Largest Non-Nuclear Bomb in world dropped on Afghanistan

Atoms for Peace · 14-04-2017 4:12pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lO2-YxWkRxk

The youtube comments section is always good for a laugh.

Autonomous Cowherd · 14-04-2017 4:20pm

Anyone wondering if I have fallen for the Eros of the mega bomb, uh no, read my earlier explanations of my response to it. No Easter conversions...

Elmer Blooker · 14-04-2017 4:21pm

Gatling wrote: »

Didn't russia use precision weapons in Syria and managed to hit Iran instead

According to US "officials" .... and the dutiful media loved it.

But they got bin laden in the end didn't they

yeah, all it cost was a suitcase stuffed with dollars, I wonder how much all those daisy cutters cost US taxpayers?

Mr.Micro · 14-04-2017 4:25pm

Widdershins wrote: »

It makes sense, imo.

OP how are you feeling or thinking in light of the latest information?

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

According to US "officials" .... and the dutiful media loved it.

yeah, all it cost was a suitcase stuffed with dollars, I wonder how much all those daisy cutters cost US taxpayers?

And they can't even look after their own poor and needy people. Let's try out this mega bomb and see what happens...

Depp · 14-04-2017 4:45pm

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

yeah, all it cost was a suitcase stuffed with dollars, I wonder how much all those daisy cutters cost US taxpayers?

It was actually a protracted surveillance operation which identified his personal courier from info gathered together from various interrogations, finding the courier, following him to bin ladens compound, then staking out the compound till confirmation of his presence there could be found. No-one grassed bin laden for a bag of cash. In all likelihood it cost far more than the 16 million pricetag of this bomb.

Depp · 14-04-2017 4:49pm

Digital Solitude wrote: »

Largest non-nuclear bomb in the world, but classified as a small nuke apparently

Not posting this to call out Digital Solitude but feel its important to clarify that all of these claims have proven to be gigantic exaggerations or just flat out lies.
Again not calling out anyone just the info, which is false. Outside of a mile from the blast other than a slight possibility of shattered glass or knocking stuff over the worst you can expect is hearing a loud bang and for any ear bleeding you would need to be well within a mile.

Gatling · 14-04-2017 4:58pm

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

According to US "officials" .... and the dutiful media loved it.

Iranian media Reported it too but what would they know

Capt'n Midnight · 14-04-2017 5:11pm

ilkhanid wrote: »

The USA spends a fair bit of money on "heart-and-minds" activities.
"30 % (of American and international assistance) has been spent on projects related to governance and development and humanitarian assistance.
These projects include programs to strengthen the local justice system of courts and prisons, expand power generation and transmission, build roads and railways, provide basic education, literacy, and technical ,vocational education and ttraining that aims to deliver basic education to communities that the government cannot reach, and administer ..health services that aim to pride primary care and hospital services".

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/06/18/415353782/afghan-schools-is-the-success-story-exaggerated

You can't win hearts and minds by throwing money at a wall. If it drives up prices and doesn't trickle down the it may even be counter productive.

The U.S. has spent more than $100 billion on rebuilding in Afghanistan, and of that, $769 million has gone to the Afghan education system, which means the education funding has been less than 1 percent of the overall U.S. aid. All those numbers are dwarfed by the sums the U.S. military spent fighting the war in Afghanistan.

http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/compass/articles/2015/6/17/john-sopko-sigar.html

What impact does it have in the minds of Afghans when the United States said it would build a health clinic but then the health clinic doesnâ€™t materialize?

It leaves a bitter taste in their mouths. Particularly if the contractor who did the job is somehow connected with a local warlord or a local government official, which we find in many cases.

$113.1 Bn spent, education got less than 0.8%. Very little got to Clinics and Schools schools and even then lots of fraud.

https://www.sigar.mil/pdf/quarterlyreports/2017-01-30qr-section3-economic.pdf

As of December 19, 2016, Afghanistanâ€™s Attorney Generalâ€™s Offce (AGO) has
not acted on the 114 Kabul Bank-related cases currently referred to it. ... $987 million stolen
from Kabul Bank,
...
USAID had disbursed approximately $883 million for
education programs in Afghanistan, as of December 31, 2016
...
The World Bank reported that only about half of all registered schools
in Afghanistan have proper buildings, and only 55% of teachers me
...
An Independent Joint Anti-Corruption
Monitoring and Evaluation Committee
assessment found that despite some successes, EQUIP has failed to meet its overall
goals since it began in 2004. The program
suffers from poor planning, weak monitoring, and ineffective coordination among
implementers that has caused 30â€“40% of
funds to be misused, schools to be poorly
constructed, and students to be inadequately educated.

