Mogadishu Delta Sniper wpns...something to ponder - Page 3

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Mogadishu Delta Sniper wpns...something to ponder (Page 3 of 3)

Posted: 7/24/2002 7:46:35 AM EDT

[#1]

Quoted:

..Several M728 Combat Engineer Vehicles were used.
The CEV's mount a 165mm main gun, have a large "A" frame boom mounted to the turret along with a bull dozer blade mounted to the front of the hull.
They are based on the M60 tank.

Show a pic!

Posted: 7/24/2002 8:38:52 AM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Uh, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the feds pump the building FULL of flammable CS? FOR HOURS? Sems to me a wooden structure, punctured at strategic points by that injection nozzle, full of flammable CS, on a breezy day....

I had no idea that CS was flammable. None of my military training said anything about CS being flammable in and of itself.

My SWAT gas-gun training also failed to inform me that CS was flammable. It seems that would be very dangerous to shoot a CS round into a structure, to be followed by another one ingniting the gas from the first one.

(friendly sarcasm intended)hr

I've had some CS training as well, but I never trained to mount a nozzle on an APC and shoot it into a building for 4 hours. And I didn't say CS was flammable "in and of itself," I said the way they deployed it was flammable. I don't know if the CS is flammable or whether it is another ingredient in the type used that day. As to CS itself, it IS flammable:

www.waco93.com/detcs.pdf

Flashpoint is 197 degrees.

According to what I've read, the method of insertion and the volume made it EXTREMELY flammable.

I SAW the Congressional hearings, both as they occurred and on the Waco tape, where several CS experts testified as to how flammable it is inside a structure. Fire cheifs, CS specialists, etc. Remember, they pumped it in for several hours, we're not talking a couple ferrets here.

Quote from Janet Reno seems to belie your position:

"JANET RENO (US Attorney General)
I am very, very troubled by the information I received this week
suggesting that pyrotechnic devices may have been used in the early
morning hours of April the 19th, 1993 at Waco."

-Taken from the Waco official site. Why would she care if it's not flammable.

It's so flammable when used this way that the feds initially denied using the 651 rounds, that is until somebody found one there.

In fact, you're the FIRST person I've ever heard say it's not flammable, why didn't the feds think of that during the hearings?

The deployment method being incendiary is the flammable part, if CS itself was flammable then deploying it the incindiary method would be like igniting a bottle propane, the gas would consume itself having been ignited by the propellant.

Posted: 7/24/2002 8:39:06 AM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:

I had friends in the Waco incident. Several were shot. Some killed. They are fathers, brothers, and husbands. They are and were good agents.

Hopefully, few of us blame individual agents for either Ruby Ridge or Waco - I know I do not.

However, in both incidents the FBI, etc., failed to 'manage' the situation.

No blame was assessed, in fact, I believe Potts (sp?) was promoted for his 'outstanding' leadership.
---------------------------------------------
Well I just lied and I'm gonna correct it now. I do blame the shooter and spotter at Ruby Ridge for murdering Mr. Weaver's wife. Only by the grace of God did he not kill both her and the infant she was holding.
-----------------------------------------------

I believe the person in charge of the FBI's HRT was the same person at both Ruby Ridge and Waco.

Posted: 7/24/2002 9:27:04 AM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Uh, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the feds pump the building FULL of flammable CS? FOR HOURS? Sems to me a wooden structure, punctured at strategic points by that injection nozzle, full of flammable CS, on a breezy day....

I had no idea that CS was flammable. None of my military training said anything about CS being flammable in and of itself.

My SWAT gas-gun training also failed to inform me that CS was flammable. It seems that would be very dangerous to shoot a CS round into a structure, to be followed by another one ingniting the gas from the first one.

(friendly sarcasm intended)

I've had some CS training as well, but I never trained to mount a nozzle on an APC and shoot it into a building for 4 hours. And I didn't say CS was flammable "in and of itself," I said the way they deployed it was flammable. I don't know if the CS is flammable or whether it is another ingredient in the type used that day. As to CS itself, it IS flammable:

www.waco93.com/detcs.pdf

Flashpoint is 197 degrees.

