Largest Non-Nuclear Bomb in world dropped on Afghanistan

Samaris

I read yesterday (still very close to when the attack happened, so reports were probably still shaky) that a civilian man and his son were killed in the blast. I don't know if it's accurate.

Dubh Linn

Unfortunately, I could almost guarantee that.

Noddyholder

Samaris wrote: »

I read yesterday (still very close to when the attack happened, so reports were probably still shaky) that a civilian man and his son were killed in the blast. I don't know if it's accurate.

I would be of the mind that there were a lot more than that, probably never hear the truth, In the bigger picture we will have to wait & see what damage it has caused to ISIS.

Dubh Linn

Like I said, 36-100 ISIS casualties.

Autonomous Cowherd

I made an error when reporting it was 300 million per bomb. I think that is the cost of the whole MOAB program.

Just correcting the record.

dr.fuzzenstein

Dubh Linn wrote: »

Like I said, 36-100 ISIS casualties.

As much as I think that simply dropping bombs cannot succeed without boots on the ground and that this is a doomed box ticking exercise, I cannot help but feel a certain, grim satisfaction.
ISIS are vermin that must be eradicated and since they all signed up for a grim, violent, pointless death I'm glad they got it.
They are hate filled creatures that delight in killing, maiming and raping. I would personally feed them slowly feet first into a shredder and not feel sorry for them.

Dubh Linn

Former Afghan President Hamid Karzai has now said on twitter that the strike was "inhuman". What on earth is he talking about there?

Shurimgreat

Probably a demo to Russia, North Korea and Syria of US military might as much as anything.

Autonomous Cowherd

Dubh Linn wrote: »

Former Afghan President Hamid Karzai has now said on twitter that the strike was "inhuman". What on earth is he talking about there?

I think he is talking about Afghanistan being used as a casual testing ground for powerful and dangerous weapons. But then again Afghanistan has been pretty much torn asunder for decades by the 'civilised' world. I met quite a number of people in the long ago who had made the land trip through Afghanistan to India and they spoke of a beautiful culture and land full of generous hospital people. Some day maybe history will write the truth of what empirical forces did in these times to ancient cultures and peoples burdened with oil in their ground.

Will I Am Not

The sad thing about this is there are many people that will be disappointed if there is no collateral damage meaning that they won't get to say their piece.
That's the way things are now.

Dubh Linn

My point was, a former Afghan president saying that it was "inhumane" to kill about 100 ISIS militants who, don't forget, he was battling only a few years ago. I mean, what a pointless statement. If a verifiable source was able to confirm that there were civilian casualties then, fine, fair enough, but saying that the death of a load of IS fighters is a godawful tragedy is just, imo wrong.

Autonomous Cowherd

The Fake Sheikh wrote: »

The sad thing about this is there are many people that will be disappointed if there is no collateral damage meaning that they won't get to say their piece.
That's the way things are now.

It's a kind of crazy misanthropic view to have that if people express shock and reserve at the escalation of warmongering and the type of weaponry that will be considered admissible from here on out that they are automatically sympathizers with Salafist monsters and their brutal ideology. Weird.

For my part it is not the killing of terrorists that would be a problem, it is the machismo that is demonstrated in this act that bellows loud and clear that the force policing the world will not feel circumscribed by any considerations for collateral damage when deciding what weapons they aught to unleash on foreign soil. The skies the limit for the big boys it seems.

And yet the same force chokes and splutters on its cake at the thoughts of certain kinds of WMDs and declares red lines over certain kinds of civilian casualties.

Gatling

Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »

And yet the same force chokes and splutters on its cake at the thoughts of certain kinds of WMDs and declares red lines over certain kinds of civilian casualties.

Have you been commenting on the assad chemical weapons attacks at all

Dubh Linn

Imo, Trump should be executing an all-out blitz on Syria, Mosul, Afghanistan and the like, just to eliminate IS and Assad in Syria. But no, he won't do it. For now...

Strong Life in Dublin

B_Wayne wrote: »

Can you explain to me how this will actually damage Isis? They're not a standard organisation, it adds to their propaganda and I'll guarantee that recruitment will go about as a result of it.

This type of bomb will show ISIS that they have no where to his because the Moab will collapse caves they hide in.

