War Game Shows Dangers of Attacking Iran

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
For the memory challenged, and those two young I actually watched the whole war on TV.

So did I.

It's how I knew it was used in the Gulf War and in what various capacities.

Please post a link to anything else that says the Daisy Cutter was used for bunker busting in Iraq during the Gulf War. Anything would be acceptable at this point. I'd even take some BDA shots of a bunker where a Daisy Cutter was used on it.

If you had seen it and remembered it there was a month and a half where they tried everything but Barbie Dolls on those bunkers.

They already had a weapon that was more than capable of destroying the bunkers without having to resort to a Daisy Cutter. They had the plans to the bunkers and knew exactly what they needed.

I have more than made my case.

You have only made two things in this topic:
1 Points
2 Me waste my time trying to explain things to you

Anyone else here care to jump on Proto's bandwagon and agree to the use of Daisy Cutters as bunker busters or any other claims he or she has made in this thread.

If nothing else tonight, will you please just answer the question about your credentials? If you don't have any than man (or woman) up and admit it.

Originally posted by jackflap
Actually they were more than willing to dive into the fray. I was in the military at that time and believe me, they couldn't wait to go. They knew the dangers but that is what they train for. Given the choice to go or deploy they wouldn't let anything take them away from that action. Sunny day, you bet.

That is because that is what the military is trained and equipped to do.

I have never heard anyone in the military refer to combat operations as sunny days.

reply to post by COOL HAND

Then why did we have to send the 82nd down there to parachute in? If we had such a large presence (we didn't) we could have accomplished the mission without them having to fly down there.

You might want to ask the International Community that by and large condemned us for the action friend.

Personally topical drift doesn't bother me. It just keeps bumping the thread.

The fact of the matter is Panama had a huge contingency of U.S. Troops Guarding the Canal and Bush Sr., wanted Noreiga out of power.

Since you are obviously pretty scetchy on history suffice to say we invaded for the sole purpose of arresting Noriega and putting the recently elected President Noriega had displaced from a coupe de tat months before back in power.

We sent in SPECIAL FORCES TO DO THAT, and when you start showing up heavily armed in people's neighborhoods distrubting the livelihood of people linked to a long term CIA INSTALLED DICTATOR then yeah people shoot at you!

Are you even aware that Panama was once part of Columbia and Teddy Roosevelt helped them stage a revolt and helped it annex itself from Columbia because he meant to buy the Canal the French had no luck digging?

That we had a significant military presence in Panama and the Canal Zone of the Nation was considered our sovereign territory until Jimmy Carter arranged to give it back to them in 2000?

Not only was it a police action but the country had long been occupied!

Thanks.

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
You might want to ask the International Community that by and large condemned us for the action friend.

What does that have to do with the fact that we had to send forces down there because there weren't enough already in place to do the job?

Personally topical drift doesn't bother me. It just keeps bumping the thread.

Obviously. You might also want to point out that you choose to answer only certain questions.

The fact of the matter is Panama had a huge contingency of U.S. Troops Guarding the Canal and Bush Sr., wanted Noreiga out of power.

The troops were there in accordance with the treaty which allowed for a US defense force to defend the Canal.

Since you are obviously pretty scetchy on history suffice to say we invaded for the sole purpose of arresting Noriega and putting the recently elected President Noriega had displaced from a coupe de tat months before back in power.

Now you are the one who is sketchy on history. Noriega voided the results of the election. He did not regain power in a coup, he never gave it up to the person his people elected.

Not only was it a police action but the country had long been occupied!

We weren't there as occupiers, we were there in accordance with the treaty and even had to lease the area where we put our bases from them.

reply to post by COOL HAND

I have never heard anyone in the military refer to combat operations as sunny days.

When you are trained long and hard for combat, then left sitting somewhere and told to hurry up and wait, time and again. The real deal is something that is welcomed and desired. Did I hear a few people refer to actual combat deployments as sunny days? Yes. I cannot provide you a link or anything but I can only offer my real life experiences.

