Bunkers and caves are pretty different from the point of view of the ordnance, and it's not hard to conflate the two. Bunkers are reinforced in part to withstand the shockwaves exuded from an explosion. Cave entrances can be, but the nature of the reinforcement (usually wooden) is much less resistant than the rebar in a bunker. The fact that the reinforcement is not embedded in the structure makes it less resistant, too.
Air-blast explosives are generally used to flatten stuff standing above ground, but the shockwave can also be used for other jobs. Spalling can and does occur (that's where the wave passing through solid material breaks off pieces on the interior, creating shrapnel). I doubt that's why MOAB was used here; GS is most likely right that it was used to seal up a ingress -- because against unreinforced earth, some dirt's gonna move. Spalling probably only happened near the entrances.
Was it a political message? Almost certainly. But that sort of ordinance does have battlefield value as well.
I'd hate to be riding in the plane that dropped that SoB.
Air-blast explosives are generally used to flatten stuff standing above ground, but the shockwave can also be used for other jobs. Spalling can and does occur (that's where the wave passing through solid material breaks off pieces on the interior, creating shrapnel). I doubt that's why MOAB was used here; GS is most likely right that it was used to seal up a ingress -- because against unreinforced earth, some dirt's gonna move. Spalling probably only happened near the entrances.
Was it a political message? Almost certainly. But that sort of ordinance does have battlefield value as well.
I'd hate to be riding in the plane that dropped that SoB.
