PDA

View Full Version : US bunker-buster 'not powerful enough' against Iran



Cebu_4_2
28th January 2012, 10:35 PM
US bunker-buster 'not powerful enough' against Iran

http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/NR8lBLSHOrNcNqvFbfqx6Q--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Zmk9Zml0O2g9NDA-/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/logo/afp/afp.gif (http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylt=Ag3Pj0muHVcltfBqehy9Znb59XQA;_ylu=X3oDMTFiN2p zZDVyBG1pdANBcnRpY2xlIEhlYWQEcG9zAzEEc2VjA01lZGlhQ XJ0aWNsZUhlYWQ-;_ylg=X3oDMTMxbjRqbTZ2BGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRw c3RhaWQDMDlhYjYzM2ItMWJjZC0zNjQwLWIxNDItZDEwOTQ0NW NjNzBhBHBzdGNhdANwb2xpdGljcwRwdANzdG9yeXBhZ2UEdGVz dAM-;_ylv=0/SIG=11746vlep/EXP=1329028480/**http%3A//www.afp.com/)AFP – 23 hrs ago

Related Content




http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/XF4jV6XDFs990TX67wtlFA--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Y2g9MTMxMjtjcj0xO2N3PTIwMDA7ZHg9MD tkeT0wO2ZpPXVsY3JvcDtoPTEyNTtxPTg1O3c9MTkw/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/afp.com/000_APP2003032752917.jpgEnlarge Photo (http://news.yahoo.com/photos/politics-1316124216-slideshow/file-photo-released-us-navy-2003-shows-bunker-photo-054825228.html;_ylt=AteOrlKe630iG5q15R.sNo359XQA;_ ylu=X3oDMTRramlnOTAwBG1pdANBcnRpY2xlIFJlbGF0ZWQgQ2 Fyb3VzZWwEcGtnAzg1NzdmNGY2LWFkZTktMzIzYi1hNWY5LTdk ZWZhNmVmYTM4MgRwb3MDMQRzZWMDTWVkaWFBcnRpY2xlUmVsYX RlZENhcm91c2VsBHZlcgNmN2ZhNTNiMC00OTczLTExZTEtYWJm Zi1mMTkwYjEyNGNlZGU-;_ylg=X3oDMTMxbjRqbTZ2BGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRw c3RhaWQDMDlhYjYzM2ItMWJjZC0zNjQwLWIxNDItZDEwOTQ0NW NjNzBhBHBzdGNhdANwb2xpdGljcwRwdANzdG9yeXBhZ2UEdGVz dAM-;_ylv=3)This file photo, released by the US Navy in 2003, shows bunker-buster bombs in the …




The US military has concluded that its largest conventional bomb is not capable of destroying Iran's most heavily fortified underground facilities suspected to be used for building nuclear weapons, according to The Wall Street Journal.
But citing unnamed US officials, the newspaper said the military was stepping up efforts to make it more powerful.
The 13.6-ton "bunker-buster" bomb, known as the Massive Ordnance Penetrator, was specifically designed to take out the hardened fortifications built by Iran and North Korea, Friday's report said.
But initial tests indicated that the bomb, as currently configured, would not be capable of destroying some of Iran's facilities, either because of their depth or because Tehran has added new fortifications to protect them, the paper noted.
In a report issued in November, the International Atomic Energy Agency said intelligence from more than 10 countries and its own sources "indicates that Iran has carried out activities relevant to the development of a nuclear device."
It detailed 12 suspicious areas such as testing explosives in a steel container at a military base and studies on Shahab-3 ballistic missile warheads that the IAEA said were "highly relevant to a nuclear weapon programme."
Iran, which has come under unprecedented international pressure since the publication of the report, with Washington and the EU targeting its oil sector and central bank, rejected the dossier as based on forgeries.
Meanwhile, doubts about its bomb's effectiveness prompted the Pentagon this month to secretly submit a request to Congress for funding to enhance the bomb's ability to penetrate deeper into rock, concrete and steel before exploding, The Journal noted.
The Defense Department has spent about $330 million so far to develop about 20 of the bombs, which are built by Boeing Co., the report pointed out.
The Pentagon is seeking about $82 million more to make the bomb more effective, The Journal said.
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, in an interview with The Journal Thursday, acknowledged the bomb's shortcomings against some of Iran's deepest bunkers.
He said more development work would be done and that he expected the bomb to be ready to take on the deepest bunkers soon.
"We're still trying to develop them," Panetta said.

mightymanx
28th January 2012, 11:08 PM
Started early laying the ground work justifying nukes I see.

Neuro
29th January 2012, 03:21 AM
Started early laying the ground work justifying nukes I see.

That was my first thought when I saw the headline!

beefsteak
29th January 2012, 12:59 PM
Must confess my first thoughts were, "Well, how dumb is the purported premise of this article!...one doesn't just drop one of these things and run away. On flies sorties, and drops a second batch into the same hole where previous ones were dropped, and the 3rd, 4th and 5th wave....well, rinse & repeat.

These will do the trick. Just have to "spend" more of them.

Besides, is sealing thugs in underground caverns all that bad when the smoke clears, ...even if "we" miss a couple buried banquet rooms?

dys
30th January 2012, 06:15 AM
Started early laying the ground work justifying nukes I see.

Nope, worse than that. 'Bunker busters' already are low grade nukes. Depleted uranium (DU). It looks like they want to use the high grade nukes.

dys