Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Largest Non-Nuclear Bomb in world dropped on Afghanistan

Options
1…78101213…18

Comments

  • Options
    #272
    BorneTobyWilde
    Registered Users Posts: 35,872 ✭✭✭✭BorneTobyWilde


    Awwww


  • Options
    #273
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,974 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Gatling wrote: »
    America​ used smaller Daisy cutters in Vietnam bombs and russia dropped numerous of their version in Grozny and other Chechnya cities ,
    The Americans were using similar weapons in Afghanistan back in 2001, with the 15,000 pound BLU-82 which only cost $27,000 each vs $16 million for the MOAB
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/nov/07/afghanistan.terrorism6


    The economics are insane. A million dollar bill weigh one tonne. This bomb cost more than it's weight in dollar bills. So this is a PR stunt. No new capability. Just more of the same.


  • Options
    #274
    TheQuietFella
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,857 ✭✭✭TheQuietFella


    Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »
    http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/us-drops-largest-nonnuclear-bomb-on-afghanistan-21000lb-moab-used-for-first-time-35621197.html

    This world is a crazy place. Do they even give a damn for the innocent people who happen to live in that area

    Should have dropped a nuclear bomb and that would have softened a few coughs!


  • Options
    #275
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,974 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    And then there's this,

    http://www.irishtimes.com/news/pentagon-plan-for-make-love-not-war-with-gay-bomb-1.1210320
    The Pentagon has admitted that it considered a proposal to love-bomb enemy troops with an aphrodisiac that would turn them gay and encourage uncontrolled sexual activity. Chemical weapons researchers believed that, after being sprayed with the chemical, enemy soldiers would be so busy making love in mass gay orgies that they would stop fighting.


  • Options
    #276
    SEPT 23 1989
    Registered Users Posts: 43,028 ✭✭✭✭SEPT 23 1989


    MysticMonk wrote: »
    I still think they should've added a bit of white phosphorus

    That would have been a nice touch

    Iceing sugar on the cake


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #277
    Klinger
    Registered Users Posts: 13 ✭Klinger


    At last, a POTUS who walks the walk, unlike the last useless apologist.


  • Options
    #278
    Kirby
    Registered Users Posts: 13,084 ✭✭✭✭Kirby


    Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »
    Yes, that's right. I suppose that will deal with all the baddies. And damn all those civilians who happen to live near Achin district of the Nangarhar province in eastern Afghanistan.

    The moment an enemy realises you balk at the notion of civilian casualties, they stick a dozen families in every hideout they have.

    It's not pleasant and you try to minimize it but collateral damage is the cost of waging war in this way.


  • Options
    #279
    Yourself isit
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,257 ✭✭✭Yourself isit


    A Little Pony wrote: »
    America is getting what they voted for. They voted for a tougher President than Obama, a different direction on foreign policy naturally when you have someone with the aggression of Trump. I have to say I have agreed with much of his foreign policy decisions so far.

    So you agree with trump attacking assad for bombing civilians, and for bombing civilians.


  • Options
    #280
    Depp
    Registered Users Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭Depp


    Billy86 wrote: »
    There is no falsehood that he ran on "bombing the sh*t" out of the middle east, or on the fact that drone strikes have gone up by more than 400% since he took office, these are facts. Now while I doubt he sought out the specific bomb because the guy isn't exactly educated on much of any of the aspects of his job, my reckoning is that someone high up in the army suggested it knowing how eager he is for any possible distractions in recent weeks, and he more than happily jumped on the opportunity having seen the 'success' of the Syrian attack on that front.

    The bomb has been around for 14 years, yet gets set off in Trump's first 100 days which says all it needs to say. Still, it should keep the Russia talk off his back over Easter weekend, and that's all Trump cares about - Trump.

    Just read a report this attack has been in planning for months and required zero congressional or presidential approval as it was in an active warzone. The notion trump had any part in it is complete nonsense. Just to clarify, I'm not saying this to defend trump, I'm calling you out for telling lies.


  • Options
    #281
    Idbatterim
    Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    Beyondgone wrote: »
    Harry Palmr wrote: »
    Blowing up a few mountians didn't make much measurable difference against the Taliban in 2001

    The whole point of "so called" IS is that it's everywhere and nowhere at the same time. Big bombs are a waste of money in an age of asymmetrical warfare.

    300 million too. Although that might be a bit like the Gards "street value" estimates on drugs seizures. There's probably a bomb-scientist somewhere in the States going "300 million..what? wait, we only got 500k for it??"

    Followed by some Airforce bean counter standing in front of an accounts committee a year later going "Yes, erm, honest, it was 300 million..:o...that 300 million"small hole in the books" we couldn't account for last year...this was it.."
    The us defence budget is $639,000,000,000. Doubt they will miss 300,000,000!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #282
    netherlands15
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 17 ✭netherlands15


    should have dropped it in west berlin tbh


  • Options
    #283
    Beyondgone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,166 ✭✭✭Beyondgone


    Idbatterim wrote: »
    The us defence budget is $639,000,000,000. Doubt they will miss 300,000,000!

    Shame the fcukers plead poverty when it comes to peoples health issues,. eh?


  • Options
    #284
    mikeoneilly
    Closed Accounts Posts: 479 ✭✭mikeoneilly


    ricero wrote: »
    The donald kicking isis ass and putting them in body bags yet the liberals still complain.

    I welcome this. Its time we destroy isis and not let them grow like obama did

    More will take their place


  • Options
    #285
    Depp
    Registered Users Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭Depp


    mikeoneilly wrote: »
    More will take their place

    That sounds like a threat almost :D:D


  • Options
    #286
    Hank Scorpio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,631 ✭✭✭✭Hank Scorpio


    ISIS, a great bunch of lads.