As far as the daisy cutter being used as a bunker buster, I believe that I remember it being used in that fashion, but who cares if it was or not. We know they used daisy cutters there and I'm sure they worked quite well in whatever capacity they were used. It is a non issue.

reply to post by COOL HAND

reply to post by Mek-Tech



Don't give yourselves nose bleeds.

They can't provide proof becuase there is none. And the lame excuse claim that it was before the "Internet" Crap is just that crap! Although they can post a whole bunch of stuff before, during and after the supposed event all from the internet.

Go figure.

reply to post by The-Hammer

The U.S. also used "daisy cutters" or the BLU-82, a 15,000 pound bomb containing GSX Gelled slurry explosives. This, too, is a concussion type bomb which military spokesmen and the U.S. press said was used to detonate pressure sensitive mines. The mines, of course, surrounded Iraqi troop deployments and the concussive force of the bomb would surely also rupture internal organs or ear-drums of Iraqi soldiers pinned down in their bunkers. This is not even to mention incineration and asphyxiation, as the fire storm of the bomb sucks all of the oxygen out of the area.

Part 41

Yet more mentions of the BLU-82 Daisy Cutter and Bunkers!

Amazing.

reply to post by The-Hammer

Pride of place for Gulf War short notice efforts must however go to the Florida based U.S. Air Force Development Test Center (AFDTC - the USAF’s ARDU) and their contractor team for the design, testing, prototyping and operational deployment of the GBU-28 Bunker Buster bomb during the Desert Storm campaign. The ”go” decision for the specific bomb design was made on the 13th February, 1991. The first bomb was dropped on its target on the 27th February, 1991. In TWO weeks the bomb design was prototyped, tested, deployed and used ! This is a remarkable story of focussed technical effort, ingenuity and clever improvisation, and without doubt the shortest development cycle for any production weapon in modern military history.

www.ausairpower.net...

Let's not give up hope yet people.

[edit on 23-2-2010 by jackflap]

reply to post by jackflap


It's alright JackFlap you see the standard debunker tactic is to try to isolate one thing that might be in error and to just concentrate on that to try to discredit everything else by making it look like there is no credibility on this one point.

Slayer started out saying they weren't used at all, and once proven wrong its all about proving one was dropped on a Bunker, to make it appear like I am wrong.

Of course he needs some help from some friends to do that, and its fairly obvious since no one is actually posting about the Threads topic!

Yeah you could say I rent a lot of space in people's heads!



They sure have lots to say about how easy it will be to attack Iran!

I wonder why they don't want people talking about that?

Any guesses?

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
Yet more mentions of the BLU-82 Daisy Cutter and Bunkers!
Amazing.

Really? Now you are stretching it. That isn't even an unbiased source. The author of the paper never even points out his source for their use, which makes his paper useless and his opinion.

The bunkers that your "evidence" is talking about are the ones made on the frontlines, and not the hardened ones where Saddam was hiding out.

A better term they could have used in the article was foxhole, which we also took care of by running over them with our tanks.

It has become quite obvious to me that you don't have any credentials when it comes to military matters (or history for that matter) or you would not have used this for your defense. But you keep trying and maybe you'll get lucky.


[edit on 23/2/10 by COOL HAND]

reply to post by COOL HAND


Just out of curiosity, and kind of back on topic, what was your take on my post about the resources of these killing systems being used to better our foreign relations rather than destroying them?

This post actually.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 23-2-2010 by jackflap]

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


Ok WOW what a bunch of misinformed individuals we have tonight.

The BLU-82 WAS NOT used for bunker Busting. You keep posting evidence that it was used on troops though. Yeah we all knew that.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/699fc5133efc.jpg[/atsimg]


reply to post by jackflap



Some seem to be confusing it with the GBU28

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/8bfa1e885b80.jpg[/atsimg]

Originally posted by jackflap
Just out of curiosity, and kind of back on topic, what was your take on my post about the resources of these killing systems being used to better our foreign relations rather than destroying them?

I support a strong foreign relations policy, but not at the expense of our ability to defend ourselves and our allies. I agree that it is important to interact with other countries in ways other than combat. That is why so much Defense spending goes towards those countries through aid and training programs.

