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.

(UPI)   Pentagon beefs up its biggest "bunker buster" bomb. Iranian generals seen whistling, slowly backing away from nuclear sites   (upi.com) divider line 106
    More: Interesting, Wall Street Journal, Iran, U.S., bunker buster, Qom, nuclear weapons, Iranians  
•       •       •

8014 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 May 2013 at 10:20 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-03 11:11:51 AM  
How does this new bomb compare to Tom Cruise's latest movie?
 
2013-05-03 11:13:14 AM  

IdBeCrazyIf: minimize collateral damage

How exactly does one minimize collateral damage with 30k pounds of explosives?


You don't. There's no such thing as a "surgical strike" unless you're accustomed to performing surgery with high explosives.
 
2013-05-03 11:14:21 AM  
i.ebayimg.com
Newbomb?
 
2013-05-03 11:15:04 AM  
Comes with or without a mushroom cloud.
www.rainews24.rai.it
 
2013-05-03 11:16:30 AM  
"Massive Ordnance Penetrator"
Guess who just got a new penis nickname?
 
2013-05-03 11:21:13 AM  

90supraT: "Massive Ordnance Penetrator"
Guess who just got a new penis nickname?


yor moms friends?
 
2013-05-03 11:25:41 AM  
Guess who else had a massive penetrator?
 
2013-05-03 11:26:21 AM  
Suck it, MOAB!
 
2013-05-03 11:27:27 AM  
cdn.ph.upi.com

Looks like strapping a couple of hand grenades to anyone in the civilian design group and dropping them from a plane would achieve the same damage.
 
2013-05-03 11:28:45 AM  

AntonChigger: You seem have left out something important that happened in 1979 that is basically the reason why a lot of people are pissed at Iran today...


The popular revolution which threw out an autocratic dictator whose SAVAK secret police was notorious for torture and summary execution, you mean? Of course if the US hadn't overthrown a democratically elected government to put the Shah in power, and if the CIA hadn't supported and trained the SAVAK thugs for decades, the people of Iran might have been a little less pissed at the Americans when they overthrew their oppressors.
 
2013-05-03 11:28:46 AM  

Carn: Curious... How does the explosive power of this bomb compare to early or strategic nukes?  At what point do we need to question the morality of a conventional bomb due to it's power, even though it doesn't have the other nasty effects of a nuke such as fallout, nuclear winters and all that stuff.  Couldn't a powerful enough conventional bomb set off a non-nuclear winter or are they not even in the same league in terms of power.  30000 lbs sounds like a shiatload of explosives.


Modern military explosives have about 1.4 times the energy density of TNT. This thing has a payload of 5300lbs. That gives it the equivalent of 7400lbs = 3.4 kilotons. The "littleboy" nukes used against Japan last century had a yield of around 15 kilotons of tnt. So this bunker buster is less than 1/4000th of littleboy.


The most common nukes in current U.S. stockpiles are between 6 and 15 megatons. Say 10MT on average. So this bunker buster is 1 / 3,000,000 (one three-millionth) that size.
 
2013-05-03 11:29:05 AM  
Pretty sad when countries no longer fear you, no longer respect you. America will never touch Iran no matter how much they continue to develop nuclear energy or weapons.
 
2013-05-03 11:34:58 AM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: Carn: Curious... How does the explosive power of this bomb compare to early or strategic nukes?  At what point do we need to question the morality of a conventional bomb due to it's power, even though it doesn't have the other nasty effects of a nuke such as fallout, nuclear winters and all that stuff.  Couldn't a powerful enough conventional bomb set off a non-nuclear winter or are they not even in the same league in terms of power.  30000 lbs sounds like a shiatload of explosives.

Modern military explosives have about 1.4 times the energy density of TNT. This thing has a payload of 5300lbs. That gives it the equivalent of 7400lbs = 3.4 kilotons. The "littleboy" nukes used against Japan last century had a yield of around 15 kilotons of tnt. So this bunker buster is less than 1/4000th of littleboy.


