Bit more about it from CNN

U.S. tests massive bomb
Designed for use in 'psychological operations'

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. Air Force tested a powerful new 21,000-pound bomb Tuesday at the Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, that could be used against critical targets in Iraq in the event of war.

The Tuesday test was expected to generate so much noise at the Eglin Air Force Base test site that nearby residents were warned in advance. A 10,000-foot cloud is expected to result.

MOAB, privately known in military circles as "the mother of all bombs," has been under development since late last year. The bomb carries 18,000 pounds of tritonal explosives, which have an indefinite shelf life. It replaces the Vietnam-era "Daisy Cutter," a 15,000-pound bomb with 12,600 pounds of the less-powerful GSX explosives.

As originally conceived, the MOAB was to be used against large formations of troops and equipment or hardened above-ground bunkers. The target set has also been expanded to include deeply buried targets.

But military officials tell CNN that the MOAB is mainly conceived as a weapon employed for "psychological operations."

Officials say they hope it will create such a huge blast that it will rattle Iraq troops and pressure them into surrendering or not even fighting. Officials suggest perhaps the Iraqis might even mistake a MOAB blast for a nuclear detonation.

www.cnn.com/2003/US/03/11/sprj.irq.moab/index.html


Psychological operations. Riiight.

---

by Hoggy
Psychological operations. Riiight.

---

I think that means trying to scare the living faeces out of Saddam and his little General-type people... and if that doesn't work, well then I suppose they might actually use the bugger...

The article I originally read said that any civvies nearby felt the effects of the blast 10 miles away. Cor blimey.

---

by Hoggy
Officials suggest perhaps the Iraqis might even mistake a MOAB blast for a nuclear detonation

---

Is it just me or does anyone else think this is not necessarily a good thing? ISTR there used to be talk about not using Fuel Air Explosives in event of a NATO/Warsaw Pact war as they were potent enough to be mistaken for low-yield nuclear munitions...

Oh, and the thread title reminds me of "You can run, but you'll just die tired"

(Edited by Ming 12/03/2003 13:08)

(Edited by Ming 12/03/2003 13:39)

---

by Ming
Is it just me or does anyone else think this is not necessarily a good thing?

---

Hence the in my original post, and me referring to it as a "monstrosity". Because it is.

---

"You can run, but you'll just die tired"

---

And I don't think I've heard that one before...

Whoops, sloppy quoting in my original post - was specifically referring to the possibility of a MOAB detonation being mistaken for a nuclear one. Not much else more likely to trigger off Iraqi use of any and all weapons of mass destruction.

As for the "You can run, but you'll just die tired" quote, it's one of many similar that appear to be unofficial US military unit mottoes ie "Mess with the best, die like the rest", "Kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out" etc although the latter seems to have first originated during the Albigensian Crusades (although it seems in somewhat more formal language...).

Ah, good evening Armageddon-watchers. I jumped when I first saw the name on the news - Moab is/was a biblical name. Much smiting. (I was very small!) There are a *lot* of biblical references to it, perhaps the most famous being from Psalms - "Moab is my washpot; over Edom will I cast out my shoe: Philistia, triumph thou because of me." Mainly because stephen fry used it as the title of his autobiography... Still, woo, being used in biblical lands...

As a sideline, there is also a small town called Moab in the States, who are, I think, considering sueing because of having their town name linked to such a weapon....

I'd be suprised if anyone (at least significant government or military) would mistake a FAB detonation for a nuclear one, as the properties of the explosion are very different (eg no EMP, radically different shockwave and flash, etc), though in terms of yield FABs would be comparable with bottom end (eg artillery) nukes. Personally I think they're a good thing as their viability dramatically reduces the perception of a need for the tactical use of nuclear devices. With viable FABs of the order of 0.1kT the only advantage to tactical nukes is their size.

Because so many Iraqis have lived through nuclear attacks and will be able to tell the difference....you know some soldiers surrendered to the British Army a few days ago?

If I saw a 10,000 ft cloud following a giant explosion that can be felt 10 miles away I'd think it's at least one of the mini-nukes the US is so keen on developing.

After I finished soiling my pants, of course.

---

by Hoggy
If I saw a 10,000 ft cloud following a giant explosion that can be felt 10 miles away I'd think it's at least one of the mini-nukes the US is so keen on developing.

---

Well then, it's a good job you haven't got your finger on the button. And that the people who do can tell the difference.

---

by Hoggy
Because so many Iraqis have lived through nuclear attacks and will be able to tell the difference

---

Eh?

---

If I saw a 10,000 ft cloud following a giant explosion that can be felt 10 miles away I'd think it's at least one of the mini-nukes the US is so keen on developing.

---

I'm not disputing that people who don't know anything about high energy weapons might not be able to tell the difference, but anyone with HEW experience (eg senior military and scientific advisors to governments) probably could.

I think maybe someone should save the world before it gets broken.

---

by idiosynthetic
I think maybe someone should save the world before it gets broken.

---

LOL, I think you might be on to something there!

---

by Havoc
(quotes)

Well then, it's a good job you haven't got your finger on the button. And that the people who do can tell the difference.

---

We don't know who will have their finger on the button. The US is planning to bombard Iraq for 24 hours with cruise missiles and the like before any invasion so the chain of command might get a wee bit messed up. That's assuming there is a button to start with, of course.

---

by idiosynthetic
I think maybe someone should save the world before it gets broken.

---

Isn't that what Mr W Bush "thinks" he's doing?
Saving us all from the nasty people??? What a *"£??!** that man is - premier of the richest most powerful nation in the world - such a scary thought.

It's all such a mess


(Edited by Green_Amber 13/03/2003 20:39)

www.votetoimpeach.org/

maybe if we could give everyone in the world a lollipop it would make things better..

i think that's a better idea than bombs anyway.

A nice bar of Fairtrade Chocolate and a smile for all
( and if people don't like/can't eat chocolate - can I have theirs??!! )

---

by Hoggy
That's assuming there is a button to start with, of course.

---

You mean if there's a Chain of Command to start with, right?

There is. I just imagine it's a very short one. Saddam Hussein -> his sons and maybe very closest advisors ie Tariq Aziz (although the latter is probably doubtful). Er... that's probably it, at least as far as release authority for NBC weapons goes.

I also expect most Iraqi field commanders will not show too much initiative as that doesn't seem to be a career/life expectancy enhancing trait in Iraq.