Well I would agree that the cost per kill isn't efficient. (9 million per kill, there abouts) However, I think this was more about show and theatrics then anything else. Which I am absolutely fine with.

I am not a military expert, so I don't know why this bomb may have been the only option to complete the misson. I don't really care. It just shows that we have a lot of cool toys and are not scared to use them.

This post was edited on 4/14/17 at 6:27 pm

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by BeefDawg

Atlanta

Member since Sep 2012

4747 posts

Posted on 4/14/17 at 6:48 pm to PhillipJFry

quote:
Well I would agree that the cost per kill isn't efficient. (9 million per kill, there abouts)

Here, I'll post this again so you folks can stop being so goddamn ignorant.

Ignorant leftist twits in this thread.

Why do they and the Left MSM keep saying "Trump just spent $314 million to kill 36 ISIS militants." when the truth is the bombs cost $16 million each, not $314m, and the money was spent on these bombs LONG before Trump took office?

Where the hell did this "36" number come from?

The US General in charge of the ground forces in this area says there were 600-800 ISIS militants possibly in this camp.

quote:
The US military was quizzed Friday on whether the munition, known as the "mother of all bombs" for its extraordinary force, was necessary for the particular target.

The GPS-guided bomb is capable of destroying an area equivalent to nine city blocks.

"This was the right weapon against the right target," the commander for US forces in Afghanistan, General John Nicholson, told a press conference.

"It was the right time to use it tactically against the right target on the battlefield."

The blast destroyed three underground tunnels as well as weapons and ammunition, but no civilians were hurt, Afghan and US officials have said.

The US military previously estimated ISIS had 600 to 800 active fighters in the area, but was unclear whether they had hoped to strike more fighters.
LINK