Largest Non-Nuclear Bomb in world dropped on Afghanistan

Capt'n Midnight

They say that the best weapon is the one you never have to fire. I respectfully disagree. I prefer the weapon you only have to fire once. That's how Dad did it, that's how America does it... and it's worked out pretty well so far. I present to you the newest in Stark Industries' Freedom line. Find an excuse to let one of these off the chain, and I personally guarantee, the bad guys won't even wanna come out of their caves. Ladies and gentlemen, for your consideration... the Jericho.

- Tony Stark

Shortly before being captured by the bad guys were being helped by

someone who was supposed to be on his side - because that would never happen in reality

Pugzilla

Gatling wrote: »

No it's a thermobaric weapon and creates a massive fireball and a huge vacuum sucking the oxygen out of a enclosed space ,more suited to caves and tunnel complexes than a jdam munition

They don't make big fireballs.....MOAB is not a thermobaric weapon, just creates a big shockwave. The FOAB is thermobaric.

You're vastly overestimating how powerful this bomb is. It isn't that much more powerful than the daisy cutter.

Depp

Samaris wrote: »

In this specific case, you appear to be correct; http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/afghanistan-commander-not-trump-approved-massive-bomb-strike-reports-say/article/2620294

However, my explanation of the system, in which I did state he was delegating more power to the generals to make these calls, was roughly accurate rather than "deluded", so you could refrain from being rude about it.

my apologies for being rude, had no intention to offend!

Samaris

At this stage, hell if I know who's bombing who at the moment. Sure, it would be -nice- to think there was a "good side" and a "bad side", but that rarely happens. Multiple sides committing atrocities and civilians getting murdered sounds more usual.

It -may- not be the American-backed rebels, not necessarily because I think they're sweetness and light, but more because they have more to lose by committing atrocities, i.e. America's backing. But right now, who knows.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-syria-bomb-evacuation-20170415-story.html
Leaving aside who did it for the moment, this gives a pretty good picture of what ordinary people in Syria are living with and have lived with for several years.

Noddyholder

Samaris wrote: »

At this stage, hell if I know who's bombing who at the moment. Sure, it would be -nice- to think there was a "good side" and a "bad side", but that rarely happens. Multiple sides committing atrocities and civilians getting murdered sounds more usual.

It -may- not be the American-backed rebels, not necessarily because I think they're sweetness and light, but more because they have more to lose by committing atrocities, i.e. America's backing. But right now, who knows.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-syria-bomb-evacuation-20170415-story.html
Leaving aside who did it for the moment, this gives a pretty good picture of what ordinary people in Syria are living with and have lived with for several years.

But isn't all wars terrible Samaris, There are always the innocents who get caught up in atrocity's & killings that for the most they don't care or know little about.

Its forever being that way & I cant see it ever changing, very unfortuanlly.

4068ac1elhodqr

Looks like it's started a free for all in the 'how big can you go', according to a recent article

Noddyholder

Braylen Rapping Skinhead wrote: »

Looks like it's started a free for all in the 'how big can you go', according to a recent article

It hasn't started nothing, The worlds military superpowers are forever trying to make/develop bigger & better weapons of destruction, The only new thing here is that there actually using/testing them out on real people in real country's.

Atoms for Peace

Millions spent and they still have to push it out the back of a Hercules, the Brits used 10 tonne grand slam bombs in WWII that could be dropped by Lancaster bombers.

Noddyholder

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

Millions spent and they still have to push it out the back of a Hercules, the Brits used 10 tonne grand slam bombs in WWII that could be dropped by Lancaster bombers.

Nice username for this thread

But what's your point ?

Gatling

Pugzilla wrote: »

They don't make big fireballs.....MOAB is not a thermobaric weapon, just creates a big shockwave. The FOAB is thermobaric.
.

Incorrect moab and it's russian​ Variant are both air detonated munitions both create a fireball and vacuum sucking oxygen out of the immediate area ,

Initial blast blows a fireball​ outwards before sucking​ oxygen into the detonation point

Samaris

Noddyholder wrote: »

But isn't all wars terrible Samaris, There are always the innocents who get caught up in atrocity's & killings that for the most they don't care or know little about.

Its forever being that way & I cant see it ever changing, very unfortuanlly.

Oh I know, yeah, but it's one thing looking back on wars and saying how awful they were and it's another thing seeing these things happen now. 100-140 people were stuck in a waystation yesterday hoping they were nearly out of the pressure they've been living under, with their kids, for years now. Now they're dead in a strike that will make no impact on who wins the war. Just more civilian casualties of a war that looks just about unsolvable.