Luggnuts · 14-04-2017 5:34pm

Gatling wrote: »

Seriously epic weapon

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZX5h2fjhKyQ

Do these things arouse you somehow?

Elmer Blooker · 14-04-2017 5:52pm

Luggnuts wrote: »

Do these things arouse you somehow?

Trump to Putin: ".... mine is bigger than yours! ..."

9or10 · 14-04-2017 6:02pm

My single contribution is that I'm sickened by the name.

Even the fcukin BBC is using the acronym.

Luggnuts · 14-04-2017 6:07pm

At least they didn't use one of those heinous barrel-bombs that that monster Assad is accused of dropping.

Pugzilla · 14-04-2017 6:10pm

Didn't know Irish people became such pacifists

Depp · 14-04-2017 6:16pm

9or10 wrote: »

My single contribution is that I'm sickened by the name.

Even the fcukin BBC is using the acronym.

the acronym actually stands for Massive Ordnance Air Blast, the mother of all bombs thing is a nickname and not an official designation

9or10 · 14-04-2017 6:17pm

Depp wrote: »

the acronym actually stands for Massive Ordnance Air Blast, the mother of all bombs thing is a nickname and not an official designation

Thanks. Then my work is done.

Dubh Linn · 14-04-2017 6:21pm

IS have now said that there are no casualties on their side, which imo is like saying the sky is purple.

PREG1967 · 14-04-2017 6:23pm

Dubh Linn wrote: »

IS have now said that there are no casualties on their side, which imo is like saying the sky is purple.

the irish invented the car bomb, we called it buma
http://www.historyireland.com/20th-century-contemporary-history/car-bombs/

Dubh Linn · 14-04-2017 7:02pm

Yes but how can there be no IS casualties? Was the only casualty in this strike the ground and the sand and rocks?

Luggnuts · 14-04-2017 7:21pm

Dropping a $300 million bomb on a shack isn't going to change the trend that Afghan farmers are winning this war. The US should just get out and join the ignominious list of empires that tried to conquer Afghanistan and were defeated.

Depp · 14-04-2017 7:23pm

Luggnuts wrote: »

Dropping a $300 million* bomb on a shack* isn't going to change the trend that Afghan farmers are winning this war. The US should just get out and join the ignominious list of empires that tried to conquer Afghanistan and were defeated.

*16 million. *Cave network that housed a highly productive ied building location.

Gatling · 14-04-2017 8:50pm

Luggnuts wrote: »

Dropping a $300 million bomb on a shack isn't going to change the trend that Afghan farmers are winning this war.

For the most part Pakistani and Arabs , Chechens are doing the fighting not Afghan farmers ,alot have had training with Pakistani military intelligence networks

josip · 14-04-2017 10:04pm

Ok, we now know for certain that there were no civilians killed and can close off that discussion.
No shepherds, etc visible at the time of detonation.

ilkhanid · 14-04-2017 10:19pm

Luggnuts wrote: »

Dropping a $300 million bomb on a shack isn't going to change the trend that Afghan farmers are winning this war. The US should just get out and join the ignominious list of empires that tried to conquer Afghanistan and were defeated.

The non-Pushtuns (there is no single Afghanistan that thinks or acts alike any more than Iraq does..you'd think that after 40 years in the news this would be common knowledge) are happy enough with the international (there are soldiers from a dozen countries,including Turkey, in Afghanistan) presence.
Anyway, I notice you didn't mention that Islamic State should get out, oddly enough. Aren't those Arabs (and Chechens, Uzbeks etc etc ) foreign invaders? Do you think they are being welcomed by the Afghan farmers? I should also add that the Taliban were being manipulated for years by elements in the Pakistani security services. But I guess that doesn't count.

Luggnuts wrote: »

At least they didn't use one of those heinous barrel-bombs that that monster Assad is accused of dropping.

Where the barrel bombs are being dropped.
la-fg-syria-depopulation-20151018

Samaris · 15-04-2017 2:11am

Can't blame the Afghani minister for his comments. I reckon most Irish people would be a wee bit pissed off if someone dropped the "largest non-nuclear missile" in anyone's arsenal onto the Provos even ten or twenty years ago. I don't think any minister of any country is going to hold up a "10" for anyone dropping an extremely large bomb on said country, no matter who the targets were!