According to what I've read, the method of insertion and the volume made it EXTREMELY flammable.

I SAW the Congressional hearings, both as they occurred and on the Waco tape, where several CS experts testified as to how flammable it is inside a structure. Fire cheifs, CS specialists, etc. Remember, they pumped it in for several hours, we're not talking a couple ferrets here.

Quote from Janet Reno seems to belie your position:

"JANET RENO (US Attorney General)
I am very, very troubled by the information I received this week
suggesting that pyrotechnic devices may have been used in the early
morning hours of April the 19th, 1993 at Waco."

-Taken from the Waco official site. Why would she care if it's not flammable.

It's so flammable when used this way that the feds initially denied using the 651 rounds, that is until somebody found one there.

In fact, you're the FIRST person I've ever heard say it's not flammable, why didn't the feds think of that during the hearings?

The deployment method being incendiary is the flammable part, if CS itself was flammable then deploying it the incindiary method would be like igniting a bottle propane, the gas would consume itself having been ignited by the propellant.

So we AGREE that the method of deployment was flammable?

Lot of wasted cyberspace walking in THAT circle.

Posted: 7/24/2002 11:55:31 AM EDT

[#5]

I'm sorry, I never meant to insinuate that an "incendiary" deployment device did no emit large amounts of heat. My point was that CS is not flammable. If you mix CS and gasoline, that is flammable.

Your point should then be that the government's incendiary CS deployment devices ignited the gasoline that was poured all over the wooden structure.

Posted: 7/24/2002 12:27:25 PM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
I'm sorry, I never meant to insinuate that an "incendiary" deployment device did no emit large amounts of heat. My point was that CS is not flammable. If you mix CS and gasoline, that is flammable.

Your point should then be that the government's incendiary CS deployment devices ignited the gasoline that was poured all over the wooden structure.

No, that should NOT be my point. I am aware of no evidence of any accellerant except the CS propellant.

I'd be happy to review any link to any source that claims there was gas poured anywhere in the structure.

From the top: Feds injected a highly flammable mixture containing CS for several hours, through strategically punched holes in the wooden structure. They did this knowing children were present and knowing that there is no acceptable way to fit a child with a mask to filter out the CS.

INCENDIARY grenade rounds were found at the location, AFTER the feds claimed that they did not and would not use such rounds due to the fire risk.

Even Reno admitted their use.

Where do you get that the Davidians poured gasoline anywhere?

Posted: 7/24/2002 12:50:48 PM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
Where do you get that the Davidians poured gasoline anywhere?

I'll have the reference tomorrow, can't get to it right now. It's a book documenting the entire investigation of the whole abortional operation.

Everyone in that compound had the opportunity to leave safely. The only "Baby Killers" present were the Davidians who placed their children in harm's way in the first place.

I'm not defending anyone during that operation...both sides could have handled it different, however, the evidence does NOT show "Jack Booted Thugs" in "Black Helicopters" attacked and viciously/purposefully, burned at the stake, innocent civilians executing their God-given rights.

Posted: 7/24/2002 1:02:55 PM EDT

[#8]

Hold on there, SCARY.

I asked for a reference, and you say you will provide one. If I'm one thing, it's open minded. I will read it and report on my thoughts. I have changed my mind on this thing once already.

But I won't be brushed aside with the straw man argument "black helicoptors" et al.

THere is pretty compelling evidence on the WACO tape that there was at the very least GROSS negligence on the part of the feds in the fire. I know the tape had an agenda, and I know what the agenda was, but there is still very compelling stuff on it.

I also agree that the Davidians COULD have come out of their own accord. THey told the negotiators they were afraid to do so, but I don't know if they were afraid or forestalling the inevitable.

I disagree about your characterization of only one side being baby killers.

