MOAB (20,000 lb. bomb) in play in Iraq

mrskippy · 04-10-2003, 01:03 AM

Fox News reports that a single 20,000 lb. bomb called the Mother Of All Bombs (MOAB) is in theater in Iraq. This was the one recently tested and can pack a powerful punch.

This thing is dropped out of the back of a C-130. Not sure if its in Kuwait or in Baghdad (where we've landed at least one C-130).

Doubtful that we'd use it given the massive casualty count it would cause. However I think there's only one possible place it could be used and that's Tikrit.

Here's why (and this is far fetched, note this is far fetched):
Tikrit is Saddam's hometown. A Republican Guard unit is believed to be there, plus a swath of paramilitary (Fedayeen Saddam). Apparently many of Saddam's distant relatives (cousins, nephews and stuff) live here. I also believe it's a Sunni community and one that is quite loyal to Saddam.

My guess is that if Saddam, his sons, and his inner circle seek refuge here. And if the loyalists wage a bloodbath ground battle, the MOAB could be used.

It'd probably wipe out 200,000 people. It'd also wipe out the supposed birthplace/hometown of Saladin (he's the one who wiped out the crusaders and recaptured Jerusalem).

Let's hope it isn't used and that we can take Tikrit without much resistance and if Saddam's regime is there they can be captured.

mrskippy · 04-10-2003, 01:04 AM

Dola ... as I said my thoughts on use are just that ... here's what Fox says:

Quote:

Senior defense officials told Fox News Wednesday night that one MOAB bomb -- the oft-referred to "Mother of All Bombs," or, more formally the "Massive Ordnance Air Blast" munition -- has been moved into the Iraqi theater, and is ready for use.

There doesn't seem to be a scenario at this point in time, however, under which the MOAB -- the largest conventional weapon in the U.S. arsenal -- would be dropped. The bomb is being kept on hand as a contingency.

CNN is reporting this as well:

MOAB in Iraq

GrantDawg · 04-10-2003, 01:06 AM

The bomb could also be used in the way it was created, not to cause the massive casualties you are describing but to destroy a heavily reinforced bunker in a mountain.

mrskippy · 04-10-2003, 01:12 AM

You're 100 percent right there GrantDawg.

It also could be used for psychological reasons. They've seen the pictures and to know one is in theater might scare the crap out of some.

Tikrit will really be the final battle of this war. Kirkuk and Mosul should fall in the coming days. Baghdad should be fully secured shortly.

But Tikrit is a big question mark. Saddam's hometown. His tribesman. His loyalists. His inner circle. His sons. And himself. ALl pulled together for one final battle.

Another possible time MOAB is used, is retaliation for a WMD attack. Keeps the weaponry conventional, but does a solid amount of damage.

I don't think we'll see tactical nukes.

andy m · 04-10-2003, 02:05 AM

Quote:

I don't think we'll see tactical nukes.

i sensed a tear in your eye in when you wrote that.

Fritz · 04-10-2003, 10:17 AM

the MOAB is not made to drop in a city, and it would not kill 200,000 people if it were, unless they were packed into a soccer stadium or something.

Where did you get 200,000 from?

Also, why do people keep raising the issue of tactical nukes? Nuclear weapons are completely unusable in all but a few and very narrow circumstances. Their use in Iraq is unfathomable.

America is not likely to ever (again) wage a war against a population in the style of WW2 bombing raids. Terror bombing and population targeting is not part of our doctrine.

Maple Leafs · 04-10-2003, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mrskippy
It'd probably wipe out 200,000 people. It'd also wipe out the supposed birthplace/hometown of Saladin (he's the one who wiped out the crusaders and recaptured Jerusalem).

I'm trying to think of a move that would cause more anger in the Arab world.

Nope, can't think of one.

CamEdwards · 04-10-2003, 10:33 AM

all together now... 1, 2, 3...

Have a nice day Andy!

edited to remove the "fuck off, Andy!" that I originally wrote

scooper · 04-10-2003, 11:23 AM

That's the funniest edit I've ever seen.

Ben E Lou · 04-10-2003, 11:29 AM

Well, considering that Tikrit has a population of around 200,000, I doubt the MOAB would wipe out an entire city. It takes a nuke to do that.