In terms of suitability, yeah, cave systems are a difficult target, a very large percussive force'll collapse the thing though. So that worked. Not really liking this show of force just before dealing with NK though. Afghanistan conveniently can't really defend itself. Neither can North Korea, mind, but they could pretty much obliterate SK before the country was taken over.

But again, much like Syria, I wonder what the next step is. Drop another one? Where? Trump doesn't seem to do forward planning, he just does stuff.

keeponhurling · 15-04-2017 4:52am

Maybe people reading too much into this.

The US have been continuously hitting IS targets in Afghanistan and elsewhere.
If the IS leaders were all in a normal house, they'd have dropped a normal ("conventional") bomb.

But they were underground in caves, so a different weapon was more appropriate in this case.
Like a golfer looking at his bag and thinking which club fits the shot.

PREG1967 · 15-04-2017 9:24am

keeponhurling wrote: »

Maybe people reading too much into this.

The US have been continuously hitting IS targets in Afghanistan and elsewhere.
If the IS leaders were all in a normal house, they'd have dropped a normal ("conventional") bomb.

But they were underground in caves, so a different weapon was more appropriate in this case.
Like a golfer looking at his bag and thinking which club fits the shot.

count is 94 folks and rising, end of days stuff for NK

Noddyholder · 15-04-2017 9:37am

Samaris wrote: »

Can't blame the Afghani minister for his comments. I reckon most Irish people would be a wee bit pissed off if someone dropped the "largest non-nuclear missile" in anyone's arsenal onto the Provos even ten or twenty years ago. I don't think any minister of any country is going to hold up a "10" for anyone dropping an extremely large bomb on said country, no matter who the targets were!

In terms of suitability, yeah, cave systems are a difficult target, a very large percussive force'll collapse the thing though. So that worked. Not really liking this show of force just before dealing with NK though. Afghanistan conveniently can't really defend itself. Neither can North Korea, mind, but they could pretty much obliterate SK before the country was taken over.

But again, much like Syria, I wonder what the next step is. Drop another one? Where? Trump doesn't seem to do forward planning, he just does stuff.

You are aware that are already strategic blueprints drawn up for every potential attack/aggressive move that the US assumes its against its Interests ,Worldwide or not,

I assume other major military countries like China, Russia, Iran, Israel, India have something similar, It doesn't matter a dam what president is in or not, Its there already.

For me its about time the US made different moves on the world stage, its alright for Russia to go annexing countries to suit its agenda & threaten its small neighbours, not much a peep out of the usual folks.

But when Uncle sam says enough is enough, folks get all weepy & blame President trump, The problems of the world were long there before Trump came along & unless something different is done they be still there after he is gone.

Its about time this immature child in NK is shown its not a video game he is playing.

Capt'n Midnight · 15-04-2017 9:53am

The B36 could carry bombs twice that size.

https://h2g2.com/edited_entry/A4175219

A pair of 42,000lb bombs were lifted on 29 January, 1949 from Muroc AFB; one was dropped at 35,000 feet, the other at 40,000 feet.

Samaris · 15-04-2017 10:35am

Noddyholder wrote: »

You are aware that are already strategic blueprints drawn up for every potential attack/aggressive move that the US assumes its against its Interests ,Worldwide or not,

I assume other major military countries like China, Russia, Iran, Israel, India have something similar, It doesn't matter a dam what president is in or not, Its there already.

Yes, I'm aware of the process. Trump isn't a tactician or a military guy, the generals will bring him pre-set plans based on a variety of factors, including how audacious he wants to be. Some of them are plans based on certain factors being right - remember Obama/Trump's Yemen military action; Obama chose not to because it required a moonless night (afair), and left it on the table for the next government to make its own decisions about. So there are a whole lot of plans readied for a variety of contingencies, but the president decides which to take (advised by his generals, but the decision is ultimately his/hers). This varies a bit in terms of what the thresholds are for presidential involvement - whether the US is officially at war, scale of intervention etcetera.

In short, the plan is there, but the choice of plan is down to the president. Furthermore, the president can authorise more authority to call strikes to (military) people further down the ladder, which Trump is doing, as well as bringing the CIA in more. Apart from that, he has also spearheaded the removal of many of the regulations set in place during the US' Afghanistan adventures to reduce the risk of civilian casualties*. This opens up more plans for the table and thus more choice of what route to take (and of course, other consequences).

