• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

CNN: US drops its largest conventional bomb (MOAB) on ISIS target in Afghanistan

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

AmyS

Member
A Fish Aficionado said:
We just modernized the B61 to be a "smart" weapon.

5UHlAHs.png
Click to expand...

It's got Boost Mode !
 
L

Lautaro

Member
EloKa said:
Do you really think that Boko Haram is the only terrorist group in the world that captures other people? You never thought "ISIS captured 120 People this week, 80 on that day, 40 on that day and here again 230" and so on might ever add up to a larger number?

trying to make it clearer: ISIS is not Boko Haram. But both are groups that are known for kidnapping.
Click to expand...

Actually Boko Haram is ISIS (they accepted the caliphate which makes them part of it), I just don't think there's thousands of human shields in THAT tunnel network but across all the Islamic State.
 
K

Kin5290

Member
jakonovski said:
Indiscriminate and disproportionate use of force or something like that. But don't worry, I do know that since the US is top dog there is no one to judge against them, and might makes right. Heck, ISIS not being a proper military, you could probably do all sorts of heinous shit against them (and whatever civilians within one mile radius or more) and it wouldn't be judged as a war crime.

So congrats I guess, the US' hands are free to do whatevs. Charred corpses are so presidential.
Click to expand...
This use of force is neither indiscriminate (the strike was planned with a specific target in mind) nor disproportionate (destroying tunnel complexes is literally the purpose of such a bomb). But okay then.

If Trump were dropping these bombs on Raqqa, a city with millions of civilians living in a built up environment, then that would probably be a war crime (and if this were to happen it would be rightfully horrifying). Isolated tunnel complexes filled with fighters a la Tora Bora are an entirely different story.
 
E

Euphor!a

Banned
jakonovski said:
I gave a pretty comprehensive set of options in how it can be interpreted. My view is obvious.

The issue isn't that I don't know something, it's that you don't like my opinion.
Click to expand...

I feel like the issues of you not knowing what you are talking about and having an opinion on that something you don't know about are very interconnected lol.
 
S

Sickboy007

Member
The worrying fact here is not the target or the results of the bombing. It's that these type of bombs have never been used because they were designed to have the same power as tactical nukes, deploying them on a battlefield blurs the line of what's admissable and makes nuclear escalation more likely in case of a conflict beween two nuclear powers.
 
S

Sijil

Member
Eh, no tear shed on ISIS or Taliban rats getting killed.

People on this board living so far away think bombings like these radicalize people, you have no idea that radicalization and indoctrination has been part of our culture for decades. Bombs don't radicalize as much as those hate preaching imams on satellite TV channels sponsored by the Saudis and international Wahabism.

FYI the US led coalition killed more civilians in Syria than Russia for the third consecutive month.

https://airwars.org/news/internatio...casualty-claims-in-iraq-and-syria-march-2017/
 
T

Tovarisc

Member
Sickboy007 said:
The worrying fact here is not the target or the results of the bombing. It's that these type of bombs have never been used because they were designed to have the same power as tactical nukes, deploying them on a battlefield blurs the line of what's admissable and makes nuclear escalation more likely in case of a conflict beween two nuclear powers.
Click to expand...

When looking at bomb like this it's hard not to think "Sooo... they just wanted create nuke that doesn't leave radiation behind?"
 
D

Disxo

Member
Sickboy007 said:
The worrying fact here is not the target or the results of the bombing. It's that these type of bombs have never been used because they were designed to have the same power as tactical nukes, deploying them on a battlefield blurs the line of what's admissable and makes a nuclear escalation more likely in case of conflict beween two nuclear powers.
Click to expand...
Nope, that bomb is huge but not as much as the small nuclear ones.
 
Z

Zophar

Member
Sickboy007 said:
The worrying fact here is not the target or the results of the bombing. It's that these type of bombs have never been used because they were designed to have the same power as tactical nukes, deploying them on a battlefield blurs the line of what's admissable and makes nuclear escalation more likely in case of a conflict beween two nuclear powers.
Click to expand...

The strength of this weapon is nowhere close to even the most modest tactical nuclear weapon.
 
R

radios shipping overview

Member
Sickboy007 said:
The worrying fact here is not the target or the results of the bombing. It's that these type of bombs have never been used because they were designed to have the same power as tactical nukes, deploying them on a battlefield blurs the line of what's admissable and makes nuclear escalation more likely in case of a conflict beween two nuclear powers.
Click to expand...

This yield of this bomb is only comparable to that of the smallest "football" nukes, though.
 
