If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Telegraph)   Note to Iran and its heavily fortified nuclear facilities: US Air Force's massive 30,000lb bunker-buster bomb is "ready to go"   (telegraph.co.uk) divider line 176
    More: Interesting, Bunker Busters, U.S. Air Force, Iran, Natanz, Iranians, Qom, shipping lanes  
•       •       •

14173 clicks; posted to Main » on 27 Jul 2012 at 3:20 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



176 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-07-27 01:46:49 PM  
Apocalyptic War porn Armageddon scenarios FTW!

/ Plus Xtians actually believe zombie jesus is going to come back and kick brown person ass! All while high-fiving Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney
 
2012-07-27 01:57:18 PM  
If I may beg the indulgences of you for the moment. Oh my this causes much of the concern to be because unlike the person who has posted above from me with the sarcasm I should state that I look at all of the issues from two sides and this is not the situation upon which is the exception to the life rule of two-sided looking of me. One side of this is that we must set them up the bomb and the other side of this is we must not set them up the bomb. I do not wish to be the judge of this but if I was the judge of this I would look at this from these sides.

The first side of this is that we should set them up the bomb. This side says that the concern upon which is noted is that if the nuclear missile silos of the Iranians are allowed to have existence in the pis of hell of fortification then they will use these on the allies such as Israel and Canada and the fallout of the nuclear waste could make the radioactive Wailing Wall or the radioactive Inuit both of which could cause much suffering to others in the world. From this side it seems as though it would be the necessity to set them up the bomb for which they do not cause the destruction. According to the article upon which is currently linked through the Telegraph.co.uk website the US of America has the 30,000 Labrador bomb upon which it can use to destroy these evil Ruskies...I mean Iranians to the oblivion and prevent the massive use of the weaponry.

The other side of this says look they have told us that they only wish to use this for the purposes of electricity and they seem very much legit. Why would these individuals do the lying to we? If we would set them up the bomb then they would not be able to have the electricity to watch the reruns of Maury and this would cause the dramatic decrease in the sale of American paternity tests to Iran. Do you wish to be the job killer, US of American Air Force Academy Football Team? I do not think you wish for this now do you.

One thing that I can be sure of is that this entire thread will be full of well thought out and purely rational postings such as the own of me. LAUGHTER OL who am I giving the jokings to? Of course it will not as I have seen this from two sides but others will see this from only one side. I do not wish to be the judge of this but do you think that we should do this threatening? I am asking you the Fark.com website and will send the results to the Head Airmaster for the consideration.

You are welcome.
 
2012-07-27 02:12:45 PM  

meow said the dog: If I may beg the indulgences of you for the moment ...


i149.photobucket.com
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2012-07-27 02:49:44 PM  
buried under 33ft feet of earth and 6ft of concrete

10 meters and 2 meters in the original?

That's not nearly enough protection. The other site's mountain might do the job, like Tora Bora.
 
2012-07-27 03:23:00 PM  
cdn204.psbin.com
 
2012-07-27 03:23:06 PM  
Note to America and its lapdog Israel and Britain: Dude, seriously. What's your farking problem?
 
2012-07-27 03:25:53 PM  
this will not end well...

see next post
 
2012-07-27 03:26:10 PM  
Why bother... Can't they just introduce a virus to all their facilities? Seems like it worked before...
 
2012-07-27 03:27:26 PM  

AverageAmericanGuy: Note to America and its lapdog Israel and Britain: Dude, seriously. What's your farking problem?


Seriously, leave them the fark alone. We can barely hold a country that has minimal infrastructure. Iran would be a disaster
 
2012-07-27 03:29:34 PM  
I would not want to go to war with Iran. They've got the US outgunned and outmanned. It'd be like a country-wide suicide mission. Fark that.
 
2012-07-27 03:29:57 PM  

Ow! That was my feelings!: [cdn204.psbin.com image 280x350]


Came for this, leaving to go chainsmoke...
 
2012-07-27 03:31:02 PM  
Awesome, we're going after them with 1940's bomb technology. Wallis would be proud.
 
2012-07-27 03:31:27 PM  

AverageAmericanGuy: Note to America and its lapdog Israel and Britain: Dude, seriously. What's your farking problem?


With a comment like that, you certainly aren't an average american guy....
 
2012-07-27 03:31:59 PM  
Nobel peace prize.
 
2012-07-27 03:32:07 PM  

meow said the dog: You are welcome.


There's an enjoyable ten minute read....
 
2012-07-27 03:35:08 PM  
Meh, we've already screwed the region up badly enough we're kind of painted in this corner.
 
2012-07-27 03:35:47 PM  
Bomb a country for using nuclear power, which you, yourself use?

/f*ck uncle sam
//treat us all like terrorists, don't be surprised when some people start acting like terrorists...
///i studied terrorists in grade school; their names were Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Jackson...
//lh6.googleusercontent.com
 
2012-07-27 03:36:29 PM  
That...wow. Huh. That's coming out at the next staff meeting.
 
2012-07-27 03:36:41 PM  
I sometimes wonder if it might not be more interesting to let them have nuclear weapons.
 
2012-07-27 03:38:46 PM  

Ned Stark: Nobel peace prize.


Alfred would be pleased. He made his fortune in explosives.
 
2012-07-27 03:40:02 PM  
FTFA: 20ft long, 1ft wide weapon

Must have been written by a woman.

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2012-07-27 03:41:47 PM  
www.darkgovernment.com

30,000Lb Bunker Buster
 
2012-07-27 03:42:17 PM  

AverageAmericanGuy: Note to America and its lapdog Israel and Britain: Dude, seriously. What's your farking problem?


Wait, I thought we were Israel's lapdog? Now I'm confused. Who's behind this, U.S. arms manufacturers or the international banking cartel? And whose lapdog is Britain, again?
 
2012-07-27 03:42:46 PM  

whither_apophis: Awesome, we're going after them with 1940's bomb technology. Wallis would be proud.


Well, the end phase is 1940's tech, sure.

However, it is important to note:

"The 20ft long, 1ft wide weapon will be delivered by the B2 stealth bomber"
 
2012-07-27 03:44:14 PM  
ok i am going back to playing civ 5
 
2012-07-27 03:44:46 PM  
Doesn't Israel have it's own military? Maybe we should give them some money so they can afford to bu...oh wait....
 
2012-07-27 03:45:00 PM  
Ain't a hope in hell,
Nothing's gonna bring us down,
The way we fly,
Five miles off the ground,
Because we shoot to kill,
And you know we always will,

It's a Bomber, it's a bomber, it's a bomber

Scream a thousand miles,
Feel the black death rising moan,
Firestorm coming closer,
Napalm to the bone,
Because, you know we do it right,
A mission every night,

It's a Bomber, it's a bomber, it's a bomber

No night fighter,
Gonna stop us getting through,
The sirens make you shiver,
You bet my aim is true,
Because, you know we aim to please,
Bring you to your knees,

It's a Bomber, it's a bomber, it's a bomber
 
2012-07-27 03:45:05 PM  

mbillips: Wait, I thought we were Israel's lapdog? Now I'm confused. Who's behind this, U.S. arms manufacturers or the international banking cartel? And whose lapdog is Britain, again?


The gnomes of Zurich. TRY to keep up, mbilips.
 
2012-07-27 03:45:16 PM  
photos-ak.sparkpeople.com

Another bombshell that is RET TA GO!
 
2012-07-27 03:45:33 PM  
I have the strangest urge to play Command and Conquer Generals Zero Hour...
 
2012-07-27 03:45:49 PM  

mbillips: FTFA: 20ft long, 1ft wide weapon

Must have been written by a woman.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 250x250]


I'm sorry, can you recalculate that in terms of "school buses"? I can only relate to ad-hoc, layman units.

/how many football fields can it penetrate?
 
2012-07-27 03:45:51 PM  

mbillips: AverageAmericanGuy: Note to America and its lapdog Israel and Britain: Dude, seriously. What's your farking problem?

Wait, I thought we were Israel's lapdog? Now I'm confused. Who's behind this, U.S. arms manufacturers or the international banking cartel? And whose lapdog is Britain, again?