CS specialist types testified in front of congress and said that the concentrations they were pouring in there would be lethal to kids, and there are no masks made to fit kids. THat sounds like baby killing, or close to it.

A fed said something like "we thought they'd come out rather than subject their kids to that."

That disgusts me. He's saying "we INTENTIONALLY harmed children because their parents wouldn't do what we wanted." Show me where that is contained in the constitution.

Tell you what, I'll read your book if you watch that tape, then we'll start out own thread and discuss what we think, or we can do it by email.

In fact, if I can find the tape, I'll trade you for the book until we're both done.

I'm a very law and order pro police guy, military brat, military college, there's no rebel/antiestablishment in me, but something STINKS about this.

Posted: 7/24/2002 1:19:56 PM EDT

[#9]

Just how did this go from Black Hawk Down to what happened in Waco? Kind of a jump there.

Posted: 7/24/2002 1:50:25 PM EDT

[#10]

This statement is incorrect in that they did not pump the building full of flammable gas (CS is not a flammable gas, propane is a flammable gas). Some of the delivery devices were incendiary, and may have caught the wooden structure on fire...

...and yes, you do sound like (in this statement)you believe federal agents purposefully set the building on fire to kill the occupants...

...which puts you pretty close to the "black helicopter crowd"

You're right, something stinks, but it is not the intentional murder of innocent civilians.

I've seen a couple videos on Waco, maybe even the one to which you are referring.

Posted: 7/24/2002 1:57:08 PM EDT

[#11]

The gas injected by the feds in the concentration it was injected is widely known to be highly flammable. And was testified to be such by feds before Congress.

Yes the feds knew exactly what they were doing. Tried to lie and cover it up. And had their cover blown when the pyrotechnic was found.

Posted: 7/24/2002 2:08:31 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
The gas injected by the feds in the concentration it was injected is widely known to be highly flammable. And was testified to be such by feds before Congress.

Yes the feds knew exactly what they were doing. Tried to lie and cover it up. And had their cover blown when the pyrotechnic was found.

If this is true then I stand corrected and humbly ask that you all forgive my strong stance on the subject.

I apologize and will research this and correct my view.

Posted: 7/24/2002 2:08:59 PM EDT

[#13]

so yeah, back to the topic when did red dot sights readily become available for military use? Just to recap what Sixgun357 said earlier.

Posted: 7/24/2002 2:09:54 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:

This statement is incorrect in that they did not pump the building full of flammable gas (CS is not a flammable gas, propane is a flammable gas). Some of the delivery devices were incendiary, and may have caught the wooden structure on fire...

...and yes, you do sound like (in this statement)you believe federal agents purposefully set the building on fire to kill the occupants...

...which puts you pretty close to the "black helicopter crowd"

You're right, something stinks, but it is not the intentional murder of innocent civilians.

I've seen a couple videos on Waco, maybe even the one to which you are referring.

I guess we DON'T agree.

The MIXTURE of CS and whatever propellant, at the concentrations used, WAS FLAMMABLE.

I DON'T mean the CS rounds fired.

They pumped a flammable mixture through a nozzle on that battlefield engineer vehicle for several hours.

Several fire authorities, as well as feds, admitted that THE MIXTURE was flammable.

THEN they fired incendiary CS rounds INTO the wooden structure full of the flammable mixture.

There's NOTHING black helicopter about this belief, much of it comes from ME seeing testimony of feds before congress.

Posted: 7/24/2002 2:26:21 PM EDT

[#15]

OK, but if I were going to blow up a building full of children, I would use a fuel/air mixture explosive device.

It's pretty clumsy to try and us CS to burn down a building. There are much better ways available. Even napalm dropped from a black helicopter would have been a more efficient destruction method.

Maybe that's why I'm not in the FBI.

Posted: 7/24/2002 2:29:44 PM EDT

[#16]

I still want to hear about the opposing viewpoint, we're all frineds here, and like I said, I changed my mind once already on this deal.

Posted: 7/24/2002 3:18:40 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
so yeah, back to the topic when did red dot sights readily become available for military use? Just to recap what Sixgun357 said earlier.

