War Game Shows Dangers of Attacking Iran

reply to post by SLAYER69

The Daisy cutters were developed to clear large amounts of vegetation so Helos could land. NOT for penetrating bunkers.

Yes they were and as the heaviest bomb in the U.S. Arsenal in 1990 it was pressed into service after being modified to bust bunkers.

History can be your friend, don't be mad at it.

Thanks!

reply to post by SLAYER69

WASHINGTON -- The United States has begun attacking the Taliban military forces with the biggest conventional bomb in the Air Force arsenal, a 15,000-pound behemoth used as much for its psychological impact as for its explosive power.

BLU-82s were dropped on Taliban positions in northern Afghanistan for the first time over the weekend, Knight-Ridder and the Associated Press reported, quoting Pentagon officials.

First created during the Vietnam War to quickly clear jungle landing zones, the bomb, nicknamed the "daisy cutter," also was used against Iraqi troops during the Gulf War.

WorldandNations.com

Why oh why must people call my near total photographic memory into question and cause me to look up things I already know!

Forgive them Father they know not what they do.

Was most definitely used as a Bunker Buster in the First Gulf War, I fly by the seat of my pants I don’t talk out of them though!

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


If we truly vested ourselves and took off the kid gloves and pushed the politically correct monkey off our backs we could destroy them in a week. Think about if we did not care what the world thought and actually fought wars with everything we have it would be a piece of cake.


The truth is it a business and they want it to go slow and to use up alot of little stuff so we need to make more. When war is a business we need to stop fighting wars!! I believe if we fight a war we fight to win and otherwise we should stay home.

Originally posted by Subjective Truth

If we truly vested ourselves and took off the kid gloves and pushed the politically correct monkey off our backs we could destroy them in a week. Think about if we did not care what the world thought and actually fought wars with everything we have it would be a piece of cake.

this is true,
The US has a good military machine



[edit on 23-2-2010 by Sean48]

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
Yes they were and as the heaviest bomb in the U.S. Arsenal in 1990 it was pressed into service after being modified to bust bunkers.

History can be your friend, don't be mad at it.

Thanks!

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Some great observations but busting bunkers didn’t do much good in the First Gulf War with its super altered Vietnam Daisy Cutter 2,000 pound bombs designed to penetrate goodness knows what.

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by SLAYER69

 

WASHINGTON -- The United States has begun attacking the Taliban military forces with the biggest conventional bomb in the Air Force arsenal, a 15,000-pound behemoth used as much for its psychological impact as for its explosive power.

BLU-82s were dropped on Taliban positions in northern Afghanistan for the first time over the weekend, Knight-Ridder and the Associated Press reported, quoting Pentagon officials.

Why oh why must people call my near total photographic memory into question and cause me to look up things I already know!

So much for your photographic memory you were talking about Iraq not Afghanistan.



Who's mad?

I'm going to enjoy this....

How Bunker Busters Work

There are thousands of military facilities around the world that defy conventional attack. Caves in Afghanistan burrow into mountainsides, and immense concrete bunkers lie buried deep in the sand in Iraq. These hardened facilities house command centers, ammunition depots and research labs that are either of strategic importance or vital to waging war. Because they are underground, they are hard to find and extremely difficult to strike.

The U.S. military has developed several different weapons to attack these underground fortresses. Known as bunker busters, these bombs penetrate deep into the earth or right through a dozen feet of reinforced concrete before exploding. These bombs have made it possible to reach and destroy facilities that would have been impossible to attack otherwise.

Conventional Bunker Busters

During the 1991 Gulf war, allied forces knew of several underground military bunkers in Iraq that were so well reinforced and so deeply buried that they were out of reach of existing munitions. The U.S. Air Force started an intense research and development process to create a new bunker-busting bomb to reach and destroy these bunkers. In just a few weeks, a prototype was created. This new bomb had the following features:

In this article, you'll learn about several different types of bunker buster so you will understand how they work and where the technology is heading.