The Raj. This is all facilitated by the East India company and Daniel Dravot.
 
2012-07-27 03:46:24 PM  
LET'S GET BOMBED!!
 
2012-07-27 03:47:15 PM  

AverageAmericanGuy: Note to America and its lapdog Israel and Britain: Dude, seriously. What's your farking problem?


9/11 . . . haven't forgotten it.
 
2012-07-27 03:47:44 PM  

AverageAmericanGuy: Note to America and its lapdog Israel and Britain: Dude, seriously. What's your farking problem?



Our politicians have been replaced with psychotic billionaires with companies that make guns.
 
2012-07-27 03:48:16 PM  

Command1: [www.darkgovernment.com image 804x539]

30,000Lb Bunker Buster


I was going to make some lengthy commentary on some of the possible ramifications of that thing and how it represents America's current war-making practices, but I realized that my point basically boiled down to, "Someone's compensating, and because we can."
 
2012-07-27 03:49:13 PM  

Fano: mbillips: AverageAmericanGuy: Note to America and its lapdog Israel and Britain: Dude, seriously. What's your farking problem?

Wait, I thought we were Israel's lapdog? Now I'm confused. Who's behind this, U.S. arms manufacturers or the international banking cartel? And whose lapdog is Britain, again?

The Raj. This is all facilitated by the East India company and Daniel Dravot.


And they'd have gotten away with it if that biatch hadn't bit Danny's cheek.
 
2012-07-27 03:49:34 PM  

mbillips: AverageAmericanGuy: Note to America and its lapdog Israel and Britain: Dude, seriously. What's your farking problem?

Wait, I thought we were Israel's lapdog? Now I'm confused. Who's behind this, U.S. arms manufacturers or the international banking cartel? And whose lapdog is Britain, again?


I blame the Illuminati.
 
2012-07-27 03:49:59 PM  
Thirty. Thousand. Pound. Bomb.

fark humanity. Goddamn.
 
2012-07-27 03:50:14 PM  
Here's a thought. What if neocon moles within the high levels of the departments of State and Defense are lobbying for air strikes that will just HAPPEN to take out Iran's oil fields along with their nuclear infrastructure, thereby driving up the price of U.S.-produced natural gas and shale oil, benefiting THIS GUY.

www.boonepickens.com

I'm not saying T. Boone Pickens is committing treason to line his pockets; I'm just asking a question.
 
2012-07-27 03:50:15 PM  

fireclown: The gnomes of Zurich. TRY to keep up, mbilips.


In fairness, I always thought the nation of Eritrea really controlled the strings of Western government and diplomacy.

Nothing, and I mean NOTHING happens in this world without Eritrea's expressed approval.
 
2012-07-27 03:54:35 PM  
They will name the bomb after Carl Spackler.
 
2012-07-27 03:55:28 PM  

mbillips: Here's a thought. What if neocon moles within the high levels of the departments of State and Defense are lobbying for air strikes that will just HAPPEN to take out Iran's oil fields along with their nuclear infrastructure, thereby driving up the price of U.S.-produced natural gas and shale oil, benefiting THIS GUY.

[www.boonepickens.com image 217x219]

I'm not saying T. Boone Pickens is committing treason to line his pockets; I'm just asking a question.


Ah so that's Pickens' Plan! I thought it was just trying to convince us to frak the hell out of our water supply so he can die with a few more billion in his pockets.
 
2012-07-27 03:56:01 PM  

Fuggin Bizzy: Thirty. Thousand. Pound. Bomb.

fark humanity. Goddamn.


Eh, if you think of it as 15 tons, or 1/125 of a Hiroshima bomb, it doesn't seem so big. We used to have nuclear artillery shells with WAY more explosive force than that. And depth charges (light fuse and get away fast).
 
2012-07-27 03:56:08 PM  

Fuggin Bizzy: Thirty. Thousand. Pound. Bomb.

fark humanity. Goddamn.


but the thing you must remember is that it's not just a big-ass bomb, but the shape of it, the materials, and the guts inside are what make this remarkable. Any chump can load up a huge bomb casing with tons of high explosives, but they're all going to kaboom either in an airburst and knock over all the soft stuff, or mcBOOM when it hits the ground and make a big crater. Your reinforced concrete bunker, buried many feet below that surface, however, may be shaken but still in business.

But this baby, oh no, THIS baby is designed to punch a starter hole, even explode a bit to open it up and get serious penetration, and only then does it unleash the full majesty and fury of the payload. THAT is the genius of this bomb, the ability to maintain integrity as it pounds deep into the loins of our enemy, ramming deep into the interior, before the glorious and inevitable release. Mmmm.
 
2012-07-27 03:58:15 PM  
www.jefferywestover.com
 
2012-07-27 03:58:39 PM  

Command1: [www.darkgovernment.com image 804x539]

30,000Lb Bunker Buster


With that board across its ass, I'm supprised that photo didn't show up in the Kate Gosselin thread.
 
2012-07-27 04:00:20 PM  

AngryJailhouseFistfark: But this baby, oh no, THIS baby is designed to punch a starter hole, even explode a bit to open it up and get serious penetration, and only then does it unleash the full majesty and fury of the payload. THAT is the genius of this bomb, the ability to maintain integrity as it pounds deep into the loins of our enemy, ramming deep into the interior, before the glorious and inevitable release. Mmmm.


i.imgur.com
But how do you feel about your mother?
 
2012-07-27 04:00:49 PM  
urban.derelict: Bomb a country for using nuclear power, which you, yourself use?

/f*ck uncle sam
//treat us all like terrorists, don't be surprised when some people start acting like terrorists...
///i studied terrorists in grade school; their names were Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Jackson...
//[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 640x176]


1/10, ignore historical and situational connotations, yet make false comparison to them. obvious troll is obvious.
 
2012-07-27 04:01:25 PM  
I have been told that I have have a M. O. P.


/I'll take a seat over there.
 
2012-07-27 04:01:59 PM  
this just proves once more of American ingenuity and why we so respected for our entrepreneurialship and our superior critical thinking skills and originality!!!

I mean do you see any other country coming with products like these!? NO! it's always the US who is the first and foremost in everything!
 
2012-07-27 04:02:05 PM  
Would be way cooler if they installed a Davy Crockett inside that mofo...

/1/4 kt FTW!
 
2012-07-27 04:02:11 PM  
Drop this then drop a Russian FOAB in the hole a minute later
/Well I heard that's the way you get rid of bedbugs
 
2012-07-27 04:03:56 PM  
www.infiniteunknown.net
 
2012-07-27 04:04:32 PM  

Command1: [www.darkgovernment.com image 804x539]
30,000Lb Bunker Buster


Wake me when you have something impressive. They were making those back in W2.
 
2012-07-27 04:04:34 PM  

mbillips: FTFA: 20ft long, 1ft wide weapon

Must have been written by a woman.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 250x250]


Exaggerating size tends to be the case of the opposite gender, actually.
 
2012-07-27 04:05:52 PM  

chewielouie: AverageAmericanGuy: Note to America and its lapdog Israel and Britain: Dude, seriously. What's your farking problem?

9/11 . . . haven't forgotten it.


So, we're gonna use this on Saudi Arabia?
 
2012-07-27 04:07:04 PM  

The Incredible Sexual Egg: AverageAmericanGuy: Note to America and its lapdog Israel and Britain: Dude, seriously. What's your farking problem?

Seriously, leave them the fark alone. We can barely hold a country that has minimal infrastructure. Iran would be a disaster


You've just described Iran.

Actually, I doubt we'd try to hold anything.

Really though, at some point a tac nuke has to be more effective and cheaper.
 
2012-07-27 04:07:13 PM  

mbillips: Fuggin Bizzy: Thirty. Thousand. Pound. Bomb.

fark humanity. Goddamn.

Eh, if you think of it as 15 tons, or 1/125 of a Hiroshima bomb, it doesn't seem so big. We used to have nuclear artillery shells with WAY more explosive force than that. And depth charges (light fuse and get away fast).


you're right.. and if you compare Hiroshima and Nagasaki to the core of the Sun it is literally a micro dew drop! yea!! .... what's the big deal?????
 
