Just wondering, why didn't they use an implosion instead of just toppling it? Seems like they could have saved time and money by having a larger, but smaller pile of debree.
The only reasons why I can think they didn't do it was
A: Just something to do(morale, ect)
B: It was unsafe to plant explosions in the upper part of the building, which is likely the reason.
Just wondering, why didn't they use an implosion instead of just toppling it? Seems like they could have saved time and money by having a larger, but smaller pile of debree.
The only reasons why I can think they didn't do it was
A: Just something to do(morale, ect)
B: It was unsafe to plant explosions in the upper part of the building, which is likely the reason.
windexglow 4 years ago
jihad!
otik123 4 years ago
Can't fire take down a building?? Why didn't they just light a fire in it?
Eriksz 4 years ago
dude, its concrete
FireflyPDP 4 years ago
Dude LOL
economistBR 4 years ago 3
i love when huge things fall over. they make great sounds.
mindisarazorblade 4 years ago 5
like rosie odonaled falling off the view. pow
FireflyPDP 4 years ago 3
lmao good for them man =]
HoblinGoblin 4 years ago
YEA BOI
LAZADALEDGEND 5 years ago
The workers are cheering...please liberals stfu
wigglesdabum 5 years ago
great, finally. I thought this already been rebuilt.
zoromaskcoming 5 years ago