Largest Non-Nuclear Bomb in world dropped on Afghanistan

Depp · 15-04-2017 9:22pm

RoboKlopp wrote: »

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

the ones in syria? the difference there is it was technically not an active warzone for the us thats why presidential approval was required, congressional should have been too though not quite sure how they got around that one!

Also he can call for attacks no doubt but as far as I'm aware he shouldn't be allowed to without running it by congress either. I'm fairly sure military top brass have a veto aswel as they have practical knowledge on tactics etc the president will not have.

Beyondgone · 15-04-2017 9:35pm

I'm just stunned so many people on Boards know the ins and outs of White House/US Military protocols. We're a knowledgeable bunch.

Widdershins · 15-04-2017 9:53pm

Beyondgone wrote: »

I'm just stunned so many people on Boards know the ins and outs of White House/US Military protocols. We're a knowledgeable bunch.

The Pentagon's Brain:The definitive history of DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency, by Annie Jacobsen. If you want to scare yourself. Not so much about the protocol, but the weaponry.

Beyondgone · 15-04-2017 9:54pm

Widdershins wrote: »

The Pentagon's Brain:The definitive history of DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency, by Annie Jacobsen. If you want to scare yourself.

Britains GCSQ scares me enough. I don't need Darpa in my life. :eek:

Depp · 15-04-2017 10:00pm

Beyondgone wrote: »

I'm just stunned so many people on Boards know the ins and outs of White House/US Military protocols. We're a knowledgeable bunch.

seemed like it was common knowledge when obama was in office!
I dunno I find that whole end of things interesting!

Gatling · 15-04-2017 11:31pm

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

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

Safe to say that nothing is off limits when it comes to American military ideas

Digital Solitude · 16-04-2017 2:15am

Depp wrote: »

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.

Honestly I was hoping the bomb was a little more exciting.

I've no problem with being called out as incorrect, as I hope I've shown already on thread and boards in general. My posts were inaccurate, those who know more have corrected me, sound. I want to be informed, not right.

I might fix it when I sober up.

Also, **** ya Depp let me have something.

Was the IS militants count only 16? Disappointing, I was hoping for at least 50 dead animals, is there a full casualty toll?

*kudos to GalwayGuy35 for immediately calling bull****, even if I didn't believe him

Depp · 16-04-2017 2:17am

Digital Solitude wrote: »

Honestly I was hoping the bomb was a little more exciting.

I've no problem with being called out as incorrect, as I hope I've shown already on thread and boards in general. My posts were inaccurate, those who know more have corrected me, sound. I want to be informed, not right.

I might fix it when I sober up.

Also, **** ya Depp let me have something.

Was the IS militants count only 16? Disappointing, I was hoping for at least 50 dead animals, is there a full casualty toll?

haha sorry lad nothing personal

:D

Also according to afghan officials via al jazeera upwards of 90 isis fighters dead and thats based on bodies found so you can only imagine the number is higher than that. Real value in the attack though is the infrastructure and stockpiles of supplies and equipment they had stockpiled at the base.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/04/afghanistan-scores-isil-fighters-dead-moab-raid-170415071056526.html

ilkhanid · 16-04-2017 9:04am

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 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.

That's the weapon that destroyed London in G.I. Joe:Retaliation.
Great film if you like scenes of destruction. Otherwise, not

Pugzilla · 16-04-2017 9:20am

Significance of this weapon is completely exaggerated. A strike using multiple bombs like JDAM is far more destructive and effective

Pugzilla · 16-04-2017 9:20am

Significance of this weapon is completely exaggerated. A strike using multiple bombs like JDAM is far more destructive and effective

PREG1967 · 16-04-2017 9:23am

Pugzilla wrote: »

Significance of this weapon is completely exaggerated. A strike using multiple bombs like JDAM is far more destructive and effective

how about multiples of the MOAB?

Capt'n Midnight · 16-04-2017 9:32am

Pugzilla wrote: »

Significance of this weapon is completely exaggerated

True

The death toll from a bomb blast on a crowded Syrian bus convoy outside Aleppo yesterday has reached at least 112 http://www.rte.ie/news/2017/0416/868061-syria-aleppo/

Death toll from 'mother of all bombs' reaches 90 http://www.rte.ie/news/2017/0415/867905-afghanistan/

"The Trump administration made a lot of noise with this bomb, but the general state of play on the ground remains the same: The Taliban continues to wage a formidable and ferocious insurgency. ISIS, by comparison, is a sideshow," Michael Kugelman of the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington told AFP, using an alternative acronym for IS.

"Still, from a strategic standpoint, there is an unsettling takeaway here: The US pulled off a huge shock and awe mission against an enemy that isn't even the top threat to the US in Afghanistan. The Taliban continues to sit pretty."

Capt'n Midnight · 16-04-2017 9:41am

PREG1967 wrote: »

how about multiples of the MOAB?

Too expensive at 300 million for 20. Also there's only 20 19 18 left at most.

But this suggests a lower price if you exclude development costs and costs to restart production. So comparable price per Kg as the Daisy Cutter or normal iron bombs.
http://uk.businessinsider.com/how-much-does-moab-bomb-cost-mother-of-all-bombs-2017-4?r=US&IR=T

One MOAB costs about $170,000, an Air Force representative said Friday. The Air Force has not confirmed the development costs associated with the larger weapons system.

