Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Trump makes good on cost-cutting promises.

Discussion in 'Free Fire Zone' started by KodiakBeer, Apr 14, 2017.

  1. CAC

    CAC Ace of Spades

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    9,504
    Likes Received:
    3,037
    Phos bombs outside caves...draw the oxygen out of them...
     
  2. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    18,254
    Likes Received:
    5,671
    And when it's gone the caves are still accessible. The troops were a bonus, the intent was to deny that material to ISIS.
     
  3. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    10,103
    Likes Received:
    2,574
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    Fire would probably work on a cave or a bunker, but would be far less effective against the tunnel system, mines, and IEDs - which, I believe, were the major holdups.
     
  4. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    Air Weapons: MOAB Leaves An Impact
    gives some details. Apparently it was a fairly large well defended area including an extensive mine field.
    From the sounds of it an assault would have been extremely costly prior to dropping the MOAB afterwards it was a cake walk.
     
    OpanaPointer likes this.
  5. Otto

    Otto Spambot Nemesis Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    9,781
    Likes Received:
    1,818
    Location:
    DFW, Texas
    On the blast effects both the previous tunnel destruction & body count scenarios could be true. An explosion of that size creates an extended overpressure, which is what will cause the serious damage. Thermobaric weapons (which the MOAB is not), are all based upon overpressure but are less predictable as they scale up.

    I wouldn't feel safe inside a tunnel underneath that blast, as it would likely do at least some damage to tunnels, and remove the air for a period. Anyone at the center of the blast would be in very tiny pieces, and people on the periphery of the blast would leave body parts. With a blast of that magnitude, it's not either atomized bodies or body parts, or no tunnel damage and total tunnel destruction. I think it's fair to say the results would be atomized bodies and body parts and some useful anti tunnel effects.
     
  6. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    18,254
    Likes Received:
    5,671
    I pointed out elsewhere that there would be problems counting bodies as you'd first have to count body parts and, for the case of legs, divide by two. Heads might survive somewhat intact, the abdomen would splatter and the rib cage collapse but remain in one or two large-ish pieces.
     
  7. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    18,254
    Likes Received:
    5,671
    Oh, please. Afghan tunnels dug without any kind of supervisory body to keep them up on the safety standards should be perfectly safe with the MOAB hits the fan.
     
    Otto likes this.
  8. KodiakBeer

    KodiakBeer Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    6,329
    Likes Received:
    1,712
    Location:
    The Arid Zone
    I suspect you're exactly right. There is no 'perfect' ordnance for a situation like this, so just drop the biggest thing you have and kill as many as you can above, and below ground. Anyone who survived in those tunnels is going to be deaf, concussed, and likely never a threat again. I doubt this bomb is useful in very many situations, mostly because few places are remote enough to guarantee a lack of civilian casualties, yet it was the perfect solution here.
     
  9. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    Anyone near the entrances was likely killed. Those far enough in may have survived for a while. The collapse of the various openings might be quick enough to attenuate the blast wave but that means they are likely sealed into a cave complex well below the surface. Apparently the effort to dig out the complex to exploit the intel is a significant one (see the strategy page report). The blast was also enough to apparently do a pretty decent job of eliminating the mine field protecting the area. The above report also mentioned that ISIL kept civilians out of the area so unless there were captives collateral damage was pretty well eliminated. Also sends a message to those elsewhere.
     