2012-07-27 04:08:14 PM  
hdhale: Really though, at some point a tac nuke has to be more effective and cheaper.

Uh, no. A tactical nuclear weapon would not only violate nearly every nuclear weapons treaty the US is a signatory to, but instantly earn the United States a persona non grata status among every country in the world.
 
2012-07-27 04:08:41 PM  
While I certainly agree with the rationale for having this bomb, I do hope like hell that it never gets dropped...on Iran or anyplace else....but I would love to see the video of the strike and the aftermath, if it ever is actually deployed...

/don't want to see blood and guts, I just like to watch shiat blow up
 
2012-07-27 04:09:05 PM  
Talk is cheap.
Use it or GTFO.
 
2012-07-27 04:13:44 PM  

mbillips: Fuggin Bizzy: Thirty. Thousand. Pound. Bomb.

fark humanity. Goddamn.

Eh, if you think of it as 15 tons, or 1/125 of a Hiroshima bomb, it doesn't seem so big. We used to have nuclear artillery shells with WAY more explosive force than that. And depth charges (light fuse and get away fast).


Keep in mind - the 30,000 pounds is the total weight of the bomb, not the amount of explosives.
It's "only" packing like 5300 pounds of boom - the rest is inertial penetration capability.
 
2012-07-27 04:13:48 PM  

Command1: [www.darkgovernment.com image 804x539]

30,000Lb Bunker Buster lawn dart.

 
2012-07-27 04:18:22 PM  
Bush/Romney doctrine: "Yer evil, Iran & North Korea! Stop bein' so evil! I will not negotiate with terrists!" :invades Iraq: :Iran and North Korea massively accelerate their nuclear deterrent programs:

Obama doctrine: "You really should rejoin the community of nations, Iran. Let's talk about it." ::stations F-22s and two carriers in the Gulf, publicizes bunker busters::

/Fark independent analysis: Both sides are bad, so vote Republican.
 
2012-07-27 04:18:45 PM  
Yawn. Been there, done that, Yanks.

api.ning.com
 
2012-07-27 04:19:17 PM  

meow said the dog: If I may beg the indulgences of you for the moment. Oh my this causes much of the concern to be because unlike the person who has posted above from me with the sarcasm I should state that I look at all of the issues from two sides and this is not the situation upon which is the exception to the life rule of two-sided looking of me. One side of this is that we must set them up the bomb and the other side of this is we must not set them up the bomb. I do not wish to be the judge of this but if I was the judge of this I would look at this from these sides.

The first side of this is that we should set them up the bomb. This side says that the concern upon which is noted is that if the nuclear missile silos of the Iranians are allowed to have existence in the pis of hell of fortification then they will use these on the allies such as Israel and Canada and the fallout of the nuclear waste could make the radioactive Wailing Wall or the radioactive Inuit both of which could cause much suffering to others in the world. From this side it seems as though it would be the necessity to set them up the bomb for which they do not cause the destruction. According to the article upon which is currently linked through the Telegraph.co.uk website the US of America has the 30,000 Labrador bomb upon which it can use to destroy these evil Ruskies...I mean Iranians to the oblivion and prevent the massive use of the weaponry.

The other side of this says look they have told us that they only wish to use this for the purposes of electricity and they seem very much legit. Why would these individuals do the lying to we? If we would set them up the bomb then they would not be able to have the electricity to watch the reruns of Maury and this would cause the dramatic decrease in the sale of American paternity tests to Iran. Do you wish to be the job killer, US of American Air Force Academy Football Team? I do not think you wish for this now do you.

One thing that I can be sure of is that this entire thread will be full of well thought out and purely rational postings such as the own of me. LAUGHTER OL who am I giving the jokings to? Of course it will not as I have seen this from two sides but others will see this from only one side. I do not wish to be the judge of this but do you think that we should do this threatening? I am asking you the Fark.com website and will send the results to the Head Airmaster for the consideration.

You are welcome.


tl;dr
 
2012-07-27 04:19:50 PM  
Now if only Iran would put all of its key military stuff in one place, instead of dispersing it widely in many underground locations . . . .

///but don't me disturb anyone's Big Bomb fantasies
//because a problem that can't be solved by blowing something up or shooting someone isn't worth solving, right?
 
2012-07-27 04:21:03 PM  

The Incredible Sexual Egg: AverageAmericanGuy: Note to America and its lapdog Israel and Britain: Dude, seriously. What's your farking problem?

Seriously, leave them the fark alone. We can barely hold a country that has minimal infrastructure. Iran would be a disaster


The difference between Iranians and Afghans is that Iranians are capable of not acting like animals.
 
2012-07-27 04:22:08 PM  
AverageAmericanGuy: Note to America and its lapdog Israel and Britain: Dude, seriously. What's your farking problem?


Our problem is that we can't carry more than 1 on a B-2
 
2012-07-27 04:22:08 PM  
Wouldn't it be cheaper to drive up to the bunker door, and weld the doors shut? Then when all the leaders are safely sealed in their bunkers, we can just move in like we own the place. The muffled thumps on the doors would be a bit annoying at first, but those would slowly die down as the food ran out. For real fun, we could pry open one of the bunker air vents and toss down a wasp nest.

You get a bunch of Iranians locked in with a couple thousand pissed off wasps, now you got your hands on the next big hit reality show.
I will call it "Mohammed and me, plus the wasp makes three."
 
2012-07-27 04:22:12 PM  

twfeline: Command1: [www.darkgovernment.com image 804x539]
30,000Lb Bunker Buster

Wake me when you have something impressive. They were making those back in W2.


They may or may not have had something of that size and weight in WWII (I honestly don't know and don't care enough to google it)...but remember that now they have the ability to drop this thing into a toilet bowl from 30,000' up....
 
2012-07-27 04:22:34 PM  

davidphogan: Meh, we've already screwed the region up badly enough we're kind of painted in this corner.


Meh, they were already screwed up badly without any interference from us.
We didn't didn't help much though.....
 
2012-07-27 04:24:11 PM  

HotIgneous Intruder: Talk is cheap.
Use it or GTFO.


Talk is all just a minor sideshow, along with the growing alarums and excursions leading up to Nov. 6th. Then everything (as it pertains to the U.S.) dies down. As far as Israel is concerned, who knows? The street seems to have it that there is no way Iran's getting nukes, and if nobody else takes care of business, Israel will. They've done it once before, no reason to believe they won't do it again. The question of the nuclear genie being let out of the bottle is one that once again throws the whole question wide open. So I guess we're back where we started.
 
2012-07-27 04:24:17 PM  

spentmiles: They've got the US outgunned and outmanned


lol wut?
 
2012-07-27 04:28:12 PM  
Can we write messages like, "Eat This Pork Chop, You Ragheads"? Or better yet smear the bomb with bacon fat to make the bomb that much more diabolical?
 
2012-07-27 04:29:41 PM  

Marine1: The Incredible Sexual Egg: AverageAmericanGuy: Note to America and its lapdog Israel and Britain: Dude, seriously. What's your farking problem?

Seriously, leave them the fark alone. We can barely hold a country that has minimal infrastructure. Iran would be a disaster

The difference between Iranians and Afghans is that Iranians are capable of not acting like animals.


Just wondering, really, but do you have some theory in which a successful military operation against Iran depends on the Iranians acting nicer than other countries that we've attacked or invaded?
 
2012-07-27 04:30:35 PM  

Summer Glau's Love Slave: [www.infiniteunknown.net image 419x512]


penetrating...hard and deeply

Tee hee.
 
2012-07-27 04:31:50 PM  

MythDragon: Wouldn't it be cheaper to drive up to the bunker door, and weld the doors shut? Then when all the leaders are safely sealed in their bunkers, we can just move in like we own the place. The muffled thumps on the doors would be a bit annoying at first, but those would slowly die down as the food ran out. For real fun, we could pry open one of the bunker air vents and toss down a wasp nest.

