Trump Foreign Policy

[zoogs]

It's GPS guided...so technically not a "dumb bomb".

You're right. This is my bad.

 

Spec sheet: http://www.deagel.com/Defensive-Weapons/GBU-43B_a000978001.aspx

 

I remember reading about this bomb back when it was first tested and I was really into keeping up with military technology.

 

Nonetheless, my issue with it is it doesn't seem very useful tactically. Perhaps I'm missing the point, but wide-area soft target destruction weapons seem very conventional in their application. ISIS in some senses is a more conventional terrorist opponent than we've had in years past, I suppose.

 

It'll be interesting to see why that particular bomb was used this time in this situation.

Yeah, I have more questions than answers here. I first read about it as a retaliation to a Green Beret's death in the region requested by a military commander. It seemed like an outsize response.

 

I'm hesitant to really tie this to Trump, despite this being the foreign policy thread. However, it doesn't escape my notice that Trump is really effective at winning the media cycle and this sort of thing is an unequivocal win for him. It's a real crowd pleaser.

[GM_Tood]

This bomb was used on the tunnel systems ISIS is using in that area. I think this type of bomb is the most effective we have for cave/tunnels.

 

Foreign policy wise I think this shows that we aren't afraid to use weapons like this to get the job done. It's been around since 2003....

 

It should also send hopefully send Afghanistan a message that we will do what it takes to win this war against ISIS/Taliban and for them to stop supporting..."allegedly"...these groups.

[zoogs]

If it's the most effective bomb we have for caves and tunnels, why hasn't it been used before? If it has to be delivered by a cargo plane, is it still our most effective weapon for this purpose? If we're going after tunnel networks, why aren't we using penetrator weapons deployed from our strike aircraft?

 

I agree that there's a lot of send-the-message here. There's also a lot of this-will-get-articles-written-about-it in a way that GBU-28s would not be.

[GM_Tood]

Thermobaric bombs are the most effective against cave/tunnel systems...and MOAB is the biggest thermobaric bomb we got. The US Military has used smaller laser guided 2000lb thermobaric weapons against caves/tunnels in this region before (in 2002). Not sure why it hasn't been used before.

 

Edit for link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermobaric_weapon

[BigRedBuster]

This is bigger but similar to the "Bunker Busters" we used sparingly in other gulf war action. The way I understand it, they were targeting tunnels being used by ISIS. So, obviously this would be the appropriate bomb.

 

I really don't like civilian lives being lost. That is really the main part I would have a problem with here. I really don't have a problem if this was done to "send a message".

 

Also, I watched about an hour of CNN and didn't see any coverage glorifying the "cool factor" of this bomb.

[zoogs]

This is bigger but similar to the "Bunker Busters" we used sparingly in other gulf war action. The way I understand it, they were targeting tunnels being used by ISIS. So, obviously this would be the appropriate bomb.

Actually, my understanding was that they're specifically different weapons. Bunker busters are penetration bombs and these are not. GM-Tood is right; they are 'thermobaric'. Nonetheless, I think you're right that they're effective against caves if the point is to burn up a large area underground. I'll try to dig up some better information about the why's here. Thermobaric bombs are not by my understanding some newfangled development, and we have plenty of smaller-sized ones that can be deployed from combat aircraft rather than C-130s.

 

GM, I get the feeling we'd have a good time talking military stuff in general

 

Also, I watched about an hour of CNN and didn't see any coverage glorifying the "cool factor" of this bomb.

Perhaps we have vastly different impressions of what the media is reporting. I haven't watched any cable news, just did a survey of the articles.

 

We don't affectionately call this the "Mother of All Bombs" because it's a weapon *not* meant to be glorified. When it was tested, wave of articles. Now that it's been used, wave of articles. To be fair, everything in our arsenal is meant to be glorified. It's something I both partake in and am troubled by.

 

We are bombing ISIS constantly and have been for years. But now there's a wave of articles because the US just dropped a big ass bomb. Do you see what I'm getting at?

[BigRedBuster]

 

This is bigger but similar to the "Bunker Busters" we used sparingly in other gulf war action. The way I understand it, they were targeting tunnels being used by ISIS. So, obviously this would be the appropriate bomb.

Actually, my understanding was that they're specifically different weapons. Bunker busters are penetration bombs and these are not. GM-Tood is right; they are 'thermobaric'. Nonetheless, I think you're right that they're effective against caves if the point is to burn up a large area underground. I'll try to dig up some better information about the why's here. Thermobaric bombs are not by my understanding some newfangled development, and we have plenty of smaller-sized ones that can be deployed from combat aircraft rather than C-130s.

 

GM, I get the feeling we'd have a good time talking military stuff in general

 

Also, I watched about an hour of CNN and didn't see any coverage glorifying the "cool factor" of this bomb.

Perhaps we have vastly different impressions of what the media is reporting. I haven't watched any cable news, just did a survey of the articles.

 

We don't affectionately call this the "Mother of All Bombs" because it's a weapon *not* meant to be glorified. When it was tested, wave of articles. Now that it's been used, wave of articles. To be fair, everything in our arsenal is meant to be glorified. It's something I both partake in and am troubled by.

 

We are bombing ISIS constantly and have been for years. But now there's a wave of articles because the US just dropped a big ass bomb. Do you see what I'm getting at?

