Slashdot Mirror
30,000-Lb. Bomb On Fast Track For Deployment
coondoggie writes "Published reports today say the Pentagon is rattling swords in the direction of North Korea and Iran by speeding the development a 20-foot, 30,000-lb bomb known as Massive Ordnance Penetrator. This weapon is intended to annihilate underground bunkers and other hardened sites (read: long-range missile or underground nuke development) up to 200 ft. underground. The Defense Threat Reduction Agency, which has overseen the development of this monster since 2007, says it is designed to be carried aboard B-2 and B-52 bombers and deployed at high altitudes, from which it would strike the ground at speeds well beyond twice the speed of sound to penetrate the below-ground target." Reuters has more specifics on the MOP's chances for deployment by 2010, and the detail that the bomb's load of explosives weighs in at 5,300 lbs.
Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) GBU-57A/B
Actually the OST just forbids warheads in orbit. This lead to the development of the F.O.B.S. by Russia. The SALT II agreement was then instituted, which among other things forbids "systems for placing into Earth orbit nuclear weapons or any other kind of weapons of mass destruction, including fractional orbital missiles", but that seems targeted at launch vehicles for warheads, which may not include purely passive kinetic weapons.
Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
They didn't surrender, so the second one was deemed needed.
Have you ever seen the American casualty count just to take Iwo Jima and Okinawa?
Iwo Jima: 23, 573
Okinawa: 50, 000
Now extrapolate that to an invasion of Japan and you'll see why the US army is still using Purple Heart medals it minted for the planned invasion of Japan. They expected close to 500, 000 casualties to invade Japan and possibly more. Some planners expected it to be be between 1M - 4M American casualties.
Fact is though it was Russia's declaration of war that brought Japan to it's knees. Russian forces combined with American forces would eventually, but not easily, conquer Japan.
But seriously, look into the history of Japan during the war and you'll see why they were such a feared enemy. The bushido code is still alive today, but at that time it was life itself.
Besides, does it really matter how one dies? it doesn't matter if it was by a club or a nuclear weapon. You're still dead.
The US has repeatedly violated the Geneva Convention as well as free trade with Canada(although that's hardly on the same level). The USA was happy to sign those treaties to look good but as soon as it prevents them from doing something they want to do, they are happy to violate it.
Even north koreans don't respect their government, they fear it. That is a wholly different proposition. Displacement of the North Korean government would probably cause less civilian violence than Iraq because their population is largely of the same ethnic origins. Violence in Iraq is largely sectarian, not just "terrorists" as the US government would have you believe.
However, that doesn't mean the actual act of displacing DPRK's governemnt wouldn't require violence. They are one of the most heavily armed countries in the region. Although an exact figure is not known for military spending, it's believed to be a large percentage of their GDP even in comparison to countries like Iraq and Israel.
You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
After all these years, you still live by that fallacy. Try reading the USMOVIC and UNSCUM quarterly report, try paying attention to foreign news media pree 2000 and try paying attention to the leaders in the US.
The entire world thought Iraq maintained its WMD programs and he left the appearance of doing so on purpose. He has said during interviews that he feared attacks from neighboring countries was his reasoning behind it. Not what makes the rest of the world different from the US is that they tackled the problem differently, France used the UN sanctions to scam secret and lucrative oil deals hidden within the UN oil for food program which is one reason why they were objectionable to an invasion (they would lose billions). Russia claimed they were contained and not a problem, Germany was the same with the exception of the UN inspector Hans Blix who contrary to reports submitted to the UN security council under his department, claimed that Iraq had no WMDs but then again, who do you believe, the guy who is anti war and stated something different when war seemed eminent or the guy who spent the better part of ten years claiming Iraq wasn't cooperating, munitions declared destroy were being found, dual use materials were being discovered which weren't reported as per the agreement, chemical processing components actually used in WMD manufacturing were being used in "other chemical processes" at other plants despite a declaration of destruction.
It wasn't until after the war when popular opinion became that there was no WMDs. You can't rewrite history.
It wasn't until after the war when popular opinion became that there was no WMDs. You can't rewrite history.
The fact is that the UN believed that there was not enough evidence to support an invasion. When the US invaded (unilaterally), surprise, surprise, there was no evidence that the invasion was warranted either. Nobody is trying to rewrite history here, you are ignoring it
Sorry but you are just poorly informed, which is not surprising since this issue has been avoided by the media and politicians ever since 1945. Japan has already made several attempts to surrender before the bombs were dropped, and under pretty much the same terms as those that were eventually accepted: http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v06/v06p508_Hoffman.html
Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.