You get a bunch of Iranians locked in with a couple thousand pissed off wasps, now you got your hands on the next big hit reality show.
I will call it "Mohammed and me, plus the wasp makes three."


You've really got to stop ordering your battle plans from the Acme Company.
 
2012-07-27 04:32:57 PM  

Raoul Eaton: Marine1: The Incredible Sexual Egg: AverageAmericanGuy: Note to America and its lapdog Israel and Britain: Dude, seriously. What's your farking problem?

Seriously, leave them the fark alone. We can barely hold a country that has minimal infrastructure. Iran would be a disaster

The difference between Iranians and Afghans is that Iranians are capable of not acting like animals.

Just wondering, really, but do you have some theory in which a successful military operation against Iran depends on the Iranians acting nicer than other countries that we've attacked or invaded?


Who knows. I'm not predicting that crap.
 
2012-07-27 04:33:44 PM  

I alone am best: spentmiles: They've got the US outgunned and outmanned

lol wut?


Begun the Clone (stamp) War has.
 
2012-07-27 04:34:27 PM  
Um they do realize that a nuclear facility has .......ummm you know, that ummmm.... nuclear stuff that kills pretty much everything when you blow it up.
 
2012-07-27 04:38:29 PM  

rico567: along with the growing alarums and excursions leading up to Nov. 6th.


GOP October surprise. Expect it. It will influence elections. Very heavily. That is its intended purpose. To be at the front of the mind come election day.

/arm yourselves, SCOTUS has repeatedly ruled no one owes you a goddamn thing when the shiat hits the fan
//dial 911 and wait for a response, or defend yourself?
///who do you count on more? Yourself, or some disgusting fat pig with a trigger finger?
//tinyurl.com/jonathanmagbie -->
/banks own everything, including your 'soul'
.and they charge you interest for its very existence
..this is not freedom; you have never seen nor do you even know what the word truly means
 
2012-07-27 04:41:05 PM  
America has not "waged war" since WW2.
She has however been involved in LIMITED police actions and Peace Initiatives and Regime Change on and off for 50 years with limited to little success.
SO if She decided to go into Iran then she has two courses. One that will lead to decisive overwhelming fear inspiring ass whipping,the other to dragged out media frenzy appeasement politics.
The choice comes down to leadership. No real leadership on the horizon.
So no matter what happens in November ,the US will still end up being a cop on the beat. My 2Cent worth.
Please ONLY serious debate with my Superior mind.
 
2012-07-27 04:41:21 PM  
All this deep penetration has me aroused. I'll be in my bunker, Buster.
 
2012-07-27 04:41:47 PM  

pit and pendulum: Um they do realize that a nuclear facility has .......ummm you know, that ummmm.... nuclear stuff that kills pretty much everything when you blow it up.


*sigh*. That isnt even remotely how nuclear materials work.
 
2012-07-27 04:41:50 PM  

meow said the dog: the radioactive Inuit


And we have our Band Name of the Week. Thank you!
 
2012-07-27 04:42:09 PM  

Polartank13: meow said the dog: If I may beg the indulgences of you for the moment ...

[i149.photobucket.com image 300x233]


I've had that poster on ignore for years, but now I get a chuckle when I see it quoted.
 
2012-07-27 04:43:37 PM  
Does the 30,000lb refer to the static weight of the bomb or the explosive force?

I just checked up on 1ft round bars of steel. It's 384.5 lb/ft. At 20ft that's 7,690lb. A 1ft square bar is a little more than 400lb/ft, so it's roughly 8,100 lbs at 20ft. If the 30,000lb spec is the weight of the bomb, it is almost 4 times heavier than a solid chunk of steel of the same size. Not to mention gaps within the bomb assembly that reduce its overall density. This tends to indicate that the 1ft x 20ft dimension is wrong or that the 30,000lb spec refers to the explosive force or that it is made of materials much, much heavier than steel.
 
2012-07-27 04:46:35 PM  

AngryJailhouseFistfark: but the thing you must remember is that it's not just a big-ass bomb, but the shape of it, the materials, and the guts inside are what make this remarkable. Any chump can load up a huge bomb casing with tons of high explosives, but they're all going to kaboom either in an airburst and knock over all the soft stuff, or mcBOOM when it hits the ground and make a big crater. Your reinforced concrete bunker, buried many feet below that surface, however, may be shaken but still in business.

But this baby, oh no, THIS baby is designed to punch a starter hole, even explode a bit to open it up and get serious penetration, and only then does it unleash the full majesty and fury of the payload. THAT is the genius of this bomb, the ability to maintain integrity as it pounds deep into the loins of our enemy, ramming deep into the interior, before the glorious and inevitable release. Mmmm.


I have the weirdest boner now....
 
2012-07-27 04:47:16 PM  

Raoul Eaton: Marine1: The Incredible Sexual Egg: AverageAmericanGuy: Note to America and its lapdog Israel and Britain: Dude, seriously. What's your farking problem?

Seriously, leave them the fark alone. We can barely hold a country that has minimal infrastructure. Iran would be a disaster

The difference between Iranians and Afghans is that Iranians are capable of not acting like animals.

Just wondering, really, but do you have some theory in which a successful military operation against Iran depends on the Iranians acting nicer than other countries that we've attacked or invaded?


Why do people seem to think attacking Iran involves occupation? All we would do is blow up their military hardware and kill a bunch of their leaders, from the air and sea, and keep blowing up any attempt they made to block the Strait of Hormuz. Which is why they're gradually climbing down from trying to join the nuclear weapons club. 1) We're threatening to disarm them if they won't do it themselves 2) We're not insisting on regime change a la Bush.

The idea that Iran is building the bomb to attack Israel with it (when Israel has, like, 100 nuclear weapons and pretty effective anti-missile defenses) is kinda dumb. Iran wants the bomb for the same reason North Korea and Pakistan do. To have something to threaten people with if they think about invading you, or if you want to support conventional terrorism fairly openly and get away with it.

And in response, the world is saying, "So sorry, Iran, but you are a bunch of religious nutjobs who shouldn't have the bomb. Welcome to the other side of asymmetrical warfare, the one that favors the high-tech country with all the airplanes."
 
2012-07-27 04:47:52 PM  

MAYORBOB: Can we write messages like, "Eat This Pork Chop, You Ragheads"? Or better yet smear the bomb with bacon fat to make the bomb that much more diabolical?


sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net
 
2012-07-27 04:52:22 PM  

cgraves67: Does the 30,000lb refer to the static weight of the bomb or the explosive force?

I just checked up on 1ft round bars of steel. It's 384.5 lb/ft. At 20ft that's 7,690lb. A 1ft square bar is a little more than 400lb/ft, so it's roughly 8,100 lbs at 20ft. If the 30,000lb spec is the weight of the bomb, it is almost 4 times heavier than a solid chunk of steel of the same size. Not to mention gaps within the bomb assembly that reduce its overall density. This tends to indicate that the 1ft x 20ft dimension is wrong or that the 30,000lb spec refers to the explosive force or that it is made of materials much, much heavier than steel.


Id put my money on materials other than steel. The weapon drives itself into the ground with momentum, more weight will help with this. Also, its supposed to explode once it reaches depth... a steel bomb would help hold in some of that explosive force.

Beyond that though... the reason we use steel is because it is a nice trade off between weight and strength. There are a lot of other metals out there.
 
2012-07-27 04:52:58 PM  
An American bomb dropped on Iraq in retaliation for the Saudi 9/11 attack:

cellar.org



I could be here all night deconstructing the idiocy, illiteracy, and suppressed homoeroticism in this photo, so I won't bother. Just gaze at it in wonder. It's a classic.
 
2012-07-27 04:54:52 PM  

Alonjar: cgraves67: Does the 30,000lb refer to the static weight of the bomb or the explosive force?

I just checked up on 1ft round bars of steel. It's 384.5 lb/ft. At 20ft that's 7,690lb. A 1ft square bar is a little more than 400lb/ft, so it's roughly 8,100 lbs at 20ft. If the 30,000lb spec is the weight of the bomb, it is almost 4 times heavier than a solid chunk of steel of the same size. Not to mention gaps within the bomb assembly that reduce its overall density. This tends to indicate that the 1ft x 20ft dimension is wrong or that the 30,000lb spec refers to the explosive force or that it is made of materials much, much heavier than steel.