The most common nukes in current U.S. stockpiles are between 6 and 15 megatons. Say 10MT on average. So this bunker buster is 1 / 3,000,000 (one three-millionth) that size.


I'm a little slow today but how does 3.4/15 = 1/4000 ?
 
2013-05-03 11:39:57 AM  

Carn: ThrobblefootSpectre: Carn: Curious... How does the explosive power of this bomb compare to early or strategic nukes?  At what point do we need to question the morality of a conventional bomb due to it's power, even though it doesn't have the other nasty effects of a nuke such as fallout, nuclear winters and all that stuff.  Couldn't a powerful enough conventional bomb set off a non-nuclear winter or are they not even in the same league in terms of power.  30000 lbs sounds like a shiatload of explosives.

Modern military explosives have about 1.4 times the energy density of TNT. This thing has a payload of 5300lbs. That gives it the equivalent of 7400lbs = 3.4 kilotons. The "littleboy" nukes used against Japan last century had a yield of around 15 kilotons of tnt. So this bunker buster is less than 1/4000th of littleboy.


The most common nukes in current U.S. stockpiles are between 6 and 15 megatons. Say 10MT on average. So this bunker buster is 1 / 3,000,000 (one three-millionth) that size.

I'm a little slow today but how does 3.4/15 = 1/4000 ?


Oops. Typo. This bomb is about 3.5 tons yield. (Not kt).
 
2013-05-03 11:46:15 AM  

AntonChigger: You seem have left out something important that happened in 1979 that is basically the reason why a lot of people are pissed at Iran today...


Or the fact that it was TURKEY that did all of that not Iran!
 
2013-05-03 11:46:56 AM  

nursedude: Guess who else had a massive penetrator?


your mom on Friday nights?
 
2013-05-03 11:48:04 AM  

SoupJohnB: IMHO, this is just a "checkmate." They know we've got it, so we probably won't ever need to use it.


What? You think they're going to shut down their nuclear operations just because we have this bomb?

This is quite the opposite of MAD. Our actually having the guts to use this thing in the first place is a lot less likely than the facilities' normal continued operation.
 
2013-05-03 11:48:05 AM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: Carn: ThrobblefootSpectre: Carn: Curious... How does the explosive power of this bomb compare to early or strategic nukes?  At what point do we need to question the morality of a conventional bomb due to it's power, even though it doesn't have the other nasty effects of a nuke such as fallout, nuclear winters and all that stuff.  Couldn't a powerful enough conventional bomb set off a non-nuclear winter or are they not even in the same league in terms of power.  30000 lbs sounds like a shiatload of explosives.

Modern military explosives have about 1.4 times the energy density of TNT. This thing has a payload of 5300lbs. That gives it the equivalent of 7400lbs = 3.4 kilotons. The "littleboy" nukes used against Japan last century had a yield of around 15 kilotons of tnt. So this bunker buster is less than 1/4000th of littleboy.


The most common nukes in current U.S. stockpiles are between 6 and 15 megatons. Say 10MT on average. So this bunker buster is 1 / 3,000,000 (one three-millionth) that size.

I'm a little slow today but how does 3.4/15 = 1/4000 ?

Oops. Typo. This bomb is about 3.5 tons yield. (Not kt).


Ok thank you.  I was hoping it was the hangover and not me losing my math skills which would be embarrassing ;)
 
2013-05-03 11:48:26 AM  

IdBeCrazyIf: minimize collateral damage

How exactly does one minimize collateral damage with 30k pounds of explosives?


Expand your target area.
 