Strong Life in Dublin

Gringo180 wrote: »

Your hypocrisy is astounding. You want Assad out for apparently using chemical weapons in Syria but are in here praising America for dropping one of the biggest bombs used in warfare. Lol

How can you not see the difference? Chemical weapons on civilians vs bomb on ISIS in caves

tomwaterford

Strong Life in Dublin wrote: »

This type of bomb will show ISIS that they have no where to his because the Moab will collapse caves they hide in.

And if they sit in city areas and residential neighbour hoods....what then?


Say you find a small village of 200 people and Isis are holding an agm there and all their top leaders/commander blah blah etc are there....and leveling it with this would conclusively neat Isis for good


At what point do you say it's too many civilians dead?


Deos anyone in all reality think this will beat them....il support it 100% if it removes Isis capacity to carry out attacks and it's all over in <6 months

Atoms for Peace

Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »

I think he is talking about Afghanistan being used as a casual testing ground for powerful and dangerous weapons. But then again Afghanistan has been pretty much torn asunder for decades by the 'civilised' world. I met quite a number of people in the long ago who had made the land trip through Afghanistan to India and they spoke of a beautiful culture and land full of generous hospital people. Some day maybe history will write the truth of what empirical forces did in these times to ancient cultures and peoples burdened with oil in their ground.

Their is no oil in Afghanistan. The major cause of strife there is internal power wrangles between various tribal groups fueled by cold war era politics.

Mickeroo

Dubh Linn wrote: »

My point was, a former Afghan president saying that it was "inhumane" to kill about 100 ISIS militants who, don't forget, he was battling only a few years ago. I mean, what a pointless statement. If a verifiable source was able to confirm that there were civilian casualties then, fine, fair enough, but saying that the death of a load of IS fighters is a godawful tragedy is just, imo wrong.

I don't see the issue, you can think someone deserves to be taken out but not be ok with the method used.

Dubh Linn

The Taliban owns half of the hole of a country, Daesh are starting to eat into the Taliban, and then of course there has to be the tribal groups slugging it out. The country will never be 100% functional, no amount of US occupation or aerial bombardment will solve that issue.

josip

Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »

lol

It's nothing to do with it not going my way. I just dislike the gloating and slavering over mega bombs. 95000 people live in Archin district. I'd say a lot of them are bleeding from their ears right now and I just can't abide the panting over a war machine

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-afghanistan-bomb-idUSKBN17F27U

Autonomous Cowherd

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

Their is no oil in Afghanistan. The major cause of strife there is internal power wrangles between various tribal groups fueled by cold war era politics.

Sorry. I should have qualified - and those places finding themselves burdened to be along the route of desired and desirable pipelines that would unlock Central Asian / Middle Eastern resources for the people who like to think they own everything. Like Afghanistan.
And Syria, for example.

Strong Life in Dublin

tomwaterford wrote: »

And if they sit in city areas and residential neighbour hoods....what then?


Say you find a small village of 200 people and Isis are holding an agm there and all their top leaders/commander blah blah etc are there....and leveling it with this would conclusively neat Isis for good


At what point do you say it's too many civilians dead?


Deos anyone in all reality think this will beat them....il support it 100% if it removes Isis capacity to carry out attacks and it's all over in <6 months

Well that is a hurdle they will overcome when they get to it, but there would not have been many innocent people in this cave network

ilkhanid

CPTM wrote: »

Imagine if someone from that part of the world dropped a bomb that big outside New York somewhere. Is that how the Afghan people will see this?

Where can we see a true account of the real impact in terms of enemy Vs civilian lives lost. Any non-biased reporters that anyone is following?

You do know that the Coalition forces are working with the Afghan authorities, so that comparison is bonkers? For all we know the local Afgan people may be delighted to see IS blown up with such ferocity. Even the Taliban, of all people. are fighting with them. If IS are behaving the way they behave everywhere else, then they have the local population terrorised.

bangkok wrote: »

obama ran a ****ing torture camp in Guantanamo Bay ffs holding prisoners that never went to trial!!!!

Idiotic post. Obama inherited the Guantanamo mess from Bush the younger, attempted to close it but ran into all kinds of obstructions, legal, bureaucratic etc from Congress and other sources. There are far,far fewer in Guantanamo now than there were when he came into office.

Yourself isit wrote: »

People who criticise a war criminal like Obama................

Evidence please.

Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/us-drops-largest-nonnuclear-bomb-on-afghanistan-21000lb-moab-used-for-first-time-35621197.html

This world is a crazy place. Do they even give a damn for the innocent people who happen to live in that area

The best thing that can be done for the innocent people who happen to live in that area is to destroy IS. Now if you have an another idea how to do that....we're all ears.

neonsofa

Strong Life in Dublin wrote: »

This type of bomb will show ISIS that they have no where to his because the Moab will collapse caves they hide in.

