US dropping the largest 'MOAB' on ISIS targets in Afghanistan

[Argus]

3 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

Hiring mercenaries would probably be the worst thing they could do. As you see in Mosul, these things can drag on and on. Because mercenaries are just doing their job, man. And if the war ends, then what? They'd be out of work. No more US money.

Hiring mercenaries would be like hiring any other kind of contractor. They have deadlines and goals and bonuses and penalties. And given the cost of modern missiles - I think the Tomahawks were a million and a half apiece, for example, and the MOAB over $300m you could get a lot more bang for your buck by sending in mercenaries. They'd be damned useful in Iraq too if there was a large, reasonably well-trained mercenary group available.

[Argus]

3 hours ago, GostHacked said:

Remember, Osama Bin Laden was one of those mercenaries back in the day.  Supporting him turned out well. :/

No, he actually wasn't.

[blackbird]

I will deign to say it was the U.S. military that made the decision to drop the bomb, not necessarily Trump himself, although he may have been asked.  At least that is the impression I got from the news. 

[kactus]

Well according to this news source it was the commander in chief who authorised the bomb.....

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/donald-trump-moab-us-bomb-afghanistan-mother-of-all-response-statement-a7683221.html

Quote

"Everybody knows exactly what happened and what I do is I authorise my military. We have the greatest military in the world and they've done their job as usual. So, we have given them total authorisation," he said.

In all honesty though listening to him is like a child with dyslexia. Limited vocabulary confined to few words..."bad deal", "good job", "beautiful babies"... 

 

Edited April 14, 2017 by kactus

[blackbird]

48 minutes ago, kactus said:

Well according to this news source it was the commander in chief who authorised the bomb.....

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/donald-trump-moab-us-bomb-afghanistan-mother-of-all-response-statement-a7683221.html

In all honesty though listening to him is like a child with dyslexia. Limited vocabulary confined to few words..."bad deal", "good job", "beautiful babies"... 

 

 

2 hours ago, Argus said:

Hiring mercenaries would be like hiring any other kind of contractor. They have deadlines and goals and bonuses and penalties. And given the cost of modern missiles - I think the Tomahawks were a million and a half apiece, for example, and the MOAB over $300m you could get a lot more bang for your buck by sending in mercenaries. They'd be damned useful in Iraq too if there was a large, reasonably well-trained mercenary group available.

I don't think they had the option of sending in mercenaries.  It is probably very difficult and complicated to do that. 

I doubt the U.S. government uses large number of mercenary armed forces.  They have their own military and send them where they need to.  That isn't done lightly.   Sometimes, things go wrong when they send in armed forces as they learned in Mogadishu, Somalia around 1990.  So it's not always easy to do that.  Read the book by General Boykin who is a retired lieutenant general who spend much of his life in the special forces (similar to navy seals).  Book is Never Surrender.  He has a Facebook page.  He tells about the different assignments they had to go on.  They still do that kind of thing.  Possibly this ISIS one in Afghanistan was considered too risky to send in special forces.  Maybe they decided the bomb was less risky for U.S. forces.  Almost zero risk to men.

Edited April 14, 2017 by blackbird

[OftenWrong]

5 hours ago, kactus said:

Daisy cutter was tested in Afghanistan in 2011. MOAB is different....

It was used as a bunker buster. It had a very high mass and hardened tip for maximum penetration into the ground. That was its purpose. The fact that 35 people died is coincidental. US should be congratulated for carrying out the mission with only minimal casualties. Instead, we hear complaints from the most bizarre corners that not enough people died.

[hot enough]

On 4/13/2017 at 5:08 PM, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Too bad...if you always leave things to be done by the Americans, then the Americans will do things the American way.

 

 

War crimes, vicious war crimes and more vicious war crimes. The American way. 

[kactus]

5 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

It was used as a bunker buster. It had a very high mass and hardened tip for maximum penetration into the ground. That was its purpose. The fact that 35 people died is coincidental. US should be congratulated for carrying out the mission with only minimal casualties. Instead, we hear complaints from the most bizarre corners that not enough people died.

When a POTUS tries to pick up as many fights with countries from the most hotspot corners of the world simultaneously (namely DPRK, Syria and Afghanistan) then one has to wonder what is the objective of the mission. IMHO, this decision by Trump has diluted the US strategy on foreign policy and only reveals a president just happy enough to see his popularity ratings going up....

[bush_cheney2004]

4 minutes ago, kactus said:

When a POTUS tries to pick up as many fights with countries from the most hotspot corners of the world simultaneously (namely DPRK, Syria and Afghanistan) then one has to wonder what is the objective of the mission. IMHO, this decision by Trump has diluted the US strategy on foreign policy and only reveals a president just happy enough to see his popularity ratings going up....

 

Even a "diluted" U.S. foreign policy around the world still has more impact and relevance than the foreign policy of many other nations, including Canada.   President Trump was elected for a change from the previous administration, which also had access to GBU-43 bombs, but never used one.

 

[kactus]

It transpires the Russians have their own version of MOAB which they call it FOAB and four times more powerful than the american version. Next thing to a nuclear bomb without radiations...

http://uk.businessinsider.com/foab-vs-moab-bomb-damage-2017-4?utm_content=buffere862d&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer-bi&r=US&IR=T

"Unlike the MOAB, the FOAB is a thermobaric weapon, meaning the primary goal is to burn up a target — so it forms a humongous fireball."

"Upon detonation in a FOAB, the high explosives rapidly spread out the fuel, helping it burn up as quickly as possible. The explosion can deliver an otherworldy surge of heat to anything within about 1,000 feet and gobbles up most of the oxygen in the blast zone."

Well guess what? This is gonna look like arms rave on whoever can flex their muscle in the area. Russia v US of A. But again what is the end game and at what cost?

[cannuck]

I doubt the CIC planned the attack, but definitely would have to authorize it.

Rare opportunity to deliver a message to daesh with no civvies around (as this seems to be a command center), and as Rue had mentioned earlier, put Russia, Assad and Kim DUNG heap on notice as well.

I would seriously doubt the actual cost of one MOAB is $800mm, as that is probably related to the programme costs including a mess of R&D and the usual very large chunk of pork thrown in to feed the trough.

[GostHacked]

On 4/14/2017 at 6:59 PM, kactus said:

Well according to this news source it was the commander in chief who authorised the bomb.....

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/donald-trump-moab-us-bomb-afghanistan-mother-of-all-response-statement-a7683221.html

In all honesty though listening to him is like a child with dyslexia. Limited vocabulary confined to few words..."bad deal", "good job", "beautiful babies"... 

 

Hey we can still run with 'Yes we can!',  if you like.

[hot enough]

The new US developed, US military, non-commercially available nanothermites are going to make these look like firecrackers. A "new generation" of super explosives, super thermites, all from nano scale technology.

[Hydraboss]

On 4/17/2017 at 1:30 PM, hot enough said:

A "new generation" of super explosives, super thermites, all from nano scale technology.

I'm curious where in the world the US found nano-sized chemists to create the nanothermites?  Seems a bit far fetched to me, but I guess anything's possible.

 

Now, if they stumble across the technology to create nanotermites, the southern US housing industry is totally screwed.