* Its casing consists of an approximately 16-foot (5-meter) section of artillery barrel that is 14.5 inches (37 cm) in diameter. Artillery barrels are made of extremely strong hardened steel so that they can withstand the repeated blasts of artillery shells when they are fired.

* Inside this steel casing is nearly 650 pounds (295 kg) of tritonal explosive. Tritonal is a mixture of TNT (80 percent) and aluminum powder (20 percent). The aluminum improves the brisance of the TNT -- the speed at which the explosive develops its maximum pressure. The addition of aluminum makes tritonal about 18 percent more powerful than TNT alone.

* Attached to the front of the barrel is a laser-guidance assembly. Either a spotter on the ground or in the bomber illuminates the target with a laser, and the bomb homes in on the illuminated spot. The guidance assembly steers the bomb with fins that are part of the assembly.

* Attached to the end of the barrel are stationary fins that provide stability during flight.

The finished bomb, known as the GBU-28 or the BLU-113, is 19 feet (5.8 meters) long, 14.5 inches (36.8 cm) in diameter and weighs 4,400 pounds (1,996 kg).



Guided Bomb Unit-28 (GBU-28)

The GBU 28 "Bunker Buster" was put together in record time to support targeting of the Iraqi hardened command bunker by adapting existing materiel. The GBU-28 was not even in the early stages of research when Kuwait was invaded. The USAF asked industry for ideas in the week after combat operations started. Work on the bomb was conducted in research laboratories including the the Air Force Research Laboratory Munitions Directorate located at Eglin AFB, Florida and the Watervliet Armory in New York. The bomb was fabricated starting on 1 February, using surplus 8-inch artillery tubes as bomb casings because of their strength and weight. The official go-ahead for the project was issued on 14 February, and explosives for the initial units were hand-loaded by laboratory personnel into a bomb body that was partially buried upright in the ground.

The first two units were delivered to the USAF on 16 and 17 February, and the first flight to test the guidance software and fin configuration was conducted on 20 February. These tests were successful and the program proceeded with a contract let on 22 February. A sled test on 26 February proved that the bomb could penetrate over 20 feet of concrete, while an earlier flight test had demonstrated the bomb's ability to penetrate more than 100 feet of earth. The first two operational bombs were delivered to the theater on 27 February.

[edit on 23-2-2010 by SLAYER69]

Originally posted by Subjective Truth
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

 

If we truly vested ourselves and took off the kid gloves and pushed the politically correct monkey off our backs we could destroy them in a week. Think about if we did not care what the world thought and actually fought wars with everything we have it would be a piece of cake.


The truth is it a business and they want it to go slow and to use up alot of little stuff so we need to make more. When war is a business we need to stop fighting wars!! I believe if we fight a war we fight to win and otherwise we should stay home.

Don’t quit your day job to become a General my friend not even in the Israeli Defense Forces.

The truth is no nation that does not want to be conquered can be conquered especially in a week. Hence why we are in Afghanistan 10 years later, and while history has shown like in the case of the U.S. war in the Philippines that morphed out of the Spanish American War in the late 1800’s early 1900’s that overly brutal scorched earth warfare can sap the will of the enemy to fight, as occurred there and in Sherman’s infamous march to the sea.

We have seen similar scorched earth total annihilation warfare as the Nazis conducted throughout the Ukraine and Western Russia simply cause a resilient and determined enemy to respond back in kind which the Soviets certainly did as they beat back the Nazi advances all the way to Berlin.

That is pure hubris and ego speaking my friend and you lack one precedent to show where a well established nation has been conquered in a week and didn’t end up then needing to be occupied against a constant resistance for years.

reply to post by SLAYER69

First created during the Vietnam War to quickly clear jungle landing zones, the bomb, nicknamed the "daisy cutter," also was used against Iraqi troops during the Gulf War.

I know a good optometrist my friend. He takes most forms of insurance. Very fashionable right next to the Bal Harbour Shops!

Gulf War in Iraq actually means Gulf War in Iraq!