I'm (obviously) very ignorant on all this and find it difficult to get my head around a lot of posts on the thread, but aren't "ISIS" spread out everywhere? Isn't that the difficulty with fighting them because they have "soldiers " doing their work all over the world? I understand that there are army (?) bases etc which are being targeted atm, but is it not impossible to tackle ISIS generally due to the recruitment all over the western world too? Or have I got it all wrong? Like I said, I don't really understand it so if someone wants to dumb it down for me and explain why I'm wrong I'd appreciate it! The way I believed it to be is similar to religion/church, the Pope and Vatican may be in Rome but the religion exists everywhere and an attack on the vatican would only strengthen (?) the followers elsewhere.

Dubh Linn

ISIS are already dying, the US just needs to blast them out of their misery, that's all.

Yourself isit

Dubh Linn wrote: »

ISIS are already dying, the US just needs to blast them out of their misery, that's all.

Except in Syria where they are useful in toppling assad, who claims to be bombing isis and Al Queda but is bombing "his people".

tomwaterford

Strong Life in Dublin wrote: »

Well that is a hurdle they will overcome when they get to it, but there would not have been many innocent people in this cave network

This is ture....but I'd you start saying 5 or 6 innocents is ok
Next is 10-20...where do you stop?


Fwiw I do think it was a good idea on paper....but there deosnt seem to been any attempt to even suggest there was senior members or anything about there
Just that trump needed positive publicity facing into the weekend....this is what the cynic in me believes

Yourself isit

Gatling wrote: »

Have you been commenting on the assad chemical weapons attacks at all

It's your hypocrisy that's on display. Assad bombs civilian areas to get terrorists = evil. The US does it = good.

Yourself isit

Dubh Linn wrote: »

The governor of the province said it was the biggest explosion he'd ever seen.

It was bigger than hiroshima

Dubh Linn

Yourself isit wrote: »

It was bigger than hiroshima

I strongly doubt that he, the governor, ever saw Hiroshima.

It really should be Damascus that Trump should be bombing, like when the missiles hit Baghdad in 2003, toppling Saddam Hussein's bloody regime and plunging the country into even more chaos.

And there was me thinking that the US were over and done with in terms of Afghanistan...

Sofiztikated

ilkhanid wrote: »

You do know that the Coalition forces are working with the Afghan authorities, so that comparison is bonkers? For all we know the local Afgan people may be delighted to see IS blown up with such ferocity. Even the Taliban, of all people. are fighting with them. If IS are behaving the way they behave everywhere else, them they have the local population terrorised.

The Taliban condemned the use of the bomb, saying in a statement, "Using this massive bomb cannot be justified and will leave a material and psychological impact on our people."

Apparently killed 36 combatants. Out of an estimated 600-800 in Afghanistan.

Dubh Linn

Yes, the Taliban either can't stand ISIS's brutality or they just want their territory back.

In a place like Nangarhar province, where the strike on the cave system happened, which is near the Afghan-Pakistani border, fighting would be rife and the tensions would be very high all the time. Infighting between local tribes, Taliban or IS.

The BBC is now reporting that 'dozens' of people are now dead in the airstrike.

ilkhanid

Sofiztikated wrote: »

The Taliban condemned the use of the bomb, saying in a statement, "Using this massive bomb cannot be justified and will leave a material and psychological impact on our people."

Apparently killed 36 combatants. Out of an estimated 600-800 in Afghanistan.

The Taliban condemned it :eek:. You'd have to listen to reputable people like them. And what hypocrites! What about the impact their terror has had on the people of Afghanistan over decades? It's laughable that a group that once murdered 5-6 thousand people and shot women in the head before crowds of people is suddenly squeamish about the loss of life.

Yourself isit wrote: »

Yeah I don't like isis either. Although the US seem OK with them in Syria. However I don't think that bombs of this magnitude can differentiate between civilians and isis

OK? Is that the same Syria where US-backed Kurdish forces are preparing to attack IS-held Raqqa? And where the USAF constantly bombs Islamic state?
Are you posting from some alternate Universe?