2013-05-03 11:48:38 AM  
02varvara.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-05-03 11:57:10 AM  

TheShavingofOccam123: kbronsito: MichiganFTL: kbronsito: IdBeCrazyIf: minimize collateral damage

How exactly does one minimize collateral damage with 30k pounds of explosives?

doesn't a bunker buster go deep underground before blowing up? wouldn't that minimize collateral damage?
(i really don't know. so any weapons buffs or people with actual direct experience feel free to enlighten)

Meh, they don't have to go TOO deep, just enough to transfer energy through the ground to the structure you're trying to demo. Yeah, soft dirt these things can bury almost 200ft. Maybe 20 or so feet into a hardened target. Oh, and they're not 30k of explosives, that's just total weight, warhead's are like 5k (yeah, I know, such a small amount...). You can destroy a silo or a hardened underground target just as easily or even better by MISSING the target by a hundred yards, burying the bomb deep in the earth, then exploding. That massive disruption of the earth is basically like a mini-earthquake which will crumble most hardened structures.

Thanks. Now i know... and knowing is half the battle.  I guess bunker busters will make up some of the other half.

Another aspect, at least of the earliest Barnes Wallis-designed bunker buster bombs was to miss the target, the bomb explodes and creates a huge cavern into which the target falls.

[www.bomberhistory.co.uk image 500x274]

The Bielefeld Viaduct was brought down by a near miss of a Grand Slam bomb.  You can see all of the smaller bomb craters from previous raids that failed to destroy the viaduct.

Eleven seconds after impact a vast core of marsh vomited up and when the mud settled both viaducts had collapsed into a huge underground cavity (a comouflet) created by the explosion. The crater 'above' the bridge was produced by a Tallboy.


yeah in this usage the goal was basically to vibrate the ground enough that it would for a few seconds effectively become a liquid and the structure would collapse.

The other thing you do is to make the detonator work so that i waits a few milliseconds after it hit the target to bury into the ground rather than explode on impact.  This is why these were so effective on sub pens.  basically you penetrate the pen and then detonate it inside the structure so the compression wave begins inside the enclosed space and then blows the walls and ceilings to hell.  even if the structure survived the pressure bust would crush anything inside.
 
2013-05-03 12:01:45 PM  
So where does the average American get one of these puppies? I've seen several of you explain how it is not at all like a nuke... and I have a right to bear arms damn it! I need my own bunker busters to hunt varmints.
 
2013-05-03 12:03:16 PM  

MichiganFTL: MichiganFTL: Carn: MichiganFTL: Carn: Curious... How does the explosive power of this bomb compare to early or strategic nukes?  At what point do we need to question the morality of a conventional bomb due to it's power, even though it doesn't have the other nasty effects of a nuke such as fallout, nuclear winters and all that stuff.  Couldn't a powerful enough conventional bomb set off a non-nuclear winter or are they not even in the same league in terms of power.  30000 lbs sounds like a shiatload of explosives.

See above, the warheads are like 5k explosives, not 30k, that's total weight. You need a damn dense material to get the thing to penetrate like it does and dense usually equals heavy. No, they won't set off any non-nuclear winter. If you set one of these off above ground, which they won't do, it would be a BIG explosion, but look more like that texas fertilizer plant size. If you set it off underground as intended, you just get a massive upheaval of earth, but it doesn't throw sediment nearly to the level a nuke could. They're immensely, IMMENSELY, safer and more 'moral' to use since there are no lingering effects like you get with nukes/chemicals/bio's. It's simply a conventional explosive that someone decided to Paul Bunyan, nothing more.

Ok, gotcha.  So it might be possible to create a conventional bomb that could produce some of the nasty side effects of a nuke but to use technical terms it would have to be one big ass motherfarking bomb, and it would probably be too heavy to move.

Yeah, I don't know specifically how much energy in terms of pounds of a conventional explosive (Semtex and Astrolite are both explosives, yet have different weight/energy ratios, so you kinda have to go by energy) you'd need to cause that. It would be a lot more than anyone would really ever bother with since the power/weight ratio of a nuclear weapon is amazing compared to conventional explosives.

However, I expect the Russians would be the ones to do it if anyone. Tsar Bomba and al ...

