US have the 'mother of all bombs'

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,095
513
126
Originally posted by: sandorski
Another result of Bush "Foreign Policy". Remember Bush Pre-9/11 for the clue, if you need one.

Hahahahaha Hohohohoho Hehehehehe

breath

Buahahahahahahahahahaha

 

Mxylplyx

Diamond Member
Mar 21, 2007
4,197
101
106
Originally posted by: sandorski
Another result of Bush "Foreign Policy". Remember Bush Pre-9/11 for the clue, if you need one.


Your stupid just went up several points after that comment.
 

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,168
60
91
You should also research the underwater nuclear missle designed to take out large navy vessels that the Russians Developed.
 

ahurtt

Diamond Member
Feb 1, 2001
4,283
0
0
Originally posted by: magomago
LOL at the fact that they mention it is "environmentally friendly" - bwahahaha.

4 times as more destructive as the "destroy 9 blocks at once" moabs...but don't worry guys~ its environmentally friendly!

Well. . .technically it would be used to destroy cities. . .which are a major cause of environmental pollution. . .hence, environmentally friendly nuclear bomb!
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
Originally posted by: piasabird
You should also research the underwater nuclear missle designed to take out large navy vessels that the Russians Developed.
Iran states that they have such (may not be nuclear)

 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,350
7,427
136
Originally posted by: BrownTown
A bomb that big has absolutely no use whatsoever in any sort of conflict, it is all just dick measuring.

The ability to destroy a town with a single conventional weapon has no use whatsoever? Our education system must blow, I am ashamed right now that we have people who don?t understand such a simple/basic concept as the power to eradicate.
 

ahurtt

Diamond Member
Feb 1, 2001
4,283
0
0
Originally posted by: novasatori
Interesting... the USAF (and military) is going towards precision small diameter bombs and Russia is going...bigger than our biggest...
SDB @ GlobalSecurity.org

Only reason I can think of for this is so that we are moving toward ones we can actually use for smaller scale tactical nuclear strikes while Russia is making one in hopes that they never have to. Either way, I don't like where this is going :(
 

ahurtt

Diamond Member
Feb 1, 2001
4,283
0
0
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Originally posted by: BrownTown
A bomb that big has absolutely no use whatsoever in any sort of conflict, it is all just dick measuring.

The ability to destroy a town with a single conventional weapon has no use whatsoever? Our education system must blow, I am ashamed right now that we have people who don?t understand such a simple/basic concept as the power to eradicate.

You've got to get it to said town before you can detonate it. Which isn't a big problem as long you only plan on blowing up your own towns or those of your closest neighbors.
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,328
126
Originally posted by: ahurtt
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Originally posted by: BrownTown
A bomb that big has absolutely no use whatsoever in any sort of conflict, it is all just dick measuring.

The ability to destroy a town with a single conventional weapon has no use whatsoever? Our education system must blow, I am ashamed right now that we have people who don?t understand such a simple/basic concept as the power to eradicate.

You've got to get it to said town before you can detonate it. Which isn't a big problem as long you only plan on blowing up your own towns or those of your closest neighbors.

That might be why they are testing western countries air defenses.

"Russian Bears flying in pairs have triggered several alerts this year as they neared the 12-mile British airspace zone, but this was the first time that so many bombers had simultaneously tested British air defences."
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,083
5,611
126
Originally posted by: Mxylplyx
Originally posted by: sandorski
Another result of Bush "Foreign Policy". Remember Bush Pre-9/11 for the clue, if you need one.


Your stupid just went up several points after that comment.

Who fired the first volley in the Treaty breaking? Hint: Bush, so he could build his NMD system.
 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
Originally posted by: sandorski
Another result of Bush "Foreign Policy". Remember Bush Pre-9/11 for the clue, if you need one.

It has zero to do with President Bush. Countless articles have talked about Russians needing something to feel they can boast about and feel like the big kid on the block again. That is the cornerstone of Putin's success.

Putin's Popularity Veils Uncertainty for Russia

"I was surprised to learn what a majority of Russians [said] when asked, 'What do you expect from your government?' I thought they would say, 'First of all, we need an improvement of our life. More security, more jobs, better payment, better social services,' " said Yevgeny Kiselev, a former television broadcaster who is editor of the weekly Moskovskiye Novosti. "No. They want Great Mother Russia. They want the government to turn Russia back into a great power."

Some current polls show Putin's popularity as high as 80%.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,083
5,611
126
Originally posted by: yllus
Originally posted by: sandorski
Another result of Bush "Foreign Policy". Remember Bush Pre-9/11 for the clue, if you need one.

It has zero to do with President Bush. Countless articles have talked about Russians needing something to feel they can boast about and feel like the big kid on the block again. That is the cornerstone of Putin's success.

Putin's Popularity Veils Uncertainty for Russia

"I was surprised to learn what a majority of Russians [said] when asked, 'What do you expect from your government?' I thought they would say, 'First of all, we need an improvement of our life. More security, more jobs, better payment, better social services,' " said Yevgeny Kiselev, a former television broadcaster who is editor of the weekly Moskovskiye Novosti. "No. They want Great Mother Russia. They want the government to turn Russia back into a great power."