Yourself isit wrote: »

Isn't this kind of bomb no different - except in magnitude - to barrel bombs? Effectively unguided munitions. If assad drops barrel bombs on areas riddled with Al nusra, Al Queda, or isis he's accuses of bombing his own people, the US is heroic when it does it.

Assad drops barrel bombs in towns. This took place in a cave complex in the countryside. Very likely it was discharged in such a way as to impact inside the complex.

Dubh Linn

This latest airstrike just exposes that IS holds more territory than you think.

Gatling

Yourself isit wrote: »

It's your hypocrisy that's on display. Assad bombs civilian areas to get terrorists = evil. The US does it = good.

Assad uses chemical weapons gets cheered by randomer's on the internet,
Then cry when America stops them

Mickeroo

Yourself isit wrote: »

It was bigger than hiroshima

Anything I've seen says it was over 1000 times less powerful (not that I know much about bomb outputs)

Yourself isit

ilkhanid wrote: »

The Taliban condemned it :eek:. You'd have to listen to reputable people like them.



OK? Is that the same Syria where US-backed Kurdish forces are preparing to attack IS-held Raqqa? And where the USAF constantly bombs Islamic state?
Are you posting from some alternate Universe?

Isis grew to its size in Syria under the US air shield. It was Russian intervention that started their decline. And to a certain extent public opinion in the West. The US remains allied with Al nusra - which is basically Al Queda.

Assad drops barrel bombs in towns. This took place in a cave complex in the countryside. Very likely it was discharged in such a way as to impact inside the complex.

Sure because the Americans are so extremely moral. I wonder though what if a dictator or Russia had used the exact same bomb in the exact area. What woukd the reaction be? Probably regime change.

Gatling

The current odd situation in Afghanistan is Iran and russia trying to sit down with the Taliban , like russia didn't do enough damage in Afghanistan for those with short memories or are to young to remember

keeponhurling

Dubh Linn wrote: »

The governor of the province said it was the biggest explosion he'd ever seen.

If he actually said that he had seen bigger, I'd be very curious to know where and when

Yourself isit

Gatling wrote: »

Assad uses chemical weapons gets cheered by randomer's on the internet,
Then cry when America stops them

We doubt that he did it. Keep mispresening my posts and I will report you.

And we are all randomers on the Internet. You more than most since, unlike me, you seem to have all day to post.

The fact is you are happy with bombs that kill civilians provided the yanks do the killings. Team America.

Gatling

keeponhurling wrote: »

If he actually said that he had seen bigger, I'd be very curious to know where and when

Probably the nuke that was set off in Yemen been discussed at one point

soups05

keeponhurling wrote: »

If he actually said that he had seen bigger, I'd be very curious to know where and when

here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBC1Qob27sM&ab_channel=PerfectCode

Gatling

Yourself isit wrote: »

We

There is no we in I





(Unless )

Yourself isit

Gatling wrote: »

The current odd situation in Afghanistan is Iran and russia trying to sit down with the Taliban , like russia didn't do enough damage in Afghanistan for those with short memories or are to young to remember

The Russians did that damage decades ago. The US is in the 16th year of a war there. Oh and it was US involvement in the support of Islamic "freedom fighters" that help ignite the Islamist craze. This is a method of operation they have applied to this day as they fund "moderate" (in reality extreme Islamist) rebels in Syria.

XsApollo

Gatling wrote: »

The current odd situation in Afghanistan is Iran and russia trying to sit down with the Taliban , like russia didn't do enough damage in Afghanistan for those with short memories or are to young to remember

And what exactly did the US do when the USSR invaded Afghanistan, or have you forgotten.
They armed ,trained and funded the mujahedeen who then turned into the taliban.

Yourself isit

Gatling wrote: »

There is no we in I





(Unless )

We meaning the posters opposed to your Team America **** Yeh position.

Gatling

XsApollo wrote: »

They armed ,trained and funded the mujahedeen who then turned into the taliban.

The Mujaheddin didn't​ turn into the Taliban badly misinformed ,
The Taliban is a totally separate group most of the Mujaheddin became the northern alliance.

What's next America trained bin laden

Gatling

Yourself isit wrote: »

We.

I






Anyway your spoiling a happy thread

Yourself isit

Gatling wrote: »

The Mujaheddin didn't​ turn into the Taliban badly misinformed ,
The Taliban is a totally separate group most of the Mujaheddin became the northern alliance.

What's next America trained bin laden

Eh. They funded Osama bin laden. He was one of their main guys. In fact that's when the US Saudi alliance began.