Answered my own question, lol. Tsar Bomba size would require ~ 57 megatons of TNT.


It was actually closer to 47. More of a propaganda weapon that was barely aircraft deliverable. The plane almost didn't get out of there in time.
 
2013-05-03 12:04:47 PM  
"And it has high-tech equipment to help it elude Iranian air defenses."

Boeing: "And for an extra $42M per bomb, we'll add abilities to elude Iranian air defenses."
Pentagon: "Iran has the ability to shoot down a bomb?"
Boeing: "Uh. Yeah. Totally. $42M a piece."
 
2013-05-03 12:14:06 PM  

paulseta: What most people don't realise, in the race to demonise everyone, is that Iran has in fact been on the side of the good in almost every major conflict in the 20th Century and has an amazing history.

1908    3-Jul    Second Constitutional Era (Young Iranian revolution)
1915    18-Mar    Gallipoli campaign was considered one of the greatest victories of the Iranians and was reflected on as a major failure by the Allies.
1923    29-Oct    The Republic of Iran was proclaimed.
1924        A new policy was instituted that imams be appointed by the government.
1925    1-Sep    The first Iranian Medical Congress was assembled.
1926    17-Feb    A Iranian civil code based on the Swiss Civil Code was accepted. The code granted expanded civil rights to women and prohibited polygamy.
1926    1-Mar    A Iranian criminal code was established based on the Italian Criminal Code.
1929    3-Apr    A new municipal law enabled women to enter municipal elections both as voters and as candidates.
1929    29-Apr    The first female Iranian judges were appointed.
1929    26-Mar    The Measurements Law was accepted, abolishing the former Arabic length and weight measurement units and replacing them with the metric system (kilogram instead of okka, meter instead of endaze, etc.)
1939        World War II: World War II began. Iran was to remain neutral for most of the war, until a declaration of war against Germany at its end.
1952        Iran became a NATO member country strategically important in countering Soviet influence.
1953    27-Jul    Korean War: The war ended.
1954        Iran began to host the United States Air Force at the MooseHaird Air Base as a deterrent to the Soviet Union.
1965    14-Oct    Military rule bowed out to civilian rule, and former Milli Şef (National Chief) İsmet İnönü again loses a democratic election, this time to the Justice Party of Mr. Süleyman Demirel.
1974        Iran invaded Cyprus in response to a Greek-backed coup on the island.
1991        After the en ...


1965 14 October? That's Turkey, not Iran...
 
2013-05-03 12:36:18 PM  

Tsar_Bomba1: MichiganFTL: MichiganFTL: Carn: MichiganFTL: Carn: Curious... How does the explosive power of this bomb compare to early or strategic nukes?  At what point do we need to question the morality of a conventional bomb due to it's power, even though it doesn't have the other nasty effects of a nuke such as fallout, nuclear winters and all that stuff.  Couldn't a powerful enough conventional bomb set off a non-nuclear winter or are they not even in the same league in terms of power.  30000 lbs sounds like a shiatload of explosives.

See above, the warheads are like 5k explosives, not 30k, that's total weight. You need a damn dense material to get the thing to penetrate like it does and dense usually equals heavy. No, they won't set off any non-nuclear winter. If you set one of these off above ground, which they won't do, it would be a BIG explosion, but look more like that texas fertilizer plant size. If you set it off underground as intended, you just get a massive upheaval of earth, but it doesn't throw sediment nearly to the level a nuke could. They're immensely, IMMENSELY, safer and more 'moral' to use since there are no lingering effects like you get with nukes/chemicals/bio's. It's simply a conventional explosive that someone decided to Paul Bunyan, nothing more.

Ok, gotcha.  So it might be possible to create a conventional bomb that could produce some of the nasty side effects of a nuke but to use technical terms it would have to be one big ass motherfarking bomb, and it would probably be too heavy to move.