Reading can be your friend!

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by SLAYER69

 

First created during the Vietnam War to quickly clear jungle landing zones, the bomb, nicknamed the "daisy cutter," also was used against Iraqi troops during the Gulf War.

I know a good optometrist my friend. He takes most forms of insurance. Very fashionable right next to the Bal Harbour Shops!

Gulf War in Iraq actually means Gulf War in Iraq!

Reading can be your friend!

Against TROOPS Not bunkers.

Where did I leave that PDF on reading comprehension?

I wonder...


[edit on 23-2-2010 by SLAYER69]

reply to post by SLAYER69


Gee really makes you wonder why they drop the Daisy Cutters on Caves in Afghanistan then?

You know caves burried in mountains like bunkers?

At least we know now you were too young back in the First Gulf War to watch it on TV!

They actually did modify the Daisy Cutter as a bunker buster utilizing it's extreme weight and pointed end and setting the fuse to go off seconds after impact as opposed to before impact.

When deforresting it is exploded slightly above ground but it is so heavy that they drop it with a parachute from 6,000 feet and rely on the chute to slow it's descent for a controlled demolition.

Of course take off the chute and let that pointed end slam into a hardened target and it actually can burrow and does!

Isn't it nice that we have learned that this Vietnam era munition is still being used today?







[edit on 23/2/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]

reply to post by SLAYER69


Of course I am guessing you also forgot that all the Iraqi Troops during the First Gulf War were DUG IN, in a massive series of hardened trenches and bunkers.

Want to talk about how the special forces flew over them in helicopters broadcasting subliminal messages in Silent Spread Sound Spectrum to get them to crawl out of their bunkers too surrender and kiss the feet of American soldiers?

Or maybe you would prefer to talk about how the same technology is now used in your all digital TV reception mandated by the 2004 Budget Reduction Act making digital cable mandatory?

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


First off Gulf War-1 came after I had already left the service.

Second using them against Troops is a big difference than using them against Bunkers. I'll let you slide this time but next time remember that your poor photographic memory coupled with your youth and inexperience is no match for my pornographic memory coupled with my slightly older age and treachery.

Now on to Dropping modified Daisy cutters on either Iraqi Troops or presently against Afghanistan positions.

Come on man...

My God! Being near ground zero to one [If the Concussion didn't kill you] You would certainly lose your hearing and or bowel control...

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by SLAYER69

 

Of course I am guessing you also forgot that all the Iraqi Troops during the First Gulf War were DUG IN, in a massive series of hardened trenches and bunkers.

Maybe some were....

Most Iraqi troops that were left behind out in the middle of the desert in cheaply made dug dirt, sandbag trenches and bunkers died. My Brother who fought there said that many who would not surrender were simply buried alive by US tanks bulldozing them over.



[edit on 24-2-2010 by SLAYER69]

Originally posted by SLAYER69

You do realize the War in Iraq for the US is pretty much over right?
Is the War Over?

Independent reporter Michael Yon has spent more time in Iraq embedded with combat soldiers than any other journalist in the world, and a few days ago he boldly declared the war over:

Barring any major and unexpected developments (like an Israeli air strike on Iran and the retaliations that would follow), a fair-minded person could say with reasonable certainty that the war has ended. A new and better nation is growing legs. What's left is messy politics that likely will be punctuated by low-level violence and the occasional spectacular attack. Yet, the will of the Iraqi people has changed, and the Iraqi military has dramatically improved, so those spectacular attacks are diminishing along with the regular violence. Now it's time to rebuild the country, and create a pluralistic, stable and peaceful Iraq. That will be long, hard work. But by my estimation, the Iraq War is over. We won. Which means the Iraqi people won.

I’m reluctant to say “the war has ended,” as he did, but everything else he wrote is undoubtedly true. The war in Iraq is all but over right now, and it will be officially over if the current trends in violence continue their downward slide. That is a mathematical fact.

If you doubt it, look at the data.