Id put my money on materials other than steel. The weapon drives itself into the ground with momentum, more weight will help with this. Also, its supposed to explode once it reaches depth... a steel bomb would help hold in some of that explosive force.

Beyond that though... the reason we use steel is because it is a nice trade off between weight and strength. There are a lot of other metals out there.


Look at the picture; that bomb is at least 3-4 feet in diameter. And it's mostly metal; only about 5k lbs. of explosives.
 
2012-07-27 04:55:32 PM  

mainstreet62: whither_apophis: Awesome, we're going after them with 1940's bomb technology. Wallis would be proud.

Well, the end phase is 1940's tech, sure.

However, it is important to note:

"The 20ft long, 1ft wide weapon will be delivered by the B2 stealth bomber"


well thats just cheatin'
 
2012-07-27 04:58:45 PM  

mbillips: Look at the picture; that bomb is at least 3-4 feet in diameter.


I don't know where TFA got 1' diameter, but that's clearly not right.
 
2012-07-27 04:59:01 PM  

Gleeman: AngryJailhouseFistfark: But this baby, oh no, THIS baby is designed to punch a starter hole, even explode a bit to open it up and get serious penetration, and only then does it unleash the full majesty and fury of the payload. THAT is the genius of this bomb, the ability to maintain integrity as it pounds deep into the loins of our enemy, ramming deep into the interior, before the glorious and inevitable release. Mmmm.

[i.imgur.com image 640x466]
But how do you feel about your mother?


Let me tell you about my mother.

www.gonemovies.com
 
2012-07-27 04:59:59 PM  

Alonjar: cgraves67: Does the 30,000lb refer to the static weight of the bomb or the explosive force?

I just checked up on 1ft round bars of steel. It's 384.5 lb/ft. At 20ft that's 7,690lb. A 1ft square bar is a little more than 400lb/ft, so it's roughly 8,100 lbs at 20ft. If the 30,000lb spec is the weight of the bomb, it is almost 4 times heavier than a solid chunk of steel of the same size. Not to mention gaps within the bomb assembly that reduce its overall density. This tends to indicate that the 1ft x 20ft dimension is wrong or that the 30,000lb spec refers to the explosive force or that it is made of materials much, much heavier than steel.

Id put my money on materials other than steel. The weapon drives itself into the ground with momentum, more weight will help with this. Also, its supposed to explode once it reaches depth... a steel bomb would help hold in some of that explosive force.

Beyond that though... the reason we use steel is because it is a nice trade off between weight and strength. There are a lot of other metals out there.


It is more than likely depleted uranium.
 
2012-07-27 05:01:24 PM  

Lord Summerisle: I could be here all night deconstructing the idiocy, illiteracy, and suppressed homoeroticism in this photo, so I won't bother. Just gaze at it in wonder. It's a classic.


clearly, what we need is YET ANOTHER government agency, because ALL THE ONES WE HAD ALREADY ... couldn't (the 'official' story goes...) 'put the pieces together.'

/uh huh, would you like to buy this bridge i have for sale?
//it's on sale for cheap! I can get you an inside deal... just give me your bank account numbers...
 
2012-07-27 05:01:31 PM  
Obama has learned well from his predecessor...
 
2012-07-27 05:17:41 PM  
I install electronic components, the little chips that know where home is.
I get a thrill going through my section when I give 'em my final inspection.
 
2012-07-27 05:23:42 PM  

AngryJailhouseFistfark: Fuggin Bizzy: Thirty. Thousand. Pound. Bomb.

fark humanity. Goddamn.

but the thing you must remember is that it's not just a big-ass bomb, but the shape of it, the materials, and the guts inside are what make this remarkable. Any chump can load up a huge bomb casing with tons of high explosives, but they're all going to kaboom either in an airburst and knock over all the soft stuff, or mcBOOM when it hits the ground and make a big crater. Your reinforced concrete bunker, buried many feet below that surface, however, may be shaken but still in business.

But this baby, oh no, THIS baby is designed to punch a starter hole, even explode a bit to open it up and get serious penetration, and only then does it unleash the full majesty and fury of the payload. THAT is the genius of this bomb, the ability to maintain integrity as it pounds deep into the loins of our enemy, ramming deep into the interior, before the glorious and inevitable release. Mmmm.


I just choked
 
2012-07-27 05:25:52 PM  

meow said the dog: If I may beg the indulgences of you for the moment. Oh my this causes much of the concern to be because unlike the person who has posted above from me with the sarcasm I should state that I look at all of the issues from two sides and this is not the situation upon which is the exception to the life rule of two-sided looking of me. One side of this is that we must set them up the bomb and the other side of this is we must not set them up the bomb. I do not wish to be the judge of this but if I was the judge of this I would look at this from these sides.

The first side of this is that we should set them up the bomb. This side says that the concern upon which is noted is that if the nuclear missile silos of the Iranians are allowed to have existence in the pis of hell of fortification then they will use these on the allies such as Israel and Canada and the fallout of the nuclear waste could make the radioactive Wailing Wall or the radioactive Inuit both of which could cause much suffering to others in the world. From this side it seems as though it would be the necessity to set them up the bomb for which they do not cause the destruction. According to the article upon which is currently linked through the Telegraph.co.uk website the US of America has the 30,000 Labrador bomb upon which it can use to destroy these evil Ruskies...I mean Iranians to the oblivion and prevent the massive use of the weaponry.

The other side of this says look they have told us that they only wish to use this for the purposes of electricity and they seem very much legit. Why would these individuals do the lying to we? If we would set them up the bomb then they would not be able to have the electricity to watch the reruns of Maury and this would cause the dramatic decrease in the sale of American paternity tests to Iran. Do you wish to be the job killer, US of American Air Force Academy Football Team? I do not think you wish for this now do you.

One thing that I can be sure of is ...


All your text are belong to us.
 
2012-07-27 05:30:13 PM  
Whenever they finally use that thing, they better call the mission "Operation Lexington Steele".
 
2012-07-27 05:35:11 PM  
Thats going to be one hell of a big crater.
photos.lasvegassun.com
 
2012-07-27 05:39:46 PM  

chewielouie: AverageAmericanGuy: Note to America and its lapdog Israel and Britain: Dude, seriously. What's your farking problem?

9/11 . . . haven't forgotten it.


It might be best if you did. Enough with the crazy flailing already.
 
2012-07-27 05:44:25 PM  
I saw something about this on tv.

Iran has many, many installations. Some of these are buried so deeply under mountains that even our (US) best penetrating bombs cannot destroy them.

The good news is that we can destroy the support infrastructure on the surface that allows these places to function, which is at least as good.
 
2012-07-27 05:44:36 PM  

Lord Summerisle: An American bomb dropped on Iraq in retaliation for the Saudi 9/11 attack:


It's really an amazing coincidence how much US foreign policy in the middle east lines up exactly with Saudi Arabia's.
 
2012-07-27 05:44:49 PM  

mbillips: And in response, the world is saying, "So sorry, Iran, but you are a bunch of religious nutjobs who shouldn't have the bomb. Welcome to the other side of asymmetrical warfare, the one that favors the high-tech country with all the airplanes."


What asymmetrical warfare might look like from the high-tech POV:

upload.wikimedia.org

/nah, I haven't forgotten either
 
2012-07-27 05:55:09 PM  
Here's a radical idea WRT the iranian nuke: LET THEM HAVE THE DAMN THING.

Trying to stop a government from acquiring 70 year old tech is futile, unless you want to do something so extreme it'll put you in the company of Pol Pot. So the USAF drops a bunker buster on one of Iran's facilities. They'll just dig the next one deeper. Or put it beneath a school or hospital. Or trick the US into thinking it's beneath a school of hospital. Next time the US bombs they'll flood the world with pictures of mangled children.

Also, a US attack on Iran will provide the regime with another generation of islamist crazies. One would almost think somebody wants to make sure the US has en external enemy.