I'm not saying what should or should not be done here, just clarifying how it works. The president of the US has a great deal of influence on how war is to be waged during their term.

*See White House page regarding Plan to defeat ISIS. I think it was WH anyway, I was reading it yesterday.

Carlos Orange · 15-04-2017 10:53am

Captain Snow wrote: »

US successfully tests new nuclear gravity bomb.

Did you read that article before posting?

Captain Snow · 15-04-2017 10:56am

psinno wrote: »

Did you read that article before posting?

OOPS:)

Samaris · 15-04-2017 6:32pm

So, what do people make of Kim Jong Un's actions today? Looks like the movement at the nuke site was a decoy, perhaps one aimed at drawing Trump out and getting him to do something stupid that would annoy China. (While I think they'd have done it on April 15th if they were going to, that could be co-incidence and they'll do one at some point unconnected to the Day of the Sun.)

Instead, a nice parade of ..uh...new* missiles through the streets as a celebration of the founder's birthday. As normal people do.

*albeit possibly more advanced and alarming ones, but I don't know much about missiles.

Gatling · 15-04-2017 6:38pm

Samaris wrote: »

So, what do people make of Kim Jong Un's actions today?

*albeit possibly more advanced and alarming ones, but I don't know much about missiles.

Most have previously seen at other parades ,one is a new type of submarine launched intercontinental ballistic missle (ICBM) which I believe has never been tested from sub ,

Most of the missles were exported to the north Korean forestry service by china

4068ac1elhodqr · 15-04-2017 6:57pm

So after the moab, and the pr/response of the (even bigger) foab from one of the other side.

Now comes the tungsten-based Kinetic Energy Projectile which bursts into flaming metal frags at x3 speed of sound. This is probably much much worse than spilling a hot cup of tea, as tungsten has a very high melting point.

It's no wonder the Pope himself, is having a go at Donald today.

Depp · 15-04-2017 7:05pm

Braylen Rapping Skinhead wrote: »

Now comes the tungsten-based Kinetic Energy Projectile which bursts into flaming metal frags at x3 speed of sound. This is probably much much worse than spilling a hot cup of tea, as tungsten has a very high melting point.

this is science fiction

Capt'n Midnight · 15-04-2017 7:48pm

Depp wrote: »

this is science fiction

Nah, mach 3 is normal for tungsten projectiles , but they don't burst into flames. That would be the depleted uranium ones.

"Rods from God" isn't Sci Fi either, just very, very expensive to do.

Forget that, it's not expensive. Spacex could put 4 five tonne tungsten rods in orbit for $63 million , which is about the same price as 4 MOAB's to give an idea of how insanely expensive these weapons are.

IIRC if something is travelling at 3Km/s then it's kinetic energy is same as an equivalent weight of TNT. Faster and it's even more.

Depp · 15-04-2017 7:57pm

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Nah, mach 3 is normal for tungsten projectiles , but they don't burst into flames. That would be the depleted uranium ones.

"Rods from God" isn't Sci Fi either, just very, very expensive to do.

Forget that, it's not expensive. Spacex could put 4 five tonne tungsten rods in orbit for $63, which is about the same price as 4 MOAB's to give an idea of how insanely expensive these weapons are.

IIRC if something is travelling at 3Km/s then it's kinetic energy is same as an equivalent weight of TNT. Faster and it's even more.

oh yeah i get the concept alright, from what ive read they could expect to get even faster, not possible to be dropped at the minute as due to the plasma coating on re-entry stopping controlls an accurate strike would be nigh on impossible. It could theoretically happen...but it never will.

4068ac1elhodqr · 15-04-2017 8:04pm

Depp wrote: »

this is science fiction

Allegedly already tested back in 2013 (monorail dry-run).

Other items in the public domain include: weight supporting (200lbs) exoskeletons, 30kw photon beams, drone swarms etc.

Must be some R&D shopping bill. Probably a similar cost to just moving to Mars and setting up habitation there.

Gatling · 15-04-2017 8:14pm

Braylen Rapping Skinhead wrote: »

Allegedly already tested back in 2013 (monorail dry-run).

Other items in the public domain include: weight supporting (200lbs) exoskeletons, 30kw photon beams, drone swarms etc.