Security incidents, or attacks, are at their lowest level in four years. Civilian deaths are down by almost 90 percent since General Petraeus’ counterinsurgency “surge” strategy went into effect. High profile attacks, or explosions, are down by 80 percent in the same time period. American and Iraqi soldiers suffer far fewer casualties than they have for years. Ethno-sectarian deaths from Iraq’s civil war plunged all the way down to zero in May and June 2008.

Yon is braver than the rest of us for declaring the war over, but it’s important to understand that there are no final battles in counterinsurgencies and it’s impossible to pinpoint the exact dates when wars like this end. The anti-Iraqi insurgency – a war-within-a-war – really is effectively over.

Is the war in Iraq really over, or is there a lull before the storm? As has been said before by others, it was a mistake to be so open and forward about combat troop withdrawals from Iraq by the current Administration. Now, the insurgents and terrorists wait, and until they feel comfortable enough to strike and launch another full-scale campaign. The elements from a few years ago are still there, but they just put down their AK and RPGs for baklava and tea. The political situation in the Iraqi government is dire, and right before the Parliamentary elections in March.

What is at issue is how, on the eve of the March 7 elections, the Shiite-led government of Nouri Al Maliki has arbitrarily blacklisted over 500 Sunni candidates, preumably because of past ties to the Baath Party, as if it is not common knowledge that countless Iraqis — literally millions — joined the group not out of ideologiical conviction but simply out of the need to secure a job in the public sector, whether as teachers or lawyers, mailmen or bank clerks. In a rigid one-party state, joining the ruling party is essential.

gulfnews.com...

When the cats away, the mice will play. Apparently, that old adage is exactly what is taking shape in Iraq, and any inroads made by the US military mission and recent political reconciliation campaign between the Shiites and Sunni could be erased with this recent political flap. There is more as well regarding this political impasse.

BAGHDAD — Assailants burst into the home of an Iraqi campaign volunteer before dawn Monday, fatally shooting the man before they stabbed his pregnant wife and their five daughters to death, relatives and authorities said. A sixth child, the only son, was found hanging from a ceiling fan with key arteries severed, a cousin said.

Over the last week and despite warnings that it was too dangerous, 47-year-old Hussein Majeed Marioush had been hanging campaign posters in the volatile mixed-sect district of Zafaraniya, a semi-rural area on the outskirts of southern Baghdad . He was a volunteer for Entifadh Qanbar, a secular candidate and longtime associate of the controversial politician Ahmad Chalabi . Both are running on the main Shiite Muslim ticket in parliamentary elections March 7.

. . . "This is a completely political message," Qanbar said. "There's no family feud, no robbery, no case of someone hating someone so much that they kill a whole family with six children. This is political."

news.yahoo.com...

BAGHDAD (AP) — The Sunni wing of Iraq's leading non-sectarian political coalition is dropping out of next month's elections, saying the vote will be illegitimate because of a Shiite-ordered ballot purge of hundreds of candidates.

A statement Saturday by the Iraqi Front for National Dialogue stopped short of urging Sunnis to boycott the March 7 parliamentary elections.

www.usatoday.com...

So, I, like you, and many others see an end of combat operations taking shape at the present. However, is the war over and the political situation fair and safe? Sadly, from what I have seen in past month leading up to the elections is another political monopoly taking over as was seen with Saddam Hussein's Baathists for the last 30 years. This time it is the Shiite majority taking over with indirect backing by a large neighbor in Iran. It seems we just traded one dictatorship for another? It be interesting what happens leading up to that election and afterward.

New Name for Iraq Mission Meets With Criticism from Left

Gates wrote in a memo exclusively obtained by ABC News that by changing the name at the same time as the change of mission -- the scheduled withdrawal of U.S. combat troops -- the US is sending "a strong signal" that "our forces are operating under a new mission."

