Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
DarkHunter

Aramco facilities on fire in Saudi Arabia

384 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Manwon Lender
27 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Thanks for that @toast

Here's one thing that I don't understand. What kind of weapon has the kinetic energy to punch those holes in the buildings, and yet does NOT have sufficient explosives to then rupture the building ? The mushrooms look undamaged. You would have thought that even a relatively small explosive charge, detonated INSIDE the structure, would "pop" the structure like a balloon ? 

Indeed, based purely on these photographs, it seems that the facility was hardly damaged at all ? As I mentioned in a previous post, I am having a real hard time correlating the (light) damage in these photographs, with the raging firestorm in the various video's. 

I dunno folks.... I'm not a forensic engineer or anything.. but... it just looks.... odd ? 

I also looked at those photos, it almost looks like the projectiles hit their target but didn't explode. If they had those mushroom shaped tanks would have been destroyed. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
3 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

I also looked at those photos, it almost looks like the projectiles hit their target but didn't explode. If they had those mushroom shaped tanks would have been destroyed. 

I agree. And here's ANOTHER thing.. those tanks don't look particularly fragile. Whatever hit them had to have been very heavy, travelling very fast, and have a pointed cylindrical shape. Like an artillery shell.  I can't imagine a "drone".. in the sense of the domestic quad-copter type things.. doing that type of damage ? They would have disintegrated on hitting the dome. They might have exploded, but they would NOT have produced those almost perfect circular holes. 

There are rumours flooding the Internet that an unexploded cruise missile was discovered. If so, this could be a smoking gun ? 

Edited by RoofGardener

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
2 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

I agree. And here's ANOTHER thing.. those tanks don't look particularly fragile. Whatever hit them had to have been very heavy, travelling very fast, and have a pointed cylindrical shape. Like a cruise missile, for example. I can't imagine a "drone".. in the sense of the domestic quad-copter type things.. doing that type of damage ? They would have disintegrated on hitting the dome. They might have exploded, but they would NOT have produced those almost perfect circular holes. 

There are rumours flooding the Internet that an unexploded cruise missile was discovered. If so, this could be a smoking gun ? 

I totally I agree the damage on those tanks was done by a missile. Drones would have left a different impact mark on those tanks. I also wonder what was in those tanks, because it would seem that if they where full the heat from the missile penetration would have set the tanks on fire, they may have empty.  I don't know about claims on the internet, but CNN reported this morning that one of the cruise missile missed its target, didn't explode and landed pretty much intact. You could most likely check it out on CNN online.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
50 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Thanks for that @toast

Here's one thing that I don't understand. What kind of weapon has the kinetic energy to punch those holes in the buildings, and yet does NOT have sufficient explosives to then rupture the building ? The mushrooms look undamaged. You would have thought that even a relatively small explosive charge, detonated INSIDE the structure, would "pop" the structure like a balloon ? 

Indeed, based purely on these photographs, it seems that the facility was hardly damaged at all ? As I mentioned in a previous post, I am having a real hard time correlating the (light) damage in these photographs, with the raging firestorm in the various video's. 

I dunno folks.... I'm not a forensic engineer or anything.. but... it just looks.... odd ? 

I was wondering about the mushrooms as well and tried to figure out what kind of facilites these are, but no results so far. I think, because of the spherical shape, these units are to store gas and not fluids. Thus, its my guess that these units were attacked with kinetic penetrators, because of the very small punctiation marks, but no explosion occured because the containers were empty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
29 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

I totally I agree the damage on those tanks was done by a missile. Drones would have left a different impact mark on those tanks. I also wonder what was in those tanks, because it would seem that if they where full the heat from the missile penetration would have set the tanks on fire, they may have empty.  I don't know about claims on the internet, but CNN reported this morning that one of the cruise missile missed its target, didn't explode and landed pretty much intact. You could most likely check it out on CNN online.

Hmm.. depends on what was in them I guess ? If it was water, then I could perhaps understand it. But if it was oil distillate vapours, (from an "empty" tank) then I would expect them to have blown up spectacularly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
13 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Hmm.. depends on what was in them I guess ? If it was water, then I could perhaps understand it. But if it was oil distillate vapours, (from an "empty" tank) then I would expect them to have blown up spectacularly. 

The tanks that looked like doomed or egg shaped were for the storage liquidised gas, but again I don't know if they were full or empty. 

Heres a link where I found out what type of tanks they were.

