akarunway 1 #1 October 7, 2009 Or maybe Tora Bora? Or just more money for the military industrial complex? Nerdgirl. Where are you? > http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/us-preparing-bomb-iran/story?id=8765343I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #2 October 7, 2009 If they haven't modified any aircraft for it yet, I don't think it's going to happen next week if that's what you're asking.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
downwardspiral 0 #3 October 7, 2009 Looks like it.www.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #4 October 7, 2009 Yes We Can! Launch another war!-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shah269 0 #5 October 7, 2009 Actually no. Think for a second, we have no clue where they are doing their work. BUT We know exactly were China is holding all it's nuclear subs. And a deep penetrating bomb could cause a minor earth quake which could effectively put China's dry docks out of commission for a few years.Life through good thoughts, good words, and good deeds is necessary to ensure happiness and to keep chaos at bay. The only thing that falls from the sky is birdshit and fools! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #6 October 7, 2009 QuoteActually no. Think for a second, we have no clue where they are doing their work. BUT We know exactly were China is holding all it's nuclear subs. And a deep penetrating bomb could cause a minor earth quake which could effectively put China's dry docks out of commission for a few years. I think the political ramifications of using such a weapon against the Chinese mean it's unlikely we're actually considering that, and certainly not viewing it as an "urgent" need (which is how the Pentagon classified this funding request). What's so urgent about starting WW III? In fact, the same logic really applies to North Korea, albeit to a lesser extent. The only logical target is Iran, and then only until they complete their own weapons development, because then the consequences would be too great (so they'll be off limits, too). Given that logic, it's no surprise that they want to develop their own nuclear weapons as soon as possible, is it?-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 35 #7 October 7, 2009 Reminds me of John McCain's joke from SNL "bombbombbombbombIran!" "Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #8 October 7, 2009 Quote Reminds me of John McCain's joke from SNL "bombbombbombbombIran!" Which is ironic, considering that it's his then-opponent who's calling the shots on this one.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DJL 235 #9 October 7, 2009 I didn't know that any Fox Corespondents had moved over to ABC! That's a bunch of alarmist tripe and irresponsible reporting."I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #10 October 7, 2009 Quote If they haven't modified any aircraft for it yet, I don't think it's going to happen next week if that's what you're asking. My understanding is the Pentagon has requested money to modify B2s to accept this bomb.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #11 October 7, 2009 QuoteQuote If they haven't modified any aircraft for it yet, I don't think it's going to happen next week if that's what you're asking. My understanding is the Pentagon has requested money to modify B2s to accept this bomb. Right. And that's going to take more than a week to do and test.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #12 October 7, 2009 It will probably take at least a year. The irresponsible reporter makes the giant leap that the only place a bomb like this might we used is against Iran. And all you people have completely bought it (not you, quade). How about we consider the possibility that it could be used against the original target, namely mountain caves in Afghanistan? - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #13 October 7, 2009 Quote Quote Reminds me of John McCain's joke from SNL "bombbombbombbombIran!" Which is ironic, considering that it's his then-opponent who's calling the shots on this one. Well, it may be an intentional bit of fake leak saber rattling. Make it obvious we have the capability to do something rather nasty as a diplomatic bargaining chip. They pretty much know we're not going to drop a nuke and they seem like they're pretty confident we're not going to invade. This however, may make them think a bit.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DJL 235 #14 October 7, 2009 Note my Fox News quip above. Why is it that the only people saying that we're going to invade Iran are reporters? It bugs the shit out of me that every single story ends with "...and the administration has not ruled out military action.""I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #15 October 7, 2009 QuoteNote my Fox News quip above. Why is it that the only people saying that we're going to invade Iran are reporters? It bugs the shit out of me that every single story ends with "...and the administration has not ruled out military action." Why would they completely rule out military action this early in the game? That just leaves them open for hypocrite and liar accusations if military action is eventually needed. With so many unknowns on the table (including what the intended target of this bomb is) it seems silly to rule anything out. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #16 October 7, 2009 Quote"...and the administration has not ruled out military action." Even if you had ruled out military action, you'd never say you had to your enemy. That would just be stupid.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #17 October 7, 2009 >Why would they completely rule out military action this early in the game? DJL's point was that they are using the phrase "has not ruled out military action" to provide proof that there WILL be military action, which is a silly conclusion. It's like hearing someone say "sure, I may need to cut away one day" and concluding "he's cutting away intentionally!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #18 October 7, 2009 QuoteGiven that logic, it's no surprise that they want to develop their own nuclear weapons as soon as possible, is it? Well, given the fact that they haven't been invaded while nuke-less then no, I don't think that's a valid reason for developing them. You'd also have to ignore all of the "wipe that country off the map" talk to argue they only want nukes for deterring invasion. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #19 October 7, 2009 Quote>Why would they completely rule out military action this early in the game? DJL's point was that they are using the phrase "has not ruled out military action" to provide proof that there WILL be military action, which is a silly conclusion. It's like hearing someone say "sure, I may need to cut away one day" and concluding "he's cutting away intentionally!" Gotcha -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DJL 235 #20 October 8, 2009 The press meetings about Iran follow various paths according to what was going on that week. It could be a reporter that has been detained, Iran halting inspection of a place, a border infraction, etc. Whomever is speaking will give an accurate summary of what actions are being taken and then ask for questions. Without fail, one of the questions will be some contrivance of, "Has military action been ruled out if this escalates?" Then of course all that gets reported in the 15 second entertainment news blip (sandwiched between MJ's death and Kanye West) is that we haven't ruled out military action. And THAT is what grinds my gears."I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cliffwhite 0 #21 October 8, 2009 Quote>Why would they completely rule out military action this early in the game? DJL's point was that they are using the phrase "has not ruled out military action" to provide proof that there WILL be military action, which is a silly conclusion. It's like hearing someone say "sure, I may need to cut away one day" and concluding "he's cutting away intentionally!" On the other hand, the fact that military action is even being mentioned in light of the fact that Iran is in complete compliance with the Nuclear NonProliferation Treaty is alarming. Perhaps it's a foreshadowing. Seems I'm havin' deja vu all over again. " Fool me twice ........, ......... , .......,....... , .........., ........... , .......... , .......... ,......... , ............ ,.......... , And we won't get fooled again!" Blues, Cliff2muchTruth Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shah269 0 #22 October 8, 2009 Quote I think the political ramifications of using such a weapon against the Chinese mean it's unlikely we're actually considering that, and certainly not viewing it as an "urgent" need (which is how the Pentagon classified this funding request). What's so urgent about starting WW III? Do a little research on something called the earth quake bomb developed by the English during WWIILife through good thoughts, good words, and good deeds is necessary to ensure happiness and to keep chaos at bay. The only thing that falls from the sky is birdshit and fools! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #23 October 8, 2009 Quote>Why would they completely rule out military action this early in the game? DJL's point was that they are using the phrase "has not ruled out military action" to provide proof that there WILL be military action, which is a silly conclusion. It's like hearing someone say "sure, I may need to cut away one day" and concluding "he's cutting away intentionally!" Maybe he can't pack and knows it, can't spot, and has a 7-cell main.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #24 October 8, 2009 QuoteOr maybe Tora Bora? Or just more money for the military industrial complex? Nerdgirl. Where are you? > http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/us-preparing-bomb-iran/story?id=8765343 I believe the US has plans for just about everywhere, including our allies.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #25 October 8, 2009 QuoteQuote I think the political ramifications of using such a weapon against the Chinese mean it's unlikely we're actually considering that, and certainly not viewing it as an "urgent" need (which is how the Pentagon classified this funding request). What's so urgent about starting WW III? Do a little research on something called the earth quake bomb developed by the English during WWII Ok, I read up on it. Can you explain how it's relevant to this discussion? Would it somehow be politically viable for use against China, when other bombs would not?-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