Must be some R&D shopping bill. Probably a similar cost to just moving to Mars and setting up habitation there.

Rail guns in advanced development to be equipped on ships in the next 2 years if all goes to plan

Widdershins · 15-04-2017 8:19pm

Why are people saying Trump will have to go bigger with the next weapon?

Samaris · 15-04-2017 8:37pm

Alarm as to his thought processes, most likely.

At least he can't physically "go bigger" than what he's already tossed out without actually launching a nuke. Hopefully. But he's flashy and likes to go big, so god knows how he reckons he'll top the last effort.

Depp · 15-04-2017 8:43pm

Samaris wrote: »

Alarm as to his thought processes, most likely.

At least he can't physically "go bigger" than what he's already tossed out without actually launching a nuke. Hopefully. But he's flashy and likes to go big, so god knows how he reckons he'll top the last effort.

this is a false narrative...if you think the president actually makes tactical calls like this you're mistaken...active warzone so he didnt even have to give approval for the strike to go ahead.

15-04-2017 8:49pm

Depp wrote: »

this is a false narrative...if you think the president actually makes tactical calls like this you're deluded...active warzone so he didnt even have to give approval for the strike to go ahead.

How do you know who's making calls on any strikes as a matter of interest?

Have you inside knowledge yourself?..

Beyondgone · 15-04-2017 8:54pm

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Nah, mach 3 is normal for tungsten projectiles , but they don't burst into flames. That would be the depleted uranium ones.

"Rods from God" isn't Sci Fi either, just very, very expensive to do.

Forget that, it's not expensive. Spacex could put 4 five tonne tungsten rods in orbit for $63, which is about the same price as 4 MOAB's to give an idea of how insanely expensive these weapons are.

IIRC if something is travelling at 3Km/s then it's kinetic energy is same as an equivalent weight of TNT. Faster and it's even more.

$63 dollars sounds like a serious bargain. Especially for 4. I'd like one. That's $15.75. I'm gonna drop it on the neighbours place. I may go $20 just to be sure they take me seriously. :cool:

Depp · 15-04-2017 8:55pm

RoboKlopp wrote: »

How do you know who's making calls on any strikes as a matter of interest?

Have you inside knowledge yourself?..

its basic knowledge of military chains of command. The last call for this came from the top man on the ground in afghanistan, gen. John W. Nicholson. as its already an active warzone for us forces Trump would have been notified but no approval would be needed past john nicholson so its highly unlikely he had any input in the decision or planning, which has been underway for several months also.

15-04-2017 8:59pm

Depp wrote: »

its basic knowledge of military chains of command. The last call for this came from the top man on the ground in afghanistan. Trump would have been notified but its highly unlikely he had any input in the decision or planning, which has been underway for several months also.

He has power to go above a lot of chains of command though doesn't he?

Beyondgone · 15-04-2017 9:01pm

RoboKlopp wrote: »

He has power to go above a lot of chains of command though doesn't he?

Like he did with the Obamacare bill?

Depp · 15-04-2017 9:04pm

RoboKlopp wrote: »

He has power to go above a lot of chains of command though doesn't he?

In some situations yes, something like this though the general with 30 years combat experience would get the final word on a tactical call over the guy with zero combat/tactical experience

Capt'n Midnight · 15-04-2017 9:09pm

Samaris wrote: »

At least he can't physically "go bigger" than what he's already tossed out without actually launching a nuke. Hopefully. But he's flashy and likes to go big, so god knows how he reckons he'll top the last effort.

He can go a lot bigger.

The US is already using a system to drop 60,000 lb. (30 tonne) loads with GPS guidance.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Precision_Airdrop_System
That's about 100 barrels if you want to compare.

And back in 1974 they dropped a Minuteman ICBM out the back of a C5, and fired it. 86,000 lb Compare to it the "MOAB" is a tiddler.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8b8LLcdBaQc

15-04-2017 9:13pm

Beyondgone wrote: »

Like he did with the Obamacare bill?

Depp wrote: »

In some situations yes, something like this though the general with 30 years combat experience would get the final word on a tactical call over the guy with zero combat/tactical experience

Yeah, true fair enough. Don't know **** all about how those military calls are made so I won't pretend I do. I just know Trump can make calls himself and bypass a lot of it if he chooses.

Would they make big calls like the recent bombings without his backing? Doubt it

Largest Non-Nuclear Bomb in world dropped on Afghanistan

Comments