Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Chemical, Biological and Nuclear Weapons Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Bush offers BIG-BLU bunker buster bomb to Israel and Gulf states
lightningtest    5/23/2006 4:11:56 AM
May 22, 2006, 9:11 PM (GMT+02:00) http://www.debka.com/ "This Massive Ordnance Penetrator – MOP – known as BIG-BLU - weighs in at 13,600 kilos and can destroy 25% of its targets in bunkers buried beneath 60 meters of reinforced concrete, a depth greater than any other bomb of its type. " I seems to recall these use old naval gun barrels, but that might be a older version. My question is does destroying 25% mean that the remaining 75% percent is merely rendered useless through damage? Or Does the 25% mean that 75% of the time the bomb doesn't get through the concrete to the target and do any damage. Of couse then we just drop four or eigtht right? The subtle difference may explain why a nuclear weapon in the end of the bomb is reccomended when dealing with important targets, Methinks only one country in the middle east has weapons that can go in the base of this beast. Israeli use of this weapon would seems to be the best way of solving the present crisis with Iran. Israel can clear out southern lebanon simultanously and leave the Iranians with no effective comeback options (+ we can dig up that WMD we lost). The Israelis could even help the US out by buying C-17's to drop these monsters, everybody wins expect the guys and girls at the IP. Babble finished.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
smitty237    RE:Bush offers BIG-BLU bunker buster bomb to Israel and Gulf states   6/20/2006 12:35:11 PM
Offer this weapon to US allies in the Middle East makes sense. Even if such weapons only damage 25% of their targets, their presence will affect policy and strategy. Belligerent Arab states and the Iranians will have to do one of two things: they will have to dig deeper bunkers, which means they will have less money to spend on other things, or they will have to move their weapons around a lot, which places them at risk from attack from attack aircraft or special forces. Sure, Saudi possession of such bunker busters theoretically puts Israeli nuclear weapons bunkers at risk, but since only slow moving cargo aircraft can carry these bombs, they would have to penetrate Israeli air defences in order to reach their targets, which is highly unlikely.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics