Pentagon war planners have concluded that their largest conventional bomb isn’t yet capable of destroying Iran’s most heavily fortified underground facilities, and are stepping up efforts to make it more powerful, according to U.S. officials briefed on the plan.
The 30,000-pound “bunker-buster” bomb, known as the Massive Ordnance Penetrator, was specifically designed to take out the hardened fortifications built by Iran and North Korea to cloak their nuclear programs…
because it would be rude to just NUKE them like they’re itching to do to us, right?
“The 30,000-pound “bunker-buster” bomb, known as the Massive Ordnance Penetrator”
Or M.O.P., lol. What’s their code for launching the thing? “Cleanup in Aisle 7”?
Wonder if they need to improve it so it can penetrate the uber thick skull of Ahmadinnerjacket?
My girlfriends call me that.
I don’t think the US should conclude that the Massive Ordnance Penetrator does not work until they have tested on Iran at least 50 or 60 times.
My girlfriends call me that.
Posted by: johnbrooks at January 28, 2012 4:28 PM
MOP? Guess it’s better than sponge.
Ahem … so why is NUKING them not an easier, “shovel ready” solution?
They live to die for Allah … we can facilitate that desire … it’s a win-win.
Its already been delivered btw. Some things started blowing up mysteriously in Iran about the same time.
Its all very mysterious…
Just nuke them what the hell. No great deal. Wipe out the middle east and end this BS.Why do we put up with all this BS.
It’s all a misunderstanding, as we are just the knuckledraggers, and Imadinnerjacket is a decent fellow.
Well, at least Gerald KKKaplan says so.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/second-reading/gerald-caplan/harper-and-the-us-are-wrong-on-the-iran-threat/article2317799/
Davers6 >
“….so why is NUKING them not an easier…solution?”
Political correctness, nukes are racist.
Everyone knows that black Nobel Peace Prize winners are not racist.
You don’t need to destroy the facility, prevention of ingress and egress would accomplish the goal.
Having the right ordnance is one thing. Having the will to use it is quite another. With Jimmy Carter part deux in the White House, the will is absent unless the mullah nutters are dumb enough to back Barry into a corner.
“President Barack Obama has made clear that he believes U.S. and international sanctions can curb Iran’s nuclear program if they are given more time to work.”
Well, do we have to consider anything else?
NObama still thinks effete papers and letters, from THE ONE will put a trance over Mr Dinnerjacket.
The narcissist knows all.
“The 30,000-pound “bunker-buster” bomb, known as the Massive Ordnance Penetrator, was specifically designed to take out the hardened fortifications built by Iran and North Korea ”
well NO, it was designed because of what they found in Iraq
War with Iran is more insane than war with Iraq.
ONE MOP won’t do it eh?
Hmmmm, lemmee think about that.Hmmm…what about 5, or 10?
Better yet, maybe a cruise missile (fond memories) into Irans Miltary HQ? Followed by a couple more when the ambulances arrive.
Let’em know we’re serious; our allies are serious, I mean. Canada, well our biggest weapon Don Cherry, is busy for the forseeable future.
As for Lizzy May, well she couldn’t find her own a$$ with both hands.Unless it was on a dinner plate.
Or drop the bomb when the scientists arrive at work.
Those who survive will have a hard time answering the phone with their eardrums mashed together..
Mark >
“War with Iran is more insane than war with Iraq.”
The biggest insanity is the new liberal definition of war.
Go into a country with lawyers and internal affairs looking over the troop’s shoulders with contempt, and attempt to occupy it peacefully with no collateral damage. Then spend billions of dollars to restructure and hopefully turn 5000 year old cultures into westerners along with filling western countries with the war torn refugee baggage.
Everyone knows that black Nobel Peace Prize winners are not racist. BS He is the biggest racist there is.
Just nuke them what the hell. No great deal.
Without provocation? Oh wait, perhaps the US can claim that they found no al-Qaeda in Iraq so they must be in Iran.
A war with Iran would be as un-winnable as the war in Afghanistan. Learn some geography.
Iran already has nuclear weapons. Hundreds of nuclear weapons went ‘missing’ with the collapse of the Soviet Union. Any country with oil export revenue can afford all the nuclear weapons they want. This “Iranian nuclear issue” is nothing more than political posturing and Paranoia Propaganda.