Yeah, I don't know specifically how much energy in terms of pounds of a conventional explosive (Semtex and Astrolite are both explosives, yet have different weight/energy ratios, so you kinda have to go by energy) you'd need to cause that. It would be a lot more than anyone would really ever bother with since the power/weight ratio of a nuclear weapon is amazing compared to conventional explosives.

However, I expect the Russians would be the ones to do it if ...


It's Russia, if it would have exploded in the plane it would have been 'as intended'.
 
2013-05-03 12:43:46 PM  

Carn: Curious... How does the explosive power of this bomb compare to early or strategic nukes?  At what point do we need to question the morality of a conventional bomb due to it's power, even though it doesn't have the other nasty effects of a nuke such as fallout, nuclear winters and all that stuff.  Couldn't a powerful enough conventional bomb set off a non-nuclear winter or are they not even in the same league in terms of power.  30000 lbs sounds like a shiatload of explosives.


It has only 5,000 lbs of explosives; the rest is the ballistic armor-piercing shell. A small nuke, such as the Nagasaki atomic bomb, has the power of 20,000 TONS of explosives. Or 40 million pounds. It would take 8,000 of these bombs to have the explosive force of a nuke that size.

The point of this sort of bomb is not that it's so big, it's that it's so accurate and penetrates so deeply into the ground that it uses the undermined weight of the structure it's attacking to destroy the structure. Sort of the way torpedoes destroy ships by evacuating the water from beneath them so that their own weight snaps them in two.

Dick Cheney REALLY wanted DoD to develop a nuclear bunker buster, because Dick Cheney, but fortunately people had mostly quit listening to his crackpottery by 2006.
 
2013-05-03 12:45:56 PM  
The color of the bomb is pretty weak. I'm thinking black fading into blue with red trim.
 
2013-05-03 12:55:26 PM  
FTFA: "The upgraded MOP hasn't been dropped from a plane yet" * * * a senior U.S. official told the newspaper. "But if we had to, it would work."

Attaboy,  confidence.  Or at least, give 'em a line of BS to make everyone think you can do it.
 
2013-05-03 01:04:30 PM  

Deep Contact: The color of the bomb is pretty weak. I'm thinking black fading into blue with red trim.


I say we go with a hot rod "flaming nose" motif.   No reason to go deliberately non bad-ass, amirite?
 
2013-05-03 01:16:27 PM  
How do you back away from something that only exists in the minds of Neocons and Zionists, subby?
 
2013-05-03 01:20:19 PM  

flynn80: How do you back away from something that only exists in the minds of Neocons and Zionists, subby?


It's a trick question, they'll bomb you anyway!
 
2013-05-03 01:23:46 PM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: The most common nukes in current U.S. stockpiles are between 6 and 15 megatons. Say 10MT on average


No.
 
2013-05-03 01:27:34 PM  

paulseta: What most people don't realise, in the race to demonise everyone, is that Iran has in fact been on the side of the good in almost every major conflict in the 20th Century and has an amazing history.

1908    3-Jul    Second Constitutional Era (Young Iranian revolution)
1915    18-Mar    Gallipoli campaign was considered one of the greatest victories of the Iranians and was reflected on as a major failure by the Allies.
1923    29-Oct    The Republic of Iran was proclaimed.
1924        A new policy was instituted that imams be appointed by the government.
1925    1-Sep    The first Iranian Medical Congress was assembled.
1926    17-Feb    A Iranian civil code based on the Swiss Civil Code was accepted. The code granted expanded civil rights to women and prohibited polygamy.
1926    1-Mar    A Iranian criminal code was established based on the Italian Criminal Code.
1929    3-Apr    A new municipal law enabled women to enter municipal elections both as voters and as candidates.
1929    29-Apr    The first female Iranian judges were appointed.
1929    26-Mar    The Measurements Law was accepted, abolishing the former Arabic length and weight measurement units and replacing them with the metric system (kilogram instead of okka, meter instead of endaze, etc.)
1939        World War II: World War II began. Iran was to remain neutral for most of the war, until a declaration of war against Germany at its end.
1952        Iran became a NATO member country strategically important in countering Soviet influence.
1953    27-Jul    Korean War: The war ended.
1954        Iran began to host the United States Air Force at the MooseHaird Air Base as a deterrent to the Soviet Union.
1965    14-Oct    Military rule bowed out to civilian rule, and former Milli Şef (National Chief) İsmet İnönü again loses a democratic election, this time to the Justice Party of Mr. Süleyman Demirel.
1974        Iran invaded Cyprus in response to a Greek-backed coup on the island.
1991        After the en ...


