Interesting choice if true.

It's as energetic as it is exothermic. Set it off, it just goes whoosh.

Whatever they used, it burned up the drone pretty efficiently, the drone itself setting fire to the last bit of forest.

Whatever they used, it was probably better for the Russians than Agent Orang was for anybody who got that shit dropped on them.

Thermite is just aluminum and iron oxide reacting to produce iron, aluminum oxide (which is powder in form) and a heck of a lot of heat.

Used for anti-tank and anti-bunker warfare, easy to produce (I made thermite in 10th grade, to everybody's horror--I mean, aluminum filings, iron oxide, and a magnesium strip look harmless enough ... until they eat through a concrete sidewalk).

But also limited because thermite is like flinging a very bad rock instead of a haze that spreads and kills slowly. Fire you can run away from because you can see it. War gas ... Even if you can see it when concentrated, at low concentrations it's still nasty.

Thermite is far more analogous to napalm than it is to poison gasses.
In fact, because it has a massive surface to mass ratio, the heat actually dissipates fairly quickly. Napalm burns far more gradually building localized heat to the point of superheated. In WWII, at the Pont of the napalm drops, troops saw & heard trees explode from superheated steam forming in the wood.
Now, the fact that it can start those trees on fire is a different matter, and a forest fire is a forest fire.
But, if that is dropped to force covered troops out into the open, it's far less pernicious than gas. They at least have some chance to get out before the whole forest lights up. With gas, they'd all just die in those woods

No comparison, such gases are far worse

The thermite is more akin to white phosphorus , but produces less smoke directly

to gas attacks?

Sorry I guess we're done for the evening

Have a great evening comparing how certain weapons work in certain countries

Incendiaries as weapons go back as far as war, and nearly as far as fire.