You can create all the Peace Corps and aid groups you want, but without a strong military we would be viewed by our enemies as weak and attackable.

Originally posted by SLAYER69
Ok WOW what a bunch of misinformed individuals we have tonight.

No, I think we are just limited to one tonight.

At least in this topic.

reply to post by COOL HAND

Comments:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Maybe that's why Saddam looked so woosy and disoriented in his post-daisy cutter appearance.

Of course, it wouldn't help matters much if the brain rupture rumors about his *other* son are true.

And all this before the official "shock and awe".

Posted by: Illicit Taxonomy on March 20, 2003 03:02 PM

No this is stretching it!

TheAntoganist

In all reality what is skewering the results is because it's more recently been used in the recent operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and those are all post internet wars while the First Gulf War was a pre-internet war.

There are literally hundreds and hundreds of articles to go through and the Daisy Cutter has as Jack Flap stated earlier been moddified into the M.O.A.B. and its very controversial because its very similiar to a small nuclear explosion.

When I mean controversial I mean is a lot of organizations are contending it shouldn't be legal in warfare because it is so destructive.

What's amazing is that so many people imagine that the hands down most powerful non-nuclear bomb in the American Arsenal which is the Daisy Cutter wouldn't have a potential application as a Bunker Buster.

THere are very clear sources stating its been used on tunnel complexes in Afghanistan by the way and caves!

This is Slayer still fuming he got owned on his last two Iranian threads by me!

Doesn't take a bomb scientist to figure that out!

reply to post by SLAYER69


It absolutely was used as a Bunker Buster!

I know it for a fact and I sure am going to enjoy revealing it once I let you all have enough rope!

reply to post by SLAYER69


Looks like I am confused alright. That doesn't retract from the fact that some individuals are confused as to the topic of thread. I did confuse the GBU for something else, but that is a topic for another thread. Yes, I was wrong with my post about the GBU. I feel so much better now that I have been corrected and will remember my smiting when making further posts.






[edit on 23-2-2010 by jackflap]

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
No this is stretching it!

More like desperation. You are posting someone's comment as proof that this was used as a bunker busting weapon?

I can't believe that someone actually gave you a star for that post. Thus proving my signature.

What's amazing is that so many people imagine that the hands down most powerful non-nuclear bomb in the American Arsenal which is the Daisy Cutter wouldn't have a potential application as a Bunker Buster.

No one here is saying that it couldn't. Now that it is a GPS guided weapon all you need to do is harden the nose and put a delayed fuse on it and you could use it as a bunker buster.

THere are very clear sources stating its been used on tunnel complexes in Afghanistan by the way and caves!

That is because that is what it was designed for.

This is Slayer still fuming he got owned on his last two Iranian threads by me!
Doesn't take a bomb scientist to figure that out!

What does that have to do with the topic at hand?

Perhaps you can point those posts out to us and we can judge if you "owned" him or not.

[edit on 23/2/10 by COOL HAND]

reply to post by COOL HAND

You can create all the Peace Corps and aid groups you want, but without a strong military we would be viewed by our enemies as weak and attackable.

I am not talking about creating a peace corps or aid group. I am talking about sharing freshwater and food resource technology in lieu of displaying an unbeatable military. How far have you bought into the propaganda machine?

reply to post by COOL HAND


Actually I would love to be posting Slayer's U2U history so everyone could see how desperate he is!

But the truth is that the Daisy Cutter was used as a Bunker Buster in Iraq and if you guys want to keep bumping the thread for the sake of your egos its alright with me.

The actual front page of the thread, what it's really about is well worth this childish game some people and their egos need to play.

You see a lot of people would love to foolishly start another Bankrupting war in Iran.

The fact that you guys can't talk about the actual topic of the thread on why its not a good idea speaks for itself.

I think its very nice of you guys to keep bumping the thread for me!

We shouldn't invade Iran and my posts aren't motivated by ego, prejudice, bigotry, religious xenophobia, anger, hatred, violance or war!

How about that Daisy Cutter!

One heck of a bunker buster.