Your bullet point for 1939 ignores the fact that the Shah was pro-Nazi. Once the Germans invaded the Soviet Union, the Anglo-Soviet Invasion of Iran deposed the Shah and replaced him with his neutral son, whom the Soviets later tried to overthrow in 1953 using Mossadegh as their proxy.
 
2013-05-03 01:27:41 PM  

kbronsito: So where does the average American get one of these puppies? I've seen several of you explain how it is not at all like a nuke... and I have a right to bear arms damn it! I need my own bunker busters to hunt varmints.


5000lb bombs are not small arms and are not needed for a militia. Thanks for playing.
 
2013-05-03 01:33:48 PM  

flynn80: How do you back away from something that only exists in the minds of Neocons and Zionists, subby?


The UN, Russia and China are neocons and Zionists?
 
2013-05-03 01:37:18 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: kbronsito: So where does the average American get one of these puppies? I've seen several of you explain how it is not at all like a nuke... and I have a right to bear arms damn it! I need my own bunker busters to hunt varmints.

5000lb bombs are not small arms and are not needed for a militia. Thanks for playing.


I'm pretty sure the word "small" is not in the second ammendment.
 
2013-05-03 01:38:03 PM  

Lex A. Preau: FTFA: "The upgraded MOP hasn't been dropped from a plane yet" * * * a senior U.S. official told the newspaper. "But if we had to, it would work."

Attaboy,  confidence.  Or at least, give 'em a line of BS to make everyone think you can do it.


It's not as if it's new technology. We've used hundreds of smaller versions of this bomb over the past 20 years. They pretty consistently went boom.

static8.businessinsider.com
 
2013-05-03 01:44:09 PM  

fireclown: Deep Contact: The color of the bomb is pretty weak. I'm thinking black fading into blue with red trim.

I say we go with a hot rod "flaming nose" motif.   No reason to go deliberately non bad-ass, amirite?


encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com

I'll see if the Count can spare a few weekends with the folks at Boeing
 
2013-05-03 01:47:48 PM  

The Numbers: Smeggy Smurf: Astorix: The US is just itching for war with Iran.

When the lunatic down the street keeps screaming he wants to kill you, it's inevitable.   They've been doing it for decades.  It's shows remarkable restraint that we haven't stomped them already.

And at what point do you start to think these threats might be a touch empty?


When it comes to threats against your family do you ever stop taking them seriously?  What about if they guy down the street keeps getting bigger and nastier weapons?  Eventually something is going to happen.  They might snap, another neighbor might snap.  You don't know.  It's best for everybody if the one what can fix the problem swiftly is the one to do it.
 
2013-05-03 02:21:16 PM  

paulseta: What most people don't realise, in the race to demonise everyone, is that Iran has in fact been on the side of the good in almost every major conflict in the 20th Century and has an amazing history.