 

The media isn't the ones that came up with "Mother of All Bombs". What I have seen is the media saying that's the nick name for it the military gave it only to point out how big they view this bomb. In fact, the first few reports I saw had it as "Massive Ordinance Air Blast" which is it's formal name.

 

And...it is similar to the Bunker Busters in that it can take out under ground installations like bunkers or tunnels.

[Moiraine]

The ewoks who, armed with spears and rocks, took down an AT-ST had big dicks.

 

David of David and Goliath fame had a big dick.

 

The dudes played by shirtless sexy men in 300 had big dicks.

 

 

Dropping a bomb from a plane on people who can't see your face has nothing to do with big dickedness.

 

Before anyone misconstrues my post, I'm not against dropping bombs. Killing the bad guys and not killing innocents or ourselves is the best way to do it. But that doesn't make it brave or manly. It shows we have science and $.

[zoogs]

Yes, the media didn't come up with the name. But they latch on to it, lovingly. We're built to love outsize shows of force and the media is a vehicle for this. To some extent I don't even have a problem with that. If this had been "F-22 does awesome stuff with the JSOW" or "US accomplishes major strategic objective with B-2 run", fine.

 

I rather think the distinguishing characteristic of this attack is that it uses a weapon not similar to any that has ever been used before. Getting to say "this is the first time we used this, and it's so much more tonnage than our other bombs" was I suspect the entire point.

 

Here's Glenn Greenwald. I like his ability to stick to his principles (whether I agree or not) and not restrict his criticism to partisan lines:

 

https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/852587086951702528

 

 

And here's some coverage from the Esquire on our general love affair with airpower: http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a54446/what-is-moab-bomb/

 

Is this any wonder that, generally speaking, the American public thinks that violence committed antiseptically from afar really does change war and makes it viable to just hit targets from the sky and, voila, war is won?

[BigRedBuster]

The ewoks who, armed with spears and rocks, took down an AT-ST had big dicks.

 

David of David and Goliath fame had a big dick.

 

The dudes played by shirtless sexy men in 300 had big dicks.

 

 

Dropping a bomb from a plane on people who can't see your face has nothing to do with big dickedness.

 

Before anyone misconstrues my post, I'm not against dropping bombs. Killing the bad guys and not killing innocents or ourselves is the best way to do it. But that doesn't make it brave or manly. It shows we have science and $.

Again, I'm not sure where you are seeing people with this attitude.

 

Maybe I'm just not looking at the same things.

[GM_Tood]

BTW...Russia developed "The Father Of All Bombs" and is supposedly 4 times as powerful. So I am guessing the US is now developing the Mother In-Law Of All Bombs which will out pace that.

[knapplc]

I think this is being "glorified" by the media for the same reason that explosion episodes of Mythbusters are so popular. It's big and explodey and that's cool. There's no denying that.

 

There's no denying that kind of thing provides good optics, too. We should be wary of that, if this is being used today for limited military effectiveness and big gain. We also can't deny that Trump's optics the past two weeks have been pretty bad, and not uncoincidentally we've had two high-profile bombings in the past few days.

[Moiraine]

 

 

The ewoks who, armed with spears and rocks, took down an AT-ST had big dicks.

 

David of David and Goliath fame had a big dick.

 

The dudes played by shirtless sexy men in 300 had big dicks.

 

 

Dropping a bomb from a plane on people who can't see your face has nothing to do with big dickedness.

 

Before anyone misconstrues my post, I'm not against dropping bombs. Killing the bad guys and not killing innocents or ourselves is the best way to do it. But that doesn't make it brave or manly. It shows we have science and $.

Again, I'm not sure where you are seeing people with this attitude.

 

Maybe I'm just not looking at the same things.

You're just over reading into my post. I didn't say anyone had an attitude. I said dropping a bomb has nothing to do with dick size. Earlier you replied to a post that specifically said the US is swinging its big D.

[knapplc]

And here's some coverage from the Esquire on our general love affair with airpower: http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a54446/what-is-moab-bomb/

 

Is this any wonder that, generally speaking, the American public thinks that violence committed antiseptically from afar really does change war and makes it viable to just hit targets from the sky and, voila, war is won?

 

War-by-remote-control is the future. The less we can put our people in harm's way while still projecting power, the better. That's why cruise missiles are used more often than commando teams.

 

I mean, what nation wouldn't prefer an "antiseptic" air war over putting their sons & brothers on the battlefield?

 

This isn't an indictment of the American public, as the Esquire author seems to intend. It's a normal human desire to see our soldiers beat their soldiers.

[GM_Tood]

 

 

The ewoks who, armed with spears and rocks, took down an AT-ST had big dicks.

 

David of David and Goliath fame had a big dick.

 

The dudes played by shirtless sexy men in 300 had big dicks.

 

 

Dropping a bomb from a plane on people who can't see your face has nothing to do with big dickedness.

 

Before anyone misconstrues my post, I'm not against dropping bombs. Killing the bad guys and not killing innocents or ourselves is the best way to do it. But that doesn't make it brave or manly. It shows we have science and $.

Again, I'm not sure where you are seeing people with this attitude.

 

Maybe I'm just not looking at the same things.

You're just over reading into my post. I didn't say anyone had an attitude. I said dropping a bomb has nothing to do with dick size. Earlier you replied to a post that specifically said the US is swinging its big D.

 

The military is our (USA) dick when it comes to how we are seen by the rest of the world. It's true..science.