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.
A hundred thousand years of human technology, and we're supposed to be impressed at the latest version of the club. Wake me up when the human race does something impressive.
-- thinkyhead software and media
Stop making bombs otherwise we're gonna hit you with the bombs we are making!
I wonder what what the North Koreas are going to think when they find out about this.
The tunnel system they had in the border areas is the king showing in their hand. As far as a paranoid North Korean is concerned, that was what assured destruction and kept the US from making the first strike. A nutty concern, of course, but let's face it, those North Koreans are a nutty bunch.
At some point, they're going to feel really cornered. Then things will get really interesting.
If one of these doesn't do the trick we can make an airplane capable of dropping one, then another on precisely the same spot a minute later. And a third if need be. six hundred feet of penetration! America wins World's Biggest Penatrator award! can you feel that? Take it right in the bunker bab-- sorry. My point is, with this and smart bomb technology at the level America has it, no bunker is safe anymore, not at any depth. This has an immense geopolitical effect. North Korea is going to have to work even harder to hide their programs--and expose them in the process. Iran can no longer feel safe announcing a nuclear bomb should it develope one. And any country that has, in the past, felt less fear of American military might because of conventional equipment being held in deep bunkers will no longer be as eager to put it to the test. With one weapon, America has greatly advanced its interests everywhere the military counts.
If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
I know it's been a long time since America has engaged in it, but it's called diplomacy, not recon. And after he likely completely fails, THEN we can blow the shit out of them righteously, if need be, since we at least tried to talk with the crazy SOB. If the Big Dog can't get N Korea to the table, then no one can. Shoot first and ask questions later (like we (America and it's allies) did in Iraq) is something that Barney Fife would do, and only works in mass market action flicks. You see unlike Iraq, N Korea really DOES have WMD (including chemical and biological weapons), and truly IS a threat to the US and it's allies.
One of these days I'm going to cut you into little pieces. - PF
My guess is that this is as much a copy of GrandSlam as the B-2 is a copy of Avro Lancaster, only slightly scaled up.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
That's one amazing hybrid since the U.S. is older than both Australia and Canada.
http://twitter.com/OLDTELEGRAM
Educated minds already know.
Umm... no they don't actually. Please inform us. They have nukes, but no way to deploy them. They have a large army, but are incredibly underfunded. The U.S. military could destroy North Korea and be back by lunch if they pulled no punches. Oh and if by "threat" you mean they could kill a few thousand, then we are talking at cross terms here -- ANYONE could do that, what we are discussing here is whether or not NK has the ability to do REAL damage to the U.S., which I would define as at least knocking the U.S. off of its perch as the dominant superpower. I don't think that any one nation, save China (maybe) has the potential to do that. But hey, you are the smarmy "educated"* one. Please "educate" me.
*Note: Fox News does not count as education
To the haters: You can't win. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
I can think of no good ways that they are a direct threat but the fact they would trash the northern half of South Korea in the first half hour of a hot war is one deterrent. They've been training massive amounts of long range artillery of Seoul for years and that would be the first thing to go. They could kill more than a "few thousand". The destruction of of Seoul and their likely ability to overrun the DMZ means they can be very very destructive until we start bringing in the carriers and massing in our own troops. We would also have to do this while managing China's agitation and China IS a real threat.
Incidentally trashing SK is also good for causing some financial turmoil in the rest of the world's market. So it would cost a bit of treasure. At least for awhile.
China seems to use NK the same way a redneck likes to keep a slobbering pitbull on a chain prominently on display in his back yard. Sure you can just shoot the nasty thing dead but it won't be the end of it and it isn't much use talking to it. The redneck is the one you have to reason with.
They have nukes, but no way to deploy them
ICBMs and bombers aren't the only way to deploy nukes. They have merchant ships don't they? They have an intelligence agency don't they?
The U.S. military could destroy North Korea and be back by lunch if they pulled no punches
Thanks for demonstrating just how naive you really are. Unless you purpose using nuclear weapons, please explain to me how we could destroy North Korea and be back "by lunch". They have a 1,200,000 man standing army. I don't care how great our advantages in training/tactics and technology are -- we can't simply destroy them and be back home in time for lunch. We would own the oceans and the skies near/over the battlefield and I'm sure the kill ratio would tilt heavily in our favor -- but it would eventually come down to men with rifles and when that happens there's no way to avoid a large number of American casualties. Unless you think we have some sort of technology that magically negates Mr. Kalashnikov's inventions.