Seriously, the best way to deal with AWs like the iranian theocrats is to ignore them.
 
2012-07-27 05:58:12 PM  

I alone am best: Alonjar: cgraves67: Does the 30,000lb refer to the static weight of the bomb or the explosive force?

I just checked up on 1ft round bars of steel. It's 384.5 lb/ft. At 20ft that's 7,690lb. A 1ft square bar is a little more than 400lb/ft, so it's roughly 8,100 lbs at 20ft. If the 30,000lb spec is the weight of the bomb, it is almost 4 times heavier than a solid chunk of steel of the same size. Not to mention gaps within the bomb assembly that reduce its overall density. This tends to indicate that the 1ft x 20ft dimension is wrong or that the 30,000lb spec refers to the explosive force or that it is made of materials much, much heavier than steel.

Id put my money on materials other than steel. The weapon drives itself into the ground with momentum, more weight will help with this. Also, its supposed to explode once it reaches depth... a steel bomb would help hold in some of that explosive force.

Beyond that though... the reason we use steel is because it is a nice trade off between weight and strength. There are a lot of other metals out there.

It is more than likely depleted uranium.

It is even more likely the journalist farked up in the article. MOP is 31.5 inches in diameter, not 12. Warhead is 5300 pounds, leaving the remaining 24,700 pounds for casing and fins.
 
2012-07-27 06:05:01 PM  

pit and pendulum: Um they do realize that a nuclear facility has .......ummm you know, that ummmm.... nuclear stuff that kills pretty much everything when you blow it up.


And when shoot at a car or drive it off a cliff it always explodes in a fireball.
 
2012-07-27 06:20:16 PM  

Uncle Tractor: Here's a radical idea WRT the iranian nuke: LET THEM HAVE THE DAMN THING.


No. I put as much thought in to my comment as they did to theirs
 
2012-07-27 06:28:17 PM  

DownDaRiver: davidphogan: Meh, we've already screwed the region up badly enough we're kind of painted in this corner.

Meh, they were already screwed up badly without any interference from us.
We didn't didn't help much though.....


Who says we're trying to help?
 
2012-07-27 06:33:42 PM  

Uncle Tractor: Here's a radical idea WRT the iranian nuke: LET THEM HAVE THE DAMN THING.


Let them have the thing that they are not building? ok
 
2012-07-27 06:40:42 PM  
i341.photobucket.com
 
2012-07-27 06:42:04 PM  
Why is it that every picture of a defense firms' staff includes at least a handful of older women in sweaters?
 
2012-07-27 06:51:07 PM  

Uncle Tractor: Or put it beneath a school or hospital.


Or Iran just force its' 30,000 Jews to live on top of it
 
2012-07-27 06:53:17 PM  
Knock Knock

Who's there?

......

China Geophysical Labortaoties "... what the f*** was that?"
 
2012-07-27 06:57:02 PM  
Holy crap, that is one brutal, death dealing beast of a bomb.

And this is just one more reason not to vote for Romney. You KNOW his sorry ass would unleash that thing the first chance he got.
 
2012-07-27 07:03:54 PM  

Dinodork: It is even more likely the journalist farked up in the article. MOP is 31.5 inches in diameter, not 12. Warhead is 5300 pounds, leaving the remaining 24,700 pounds for casing and fins.


Oooh. Ok. I was reading that and thought it had a 30,000 pound warhead. That makes sense.

Was thinking to myself "DAAAaaaaamn.... Big badda boom."
 
2012-07-27 07:07:00 PM  
Thank you Jimmy Carter
 
2012-07-27 07:10:01 PM  

Lord Summerisle: Yawn. Been there, done that, Yanks.

[api.ning.com image 800x367]


Not really. Those bombs could penetrate more concrete then any other bomb in WWII, but they wouldn't be able to reach the bunkers that Iran has buried under the mountains. The big innovation of Barnes' bombs were their aerodynamic design compared to other bombs of the day, and their actual use.
 
2012-07-27 07:11:38 PM  

cgraves67: Does the 30,000lb refer to the static weight of the bomb or the explosive force?


Actual answer: explosive force. It goes boom with the same boominess as 30,000lbs of TNT. It does not weigh 30,000lbs.
 
2012-07-27 07:14:38 PM  
I say it's a red herring. Throw together a scary-looking mock-up, get some staffers and cadre to do a portrait, some flashy graphics, throw in some tech-sounding drivel and hand it off to some reporter with a hard-on for a Pulitzer and let nature take its course.

As for the reason why, I don't have a clue, but there's something...off...about this whole deal. I'm sure someone here will politely inform me that either they or someone they knew worked on it, but there's the smell of BS all over this one for me for some reason.
 
2012-07-27 07:19:01 PM  
So they could be dropped repeatedly on the same spot to reach further depths? How deep/hardened are these bunkers? What's the highend of what they could use as defensive tech?
 
2012-07-27 07:21:09 PM  
Please stand down.

Pretty please with world on top?

Thank you, sirs.

;)
 
2012-07-27 07:34:10 PM  

Mouser: DownDaRiver: davidphogan: Meh, we've already screwed the region up badly enough we're kind of painted in this corner.

Meh, they were already screwed up badly without any interference from us.
We didn't didn't help much though.....

Who says we're trying to help?


I think it was Cheney that I heard it from.
He wouldn't lie about such a thing.
 
2012-07-27 07:37:04 PM  
My uncle knew a guy who was in the Air Force who said that nucu-lar bomb testing was suspended because it attracted too much attention from space aliens...
 
2012-07-27 07:38:11 PM  

Somaticasual: Why is it that every picture of a defense firms' staff includes at least a handful of older women in sweaters?


Because women work in those industries. Sexist much?
 
2012-07-27 07:40:32 PM  

Plinky: So they could be dropped repeatedly on the same spot to reach further depths? How deep/hardened are these bunkers? What's the highend of what they could use as defensive tech?


Well, thats the interesting thing.. you can do a whole farking lot for defense. Like... put your facility 500 meters under a mountain. They can blow up the entrance and fark up your logistics, but if you REALLY wanted to hide/protect something, and you have State level funding, the possibilities are rather limitless.

With that said, underground structures require ventilation to the outside of some type. Destroying those vents would really ruin their day.
 
2012-07-27 07:40:40 PM  

incendi: cgraves67: Does the 30,000lb refer to the static weight of the bomb or the explosive force?

Actual answer: explosive force. It goes boom with the same boominess as 30,000lbs of TNT. It does not weigh 30,000lbs.



WRONG! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massive_Ordnance_Penetrator
 
2012-07-27 07:41:55 PM  

Gdalescrboz: Our problem is that we can't carry more than 1 on a B-2



WRONG!Link
 
2012-07-27 07:44:19 PM  

FabulousFreep: WRONG! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massive_Ordnance_Penetrator


Hmm. That's interesting. And a deviation from the way bombs are normally discussed, but there you have it. It weighs 30farking000 pounds.
 
2012-07-27 07:45:50 PM  

Somaticasual: Why is it that every picture of a defense firms' staff includes at least a handful of older women in sweaters?


I don't know. I was going to make a snide comment on the FA and the futility of messing with Iran but got distracted by the thought of doing a Slim Pickins on the lady wearing the sweater in front.
 
2012-07-27 07:50:52 PM  

Summer Glau's Love Slave: [www.infiniteunknown.net image 419x512]


ohhhh sexy time! Go get em, big boy!
 
2012-07-27 07:52:10 PM  

I alone am best: Alonjar: cgraves67: Does the 30,000lb refer to the static weight of the bomb or the explosive force?

I just checked up on 1ft round bars of steel. It's 384.5 lb/ft. At 20ft that's 7,690lb. A 1ft square bar is a little more than 400lb/ft, so it's roughly 8,100 lbs at 20ft. If the 30,000lb spec is the weight of the bomb, it is almost 4 times heavier than a solid chunk of steel of the same size. Not to mention gaps within the bomb assembly that reduce its overall density. This tends to indicate that the 1ft x 20ft dimension is wrong or that the 30,000lb spec refers to the explosive force or that it is made of materials much, much heavier than steel.

