causing these floors to collapse to the floors below which in returned collapsed to the floors below due to the additional weight and then collapsed to the floor below it and so forth all in accelerated fashion which in turn caused the exterior walls to buckle.
It’s kind of like ramming facts into your conspiracy theories, they cause the conspiracies to crash down upon themselves.
also note that there were no ‘massive amounts’ of jet fuel to feed the fire.. the planes had been airborne and had spent some fuel.. the rest would obviously not stay concentratd in one place after the impact.. u can see the photos and the intensity of the fires.. i tend to agree with the NIST engineers that fuel was a contributory factor to the fire for the first 10 minutes maybe..
i’ve seen photos of people trapped on the same floors where u claim fires raged hot enough to ‘weaken’ steel.. so let’s hear another one please
The final report talks how the high temperatures weaken the structure (especially the parts that were not insulated, which was damaged on certain floors due to the impact of the jets) causing the floors to sag and columns to buckle which in turn caused the collapse.
Why are those who see a different picture and present it to the world seen as conspiracy theorists? Why are those that seek to unravel every loose end to find the truth as traitors or unpatriotic?
In the rush to war, all those seeking alternate answers were brushed aside as conspiracy theorists…
If so, then what was the fact behind the Afghanistan and Iraq war?
Fact is, there was no fact, just conspiracies…And those wishing to unearth the facts were labelled conspiracy theorists…:wah:
Those two wars are very different from one another and should not be bundled together. The evidence put forth justified the war in Afghanistan. After multiple embassy bombings, the Cole bombing, the attack on the Pentagon, the attacks on NYC, and the crash in Pennsylvania the U.S. had a obligation to it’s citizens to respond against those who supported those attacks.