Kadayi

Kadayi

Banned
Sickboy007 said:
The worrying fact here is not the target or the results of the bombing. It's that these type of bombs have never been used because they were designed to have the same power as tactical nukes, deploying them on a battlefield blurs the line of what's admissable and makes nuclear escalation more likely in case of a conflict beween two nuclear powers.
Click to expand...

Not even remotely comparable in scope.
 
I

Instro

Member
Sickboy007 said:
The worrying fact here is not the target or the results of the bombing. It's that these type of bombs have never been used because they were designed to have the same power as tactical nukes, deploying them on a battlefield blurs the line of what's admissable and makes nuclear escalation more likely in case of a conflict beween two nuclear powers.
Click to expand...

I could be wrong here, but I don't think this bomb has anywhere near the power of even the smallest tactical nuke.

Edit

Looks like there's already been a million replies on this lol.
 
A

AmyS

Member
Zophar said:
The strength of this weapon is nowhere close to even the most modest tactical nuclear weapon.
Click to expand...

Instro said:
I could be wrong here, but I don't think this bomb has anywhere near the power of even the smallest tactical nuke.

Edit

Looks like there's already been a million replies on this lol.
Click to expand...

That's true, the MOAB is not even in the same universe as the smallest tactical nuke
 
K

Kin5290

Member
Disxo said:
Nope, that bomb is huge but not as much as the small nuclear ones.
Click to expand...
From Wikipedia, the MOAB has a yield of 11 tons. In comparison, the M-28 Davy Crockett, which was basically a nuclear recoilless rifle (that's right, we made and even fielded a nuclear bazooka) had a yield that bottomed out of 10 tons. The Davy Crockett even saw service in the 60s, although it was decommissioned in the 70s.

Even the smallest nuclear device these days has yields measured in the kiloton range.
 
Woo-Fu

Woo-Fu

Banned
Everybody who thinks it is bad to knock out a tunnel complex with one of these should feel free to volunteer to clear it themselves with a flashlight and a .45.

Think you're letting your trump hate distort your view(and hey, I don't like him either but come on, people).

At the end of the day, MOAB is just another conventional bomb. If you think conventional bombs shouldn't be used against ISIS OK, but don't single out this particular bomb as something significantly different than all the conventional warheads already used.
 
Crazyorloco

Crazyorloco

Member
I'm guessing we're not going to get a civilian body count on this side of the world especially since it's just caves. So it'll be like we killed no one.

Did we drop bombs like this before? I'm just wondering if this is normal or is that trump is just more attack happy than other presidents.
 
A

AmyS

Member
Kin5290 said:
From Wikipedia, the MOAB has a yield of 11 tons. In comparison, the M-28 Davy Crockett, which was basically a nuclear recoilless rifle (that's right, we made and even fielded a nuclear bazooka) had a yield that bottomed out of 10 tons. The Davy Crockett even saw service in the 60s, although it was decommissioned in the 70s.
Click to expand...

Here's a few videos on the Davy Crockett.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtp1gnj0zaE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiM-RzPHyGs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fReCrjZ6iVc

Edit: It's blast was about 1,000 times *less* powerful than the bomb dropped on Nagasaki
 
TheLaughingStock

TheLaughingStock

Member
WhiteRabbitEXE said:
I don't think utilizing the MOAB is necessarily a "bad" thing, for what it's worth. What I DO think is that *Trump* using it is outright terrifying. Not only do I have no confidence in his ability to properly plan strikes and operate with long term goals and strategies, this is a man who lives off the praise of his supporters and the media, and he just got TONS of it for doing a whole lot of nothing with a whole lot of missiles. This man being praised for dropping bombs is legitimately terrifying when halfway through his campaign he asked why we can't use nukes and said he wouldn't rule out nukes in EUROPE, and we're already seeing him escalating his use of armaments. And it hasn't even been three months. I can't imagine 4 years of feedback -> escalation loops.
Click to expand...

How do you have no confidence? Trump's team has been in office for nearly 100 days, he has a handful of folks with impressive resumes giving him advice and you're still alive. There are folks behind the scenes keeping things under control around the world regardless of who's in charge.
 
W

WhiteRabbitEXE

Member
TheLaughingStock said:
How do you have no confidence? Trump's team has been in office for nearly 100 days, he has a handful of folks with impressive resumes giving him advice and you're still alive. There are folks behind the scenes keeping things under control around the world regardless of who's in charge.
Click to expand...
Yeah, "I haven't died in 90 days" is a fantastic metric.
 
E

Effect

Member
So does Trump's response to being asked if he authorized the drop sound like he didn't and also that he didn't even know it was happening or happened? Just want to make sure as I haven't had a chance to listen to the news today until now. That was my take away from the clip they showed.
 