Craptacular · 04-10-2003, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mrskippy
the Mother Of All Bombs (MOAB) is in theater in Iraq.

Hmm, this or "What A Girl Wants"?? Tough call.

Bee · 04-10-2003, 11:43 AM

Reports I've seen indicated the MOAB could be used against "front lines" and kill a couple thousand. Maybe Skippy meant 2,000.

Daimyo · 04-10-2003, 11:51 AM

People are actually surprised that Kippy posted something factually incorrect?? I would be surprised if he actually got something right.

Marmel · 04-10-2003, 11:51 AM

maybe mrs kippy likes to exagerrate. (sp?)

Fritz · 04-10-2003, 12:06 PM

"The yield of the Nagasaki explosion is rather well established by both fireball and radiochemical data from other tests as 21 kt [one kiloton equals the explosive power of 1,000 tons of TNT]. "
~ http://www.danford.net/hiroshim.htm

Even with advances in explosive yield, I doubt a 10 ton conventional bomb could explode with the force of 21,000 tons of TNT.

I don't know how the population density or any other relevant factors would compare between the Japanese and Iraqi cities, but I imagine that the Japanese cities were more susceptible to casualties.

About 70,000 people died at Hiroshima and about 40,000 at Nagasaki, and many thousands more were injured.
~http://wso.williams.edu/~globe/War2.htm

With this in mind, 200,000 seem very high.

---
Edit: I am not trying to rip MrSkippy here. If he has information to support a 200,000 figure I would like to see it.

Bee · 04-10-2003, 12:12 PM

The 15000 lb Daisy Cutters have a "lethal radius" of 300-900 feet. The MOAB would probably be significantly wider, but not to the point of killing 200,000.

JonInMiddleGA · 04-10-2003, 12:27 PM

I've yet to see anything that talks about prospective casualty figures, which kinda makes sense since the target would play a large role in determining the numbers. But this link at least has a picture of a MOAB that most of the others don't

MOAB pic and facts

Kodos · 04-10-2003, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SkyDog
It takes a nuke to do that.

That could be Hillary's new book: "It Takes A Nuke".

Drake · 04-10-2003, 12:32 PM

'Nother MOAB link.

Fritz · 04-10-2003, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kodos
That could be Hillary's new book: "It Takes A Nuke to Flatten the Village."

mrskippy · 04-10-2003, 01:23 PM

200,000 is the population of Tikrit.

I imagine dropped a 21,000 pound bomb in the middle of a city is going to kill thousands, injure scores more, and probably damage a lot of houses.

Look at what four 2,000 pound bombs did? And those were a different breed.

MOAB's shattering blast is audible at 20 kilometres. It also produces a mushroom cloud.

It is said to be only the equivalent of a small nuclear bomb.

Tikrit likely is fairly dense. Most Iraqi cities are. Baghdad packs 5 million into a city the size of Columbus, Ohio.

Needless to say ... a MOAB in central Tikrit ... is going to do a lot of damage.

Maybe wipeout wasn't a good choice of words.

04-10-2003, 10:17 AM	#6
Fritz Lethargic Hooligan Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: hello kitty found my wallet at a big tent revival and returned it with all the cash missing	the MOAB is not made to drop in a city, and it would not kill 200,000 people if it were, unless they were packed into a soccer stadium or something. Where did you get 200,000 from? Also, why do people keep raising the issue of tactical nukes? Nuclear weapons are completely unusable in all but a few and very narrow circumstances. Their use in Iraq is unfathomable. America is not likely to ever (again) wage a war against a population in the style of WW2 bombing raids. Terror bombing and population targeting is not part of our doctrine. __________________ donkey, donkey, walk a little faster

04-10-2003, 10:33 AM	#8
CamEdwards Stadium Announcer Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Burke, VA	all together now... 1, 2, 3... Have a nice day Andy! edited to remove the "fuck off, Andy!" that I originally wrote __________________ I don't want the world. I just want your half. Last edited by CamEdwards : 04-10-2003 at 10:45 AM.

04-10-2003, 11:29 AM	#10
Ben E Lou Morgado's Favorite Forum Fascist Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Greensboro, NC	Well, considering that Tikrit has a population of around 200,000, I doubt the MOAB would wipe out an entire city. It takes a nuke to do that. __________________ The media don't understand the kinds of problems and pressures 54 million come wit'!

