On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 14:02:32 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 4/15/2017 1:12 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 12:27:27 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 4/15/17 11:17 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:

Well, if that's the case, we have 14 more of those MOAB's in inventory.



And after we use them up, we'll still be leaving Afghanistan without a
resolution.

Don't worry, I imagine the appropriation to build more is already
bouncing around DC. I think they should ditch the guidance package,
ditch the high tech bomb case and just fill old gas station fuel tanks
with ammonium nitrate. They could make those for less than the price
of a new F150 and get a bigger bang.
Precision guidance on a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius is like
putting a 20 power scope on a blunderbus


Your idea of a bomb has one major problem in being unguided and possibly
along other design issues. It's use would likely be in violation of
international law. Or maybe you are saying we should do the same thing
that people like Assad and others do?


Huh? there is nothing about the size of a conventional explosive in
the Hague conventions.
I am also not sure where the Assad connection is other than any bomb
is fairly indiscriminate and a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius more so
that others.
Why is "guided" so important with a bomb like that which is dropped
from low altitude and makes such a big hole? Guided is important with
little bombs. Big bombs, not so much. It is like when Tibbets was so
concerned with hitting one particular bridge when the whole city was
going to be in the fire ball.