Pugzilla · 16-04-2017 9:48am

MOAB is like the Tsar Bomba of conventional bombs, not very useful in real life outside of propaganda purposes.

PREG1967 · 16-04-2017 9:49am

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Too expensive at 300 million for 20. Also there's only 20 19 18 left at most.

But this suggests a lower price if you exclude development costs and costs to restart production. So comparable price per Kg as the Daisy Cutter or normal iron bombs.
http://uk.businessinsider.com/how-much-does-moab-bomb-cost-mother-of-all-bombs-2017-4?r=US&IR=T

surely in an all out war scenario costs are inconsequential and bigger is better

Pugzilla · 16-04-2017 9:54am

PREG1967 wrote: »

surely in an all out war scenario costs are inconsequential and bigger is better

No, multiple strikes with a smaller bomb is far better at killing your enemy.

PREG1967 · 16-04-2017 9:56am

Pugzilla wrote: »

No, multiple strikes with a smaller bomb is far better at killing your enemy.

but multiple strikes with a larger bomb will kill more, come on its obvious the only issue is the possible extra cost but that would be negated during mass production, get real

......... · 16-04-2017 9:59am

Pugzilla wrote: »

No, multiple strikes with a smaller bomb is far better at killing your enemy.

not if they are underground in caves, every bomb has it's job.

......... · 16-04-2017 10:04am

I'd like to see the US test NNEMP as well, but I doubt Afghanistan would be the right theatre to test it in.

Russia have cleverly used Syria as convenient testing ground for their weapons and operations.

PREG1967 · 16-04-2017 10:08am

......... wrote: »

I'd like to see the US test NNEMP as well, but I doubt Afghanistan would be the right theatre to test it in.

Russia have cleverly used Syria as convenient testing ground for their weapons and operations.

the dogs on the street know that Obama was using electronic warfare plus cyber attacks against NK, hence 88% failure rates on certain missiles, NNEMP is just a larger scale of this electronic warfare and will only be used when war breaks out

......... · 16-04-2017 10:14am

PREG1967 wrote: »

the dogs on the street know that Obama was using electronic warfare plus cyber attacks against NK, hence 88% failure rates on certain missiles, NNEMP is just a larger scale of this electronic warfare and will only be used when war breaks out

Obama was a ponce.
There's always a war somewhere for the US, they just have to find the right one to test and improve it in.

Pugzilla · 16-04-2017 10:17am

......... wrote: »

not if they are underground in caves, every bomb has it's job.

None of the US strategic bombers can carry a single weapon that big. MOAB has to be thrown out the back of a C-130.

If you want to demoralise your enemy, then just carpet bomb the sh*t out of them. Didn't help in Vietnam though.

Destroying underground targets was never the MOAB's intended purpose. It's the successor to the BLU-82, which was used for clearing forests and psychological warfare. They detonate before they hit the ground, most of the energy goes into the atmosphere.

The "bunker buster" bombs are used for destroying cave complexes. They penetrate through the ground before exploding.

This was a PR stunt.

......... · 16-04-2017 10:21am

Pugzilla wrote: »

None of the US strategic bombers can carry a single weapon that big. MOAB has to be thrown out the back of a C-130.

If you want to demoralise your enemy, then just carpet bomb the sh*t out of them. Didn't help in Vietnam though.

Destroying underground targets was never the MOAB's intended purpose. It's the successor to the BLU-82, which was used for clearing forests and psychological warfare. They detonate before they hit the ground, most of the energy goes into the atmosphere.

The "bunker buster" bombs are used for destroying cave complexes. They penetrate through the ground before exploding.

This was a PR stunt.

So ? As I said every bomb has it's job.

Pugzilla · 16-04-2017 10:25am

......... wrote: »

So ? As I said every bomb has it's job.

You thought it was designed for destroying underground targets.

......... · 16-04-2017 10:41am

Pugzilla wrote: »

You thought it was designed for destroying underground targets.

no, I said it was dropped to deal with their caves, and is imminently well-suited to collapsing cave openings and killing combatants within the local area. The US know a lot more about bombing and weapon selection than you do.

Gatling · 16-04-2017 10:44am

Pugzilla wrote: »

You thought it was designed for destroying underground targets.

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

Samaris · 16-04-2017 11:06am

Well, it worked anyway.

Samaris · 16-04-2017 11:51am

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.

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.

Beyondgone · 16-04-2017 11:52am

Samaris wrote: »

Well, it worked anyway.

Kims seriously huffy today. His didn't.

Capt'n Midnight · 16-04-2017 11:57am

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 · 16-04-2017 1:22pm

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 · 16-04-2017 1:23pm

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 · 16-04-2017 1:26pm

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 · 16-04-2017 2:22pm

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 · 16-04-2017 2:22pm

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

Noddyholder · 16-04-2017 2:30pm

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 · 16-04-2017 2:30pm

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 · 16-04-2017 2:33pm

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 · 16-04-2017 2:44pm

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 · 16-04-2017 2:47pm

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 · 16-04-2017 2:58pm

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 · 16-04-2017 3:09pm

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 · 16-04-2017 3:42pm

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 · 16-04-2017 3:57pm

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 · 16-04-2017 4:13pm

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 · 16-04-2017 4:32pm

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 · 16-04-2017 4:33pm

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 · 16-04-2017 5:03pm

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 · 16-04-2017 7:34pm

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/

Largest Non-Nuclear Bomb in world dropped on Afghanistan

Comments