They are operating under a new mission because the war is over.
The Combat divisions are coming home. There hasn't been any real fighting in Iraq in almost two years. My son came back in March of last year he said the same thing. There have been many many sectarian bombings and killings in other words Iraqi Sunni and Iraqi Shia killing each other but for the US the war is done.

The reason for the name change is because the Combat troops are leaving because there is not much in the way of combat going on. US troops have been held up on bases for a while now they don't patrol it's pretty much over for the US. There is a new Government and the Iraqis are focused on each other and their Government.

I love the new name change for the Iraq Conflict. It is very poetic sounding. Back to the subject, I think it is a bad move to be choreographing troop movements, not so much for the US forces because I know they want to get out of there, but for the Iraqis.

The security situation is being held together by a slender thread, and if violence escalates nationwide, Iraqi forces will not be able to be able to stem the bleeding. These individuals that have been fighting US forces since 2003 know that, and now they have been given the green-light to continue the blood bath by a sitting President when US have been drawn down to manageable levels.

The only reason we haven't seen pre-2007 levels in violence is the simple fact is that they want the US to believe things have calmed down, when in all reality it is a diversionary tactic. They will do nothing to force the US out of their bases to patrol the streets again. All the talk of giving up a vital strategic garrison in the center of Middle East is just talk, and personally, I don't see it happening in the way they would like us to believe.

Under a deadline set by President Obama, all combat forces are slated to withdraw from Iraq by the end of August, and there remains heavy political pressure in Washington and Baghdad to stick to that schedule. But Army Gen. Ray Odierno, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said Monday that he had briefed officials in Washington in the past week about possible contingency plans.

www.commondreams.org...

The US invasion didn't create the sectarian conflict. Research Sunni and Shia history.

Sectarian Violence

Gunmen in Iraq have shot dead a family of eight and beheaded some of the bodies, officials say, amid a wave of pre-election violence.

The gunmen killed the family, who were reportedly Shia Muslims living in a majority Sunni area just outside the capital, Baghdad, early on Monday.

Yes, the US didn't create the sectarian divide between Sunni and Shia, and that goes back along time, centuries to be exact. However, it is a good idea to remain in country at some capacity to ensure Iraqi democracy is kept honest and not unduly influenced by violent sectarianism. Just my two cents, and I agree with you that it appears the withdrawal is going as scheduled, however, I only see it on the surface. Keep up the good work!


[edit on 23-2-2010 by Jakes51]

This approach was adopted not just by the Army.

en.wikipedia.org...

Bulldozer assault

Another incident during the war highlighted the question of large-scale Iraqi combat deaths. This was the “bulldozer assault”, wherein two brigades from the 1st Infantry Division (Mechanized) were faced with a large and complex trench network, as part of the heavily fortified "Saddam Hussein Line." After some deliberation, they opted to use anti-mine plows mounted on tanks and combat earthmovers to simply plow over and bury alive the defending Iraqi soldiers.

reply to post by SLAYER69

First off Gulf War-1 came after I had already left the service.

Youth, senility, you say tomato I say tamato! It must have been a good while before because they darn near called everyone back still listed on the reserves for the First Gulf War up to and over 50 year olds depending on their specialties and ranks. You lucked out if you didn't have to go!

Second using them against Troops is a big difference than using them against Bunkers. I'll let you slide this time but next time remember that your poor photographic memory coupled with your youth and inexperience is no match for my pornographic memory coupled with my slightly older age and treachery.

Sure we can talk about the Devil in Miss Jones, John Leslie, John Holmes, Seka!

The truth is that they really experimented with the Air Power concept in the First Gulf War and I do believe that the Pentagon actually imagined there for a spell that precision air power alone might have won it.

A lot of that experimentation including dusting off a number of older munitions in the inventory and using them in creative ways.

Did they always work? Well, lets just say much to the chagrin of the Air Force Generals ground troops did have to be eventually employed.

Now on to Dropping modified Daisy cutters on either Iraqi Troops or presently against Afghanistan positions.

Come on man...

My God! Being near ground zero to one [If the Concussion didn't kill you] You would certainly lose your hearing and or bowel control...