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/09/damage-at-saudi-oil-plant-points-to-well-targeted-swarm-attack.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
4 hours ago, DarkHunter said:

America is claiming to have satelite photos of the launch site and of Iran preparing for the attack, debris of the cruise missiles and drones have been recovered, and if rumors are correct Saudi Arabia found one cruise missile that malfunctioned and did not detonate so its largely intact.  While evidence can be fabricated there comes a point where there is just too much evidence to deny what happened.

There is never too much evidence to convince a person who has chosen to believe their own narrative. We have a few of them here.  I don't waste my time with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome

The evidence being Saudi Arabia, bastion of civil rights and democracy in the middle east, has probably shown Acting President Pompeo (President Bolton sadly currently being no more, for the time being at least) a picture on instagram of a bit of what it says is a missile with "MADE IN IRAN" stamped on it, i 'spect. Can you remind us why you're so eager to go to war on behalf of Saudi Arabia? Is it because it's so well known to be a beacon of human rights and democracy? 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
22 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

The tanks that looked like doomed or egg shaped were for the storage liquidised gas, but again I don't know if they were full or empty. 

Heres a link where I found out what type of tanks they were.

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/09/damage-at-saudi-oil-plant-points-to-well-targeted-swarm-attack.html

Most interesting. Thanks for that link, @Manwon Lender

The more I hear about this event, the more confusing it becomes. 

The holes in those dome/egg buildings looks more like an artillery shell. But no artillery gun could have hit with that level of consistency from one building to the next. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
9 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Most interesting. Thanks for that link, @Manwon Lender

The more I hear about this event, the more confusing it becomes. 

The holes in those dome/egg buildings looks more like an artillery shell. But no artillery gun could have hit with that level of consistency from one building to the next. 

I agree I also thought they looked like they hit by Artillery, but that would have blown the hell out of those tanks. It almost looks like a missile may have hit one of the end tanks and didn't explode and just went through that tank and hit the next one and just kept going. Tanks fire a round called a sabot round, these rounds don't explode, they use kinetic energy to burn through tank armor and then bounce around inside the tank set off the tanks ammunition. Now if these rounds are fired at something like the tanks from oil field they would just go clear through and continue on. The Sabot rounds used by the US are made from Depleted  Uranium, that stuff will penitrate any known armor. 

Getting back to the Artillery rounds, there is a round that could cover the distance to the oil field. It is called a RAP round, or a Rocket Asisted Projectile, these are the same type or round used by Artillery to deploy a battle field tactical nuclear weapon. I don't think they used Artillery but, if they would have they have used a RAP Round. I use train people in the use of what we called Special Weapons before I retired from the Army.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
2 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

I agree I also thought they looked like they hit by Artillery, but that would have blown the hell out of those tanks. It almost looks like a missile may have hit one of the end tanks and didn't explode and just went through that tank and hit the next one and just kept going. .....

Interesting theory @Manwon Lender. I don't that could have happened in this particular case, as the holes are not lined up like that ! Still, who knows ? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
7 hours ago, Dumbledore the Awesome said:

The evidence being Saudi Arabia, bastion of civil rights and democracy in the middle east, has probably shown Acting President Pompeo (President Bolton sadly currently being no more, for the time being at least) a picture on instagram of a bit of what it says is a missile with "MADE IN IRAN" stamped on it, i 'spect. Can you remind us why you're so eager to go to war on behalf of Saudi Arabia? Is it because it's so well known to be a beacon of human rights and democracy? 

As I said, no amount of evidence will change the mind of someone who insists that they understand things so well their opinions can't be changed.  It doesn't matter to me what they decide to do, actually.  If this is some kind of FF then why would Yemen claim the attack?  Yemen does not domestically produce weapons capable of this kind of attack and their supplier is Iran.  I believe that Iran is at the breaking point and will attack again if they don't get sanctions relief.  I'll be looking forward to your next round of apologies for their behavior, comrade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast

Mr. Turki Al Malaki, spokesperson of the Saudi Arabia Ministry of Deference, press conference vid. Debris of weapon systems displayed from 15:10 on.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter

Kuwait has put its armed forces on the highest level of combat readiness, the Houthis are threatening the UAE saying they have dozens of targets selected within the UAE and are prepared to attack them, and the press conference Pompeo was supposed to give today from Saudi Arabia got canceled.

Also since it has been talked about a good bit in this thread, here is a picture of one of the damaged spherical LNG storage containers.  As can be seen the damage is a lot more extensive then it appears from satellite images.

