Are you in favor of the MOAB?

[Minimalist]

First of all, I rather doubt the Afghans grew enough balls to go into those tunnels and count the bodies so anything they say can be dismissed with a grain of salt.  No where have I seen where any of our people have gone in to do a damage assessment which is interesting on a couple of counts but we'll let that go for now.

For the sake of argument let's assume that 26 were killed.  With the cost of the bomb and the delivery system that works out to just under $1 million apiece to kill each towel head.  Compared to the $80 million that the WLB wasted on his Syria "demonstration" I suppose that is cheap but I don't ever want to hear anyone complain about the fucking federal budget again.

To paraphrase Voltaire, we are the new Prussia.

“Where some states have an army, the Prussian Army has a state.”

[chimp3]

I am in favor of self defense. I am not a pacifist. However , I am a peacenik. We have encyclopedias on warfare. Strategies, weaponry, tactics, histories and analysis of " great battles".  Humans cannot even define what it takes to have a lasting peace. That bothers me more than the most current "biggest bomb".

[The Industrial Atheist]

There are or were roughly 800 ISIS fighters in Afghanistan. Why not just let Al Qaeda and ISIS fight each other?

Sent from my LGL52VL using Tapatalk

[emjay]

I'm in favour: they're dangerous fanatics, no different or better than Nazis, and left to their own devices could probably bring this world to its knees, willfully taking us back to the Dark Ages or worse. So as far as I'm concerned it should be all hands on deck fighting them... while we still can.

[brewer]

This drop or any drop? If you're talking about this drop I'm undetermined. I've heard we've taken out this or destroyed that in the past, and it ultimately had very little over all impact in the course of events. 

This might have had greater military/political psychological impact than anything else. Especially if you tie it together with the Syria bombing and the show of force directed at NK. But that will also take time before an accurate assessment can be made. It's to soon to tell.

[vorlon13]

It occurs to me if the MOAB is truly effective against the Islamic terrorists, they will RAPIDLY evolve tactics and strategy that will render them either less useful or useless.


And that's how the game is played . . . .

[emjay]

It occurs to me if the MOAB is truly effective against the Islamic terrorists, they will RAPIDLY evolve tactics and strategy that will render them either less useful or useless.


And that's how the game is played . . . .

I admit I don't know much about it, but if this thing can take out their infrastructure (caves, tunnels, bunkers etc) then surely it would be much harder for them to adapt? Or at least adapt quickly? So from that standpoint I'm even more in favour of this... flush them out into the open as it were.

[vorlon13]

Well, let's not brainstorm ideas for the terrorists to use to thwart techniques employed against them . . .

[emjay]

Well, let's not brainstorm ideas for the terrorists to use to thwart techniques employed against them . . .

Nevermind

[The Industrial Atheist]

We've been trying to bomb and shoot Al Qaeda and now ISIS out of existence for 17 years. There's now more terrorists than when we started. This probably has a lot to do with the massive civilian casualties. Perhaps there is no solution but it's obvious to me what we've been doing so far has been a massive waste of money and lives.

My country (US) doesn't have money for single payer healthcare or reasonably priced higher education, but it looks like we may scrape together a few trillion dollars for another war that doesn't benefit average americans in any way.

Sent from my LGL52VL using Tapatalk