what we are discussing here is whether or not NK has the ability to do REAL damage to the U.S., which I would define as at least knocking the U.S. off of its perch as the dominant superpower
NK has the ability to do real damage to at least one critical ally (South Korea) of the United States and perhaps another (Japan). If the United States can't be relied on to defend our friends then we will be knocked off that perch. We enjoy the position that we have because of our relationships with our allies. The United States without allies/basing rights/trading partners is a Western Hemisphere power.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Supposedly by next year NK will have icbms which could launch a nuclear warhead to California. Me here on the east coast is safe, but there are 26 or so million people living on that coast who I am sure do not want to be at the mercy of that lunatic dictator. There are other countries that have the capability to hurt as just as much. The difference is that they are not fanatical like North Korea. Until the fascist dictator is gone (including all his descendants) North Korea will pose a threat. Even after they are gone, there will have to be a major political revolution and cooperation with other countries in order for them to not be a threat. On another point, I think North Korea has showed just how powerless and useless the United Nations really is. When dealing with non-cooperative nations diplomacy and sanctions do nothing but to spur more hatred and make them more resilient. Military force is the only way to MAKE them understand and cooperate.
If they understand a few things about America, then they realize that they really can do damage by killing a few thousand - look at all the idiocy we inflicted upon ourselves after al Qaeda killed a few thousand of us.
And it's not like North Korea needs to do it themselves to gain a strategic advantage from it. It is true they have nukes, but no (conventional) way to deploy them. But our borders and shipping routes are pretty porous, and there are plenty of non-state actors out there that could smuggle a weapon in. A single blast to a major American city would do lots of damage well beyond just the death toll.
Knocking us off the pedestal by overwhelming force is not the only possible or fruitful goal.
You seem to be under the same cowboy delusion that sold us an easy win in Iraq 'with flowers for the liberators'. Your appalling lack of geopolitical (not to mention military) knowledge is remarkable but unfortunately all too common in the US.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
That artillery wouldn't last very long if a shooting war broke out.
Doesn't have to. Each piece (which, BTW NK has had over 50 years to dig in and fortify) only needs to get off a handful of shots to level Seoul (population 10M) and cause appalling civilian casualties when they have 10,000 of them - about 16 for every square kilometer of Seoul's area.
And that's not counting the nukes, which don't need a fancy delivery system since Seoul is only about 40 km from the border.
This will sound counter-intuitive but we actually want them to overrun the DMZ. We pulled the bulk of our forces back from the DMZ many years ago. The current plan calls for a counterattack into North Korea to cut them off/go after Pyongyang rather than meeting them at the DMZ and fighting for every inch of ROK soil.
And that strategy protects the civilian population of Seoul how? NK doctrine (warning: pdf) is for a quick and decisive victory with overwhelming force concentrated in small areas backed by special ops in the enemy rear - the plan you mention plays right into that strategy.
NK is a hostage negotiation, not strategic diplomacy.
Each piece (which, BTW NK has had over 50 years to dig in and fortify) only needs to get off a handful of shots to level Seoul (population 10M) and cause appalling civilian casualties when they have 10,000 of them
They don't have 10,000 pieces of long range artillery. According to this they only have about 10k-11k total pieces of artillery.
And that's not counting the nukes, which don't need a fancy delivery system since Seoul is only about 40 km from the border.
They still need some sort of delivery system, unless you think they can slingshot their Fat Man sized bombs 40 kilometers. Besides, nukes are a moot point. If they use one they lose the war and the regime doesn't survive. I'd be more worried about them using one when it became apparent that defeat was inevitable and even at that I'd be worried about them using it in the tactical sense (put one somewhere in the path of an advancing American/ROK formation and wait -- no delivery system needed) than trying to get one into Seoul.
And that strategy protects the civilian population of Seoul how?
Who said they were going to make it all the way to Seoul? Did you pay any attention at all to what I said? They are easier to destroy when they are out in the open conducting offensive operations. They set themselves up to be cut off and make their supply lines vulnerable to American/ROK air power.
NK doctrine [globalsecurity.org] (warning: pdf) is for a quick and decisive victory with overwhelming force concentrated in small areas
Overwhelming force concentrations play right into our advantages. Go take a look at military history ranging from WW2 to the Persian Gulf and tell me how well massed force concentrations manage against American air power.
backed by special ops in the enemy rear
Their special ops units would be a PITA but are not enough in of themselves to be decisive. I would use them against American/ROK airbases if I was the North Koreans but even that is only going to delay the inevitable -- and special ops won't be much use against aircraft carriers or our bases in Japan.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.