EEwprFNXYAEw6V4.jpeg

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
2 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

the Houthis are threatening the UAE saying they have dozens of targets selected within the UAE and are prepared to attack them

Good for them!

Honestly everyone is saying they dont have the technical capability to pull off this attack but thats kind of simplistic thinking. Think Afghanistan in the 1980's.

If I were a world power currently outside the US's favor I would be pouring money and plausibly deniable mercenaries into Yemen to help the Houthis.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
8 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

The tanks that looked like doomed or egg shaped were for the storage liquidised gas, but again I don't know if they were full or empty. 

Heres a link where I found out what type of tanks they were.

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/09/damage-at-saudi-oil-plant-points-to-well-targeted-swarm-attack.html

This comment from your link is ringing a little too true ....IDK

Quote

"Big Bad Iran" - Good timing for Bibi!

What luck for Bibi this would happen just days before he faces an election on a knife-edge!

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77

So basically Iran did it, even if they didnt, Iran did it :rolleyes:

Quote

Pompeo, speaking to reporters off-camera before landing in Jeddah, said: "This was an Iranian attack. It’s not the case that you can subcontract out the devastation of 5% of the world’s global energy supply and think that you can absolve yourself from responsibility. Were it the case that the Houthis’ fraudulent claim was accurate, were that true — it’s not, but were that true, it doesn’t change the fingerprints of the Ayatollah as having put at risk the global energy supply."

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
crookedspiral
13 hours ago, DarkHunter said:

America is claiming to have satelite photos of the launch site and of Iran preparing for the attack, debris of the cruise missiles and drones have been recovered, and if rumors are correct Saudi Arabia found one cruise missile that malfunctioned and did not detonate so its largely intact.  While evidence can be fabricated there comes a point where there is just too much evidence to deny what happened.

And Saddam Hussein had massive stockpiles of WMDs.

Edited by crookedspiral
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome

 

1 hour ago, Farmer77 said:

So basically Iran did it, even if they didnt, Iran did it :rolleyes:

 

he's learning the art of incoherence from the best, and there's none better at it than his master. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter
53 minutes ago, crookedspiral said:

And Saddam Hussein had massive stockpiles of WMDs.

And Saddam Hussein did everything in his power to make it look like he did

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome

* I see that Russia's Putin, with his fine grasp of the subtle art of taking the p***, has suggested to the Saudis that they might be interested in buying some of the latest Russian defense systems, since the Saudis' current systems don't seem to be terribly up to the job :P 

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
10 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Interesting theory @Manwon Lender. I don't that could have happened in this particular case, as the holes are not lined up like that ! Still, who knows ? 

I agree, I was just making a point and adding some addition information.

Edited by Manwon Lender

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then

For the stooges here that are so convinced that Iran did not do this, let's wait awhile and see if they "don't do it" again, soon.  Shall we?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
13 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Interesting theory @Manwon Lender. I don't that could have happened in this particular case, as the holes are not lined up like that ! Still, who knows ? 

Watched the news this morning Saudi Arabia, is saying that they don't want war. They also asked the US not to get involved. But President Trump is already talking about planing military action. Why would the US jump in if Saudi Arabia isn't asking for help?

Edited by Manwon Lender
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Black Red Devil
48 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

Watched the news this morning Saudi Arabia, is saying that they don't want war. They also asked the US not to get involved. But President Trump is already talking about planing military action. Why would the US jump in if Saudi Arabia isn't asking for help?

Because there are enough fools in America that will follow their 'dear leader' and his politics blindly no matter what he is, says or what his hidden agendas are.  Just read all the comments from his followers here on UM, those courageous armchair war hawk heroes and you get the idea.  Considering the minimum risk of these 'heroes' being affected by the devastation in a conflict where the US is overwhelmingly superior and add to that none of them would be 'suiting up' to go into battle while eating their popcorn and enjoying the spectacle from the sidelines it just shows you the disgusting mindset and lust for blood these people have.  Unsurprisingly, they all belong to the one stream, right wing nationalists and conservative fascists.

Until now, there is no evidence Iran was responsible for the attack, only rhetoric from the usual culprits with most likely fabricated evidence and all this with full the approval from their partners in crime such as Israel and blessings by servile Govts in Australia, the UK and the West  In the end, there won't be any undeniable evidence or war, just more muscle flexing rhetoric which suits Trump and Netanyahu in the polls and more sanctions on Iran.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.