I don't think that the MOAB killed anyone.

[Jehanne]

I don't think that they hit one of the openings, of which, no doubt, there are many.  From what I read, the thing exploded mid-air, hundreds of feet off the ground.

---

I don't know what the expiration date for one of those is; obviously, someone needs to build it, a defense contractor who needs to get paid on a regular basis.

You need to read better sources. It was an air-burst device, designed that way, same at the bombs that hit Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And they were designed to burst one hundred feet in the air, IIRC. 

And you're still going on about the Military-Industrial complex?

Oh, I agree that a nuclear weapon could do a great deal of damage!  However, this weapon only released 1/10th of 1 percent of the Hiroshima bomb:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world...176770.cms

And, even the Hiroshima bomb did not leave much of a crater:

https://www.quora.com/Does-an-atomic-bom...e-a-crater

And, so, my question remains, "What was Trump's real motive in using this weapon?"

---

The misunderstanding seems to centered around the munitions detonation height.  The reason we do that, is to allow blast time to accelerate before it reaches target.  Otherwise, some potential force is wasted/lost.  That, is "the physics" of it.  These bombs don;t lose applied force over that distance, they gain it.  Detonating the munition in the mouth of the access tunnels would have less effect, not more.

I just don't think that an above-ground explosion against a below-ground target makes much sense, from a physics POV.  As for "gaining force over distance" that would be equivalent to saying that a bullet gains speed after leaving the muzzle of a gun (neglecting its vertical drop, of course!), and that is false.