It looks like Syria is heading for partition though. These movements of civilian populations are splitting them based on whether they support the rebels or the government (ish. Whether their towns did anyway). Once that starts happening, it may be best if its partitioned asap. If either the rebels or Assad are destroyed, the places where the "enemy" civilians could be destroyed wholesale by whichever side wins in revenge.

Noddyholder

Assad wont be destroyed as long as Russia & to a smaller extent Iran keep supporting & supplying him, Its just another game of chess in the war world.

Depp

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

Millions spent and they still have to push it out the back of a Hercules, the Brits used 10 tonne grand slam bombs in WWII that could be dropped by Lancaster bombers.

think the reason they use a hercules is it can be dropped from a standard model without modification rather than a specialized bomber. The hercules is already set up for air drop situations all they needed to develop in terms of delivery system is the cradle that falls out the back. Also as far as I know the lancaster bombers that dropped the earthquake bombs required heavy modification.

nacho libre

Yourself isit wrote: »

It's your hypocrisy that's on display. Assad bombs civilian areas to get terrorists = evil. The US does it = good.

He will likely reply, the US does not deliberately target civilians, while Assad has.

I would call out his hypocrisy, and that of his other team America cheerleaders, on the condemnation of Russia liberating Aleppo of Al-nusra, whilst praising the battle of Mosul to liberate the city of ISIS. As comrade mysticmonk put it you can't make an omelette without breaking an egg-
but it depends who is cracking the egg:)
You can also be sure these lads and ladies wouldn't be in as celebratory mood if Russia had dropped this kind of bomb on ISIS. Unlike these hypocrites, who are slaves to their hard right mentality, I applaud who ever it is taking the fight to ISIS and AL nusra.

Gatling

nacho libre wrote: »

He will likely reply,

Will be lol.

I'd leave that nonsense to the low post count regegs who have tried to and got several threads locked with the Team PutinAss leading the way

Samaris

Mod: Gatling, another crack like that and you'll be thread-banned. If you suspect someone's reregged, report them and it'll be looked into. Nacholibre - don't respond for other posters, you're probably incorrect and it derails things.

Atoms for Peace

Noddyholder wrote: »

Nice username for this thread

But what's your point ?

That the importance that seems to be giving to the Moab is being blown out of proportion by the media, if it had been dropped under the Obama administration it would be mere footnote.

Depp

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

That the importance that seems to be giving to the Moab is being blown out of proportion by the media, if it had been dropped under the Obama administration it would be mere footnote.

agree with this...been blown up massively, pun not intended

nacho libre

Gatling wrote: »

Will be lol.

lol indeed. You are very good at recognising the blinkered narrative of those on the other side, but fail to address your own blinkered cheerleading for America. Funny that.

Beyondgone

Seems Vlad joined in the "My Bomb is bigger than yours" contest, dropping a whopper on Hama province in Syria there.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3340626/vladimir-putin-new-bomb-syria-airstrikes-video/amp/

Dublin Pintman

90 ISIS scumbags roasted? Hell yeah!

Gatling

What's kind of gone unnoticed is the russian /Taliban discussions this weekend in Moscow ,
Russia ,Iran, Pakistan,India and China are apparently trying to negotiate between the current Afghanistan government and the Taliban.

http://m.dw.com/en/us-skips-out-on-afghanistan-taliban-conference-in-moscow/a-38426486

Beyondgone

Gatling wrote: »

What's kind of gone unnoticed is the russian /Taliban discussions this weekend in Moscow ,
Russia ,Iran, Pakistan,India and China are apparently trying to negotiate between the current Afghanistan government and the Taliban.

http://m.dw.com/en/us-skips-out-on-afghanistan-taliban-conference-in-moscow/a-38426486

A missed opportunity? Or not what the US wants? They never seem too keen on means to expedite "peace". It always seems to be more conflict they desire. Or is that a mistaken take on that^ ?.

Gatling

Beyondgone wrote: »

A missed opportunity? Or not what the US wants? They never seem too keen on means to expedite "peace". It always seems to be more conflict they desire. Or is that a mistaken take on that^ ?.

Why would russia be negotiating with the Taliban when they are not involved in Afghanistan , surely​ it's Afghanistan should be negotiating with America and Pakistan ,
Been it's Pakistan who supports,supplies and is training​ Taliban fighters through the intelligence services

Beyondgone

Gatling wrote: »

Why would russia be negotiating with the Taliban when they are not involved in Afghanistan , surely​ it's Afghanistan should be negotiating with America and Pakistan ,
Been it's Pakistan who supports,supplies and is training​ Taliban fighters through the intelligence services

You have a point. Care to elaborate, I'm genuinely interested?. Why in your opinion are the Russians involved? Past history as an invader? Just to meddle?

