OT Message to Iran...we are getting ready to destroy your WMDs

[url]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060331/ap_on_re_us/mushroom_cloud[/url]

LAS VEGAS - Plans for a
Pentagon-led experiment that involves detonating 700 tons of
explosives in the desert drew criticism from state leaders and a
disarmament activist.

The explosion scheduled for June 2 at the Nevada Test Site is part of
an effort to design a weapon that can penetrate solid rock formations
in which a country might store nuclear weapons or other weapons of
mass destruction.
--

Scott in Florida

I think we should test it on-site when we deliver the earthquake aid
we are sure to provide.

they provide test site, we provide aid.

Ron

In article <e5mq22p9qrtusjac3bpoe4jiavi68ds8ga@4ax.com>,
Scott in Florida <MoveOn@outa.here> wrote:
[color=blue]
> [url]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060331/ap_on_re_us/mushroom_cloud[/url]
>
> LAS VEGAS - Plans for a
> Pentagon-led experiment that involves detonating 700 tons of
> explosives in the desert drew criticism from state leaders and a
> disarmament activist.
>
> The explosion scheduled for June 2 at the Nevada Test Site is part of
> an effort to design a weapon that can penetrate solid rock formations
> in which a country might store nuclear weapons or other weapons of
> mass destruction.[/color]

I wonder if it will be big enough. Some of these bunkers are in
mountains.
--
"We are ready for any unforeseen event that may or may not occur."

-- Vice President Al Gore

Seems to me that the bunker has to have an entrance and if you keep blowing
up the entrance you don't have to worry about blowing up the underground
bunker.


"The Benev0lent dbu" <relaxan.d@smeltherose.comm> wrote in message
news:relaxan.d-9C43A5.14181731032006@news-rdr-03.rdc-kc.rr.com...[color=blue]
> In article <e5mq22p9qrtusjac3bpoe4jiavi68ds8ga@4ax.com>,
> Scott in Florida <MoveOn@outa.here> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> [url]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060331/ap_on_re_us/mushroom_cloud[/url]
>>
>> LAS VEGAS - Plans for a
>> Pentagon-led experiment that involves detonating 700 tons of
>> explosives in the desert drew criticism from state leaders and a
>> disarmament activist.
>>
>> The explosion scheduled for June 2 at the Nevada Test Site is part of
>> an effort to design a weapon that can penetrate solid rock formations
>> in which a country might store nuclear weapons or other weapons of
>> mass destruction.[/color]
>
> I wonder if it will be big enough. Some of these bunkers are in
> mountains.
> --
> "We are ready for any unforeseen event that may or may not occur."
>
> -- Vice President Al Gore[/color]

On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 20:18:38 GMT, The Benev0lent dbu
<relaxan.d@smeltherose.comm> wrote:
[color=blue]
>In article <e5mq22p9qrtusjac3bpoe4jiavi68ds8ga@4ax.com>,
> Scott in Florida <MoveOn@outa.here> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> [url]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060331/ap_on_re_us/mushroom_cloud[/url]
>>
>> LAS VEGAS - Plans for a
>> Pentagon-led experiment that involves detonating 700 tons of
>> explosives in the desert drew criticism from state leaders and a
>> disarmament activist.
>>
>> The explosion scheduled for June 2 at the Nevada Test Site is part of
>> an effort to design a weapon that can penetrate solid rock formations
>> in which a country might store nuclear weapons or other weapons of
>> mass destruction.[/color]
>
>I wonder if it will be big enough. Some of these bunkers are in
>mountains.[/color]

We are going to find out....

I, personally, would NOT want to be in one of their 'bomb proof'
bunkers...