Yeah, Black Hawk Down, Somalia, remember?
Mike Durants Crash Site? Delta boys suicide mission?
Not Waco. Start a new thread for that.

Posted: 7/24/2002 3:38:31 PM EDT

[#18]

"CS Gas" is not actually a gas. It is a very fine powder that is usually suspended in an inert gas in order to facilitate delivery.

I don't know if you ever did this experiment in 6th grade science class, but you can take just about any finely-ground material (we used flour or fine sawdust) and squirt it at a flame from a squeeze bottle and you'll get a "flamethrower" type flame, similar to spraying hairspray into a flame.

Why does this happen?

It happens because the particles are small, and the concentration is high, but the surface area (and exposure to oxygen) is also high. That allows the flour/sawdust/whatever to burn very rapidly and very hot. You have probably heard of grain elevators and silos having spontaneous fires/explosions. This occurs when the air in the structure is filled with fine particles and a spark or flame is introduced into the environment.

This is exactly what happened with the CS gas. The powder, suspended in the air at such a high concentration, was flamable, not because of the specific properties of the compound that makes up CS, but because of the small particles being suspended in the air at such high concentrations.

And to help things along, vent holes were added to the structure by the feds to guarentee that there would be plenty of oxygen to feed the flames once they got going.

Firing the pyrotechic grenades into the building (AFTER filling it with CS from the APC) was the likely ignitor of the fire, but the situation was set up such that many other things could have caused the initial ignition. It was well known by the agents at the site that the Davidians were using propane lanterns for light because the Feds had cut off all utility services from the church.

It should also be noted that the Feds did not allow the Fire Department to approach the building for several hours, until after it was thoroughly engulfed in flames, and there was no hope of containing the fire.

All of the above was information that came directly from the congressional hearings. None of it is in dispute. Really, the ONLY thing that is disputed is the actual ignition source of the fire.

-Troy

Posted: 7/24/2002 5:23:19 PM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
Quoted:

..Several M728 Combat Engineer Vehicles were used.
The CEV's mount a 165mm main gun, have a large "A" frame boom mounted to the turret along with a bull dozer blade mounted to the front of the hull.
They are based on the M60 tank.

Show a pic!

Valkyre, After digging up a few pics on line I see not only the CEV's but also an M1 Abrams, M88 recovery vehicle along with the Bradleys.
Looking at the pics makes it hard to beleive that this was used on US citizens reguardless what they may or may not have done.

Posted: 7/24/2002 5:40:14 PM EDT

[#20]

Never again.

Posted: 7/24/2002 6:32:53 PM EDT

[#21]

I dunno, Arock.

I am currently reading "Red Dragon Rising." The Clinton/Gore folks were awfully chummy with a bunch of communist murderers.

Six out of Seven of the chinese generals that were directly involved in the wholesale slaughter of civilians in the Tiananamen Square incident were invited to the White house to visit with the US president.

Maybe they were just comparing notes on how to best quell civil disobedience?

Afterall, the PLA burned the bodies of the protestors to destroy evidence, as did the fire at Waco...

Both the Chinese and the Clinton/Gore administrations used main battle tanks against its unarmed civilians...

I don't think we can use the phrase "Never Again"

I believe we are still on the slippery slope. Many things from the Bush Administration make me lose sleep at night.

Posted: 7/24/2002 7:00:26 PM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:
I dunno, Arock.

I believe we are still on the slippery slope. Many things from the Bush Administration make me lose sleep at night.

YMMV and this ain't AssWeb but speaking for myself repeal of Possee Comitatus is not going to be acceptable.

I have enough problem with the fed gov promoting the militarization of every podunk PD.

The other approach of making our armed forces into police is just as bad if not worse.

I worked hard for W. He is disappointing me right now by sounding too much like his father who I USED to respect highly.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Mogadishu Delta Sniper wpns...something to ponder (Page 3 of 3)

Armory » General Firearm Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us