Gatling

Beyondgone wrote: »

You have a point. Care to elaborate, I'm genuinely interested?. Why in your opinion are the Russians involved? Past history as an invader? Just to meddle?

Their trying to show they are big players they made Afghanistan the **** hole it is today ,
Pre Soviet invasion massive fruit exporters​ , modern towns and cities , progressively​ Western , great education and third level Universities , women dressed for the era ,make up ,mini skirts ,pop music was popular ,

The military destroyed the country and infrastructure then got there asses kicked but when they left ,they left thousands of tons of weapons and military equipment , which led to a free for all and allowed the Taliban to rise ,

The stupid part is people blame Obama for Afghanistan

Beyondgone

Gatling wrote: »

Their trying to show they are big players they made Afghanistan the **** hole it is today ,
Pre Soviet invasion massive fruit exporters​ , modern towns and cities , progressively​ Western , great education and third level Universities , women dressed for the era ,make up ,mini skirts ,pop music was popular ,

The military destroyed the country and infrastructure then got there asses kicked but when they left ,they left thousands of tons of weapons and military equipment , which led to a free for all and allowed the Taliban to rise ,

The stupid part is people blame Obama for Afghanistan

You make a point there. I can't disagree with what you say. That bit of history is usually forgotten.

ilkhanid

Gatling wrote: »

Their trying to show they are big players they made Afghanistan the **** hole it is today ,
Pre Soviet invasion massive fruit exporters​ , modern towns and cities , progressively​ Western , great education and third level Universities , women dressed for the era ,make up ,mini skirts ,pop music was popular ,

The military destroyed the country and infrastructure then got there asses kicked but when they left ,they left thousands of tons of weapons and military equipment , which led to a free for all and allowed the Taliban to rise

true enough....to a degree. With time, strangely enough, I've begun to feel a bit of sympathy for the Russian position. The Soviets were probably all right with the situation of Afghanistan in the mid-seventies. But then the Communist party (not called that, but never mind) took over and things started to go to hell in a handbasket.
The Soviets were prisoners of their own Marxist position. As soon as some bunch of eejits claimed they were Marxists,titled themselves the "People's Democratic Party of blah blah" and asked for Soviet help,the Soviets felt impelled to assist them. Of course,they jumped at the chance of broadening the Soviet sphere of influence. But soon they began to find they they were allying with ruthless opportunists full of half-baked Marxist nonsense and who often brought the usual local tribal, family and cultural baggage with them. It wasn't like the late forties when they had tame communists that they trained in Moscow for years until they were carbon copies of Soviet communists (and even that didn't always work out....)
The Afghan PDPA messed up, a civil war was set ablaze. The Soviets turned a blind eye to coup after coup hoping that somebody,anybody they could work with would take control, eventually installing their own man. One was as bad as the other, but they couldn't just wash their hands and walk out.

josip

Mountainous regions have always been difficult/impossible to control from a remote central location.
Psychologically and culturally, people who grow up in the mountains are very independent and capable.
Even here in Ireland with no real mountains to speak of, we consider people from our upland areas to be a law unto themselves.
Some might point out Switzerland as an example of being able to centrally govern a mountainous region, but the cantons have much more autonomy there in many other countries. Also, one element of the Swiss defence plan (National Redoubt) was the permanent mining of 3,000 bridges with explosives in the knowledge that each mountain valley was self sufficient without road access.

Afghanistan is a much larger country with more significant mountains. It always has been, and always will be tribal in mountain areas where neighbouring valleys may be cut off from each other for 4-5 months of each year. With annual temperature swings of up to 70C, the real enemy is the climate and politics are but a gadfly.

PREG1967

josip wrote: »

Mountainous regions have always been difficult/impossible to control from a remote central location.
Psychologically and culturally, people who grow up in the mountains are very independent and capable.
Even here in Ireland with no real mountains to speak of, we consider people from our upland areas to be a law unto themselves.
Some might point out Switzerland as an example of being able to centrally govern a mountainous region, but the cantons have much more autonomy there in many other countries. Also, one element of the Swiss defence plan (National Redoubt) was the permanent mining of 3,000 bridges with explosives in the knowledge that each mountain valley was self sufficient without road access.

Afghanistan is a much larger country with more significant mountains. It always has been, and always will be tribal in mountain areas where neighbouring valleys may be cut off from each other for 4-5 months of each year. With annual temperature swings of up to 70C, the real enemy is the climate and politics are but a gadfly.

but the swiss national redoubt plan has been largely decommissioned