04-10-2003, 11:51 AM	#14
Marmel Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Manchester, CT	maybe mrs kippy likes to exagerrate. (sp?) __________________ 81-78 Cincinnati basketball writer P. Daugherty, "Connor Barwin playing several minutes against Syracuse is like kids with slingshots taking down Caesar's legions."

04-10-2003, 12:06 PM	#15
Fritz Lethargic Hooligan Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: hello kitty found my wallet at a big tent revival and returned it with all the cash missing	"The yield of the Nagasaki explosion is rather well established by both fireball and radiochemical data from other tests as 21 kt [one kiloton equals the explosive power of 1,000 tons of TNT]. " ~ http://www.danford.net/hiroshim.htm Even with advances in explosive yield, I doubt a 10 ton conventional bomb could explode with the force of 21,000 tons of TNT. I don't know how the population density or any other relevant factors would compare between the Japanese and Iraqi cities, but I imagine that the Japanese cities were more susceptible to casualties. About 70,000 people died at Hiroshima and about 40,000 at Nagasaki, and many thousands more were injured. ~http://wso.williams.edu/~globe/War2.htm With this in mind, 200,000 seem very high. --- Edit: I am not trying to rip MrSkippy here. If he has information to support a 200,000 figure I would like to see it. __________________ donkey, donkey, walk a little faster Last edited by Fritz : 04-10-2003 at 12:07 PM.

04-10-2003, 01:06 AM	#3
GrantDawg World Champion Mis-speller Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Covington, Ga.	The bomb could also be used in the way it was created, not to cause the massive casualties you are describing but to destroy a heavily reinforced bunker in a mountain.

04-10-2003, 01:12 AM	#4
mrskippy Banned Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: California	You're 100 percent right there GrantDawg. It also could be used for psychological reasons. They've seen the pictures and to know one is in theater might scare the crap out of some. Tikrit will really be the final battle of this war. Kirkuk and Mosul should fall in the coming days. Baghdad should be fully secured shortly. But Tikrit is a big question mark. Saddam's hometown. His tribesman. His loyalists. His inner circle. His sons. And himself. ALl pulled together for one final battle. Another possible time MOAB is used, is retaliation for a WMD attack. Keeps the weaponry conventional, but does a solid amount of damage. I don't think we'll see tactical nukes.

04-10-2003, 11:23 AM	#9
scooper College Benchwarmer Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Cinn City	That's the funniest edit I've ever seen.

04-10-2003, 11:43 AM	#12
Bee Pro Starter Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Fairfax, VA	Reports I've seen indicated the MOAB could be used against "front lines" and kill a couple thousand. Maybe Skippy meant 2,000.

04-10-2003, 11:51 AM	#13
Daimyo College Starter Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Berkeley	People are actually surprised that Kippy posted something factually incorrect?? I would be surprised if he actually got something right.

04-10-2003, 12:12 PM	#16
Bee Pro Starter Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Fairfax, VA	The 15000 lb Daisy Cutters have a "lethal radius" of 300-900 feet. The MOAB would probably be significantly wider, but not to the point of killing 200,000.

04-10-2003, 12:27 PM	#17
JonInMiddleGA Hall Of Famer Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Behind Enemy Lines in Athens, GA	I've yet to see anything that talks about prospective casualty figures, which kinda makes sense since the target would play a large role in determining the numbers. But this link at least has a picture of a MOAB that most of the others don't MOAB pic and facts

04-10-2003, 12:32 PM	#19
Drake assmaster Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Bloomington, IN	'Nother MOAB link. Last edited by Drake : 04-10-2003 at 12:32 PM.

04-10-2003, 01:23 PM	#21
mrskippy Banned Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: California	200,000 is the population of Tikrit. I imagine dropped a 21,000 pound bomb in the middle of a city is going to kill thousands, injure scores more, and probably damage a lot of houses. Look at what four 2,000 pound bombs did? And those were a different breed. MOAB's shattering blast is audible at 20 kilometres. It also produces a mushroom cloud. It is said to be only the equivalent of a small nuclear bomb. Tikrit likely is fairly dense. Most Iraqi cities are. Baghdad packs 5 million into a city the size of Columbus, Ohio. Needless to say ... a MOAB in central Tikrit ... is going to do a lot of damage. Maybe wipeout wasn't a good choice of words.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)