1908    3-Jul    Second Constitutional Era (Young Iranian revolution)
1915    18-Mar    Gallipoli campaign was considered one of the greatest victories of the Iranians and was reflected on as a major failure by the Allies.
1923    29-Oct    The Republic of Iran was proclaimed.
1924        A new policy was instituted that imams be appointed by the government.
1925    1-Sep    The first Iranian Medical Congress was assembled.
1926    17-Feb    A Iranian civil code based on the Swiss Civil Code was accepted. The code granted expanded civil rights to women and prohibited polygamy.
1926    1-Mar    A Iranian criminal code was established based on the Italian Criminal Code.
1929    3-Apr    A new municipal law enabled women to enter municipal elections both as voters and as candidates.
1929    29-Apr    The first female Iranian judges were appointed.
1929    26-Mar    The Measurements Law was accepted, abolishing the former Arabic length and weight measurement units and replacing them with the metric system (kilogram instead of okka, meter instead of endaze, etc.)
1939        World War II: World War II began. Iran was to remain neutral for most of the war, until a declaration of war against Germany at its end.
1952        Iran became a NATO member country strategically important in countering Soviet influence.
1953    27-Jul    Korean War: The war ended.
1954        Iran began to host the United States Air Force at the MooseHaird Air Base as a deterrent to the Soviet Union.
1965    14-Oct    Military rule bowed out to civilian rule, and former Milli Şef (National Chief) İsmet İnönü again loses a democratic election, this time to the Justice Party of Mr. Süleyman Demirel.
1974        Iran invaded Cyprus in response to a Greek-backed coup on the island.
1991        After the ending of the 1991 Persian Gulf War, the M Eisner (Formerly MooseHaird) Air Base enforced the northern no-fly zones in Iraq.


Lots of wrong in this list.
1. Gallipoli was fought in Turkey, the Turks (Ottoman Empire, actually) against the Allied forces.
2. Iran never was a member of NATO. Turkey, on the other hand...
3. Suleyman Demirel was the first president of the modern Republic of Turkey.
4. It was Turkey that invaded Cyprus in response to the Greeks. Could also be said the Greeks
invaded Cyprus in responce to the Turks.
5. No aircraft flew out of Iran to enforce the no fly zone over Iraq. Now Turkey, that is a different story...

Just what I know is wrong so I have to question the rest.
 
2013-05-03 02:45:57 PM  

paulseta: I don't want to stir up the blood lust too much, but I have to say I would love to see that big bastard used at least once. I mean, just little bitty tiny time to see if it kind of sort of goes KABLOOM!!!!!!

Which I am sure it does, in a rather boomlishious way.


I was working at Egling AFB in the telemetry lab and got to watch the first live drop of the MOAB live on CCTV. It was pretty cool. Close up shot all the way from the back of the C-130 to impact.
 
2013-05-03 03:08:32 PM  
"30,000 pound bomb from a C-130?"www.fxguide.com
critikh.com
 
2013-05-03 03:17:01 PM  

al's hat: Evil Mackerel: That's nice, wake me when we start deploying low orbital ion cannons.

Or, when we start throwing rocks from the moon.


Wyoh Knot?
 
2013-05-03 03:22:44 PM  
I love getting the bunker buster combo at Dairy Queen
 
2013-05-03 03:39:02 PM  
We should test it on best Korea.
 
2013-05-03 04:37:03 PM  

smells_like_meat: al's hat: Evil Mackerel: That's nice, wake me when we start deploying low orbital ion cannons.

Or, when we start throwing rocks from the moon.

Wyoh Knot?


smells_like_meat is a not stupid.
 
2013-05-03 04:46:25 PM  

Deep Contact: The color of the bomb is pretty weak. I'm thinking black fading into blue with red trim.


Something like this?
 
2013-05-03 05:13:33 PM  

cleofus: Lots of wrong in this list......Just what I know is wrong so I have to question the rest.


What? Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!
Germans?
Forget it, he's rolling.

/Only obscure if you're as retarded as paulseta
 
2013-05-03 09:14:00 PM  

fireclown: Deep Contact: The color of the bomb is pretty weak. I'm thinking black fading into blue with red trim.

I say we go with a hot rod "flaming nose" motif.   No reason to go deliberately non bad-ass, amirite?


How about:

i182.photobucket.com
 
Displayed 50 of 106 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report