  10. USMCPrice

    USMCPrice Idiot at Large

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    5,168
    Likes Received:
    2,140
    Location:
    God's Country
    One of the biggest problems with any action in Korea is that North Korea has massive forces (4th largest military in the world; China-1, USA-2, India-3, N. Korea-4) that if they come across the border they are only 35 miles from Seoul which is the 4th largest metropolitan area in the world at 25.6 million people. North Korean air and artillery would have a target rich environment of innocent civilians. If they come across the border, our troops and the South Koreans will slow them down, but not for long. In the past we deployed tactical nukes to the peninsula, as a deterrent but, they were removed in 1992 as part of a DRKP-ROK Joint Declaration of commitment to a nuclear weapons-free Korea. In 1993 it became obvious that North Korea was violating the Nuclear non-proliferation treaty by hiding plutonium from IAEA inspectors. They then served notice that they were withdrawing from the treaty (they cancelled the threat 89 days into the 90 day notice period). The Clinton administration in an attempt to rectify the problem agreed that they would provide fuel oil and a modern nuclear reactors, if the North agreed to shut down it's Yongbyon nuclear plant and two larger reactors that were being built. We also agreed to suspend our annual "Team Spirit" exercises with South Korea. North Korea never complied with the agreement and increased it's attempts at gaining ballistic missile technology through Pakistan. By 2003 the agreement had fallen apart, the US refusing to remove sanctions and normalize relations until the North ceased it's uranium enrichment program and allow inspections, and the North refusing to cease it's clandestine nuclear program or allow full inspections until the US normalized relations and removed sanctions.

    [​IMG]
    Then you have the problem with Korea's location, it shares it's northern border with China and Russia, it is located close to Japan and it's population centers and then there is the 25,600,000 people just south of the DMZ. It would be problematic to use nukes without effecting friendlies or widening the conflict if/when fallout blew over China and Russia.

    When Obama entered office in 2008 he selected Robert Gates as Secretary of Defense and retired General James "Jim" Jones as his National Security advisor, both good choices. They both resigned early on because the real power behind the throne was lawyer and Democratic Party operative Thomas "Tom" Donilon. Gates when he heard that Jones was leaving and would be replaced by Donilon stated that he would be "a disaster" as National Security Advisor. Gates had pushed to have James Mattis (current SecDef) placed in charge of CentCom whose AOR is countries in the Middle East, North Africa, and Central Asia. With Gates and Jones out, they were replaced by Leon Panetta and Donilon. I think Panetta was a good man and tried to do a good job but, was marginalized and not listened to when he sounded a number of warnings. He left the SecDef post after only a year and a half in January 2013. Around the same time James Mattis was fired from CentCom because he wouldn't sit down and shut up. Donilon, according to news reports was particularly irked that Mattis demanded to be heard concerning issues relating to his AOR. A Pentagon insider is also quoted as saying;
    Pentagon insiders say that he rubbed civilian officials the wrong way -- not because he went all "mad dog," which is his public image, and the view at the White House, but rather because he pushed the civilians so hard on considering the second- and third-order consequences of military action against Iran. Some of those questions apparently were uncomfortable. Like, what do you do with Iran once the nuclear issue is resolved and it remains a foe? What do you do if Iran then develops conventional capabilities that could make it hazardous for U.S. Navy ships to operate in the Persian Gulf? He kept saying, "And then what?"

    So for most of eight years North Korea has pretty much done as it liked with no real fear of repercussions, because it wasn't high on the priorities of political operatives that were more worried about political ramifications and domestic agendas than real world strategic threats.

    Now Trump comes along, a businessman, and I'm really not confident he has any strategic/military knowledge (to be fair his predecessor was also similarly lacking in this area, his expertise was as a lawyer, law teacher and community organizer). Anyway, Trump's first National Security Advisor was a shady MF'er, Michael Flynn, but on the plus side he'd appointed Mattis as SecDef. Mattis is apolitical and does not suffer fools lightly, plus he's a noted military thinker, he co-authored the Army-Marine Corps Counter-Insurgency Manual with David Petraeus, the doctrine contained therein which led to the breaking of the Iraq insurgency. (This was all for naught when the Obama Administration abruptly pulled out all US forces leaving a vacuum). He's working with one of his former subordinates, General Joseph "Fighting Joe" Dunford, Chairman of the JCS, (General John F. Kelly, Secretary of DHS is another former Mattis subordinate), but then they brought another world class all-star on board as the new National Security Advisor. One who refused the position unless he could remain on active duty. Lt. General H.R. McMaster, USMA West Point,1984; A warrior AND thinker, he was an armored captain whose unit fought the famous battle at 73 Easting during the 1991 Gulf War.
    "...though significantly outnumbered and encountering the enemy by surprise as McMaster's lead tank crested a dip in the terrain, the nine tanks of Eagle Troop destroyed over eighty Iraqi Republican Guard tanks and other vehicles without loss."
    A man that wrote, "Dereliction of Duty: Lyndon Johnson, Robert McNamara, The Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Lies that Led to Vietnam." This book didn't sit to well with many of the chairborne hierarchy in the Army but was well received and widely read by the warriors. It has been speculated that it was in part responsible for him, initially, being passed over for promotion to Brigadier General. Anyway he served well as a combat commander in Iraq and as a planning officer in Afghanistan, he also did an stint as Consulting Research Fellow at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London.
    IISS