If the Iranian government attacks the US forces, then war should be the last option only if everything else fails, but then it should be the final one. Once committed to war then do it fully and with deadly intention. Nuke the cities and eliminate the bulk of the population as quickly as possible before sending in any troops. Burn the fields, kill the livestock and poison the water. Bomb schools and hospitals, kill women and children to eliminate the possibility of the war extending beyond one generation. Kill them fast and efficiently, then it’s upon them to surrender prior to becoming exterminated as a people. Kill everyone and break everything until they surrender unconditionally. After one war, nobody should ever want to allow that possibility again.
We have pictures posted of Mark Levin’s hugely successful Book Signing of Ameritopia at Tysons Corner Mall in Northern Virginia. Check them out here…
http://www.commoncts.blogspot.com/2012/01/pictures-mark-levins-tyson-corner-book.html
Guess they need to resurect Barnes Wallis. He was building bombs like that 70 years ago.
“Hundreds of nuclear weapons went ‘missing’ with the collapse of the Soviet Union.”-North of 60
Really? Where’d ya get that jewel of information?
@North of 60:
About your scorched earth policy on Iran, you are being facetious, aren’t you? Surely you are not serious.
War with Iran is more insane than war with Iraq.
Posted by: Mark at January 28, 2012 5:27 PM
Mark is right. Some of us libertarian/conservatives learn. A good libertarian can agree that pacifism is dangerous, but a unprovoked war against Iran is way more dangerous. I’ve removed the /conservative from my self-descriptor.
WAR is a government programme and in the case of the US superpower a consistently failed programme since 1945. Grenada doesn’t count.
Anything the US does will result in an outcome far worse than the status quo, as awful as that is with nuclear mullah-twelvers.
And let’s please remember that the Persian people have no issue with the America people; that the Persian people had candlelight vigils on 9/11 – not candies and street dancing.
North of 60 >
Now that is war!
If you don’t have the stomach for it, don’t get involved in the first place. The prissy left thinks they can have their cake and eat it as well.
The reason they think they can peaceably get involved in regional and cultural conflicts they don’t understand, even importing much of the problems home, is beyond me.
We have the useless Arab League now telling us which ME conflict we need to spend our money and inject ourselves, while their immigrated minions put political pressure on our parliaments as citizens.
Enough already.
About your scorched earth policy on Iran, you are being facetious, aren’t you? Surely you are not serious.
Deadly serious.
What part of:
war should be the last option only if everything else fails, but then it should be the final one.
was difficult to understand?
Me No Dhimmi >
“I’ve removed the /conservative from my self-descriptor.”
Why does “conservative” now mean war?
Obamba, Clinton and the socialist EU identify themselves as Liberal; yet have no qualms about war, aside from remarketing it as something other. Not to mention Communism, Fascism and so on.
Conservatism and libertarianism go hand in hand, until the special interest spin doctors lay their hands on it.
Otherwise I completly agree with your statment.
It would be foolish and naive to assume that any governments and rogue organizations don’t have nuclear weapons, if they want them.
Before its collapse in 1991, the Soviet Union had more than 27,000 nuclear weapons and enough weapons-grade plutonium and uranium to triple that number. Since, severe economic distress, rampant crime, and widespread corruption in Russia and other former Soviet countries have fed concerns in the West about loose nukes, underpaid nuclear scientists, and the smuggling of nuclear materials. Security at Russia’s nuclear storage sites remains worrisome…
…there is ample evidence of a significant black market in nuclear materials. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has reported more than a hundred nuclear smuggling incidents since 1993, eighteen of which involved highly enriched uranium, the key ingredient in an atomic bomb and the most dangerous product on the nuclear black market.
Anyone with even a basic understanding of internet searches can find ample additional evidence.
We have forgotten about the WMD’s which never existed in Iran, and now plow ahead with similar information into Iran because we’re sure they are developing nukes. Bush was wrong and now Obama is suddenly right about something?
I was pro-war against Iran, but in retrospect I was wrong about it. Is it possible that America is making a similar mistake by escalating tensions with Iran?
Obama, even before his unfortunate election, was pro-Iran. The last thing he wants is to butt heads with Iran. It would take guts.
There were WMDs in Iraq before they were shipped to Syria while the UN looked everywhere but the railway from Baghdad to Damascus. The US knew that because they sold them to Iraq.