Id put my money on materials other than steel. The weapon drives itself into the ground with momentum, more weight will help with this. Also, its supposed to explode once it reaches depth... a steel bomb would help hold in some of that explosive force.

Beyond that though... the reason we use steel is because it is a nice trade off between weight and strength. There are a lot of other metals out there.

It is more than likely depleted uranium.


More likely tungsten: we've been moving away from DU for penetration because detonating/fragmenting an alpha emitter near your own troops isn't really a good thing. Still lots of DU ammo in the system though.
 
2012-07-27 08:04:11 PM  
So why not use all of that ordinance to widen the straight of Hormuz and make Iran much less interesting as an adversary?

/just sayin'
 
2012-07-27 08:07:55 PM  

fragMasterFlash: So why not use all of that ordinance to widen the straight of Hormuz and make Iran much less interesting as an adversary?


The UAE and Oman would probably not appreciate us blowing off a significant portion of their territory (more significant for the UAE, but still). Also, we'd have to rewrite all our contingency plans that are based on the straights being the shape they are now.
 
2012-07-27 08:12:05 PM  
This just in...

*newsflash*

"Shooting star collides with planet and creates a black hole. Singularity apparently happens...who knew? World ends at eleven..."
 
2012-07-27 08:12:29 PM  
The Olympics are in play.

Some conspiracy nut might wonder whether this would be fine timing for a false-flag attack.


/always suspect ISRAEL FIRST!
 
2012-07-27 08:12:43 PM  

FabulousFreep: Somaticasual: Why is it that every picture of a defense firms' staff includes at least a handful of older women in sweaters?

Because women work in those industries. Sexist much?


Yeah but it's not even representative of the gender, proportionally. In reality, it's probably because a lot of the defense manufacturing is done in factories in relatively rural areas,with a larger proportion of conservative men and women than other industries.

//Looking for sexism, much? (hint: just because the word "women", "female", or "girl" appears in a sentence, that doesn't make it a sexist comment, especially coupled with the fact that was referring to a very specific personality type). Take this to heart: Politically correct thinking does nothing to advance society's actual issues, and glosses over subjects that could more easily be dealt with through open and frank discussion).
 
2012-07-27 08:23:10 PM  

Amos Quito: The Olympics are in play.

Some conspiracy nut might wonder whether this would be fine timing for a false-flag attack.


/always suspect ISRAEL FIRST!


Wrong.

Olympics are safe, fear-monger.

*shield*

"My shield protects."

;)
 
2012-07-27 08:27:14 PM  

Indubitably: Amos Quito: The Olympics are in play.

Some conspiracy nut might wonder whether this would be fine timing for a false-flag attack.


/always suspect ISRAEL FIRST!

Wrong.

Olympics are safe, fear-monger.

*shield*

"My shield protects."

;)


Run, play, show, be human.

Words.

Poems.

Games.

Safe.

We demand.
 
2012-07-27 08:32:15 PM  
Note to Iran: The USA made the decision to blow up your country years ago, it's just taken us a bit longer than originally planned, so you may as well take that opportunity to begin evacuating your entire population now.
 
2012-07-27 08:33:41 PM  

Amos Quito: The Olympics are in play.

Some conspiracy nut might wonder whether this would be fine timing for a false-flag attack.


/always suspect ISRAEL FIRST!


Already happened.
 
2012-07-27 08:41:18 PM  

Porous Horace: Amos Quito: The Olympics are in play.

Some conspiracy nut might wonder whether this would be fine timing for a false-flag attack.


/always suspect ISRAEL FIRST!

Already happened.


Won't work.

You need to roll some atrocity for World War, man.

P.S. If you do, I will think the world to end now, and you can't kill me first, for if I die, the world dies with me...
 
2012-07-27 08:52:56 PM  

Alonjar: Plinky: So they could be dropped repeatedly on the same spot to reach further depths? How deep/hardened are these bunkers? What's the highend of what they could use as defensive tech?

Well, thats the interesting thing.. you can do a whole farking lot for defense. Like... put your facility 500 meters under a mountain. They can blow up the entrance and fark up your logistics, but if you REALLY wanted to hide/protect something, and you have State level funding, the possibilities are rather limitless.

With that said, underground structures require ventilation to the outside of some type. Destroying those vents would really ruin their day.


Those openings are about the size of a womp rat, you could totally bullseye it with this bomb.
 
2012-07-27 08:58:12 PM  

Indubitably: Porous Horace: Amos Quito: The Olympics are in play.

Some conspiracy nut might wonder whether this would be fine timing for a false-flag attack.


/always suspect ISRAEL FIRST!

Already happened.

Won't work.

You need to roll some atrocity for World War, man.

P.S. If you do, I will think the world to end now, and you can't kill me first, for if I die, the world dies with me...



You're all right, Indubitably.

The thing that farks Humanity is that human nature is farked.

Can it BE changed? No, not by coercion.

Can it change? Yes, from the inside out.

One human at a time.

Will it change?

Indubitably.

Otherwise, some day some where some other species gets a go at reconnecting, at reconciling, at recollecting.


/THERE IS ONLY ONE THING
 
2012-07-27 09:06:04 PM  
Is it true that Subbys Mom uses it as a sex toy?
 
2012-07-27 09:13:14 PM  

Amos Quito: Indubitably: Porous Horace: Amos Quito: The Olympics are in play.

Some conspiracy nut might wonder whether this would be fine timing for a false-flag attack.


/always suspect ISRAEL FIRST!

Already happened.

Won't work.

You need to roll some atrocity for World War, man.

P.S. If you do, I will think the world to end now, and you can't kill me first, for if I die, the world dies with me...


You're all right, Indubitably.

The thing that farks Humanity is that human nature is farked.

Can it BE changed? No, not by coercion.

Can it change? Yes, from the inside out.

One human at a time.

Will it change?

Indubitably.

Otherwise, some day some where some other species gets a go at reconnecting, at reconciling, at recollecting.


/THERE IS ONLY ONE THING


Wow, bolded, even.

Thank you.
 
2012-07-27 09:14:29 PM  

Indubitably: Amos Quito: Indubitably: Porous Horace: Amos Quito: The Olympics are in play.

Some conspiracy nut might wonder whether this would be fine timing for a false-flag attack.


/always suspect ISRAEL FIRST!

Already happened.

Won't work.

You need to roll some atrocity for World War, man.

P.S. If you do, I will think the world to end now, and you can't kill me first, for if I die, the world dies with me...


You're all right, Indubitably.

The thing that farks Humanity is that human nature is farked.

Can it BE changed? No, not by coercion.

Can it change? Yes, from the inside out.

One human at a time.

Will it change?

Indubitably.

Otherwise, some day some where some other species gets a go at reconnecting, at reconciling, at recollecting.


/THERE IS ONLY ONE THING

Wow, bolded, even.

Thank you.


I love you too, man.
 
2012-07-27 09:19:16 PM  

AverageAmericanGuy: Note to America and its lapdog Israel and Britain: Dude, seriously. What's your farking problem?


WTF does this even mean?
 
2012-07-27 09:36:53 PM  

Polartank13: meow said the dog: If I may beg the indulgences of you for the moment ...

[i149.photobucket.com image 300x233]


In spades.
 
2012-07-27 09:50:06 PM  

Gyrfalcon: Polartank13: meow said the dog: If I may beg the indulgences of you for the moment ...

[i149.photobucket.com image 300x233]

In spades.


Pot, meet kettle...

Cards and color be random, anymore, friend. Recard.
 
2012-07-27 09:51:01 PM  

Indubitably: Gyrfalcon: Polartank13: meow said the dog: If I may beg the indulgences of you for the moment ...

[i149.photobucket.com image 300x233]

In spades.

Pot, meet kettle...

Cards and color be random, anymore, friend. Recard.


Sex is sex.
 
2012-07-27 09:59:28 PM  

Indubitably: Gyrfalcon: Polartank13: meow said the dog: If I may beg the indulgences of you for the moment ...

[i149.photobucket.com image 300x233]

In spades.

Pot, meet kettle...