    So now we've got in place an all-star team of strategic military thinkers that understand the probable secondary, tertiary, quaternary, quinary, senary, septenary, octonary, nonary, and denary, results of their actions, tactically, operationally, strategically from both a regional and global perspective. They understand geo-politics and which tools in the military tool box to use for specific jobs. For instance when Syria recently employed chemical weapons, we could have responded with a symbolic response, it would have had little efficacy. Instead we responded forcefully, but with limited objectives and got the message across. Unfortunately, the media in it's reporting and questioning missed the point. What's our next step? Ground troops? Regime change? No, it was a single response to a single act and a warning that a repeat would be met with as much or more force.
    They chose the perfect weapon for the task, hit what they needed to hit and that was it. I watched CNN and ABC that night and was angered that they focused on the lack of damage to the runway and that we had warned Russia when the strike was on it's way to get their personnel out. Well, killing Russians would be a pretty sure way of widening the conflict. Tomahawks could be launched from international waters, meaning we didn't have to receive permission from host countries where our aircraft are stationed for the strikes. Tomahawks can avoid most of the air defense system, they're accurate and carry a 1,000lb payload. The CNN chick asked the military commentator "why use Tomahawks, they're from the 1991 Gulf war, couldn't we use something else." Guess she doesn't realize weapons systems are constantly upgraded and improved. No chance of having a downed pilot that Assad could parade around or barter for concessions.
    We didn't hole the runways, which can be patched over-night, but we did destroy ten out of ten munitions storage bunkers (might want to explain to the CNN chick that's where bombs, missiles and possibly more chemical weapons would be stored). They hit thirteen of thirteen hardened aircraft hangers/shelters, some destroyed all damaged; guess where the aircraft that delivered the chemical weapons munitions are kept? Five or six maintenance shops, the air traffic control and coordination facilities and air defense positions, and all but two of the fuel storage facilities, at least 22 aircraft and more that I've forgotten. It also sent a message to Kim Jong Numbnuts. Mattis' first overseas trip as SecDef was on 2 Feb., to Korea to reassure them of our support and he warned North Korea that our response to an attack on South Korea would be "effective and overwhelming". Now enter the MOAB, on a tactical level we used another tool for a mission that it was well suited for, but more importantly on a strategic level we demonstrated to North Korea that we have non-nuclear options for attacking massed troops and artillery, hopefully making them rethink potential aggression. If our and the S. Korean airforce can establish local air superiority for just a shot time, a half-dozen MOAB's could really wreak havoc on conventional forces, and their support stacked up near the line of departure for an invasion of the south.
     
    Takao, A-58 and Otto like this.
  11. A-58

    A-58 Cool Dude

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    Messages:
    9,021
    Likes Received:
    1,816
    Location:
    Baton Rouge, Louisiana
    Dang you're a smart and articulate dude!

    Here's what could the next biggest thing.

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2017
  12. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    10,103
    Likes Received:
    2,574
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    Certainly easier to take out than a C-130.
     
  13. A-58

    A-58 Cool Dude

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    Messages:
    9,021
    Likes Received:
    1,816
    Location:
    Baton Rouge, Louisiana
    Maybe during the day.
     