“President Barack Obama has made clear that he believes U.S. and international sanctions can curb Iran’s nuclear program if they are given more time to work.”
Wouldn’t this make the US responsible for the starvation deaths of hundreds of thousands of iranian children, and wouldn’t Maobama have their blood on his hands?
Oh, wait. Different party running things. Marxist extreme left-wing president in charge. Totally different situation from Bush.
I forgot.
mhb23re at gmail d0t calm
I like the idea of total war or none at all. Fight to win from day one with all resources. When they’ve had enough casualties they can unconditionally surrender whenever they choose. Citizens who don’t control their government are equally guilty and are reasonable targets. These 10 or 15 year wars against stone age idiots are simply stupid.
Although total, all out, take no prisoners war is almost unthinkable, it seems that the best policy is if you have a big stick … use it.
Buggering about in the manner employed in Iraq, Afghanistan and, to a lesser extent, Vietnam only results in unnecessary casualties with litte or no tangible results.
“War with Iran is more insane than war with Iraq.”
I agree with that, apparently as does much of Israel’s senior military and intelligence ranks:
– nytimes.com/2012/01/29/magazine/will-israel-attack-iran.html?_r=1&pagewanted=1
– nytimes.com/2012/01/27/world/middleeast/israelis-see-irans-threats-of-retaliation-as-bluff.htm
“Fight to win from day one with all resources.”
Define “winning”.
“When they’ve had enough casualties they can unconditionally surrender whenever they choose.”
This was tried in Vietnam. Worked well, didn’t it?
The DEMONcRAT policy is simple enough, when action cannot be avoided, sustaining casualties IS avoided. Hence the Clinton era policy of “surgical” cruise missle strikes and the Maobama policy of armed drones. MOPs involve manned aircraft….and bad press “innocent” colateral casualties.
It’s not so much valuing american lives as dreading responsibility for ANY casualties or MIAs….it’s all about image…
That Gerald Caplan is a piece of work.
His role model, Lord Hawhaw, had to hide in Nazi occupied Europe…..
How times have changed….Lord Hawhaw met his end on a UK scaffold. Caplan can live here openly and have access to print and electronic media.
I contemplate the irony, if the Iranians have a whoops while assembling their weapon….or an undetected cruise missle does a contact/surface detonation on Nantaz….making it look like a whoops….
Back in the ’50’s-’60’s the soviets had a still classified nuclear whoops which to this day is a big no go zone east of the Urals.
In the early ’80’s, the Soviets had a major whoops which destoyed out their Northern Fleet’s arsenal(reloads, facilities, and associated skilled personnel) at Polyarnyy….
“…Pentagon war planners have concluded that their largest conventional bomb isn’t yet capable of destroying Iran’s most heavily fortified underground facilities, and are stepping up efforts to make it more powerful..”
Put a dunce cap on Libby Davis for a bit of streamlinin’ and drop ‘er from about 6 miles up.
cgh >
“Define “winning………This was tried in Vietnam. Worked well, didn’t it?”
Option #1. Think Japan WW2 and you might understand a little better.
Of course it won’t fit well with the liberal idea that war is fought with flowers in your hair and a bank of lawyers behind each mission, but it is what others are trying to explain.
Option #2. Don’t get involved in the first place unless there is no choice, and then refer to option #1.
It’s funny that our existing personal self defence laws in society work in a similar fashion for the Liberal left, yet not so much when extended to foreign affairs and national defence. Of course they would have you roll over and be gang raped in your own home as well without the means to defend yourself.
Worth reading in the NY Times Magazine, lots of material from senior Israelis–by Ronen Bergman, an analyst for the Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth, the author of ‘‘The Secret War With Iran’’ and a contributing writer for the magazine:
“Will Israel Attack Iran?”
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/29/magazine/will-israel-attack-iran.html?_r=1&ref=magazine
Mark
Ottawa
It’s nice to see that there are at least a few sane, thinking, reasonable folks that comment here. Some days, I’m convinced that only yahoos, idiots and the bottom of the barrel of humanity posts here. A rare beam of reasoned light in an ocean of benighted ignorance and gnashing stupidity is something to be praised here as it seems, not always but often, all too rare.
So it goes…
If you read the history books or are old enough to remember, Japan had big economic sanctions on it. It bit back hard in Pearl Harbour.