Cards and color be random, anymore, friend. Recard.


What what? Because I admire meow's deranged banter? I am so sorry, except not really.
 
2012-07-27 10:03:28 PM  

Gyrfalcon: Indubitably: Gyrfalcon: Polartank13: meow said the dog: If I may beg the indulgences of you for the moment ...

[i149.photobucket.com image 300x233]

In spades.

Pot, meet kettle...

Cards and color be random, anymore, friend. Recard.

What what? Because I admire meow's deranged banter? I am so sorry, except not really.


You need never apologize to me, friend.

I have given you the love card freely and willfully.

Be dumb at will and be loved...

Singular ellipsis.
 
2012-07-27 10:18:05 PM  

Indubitably: Gyrfalcon: Indubitably: Gyrfalcon: Polartank13: meow said the dog: If I may beg the indulgences of you for the moment ...

[i149.photobucket.com image 300x233]

In spades.

Pot, meet kettle...

Cards and color be random, anymore, friend. Recard.

What what? Because I admire meow's deranged banter? I am so sorry, except not really.

You need never apologize to me, friend.

I have given you the love card freely and willfully.

Be dumb at will and be loved...

Singular ellipsis.


Now I'm happy again.
 
2012-07-27 10:19:43 PM  
disney-clipart.com

Strictly Plutonic.
 
2012-07-27 10:19:44 PM  
when the air force talks about a (insert number)lbs bomb we are talking about actual weight not home much explosive(usually tritonal) they have been working on this bomb for a while...i first start seeing pictures around 10 years ago...

test drop

IYAAYAS :(
 
2012-07-27 10:28:41 PM  

Onkel Buck: Alonjar: Plinky: So they could be dropped repeatedly on the same spot to reach further depths? How deep/hardened are these bunkers? What's the highend of what they could use as defensive tech?

Well, thats the interesting thing.. you can do a whole farking lot for defense. Like... put your facility 500 meters under a mountain. They can blow up the entrance and fark up your logistics, but if you REALLY wanted to hide/protect something, and you have State level funding, the possibilities are rather limitless.

With that said, underground structures require ventilation to the outside of some type. Destroying those vents would really ruin their day.

Those openings are about the size of a womp rat, you could totally bullseye it with this bomb.


25.media.tumblr.com
All right, we got seven canisters of CN-20. I say we roll them in there and nerve gas the whole farking nest.
 
2012-07-27 10:31:33 PM  
Is "international banking cartel" Fark's autocensor word for "Jews"?
 
2012-07-27 10:33:05 PM  

DavidVincent: [www.darkgovernment.com image 804x539]

In the Hollywood movie, which one does Denzil Washington play?


i.imgur.com
 
2012-07-27 10:43:07 PM  

The Incredible Sexual Egg: AverageAmericanGuy: Note to America and its lapdog Israel and Britain: Dude, seriously. What's your farking problem?

Seriously, leave them the fark alone. We can barely hold a country that has minimal infrastructure. Iran would be a disaster


You both sound like a couple of pussies.
 
2012-07-27 10:46:54 PM  
I'm cool with this as long as I get promised that it will be dropped on brown people.
 
2012-07-27 11:02:05 PM  

SuperNinjaToad: mbillips: Fuggin Bizzy: Thirty. Thousand. Pound. Bomb.

fark humanity. Goddamn.

Eh, if you think of it as 15 tons, or 1/125 of a Hiroshima bomb, it doesn't seem so big. We used to have nuclear artillery shells with WAY more explosive force than that. And depth charges (light fuse and get away fast).

you're right.. and if you compare Hiroshima and Nagasaki to the core of the Sun it is literally a micro dew drop! yea!! .... what's the big deal?????


the exposive charge is a small porportion of the total weight. the high mass is there not for explosive force, but to push through rock.
 
2012-07-27 11:35:35 PM  
If every country had nukes every country would be afraid of war. Some people act like this would be the worst thing ever.
 
2012-07-28 12:07:38 AM  

Lord Summerisle: An American bomb dropped on Iraq in retaliation for the Saudi 9/11 attack:

[cellar.org image 450x309]

I could be here all night deconstructing the idiocy, illiteracy, and suppressed homoeroticism in this photo, so I won't bother. Just gaze at it in wonder. It's a classic.


Your pompousness might be better enjoyed if you were accurate. That bomb was dropped in October 2001, in Afghanistan. Nobody cares where the hijackers happened to pop out of mommy's vagina.
 
2012-07-28 12:43:12 AM  

whither_apophis: Awesome, we're going after them with 1940's bomb technology. Wallis would be proud.


Oh come on. Really, 1940's technology?? They've added like, 5000lbs to it since then; that's real progress is that...

Hopefully, they won't be strapping it to the bottom of a Lancaster, although so help me, I think a Lanc would still get off the ground with it.
 
2012-07-28 01:15:08 AM  

Nem Wan: If every country had nukes every country would be afraid of war. Some people act like this would be the worst thing ever.


We do. They are. Of NUCLEAR war, you see. But since everyone's afraid of nuclear retaliation, nobody is ever going to actually drop the things. It's why we still have all these conventional wars, even between nuclear-armed nations.
 
2012-07-28 01:30:07 AM  

Gyrfalcon: Nem Wan: If every country had nukes every country would be afraid of war. Some people act like this would be the worst thing ever.

We do. They are. Of NUCLEAR war, you see. But since everyone's afraid of nuclear retaliation, nobody is ever going to actually drop the things. It's why we still have all these conventional wars, even between nuclear-armed nations.


Fun fact: missile defense actually makes the likelihood of nuclear war higher, as nations begin factoring in acceptable loss and defense failure rates into their strategies, instead of the zero-sum total annihilation game.

In some ways, this means missile defense is actually more dangerous than the weapons themselves.

Society and FP is weird. All this MAD bullshiat needs to stop.

/End drunken threadjack.
 
2012-07-28 01:31:42 AM  
While I don't like the idea of preemptively bombing Iran, I do believe they're working towards a nuclear weapon and I think that them having one would be really bad. Someone up-thread commented that if all nations had nukes then all nations would fear war. I don't think that poster is taking into account the fanatical extremist viewpoint. Who cares if the world burns when you're going to be rewarded in heaven?

Anyway, Iran keeps stating they want nuclear fuel for electricity. Have they started building a power plant? Fuel for an electricity producing reactor doesn't need much purity. It only needs to be refined to about 5% or so ( Link ). Iran's refining to about 20% ( Link ). 20% refinement is considered useful for reactors that power ships and subs, and Iran has stated they intend to build nuclear subs, but if they've begun building, I haven't been able to find anything about it.

Now, I don't know much about constructing nuclear reactors or ships, but if I were in charge of things I would have more than one thing going on at a time. Why stockpile nuclear fuel for a ship reactor and then build the ship? Wouldn't it make more sense to have the ship construction going on while the fuel is being refined. Then, everything is done closer to the same time and you don't have a bunch of fuel sitting around waiting for a ship to be built, so a reactor can be installed and then the fuel put into the reactor.

I find it hard to suggest that we should bomb Iran. Then again, I find it hard to believe that if they got a nuke they wouldn't start looking for a reason to use it. They're big fans of the idea of holy war with Israel, and the destructive power of a nuke invokes images of armageddon that fanatics are so fond of, and a nuclear war in the Middle East threatens the world wide oil supply, so it's not like other nations could stay out of a regional conflict that involved nukes. I hate to suggest that Iran getting a nuke could lead to WWIII, but I can't ignore the possibility. Of course, if Iran wanted to start a war with Israel, they could just borrow some chemical weapons from Assad, but then they'd miss out on the whole massive fiery destruction thing.
 
2012-07-28 01:39:17 AM  

El Morro: Holy crap, that is one brutal, death dealing beast of a bomb.

And this is just one more reason not to vote for Romney. You KNOW his sorry ass would unleash that thing the first chance he got.


First thing I thought of (video)
 
2012-07-28 06:12:08 AM  
You cannot just be friends with the bomb. Don't tell the bomb you love her or the bomb will not work.
 
Displayed 176 of 176 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report