  14. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    10,103
    Likes Received:
    2,574
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    Day...Night...Hacking drones is easy.

    It'd be a real bear...If this one came back marked "Return to sender."
     
  15. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    10,103
    Likes Received:
    2,574
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    Yep...But, not the message intended..."Keep your friends close, and the civilians closer."
     
  16. A-58

    A-58 Cool Dude

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    Messages:
    9,021
    Likes Received:
    1,816
    Location:
    Baton Rouge, Louisiana
    Relax a bit. You take all the fun out of things.
     
  17. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    10,103
    Likes Received:
    2,574
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    Oh, c'mon...Your the one that came up with the POAB...Preemie Of All Bombs.
     
    A-58 likes this.
  18. A-58

    A-58 Cool Dude

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    Messages:
    9,021
    Likes Received:
    1,816
    Location:
    Baton Rouge, Louisiana
    I resemble that remark. I think.
     
  19. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    10,103
    Likes Received:
    2,574
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    A-58,

    For your next trick...Could you edit the Amazon drone to be carrying the USS Carl Vinson?
     
  20. USMCPrice

    USMCPrice Idiot at Large

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    5,168
    Likes Received:
    2,140
    Location:
    God's Country
    Yeah there's no easy answer, but I think they might have gotten China's attention because next to South Korea they have the most to lose. If they too staunchly back North Korea they suffer economically from losing trade with the US and South Korea.

    First in Trump's meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping, some interesting things happened:

    Act I- there was the performance of Trump's granddaughter for President Xi and his wife, in Mandarin. The video went viral in China. Great move. A report on this;

    "Visible, dignified, ritualistic displays are of critical importance to the Chinese. On that score, therefore, Trump gave Xi what he wanted most from this first meeting: vivid images of respect for China as a great nation and for him as a great leader.

    The moment at which the Trump show likely captured Xi came when Trump's 5-year-old granddaughter, Arabella, performed for Xi and his wife Peng Liyuan, a famous Chinese folk singer.

    Arabella sang "Jasmine Flower," a song Peng is famous for performing, and followed up by reciting a poem by Li Bai, one of China's most acclaimed poets and a personal favorite of Xi's. Moreover, she did this all in Mandarin. The video went viral and has been viewed tens of millions of times on Chinese social media.

    As Henry Kissinger has noted, Chinese emperors historically treated foreigners "humanely and compassionately in proportion to their attainment of Chinese culture and their observance of rituals connoting submission to China." On that test, no one trumped Trump.

    The Trump team understood that Xi's overriding objective for 2017 is to consolidate his personal power at home. Xi has been meticulously setting the stage for the 19th Party Congress this fall, where he will be "elected" for a second five-year term and where he is planning to put in place his choice of new members of China's highest political body -- the Politburo Standing Committee -- that will allow him to extend his rule thereafter.

    For this to happen as planned, the one thing he needs in China's most important international relationship is stability. Approaching his first meeting with a President notorious for spontaneous tweets, we can imagine his anxiety."

    Act II- Then over desert Trump informs Xi he's just launched cruise missiles at Syria in retaliation for the gas attack;

    From the Daily Caller:
    "Xi was informed of that strikes at the conclusion of his meal with Trump, the White House said Friday. And according to Tillerson, the Chinese president told Trump that he “understood that such a response was necessary when people are killing children” and expressed “appreciation” that the president took the time to explain the details of and purpose behind the strike on the Syrian airfield.

    -Then China refused to join Russia in a veto of the US sponsored UN resolution condemning Assad's April 4th Chemical Attack.

    -Then Reuters reports:China turned back several (12) ships carrying North Korean coal, practically the only commodity the country exports other than illicit deliveries of weapons.

    -Then China deploys 150,000 troops to North Korea's Manchurian border, rumors begin circulating that China may act to remove Kim Jong Un if things continue to escalate.



     
    A-58 likes this.

Share This Page