The Daisy Cutter has always been a shock and awe weapon, as the largest conventional bomb in our arsenal.

The blast actually produces a Mushroom Cloud and when we used them on front line Iraqi positions in the First Gulf War the first time Australian Troops stationed near the Kuwaiti border where they were dropped actually thought we Americans had gone mad and started dropping battle field nukes.

With a blast radius of up to 900 meters it does tend to have a frightening and demoralizing effect on the forces they are being employed against.

Personally I only use them at my 4th of July celebrations anymore when its time to clear everyone out and start cleaning up the house!

There were in fact about 3 different bombs they tried out as bunker busters in the First Gulf War. None of them ended up being very effective in actually penetrating the core of the Presidential and Republican Guard Bunkers.

They do though use them in Afghanistan for amongst other things dropping on mountain faces near cave complexes and blowing a portion of the mountain off to bury the entrances. Since it’s not a precision guided munitions though it’s hard to say how much success they actually have with it utilizing it that way.

It is most often used as an aerial burst to clear minefields and as a depopulation weapon against fixed troops but remains prized for its psychological impact.

Should have bought some stock man!

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


I bring facts and links for confirmation.

You try with wit [Very lacking] and Humor [Very-Dry I'm sure you're laughing at your own jokes] Meanwhile I provide the reader with resources to confirm what I've said what about you?


Discussing what could or may happen is good sport for a good old fashion round of speculation.

WARGAMES (A movie about a computer named "Joshua" that has analyzed all possible nuclear war scenarios)

JOSHUA: "A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess?"

And so it begins. There are several problems in the scenerio that they are putting out. If Isreal attacks Iran, it will plunge the area into mass war, as then Isreal will be taking on a good 3 to 4 fronts at the same time, not only from Iran, but from its neighbors. Iran would count on its relations with China and Russia for back up, to include military hardware and support. Any attack would end the dissenters in the country to where the hard line clerics and current regiem would point and say see we were right, thus making a bad situation worse. Iran, may or may not choose to attack the US, rather probably take out US interest in the region, as a side part of the conflict, to include helping out those who do not like the US. If the US goes against Iran, we take a chance of loosing support by some of the Islamic countries in the region whose continued support we require to carry out opperations in the region. So ultimately this is a balancing act in the area, between the different countries. I can only hope that cooler heads will prevail and that all of this is just sabre rattling.

Originally posted by Jakes51
Is the war in Iraq really over, or is there a lull before the storm? As has been said before by others, it was a mistake to be so open and forward about combat troop withdrawals from Iraq by the current Administration.

Why? Is Saddam going to return? or the Baath party return to power?
I highly doubt it.

Now, the insurgents and terrorists wait, and until they feel comfortable enough to strike and launch another full-scale campaign. The elements from a few years ago are still there, but they just put down their AK and RPGs for baklava and tea. The political situation in the Iraqi government is dire, and right before the Parliamentary elections in March.

Are we going to discuss where exactly these insurgents are getting their training and supplies from? Cough, cough, Iran Cough, gag choke!

When the cats away, the mice will play. Apparently, that old adage is exactly what is taking shape in Iraq, and any inroads made by the US military mission and recent political reconciliation campaign between the Shiites and Sunni could be erased with this recent political flap. There is more as well regarding this political impasse.

As has been said already that issue goes back hundreds of years. We didn't create it by invading, we wont solve it while being there and it wont end after we are gone. The US invasion didn't create the sectarian conflict. We are not responsible to end it either.

Yes, the US didn't create the sectarian divide between Sunni and Shia, and that goes back along time, centuries to be exact. However, it is a good idea to remain in country at some capacity to ensure Iraqi democracy is kept honest and not unduly influenced by violent sectarianism. Just my two cents, and I agree with you that it appears the withdrawal is going as scheduled, however, I only see it on the surface. Keep up the good work!

I couldn't agree more.


[edit on 23-2-2010 by SLAYER69]