Some current polls show Putin's popularity as high as 80%.

"The new bomb comes at a time when both Russia and the US appear to be reneging on nuclear arms limitation treaties signed during the cold war and after the collapse of the Soviet Union."

 

Gneisenau

Senior member
May 30, 2007
264
0
0

Originally posted by: BrownTown

A bomb that big has absolutely no use whatsoever in any sort of conflict, it is all just dick measuring.


I believe their primary use would be against concentrated enemy troops. If you have a tank platoon headed your way, one of these babies would pretty much remove that threat.

They also help with entrenched troops since the shock wave pretty much ruins everyone's day in the blast zone.
 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
lol. I admire your attempts to stay blind.

Neither this new bomb or those menacing bomber flights serve any useful purpose other than as propaganda.

Russia Under Vladimir Putin

At any rate, when Dr. Krieble and I compared notes after our seminars had concluded, the one issue which came up time and again was shouldn't Russia carry a big stick to make itself relevant at home and abroad. Indeed, that is exactly what is happening now. Yeltsen could barely top 25% approval at his best when he was in office. Putin manages 70% approval by being tough at home.

The oil revenues which President Vladimir Putin has accumulated have enabled him to carry the big stick abroad. After the end of the Cold War Yeltsen all but disarmed Russia, maintaining only sufficient armed forces to defend the country. Now flush with oil revenues, Putin is carrying the big stick abroad as well. The Russian public felt that Yeltsin had humiliated the country. Again and again we were asked if President Augusto Pinochet of Chile might be a good role model for Russia.

Now Putin is both re-arming Russia and allying with his communist allies, gaining domestic applause in the process. He repeatedly has claimed that he would not seek to have the constitution amended so he could run for a third term. Many Russian observers don't believe that, with 70% popularity and a sound economy, Putin could do anything else. After all, he is still a young man; why else would he picture himself bare-chested, while fishing, in Siberia? It surely looks political.

The making of a neo-KGB state

?A few years ago, we succumbed to the illusion that we don't have enemies and we have paid dearly for that,? Mr Putin told the FSB in 1999. It is a view shared by most KGB veterans and their successors. The greatest danger comes from the West, whose aim is supposedly to weaken Russia and create disorder. ?They want to make Russia dependent on their technologies,? says a current FSB staffer. ?They have flooded our market with their goods. Thank God we still have nuclear arms.? The siege mentality of the siloviki and their anti-Westernism have played well with the Russian public. Mr Goloshchapov, the private agents' spokesman, expresses the mood this way: ?In Gorbachev's time Russia was liked by the West and what did we get for it? We have surrendered everything: eastern Europe, Ukraine, Georgia. NATO has moved to our borders.?

From this perspective, anyone who plays into the West's hands at home is the internal enemy. In this category are the last free-thinking journalists, the last NGOs sponsored by the West and the few liberal politicians who still share Western values.

To sense the depth of these feelings, consider the response of one FSB officer to the killing of Anna Politkovskaya, a journalist whose books criticising Mr Putin and his brutal war in Chechnya are better known outside than inside Russia. ?I don't know who killed her, but her articles were beneficial to the Western press. She deserved what she got.? And so, by this token, did Litvinenko, the ex-KGB officer poisoned by polonium in London last year.

New peril in Putin's Cold War

So why does Putin want a new Cold War? For most Moscow-watchers, it?s because he can now afford one. Russia is riding the wave of a world oil, gas and minerals boom.

Russians have looked on in misery since 1989 as the West lauded their Cold War victory over them, and with their economy in tatters.

Now, the Great Bear is back ? and he ain?t half popular.

Leading Russia author Chris Dobson said: ?Until recently he has not had the money to rebuild Russia?s armed forces but now petrol and gas dollars are flowing into the coffers and he is determined to rebuild his armed forces.

?He intends to display to the Russian people that he has made Russia great again. He has set out to show them that Russia cannot be kicked about.?

The terrible tension of those long decades without a huge amount of face-to-face confrontation made for myriad conspiracy theories. Every now and then there was the odd spark that left the world on tenterhooks for days.

No shots were fired last Friday lunchtime; and neither were they likely to be. But with the stakes terrifyingly high if anything went wrong, air chiefs on both sides are well aware that it is brinkmanship at its most dangerous.

Chris Dobson added: ?The danger is that if we decide to retaliate and restart our own ?Ferret? flights along the Russian borders, what began as an exercise to boost Putin?s popularity could escalate into a full-scale confrontation if some trigger-happy fighter pilot had a rush of blood to the head and opened fire.

?It is an unlikely possibility but one that calls for calm on the part of the Western powers.?
 

fornax

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
6,866
0
76
Originally posted by: yllus
Neither this new bomb or those menacing bomber flights serve any useful purpose other than as propaganda.

You are clueless, as usual. The Russian press did not announce the resumed flights very widely. It was the British, and then everyone else, that started complaining far and wide about the flights. In fact, many of the Russian publications reprinted the British/Norwegian articles about the flights.

Are our own patrols also propaganda? We patrol regularly the skies of Europe and Asia. How else will we train our pilots? And how will the Russians train their pilots?
 

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
28,223
19,704
146
In Soviet Russia, bomb fathers you!