You mean like Gaza?
A utricle to watermelon comparison. There is likewise no comparison between Gaza conflict losses and the scale of a modern Nuclear weapon discharged over a populous city by Iranian leadership.
Yes, like Hamas doesn't care about the civilians in Gaza
Yea, Hamas doesn't care about civilians any more than any other part of the Iranian military.
If it comes to it, it's easier and cheaper to just use one of the new light B61-13 gravity bunker busters with a 360 kiloton detonation of ground earth coupling after penetration (we have these in new inventory as a deterrent to China and any power thinking reinforced bunkers are a safe haven). We sped up production, completed production ahead of schedule and these have recently been placed in the ready to go inventory. Iran has no safe haven if the US uses these.
So, pick your poison, use nukes or use weapons from space.
I figure a line would have already been crossed by adversaries ... for a B61-13, space deployed weaponry, or similar devices (that arguable meet existing treaties if by a loophole and are primarily meant to be a deterrence) are deployed in conflict.
The irony of nuking a nation that we are forbidding from having nukes is not lost on me.
Where on earth do people get the idea that international geopolitics is supposed to be fair ?
The original "rods from god" concept were 20' long 1' diameter tungsten rods. Each would weigh about 10 tons and hit the target at about 12,000 fps.
Who said ANYTHING about fairness? Maybe you don’t know the definition of irony, so it got you all worked up?
We trust ourselves with them, we don't trust Iran with them.Who said ANYTHING about fairness? Maybe you don’t know the definition of irony, so it got you all worked up?
A B61-13 would not have fallout like Chernobyl (or Fukushima, or Heroshima, or Nagasaki, or like most early weapon testing) since 1) it is primarily a nuclear fusion device (with one primary fission trigger) which generates less contamination, 2) there would be scaled depth of burial (it is a bunker buster placed deep enough to contain the explosive yield and pack the entry shaft) and 3) Pickaxe Mountain will have some geological screening. Although it would likely be a contained seismic event and sinkhole with loss of life limited to the blast circumfrance, the use of a thermonuclear device by the United States would not be employed cavalierly and would piss many off as you suggest.
There is just something satisfying about an inert chunk of metal the size of a VW Beetle impacting a bad guy's hideout at high velocities. Kind of hard to deflect or destroy en-route.
It's amazing the number of Iranian attacks and US and Isreali announcements you have to ignore to turn that into an unprovoked "sneak attack".
We dont care about Israel. Bet if a vote was taken across the U.S. it would be %.000001. If you care go kiss the Wall and put a $20 in the donation box. Just make an appointment 2 weeks from now.
Using DE might would probably run afoul of the 1967 space treaty, using tungsten carbide however... Tungsten carbide is not cheap making it happen would be expensive even by US Govt fuck you money standards. Space flight costs aside, Last time I sold tungsten it was over $20/lb just for scrap value.
I don't think DU is anything special for treaty purposes, it's just another heavy metal.
There's no such thing as "fair" it's an abstract concept that weighs how hard you're getting fucked against the fucking you're giving.