  • Options
    #287
    Digital Solitude
    Registered Users Posts: 11,397 ✭✭✭✭Digital Solitude


    MysticMonk wrote: »
    A similarsized napalm and white phosphorus bomb would've been good too

    Would it have been as effective as literally eating all the oxygen in a cave system? Probably not to be fair.

    Have to agree with can't make an omelette without breaking eggs sentiment, I've had a gander at the region on Google Maps and it looks empty as fook, ISIS have been the main men there for a long while and it seems to have been a base for them in Afghanistan. Collateral damage can go and ****e if they got some of the bastards, as well as munitions or supplies.


  • Options
    #288
    Digital Solitude
    Registered Users Posts: 11,397 ✭✭✭✭Digital Solitude


    kona wrote: »
    Eh it's not a nuclear weapon. It doesn't have the components for a nuclear weapons.

    It's a massive bomb.

    Eh "considered", not "literally".

    And has been pointed out like 3 times and I've accepted I was wrong. Anything for a one up 6 pages later


  • Options
    #289
    Ferrari3600
    Closed Accounts Posts: 617 ✭✭✭Ferrari3600


    Any comment from the Hillary Clinton supporters?

    Their candidate was the biggest war-shill neo-con going (the woman never found a war she didn't approve of) , and just last week (on other forums) they were insisting that Trump had ordered the attack on the Syrian airport only with prior agreement from the Syrian military/government + Putin, so I'm just curious as to what they are saying now!


  • Options
    #290
    Hank Scorpio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,631 ✭✭✭✭Hank Scorpio


    Ferrari3600 wrote: »
    Any comment from the Hillary Clinton supporters?

    Their candidate was the biggest war-shill neo-con going (the woman never found a war she didn't approve of) , and just last week (on other forums) they were insisting that Trump had ordered the attack on the Syrian airport only with prior agreement from the Syrian military/government + Putin, so I'm just curious as to what they are saying now!

    Meanwhile on msnbc...



  • Options
    #291
    Drain Brain
    Closed Accounts Posts: 33 ✭Drain Brain


    Galwayguy35 wrote: »
    Well the military who advise him and who obviously know a lot more about the situation than anyone on this forum felt it would damage Isis so that's good enough for me.

    Yeah because they were spot on with Iraq.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #292
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,297 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    Beyondgone wrote: »
    It's a fuel air blast bomb too - especially horrific for anyone in the blast radius. The zone hit is deoxygenated instantly and scorched by intensely high temperatures. Nasty weapon.
    So, how effective is it against an underground enemy base, versus a truck bomb hitting a densely populated public space?
    MysticMonk wrote: »
    A similarsized napalm and white phosphorus bomb would've been good too
    Completely fcuking useless. It would have burned a few trees, but when the MOAB dropped, the underground base which it landed over caused cave-in's underground.


  • Options
    #293
    Luggnuts
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 106 ✭✭Luggnuts


    Noddyholder wrote: »
    I would like to know the damage & casualties of this action.


    Would you really? Everything within a mile or 2 of this is destroyed. Can you imagine what is left of livestock? Fcuk it though.....nice to test a thermobaric bomb for the craic,


  • Options
    #294
    Depp
    Registered Users Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭Depp


    Luggnuts wrote: »
    Would you really? Everything within a mile or 2 of this is destroyed. Can you imagine what is left of livestock? Fcuk it though.....nice to test a thermobaric bomb for the craic,

    The effective blast radius in which everything would be destroyed is actually a few hundred metres. The worst you could expect a mile out would be shattered glass etc. This wasnt a test for the craic either it was a strategic strike on an IS stronghold.

    Also just read that the 300mil figure being tossed around is actually the price of the entire program of bombs produced (15 known) and the individual price of each device is around 16mil...which is still fairly insane!


  • Options
    #295
    Stigura
    Registered Users Posts: 3,413 ✭✭✭Stigura


    Luggnuts wrote: »
    Can you imagine what is left of livestock? Fcuk
    .....


    Won't somebody think of the camels, Joe! Sure; Any lads crawling out of those tunnels would have nothing left to ride! :eek:


  • Options
    #296
    netherlands15
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 17 ✭netherlands15


    AFTER THE LAST STRIKE WE GOT STOCKHOLM

    I WOULDN'T LIKE TO BE IN A EUROPEAN CAPITAL CITY TOMORROW,


  • Options
    #297
    Noddyholder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 696 ✭✭✭Noddyholder


    Luggnuts wrote: »
    Would you really? Everything within a mile or 2 of this is destroyed. Can you imagine what is left of livestock? Fcuk it though.....nice to test a thermobaric bomb for the craic,

    Yes I would, do you find that a problem ? Your worried about the ****ing livestock :confused: & it wasn't tested for the craic , now carry on with your faux outrage etc etc


  • Options
    #298
    Dubh Linn
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 172 ✭✭Dubh Linn


    Apparently they killed 36 IS militants in the strike. Other reports say "at least 100" casualties on the IS side.


  • Options
    #299
    Dubh Linn
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 172 ✭✭Dubh Linn


    The Afghan authorities have also ruled out any civilian casualties too, something which I find quite hard to believe.


  • Options
    #300
    Will I Am Not
    Registered Users Posts: 3,495 ✭✭✭Will I Am Not


    Dubh Linn wrote: »
    The Afghan authorities have also ruled out any civilian casualties too, something which I find quite hard to believe.

    Any word on the camel death toll?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #301
    Dubh Linn
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 172 ✭✭Dubh Linn


    The governor of the province said it was the biggest explosion he'd ever seen.


Advertisement