Crazyorloco

Crazyorloco

Member
TheLaughingStock said:
How do you have no confidence? Trump's team has been in office for nearly 100 days, he has a handful of folks with impressive resumes giving him advice and you're still alive. There are folks behind the scenes keeping things under control around the world regardless of who's in charge.
Click to expand...

It's less than 100 days and we've had a lot of attacks already. There will be retaliation. I can only imagine how it'll be in 4 years. I hope Trump's team keeps us alive for 4 years.
 
A

AESplusF

Member
Crazyorloco said:
I bet North Korea gets attacked within two weeks.
Click to expand...

Let's hope not, if they retaliated by attacking a neighboring country with nuclear weapons, we would have a very big problem.

I do think something needs to be done about North Korea but it needs to be done very carefully.
 
TheLaughingStock

TheLaughingStock

Member
WhiteRabbitEXE said:
Yeah, "I haven't died in 90 days" is a fantastic metric.
Click to expand...

All I'm saying is Trump has a decent cast who served under multiple administrations and aren't scrubs. Sure Trump may say yes to whatever they advise but these guys and gals are among the best and brightest. I sleep easy every night and have faith in them.
 
M

MechDX

Member
LifEndz said:
Missiles fired at Syria. Largest non-nuclear bomb in Afghanistan. And North Korea looks to be next.

His supporters must be freaking the hell out. Well, I guess we can welcome them to our reality since he took office.
Click to expand...

BNO News‏Verified account
@BNONews

BREAKING: U.S. is prepared to launch a preemptive strike against North Korea if it carries out a nuclear test, American officials say - NBC

https://twitter.com/BNONews/status/852648183197048832
 
B

Bronx-Man

Banned
I love how our standards for government have dropped so low, "We're still technically alive" is now the measure of success.
 
X

xxracerxx

Don't worry, I'll vouch for them.
TheLaughingStock said:
All I'm saying is Trump has a decent cast who served under multiple administrations and aren't scrubs. Sure Trump may say yes to whatever they advise but these guys and gals are among the best and brightest. I sleep easy every night and have faith in them.
Click to expand...
Yikes.
 
K

kmag

Member
Kin5290 said:
From Wikipedia, the MOAB has a yield of 11 tons. In comparison, the M-28 Davy Crockett, which was basically a nuclear recoilless rifle (that's right, we made and even fielded a nuclear bazooka) had a yield that bottomed out of 10 tons. The Davy Crockett even saw service in the 60s, although it was decommissioned in the 70s.

Even the smallest nuclear device these days has yields measured in the kiloton range.
Click to expand...

Got to love the operating guidelines for the M-28, they basically consisted of make sure your jeeps engine is running and it is pointed back the way you came, fire the damn thing in as high a parabola as you can manage to get close to the masses of Soviet armor bearing down on you, jump in the jeep and get the driver to floor it. Pray.
 
B

BlastProcessing

Member
TheLaughingStock said:
All I'm saying is Trump has a decent cast who served under multiple administrations and aren't scrubs. Sure Trump may say yes to whatever they advise but these guys and gals are among the best and brightest. I sleep easy every night and have faith in them.
Click to expand...

Oh, yeah. It's a deal decent cast.

Trump Nominates Salesman To Run Military Draft

If he is confirmed by the Senate, Benton, who is a sales consultant by trade, will become the first director in the history of the Selective Service who has not served in any branch of the military.
Click to expand...

Kastrioti said:
I don't see the big deal, probably standard military procedure. Do you want him to hold a press conference stating exactly at what time he authorized the use of the bomb?
Click to expand...

It's the first time the bomb has been used. The White House did hold a press conference about it, so they thought it was significant. If the White House wanted to say that the President authorized the Military to use the MOAB at their discretion in Afghanistan, they would have. They explicitly and repeatedly refused to say if it's use was approved at all.

I want the White House to be able to state who is in control of our nations vast arsenal, so yes, knowing the exact chain of command involved with this bombing would be good. It's absolutely abnormal for this information to be withheld.
 
B

BlastProcessing

Member
Maxim726X said:
Mattis and McMaster are more than capable, and they likely make the final decisions.
Click to expand...

It takes a large team with strong leadership to provide the consistent actions that are necessary to deal with foreign threats. Everything from the Military to the State Department to the President needs to work in concert. These are almost impossible, usually intractable problems. I'm not comfortable with the idea that two dudes will probably be able to cover it. Especially when either could be fired at any moment if they displease the President.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Guardian: Israel asked US for green light to bomb nuclear sites in Iran
3
809
Zapages replied
  • Locked
US says 5k lb bunker busters aren't enough - in market for 30 ton variant
2
62
2K
Phoenix replied
  • Locked
Halo 3 Story Line?
9
913
BMAN replied
Top Bottom