--

Scott in Florida

"Scott in Florida" <MoveOn@outa.here> wrote in message
news:e5mq22p9qrtusjac3bpoe4jiavi68ds8ga@4ax.com...[color=blue]
> [url]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060331/ap_on_re_us/mushroom_cloud[/url]
>
> LAS VEGAS - Plans for a
> Pentagon-led experiment that involves detonating 700 tons of
> explosives in the desert drew criticism from state leaders and a
> disarmament activist.
>
> The explosion scheduled for June 2 at the Nevada Test Site is part of
> an effort to design a weapon that can penetrate solid rock formations
> in which a country might store nuclear weapons or other weapons of
> mass destruction.
> --
>
> Scott in Florida[/color]

I'm fairly certain that the largest bomb we can deliver is 20 tons. We
might be able to load two of those on a single B-52, but I doubt it.
However, presuming we could, 700 tons would be 35 bombs carried by about 18
B-52s.

That's not the same as a single 700 ton strike.

A different version of the article seemed to imply the detonation would be
subterranean. If so, we don't have a way of delivering 700 tons of
explosives to a point undergound in Iran, except by a series of trucks (17.5
tractor-trailers at 80,000 lbs each) accompanied by tunneling equipment.

I would think the Iranians would notice a thing like that.

I am not saying this won't be a heckuva big bang and maybe even fun to watch
from a respectful distance but I do wonder why this test is thought to be
useful.


*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from [url]http://www.SecureIX.com[/url] ***

"DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote in message
news:442d93ad$3$22853$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...[color=blue]
> "Scott in Florida" <MoveOn@outa.here> wrote in message
> news:e5mq22p9qrtusjac3bpoe4jiavi68ds8ga@4ax.com...[color=green]
> > [url]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060331/ap_on_re_us/mushroom_cloud[/url]
> >
> > LAS VEGAS - Plans for a
> > Pentagon-led experiment that involves detonating 700 tons of
> > explosives in the desert drew criticism from state leaders and a
> > disarmament activist.
> >
> > The explosion scheduled for June 2 at the Nevada Test Site is part of
> > an effort to design a weapon that can penetrate solid rock formations
> > in which a country might store nuclear weapons or other weapons of
> > mass destruction.
> > --
> >
> > Scott in Florida[/color]
>
> I'm fairly certain that the largest bomb we can deliver is 20 tons. We
> might be able to load two of those on a single B-52, but I doubt it.
> However, presuming we could, 700 tons would be 35 bombs carried by about[/color]
18[color=blue]
> B-52s.
>
> That's not the same as a single 700 ton strike.
>
> A different version of the article seemed to imply the detonation would be
> subterranean. If so, we don't have a way of delivering 700 tons of
> explosives to a point undergound in Iran, except by a series of trucks[/color]
(17.5[color=blue]
> tractor-trailers at 80,000 lbs each) accompanied by tunneling equipment.
>
> I would think the Iranians would notice a thing like that.
>
> I am not saying this won't be a heckuva big bang and maybe even fun to[/color]
watch[color=blue]
> from a respectful distance but I do wonder why this test is thought to be
> useful.
>[/color]

I'm not familiar with Breitbart but this is where I found the reference to
underground detonation:
[url]http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/03/30/060330162648.wxde5ocl.html\[/url]

It's credited to AFP.


*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from [url]http://www.SecureIX.com[/url] ***

In article <***Xf.1579$i41.1427@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
"Art" <begunaNOSPAMPLEASE@mindspring.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
> Seems to me that the bunker has to have an entrance and if you keep blowing
> up the entrance you don't have to worry about blowing up the underground
> bunker.[/color]

This perhaps is true, however you would leave the fizzle still intact
which would be NOT good.
--
"We are ready for any unforeseen event that may or may not occur."

-- Vice President Al Gore

In article <442d93ad$3$22853$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com>,
"DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
> "Scott in Florida" <MoveOn@outa.here> wrote in message
> news:e5mq22p9qrtusjac3bpoe4jiavi68ds8ga@4ax.com...[color=green]
> > [url]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060331/ap_on_re_us/mushroom_cloud[/url]
> >
> > LAS VEGAS - Plans for a
> > Pentagon-led experiment that involves detonating 700 tons of
> > explosives in the desert drew criticism from state leaders and a
> > disarmament activist.
> >
> > The explosion scheduled for June 2 at the Nevada Test Site is part of
> > an effort to design a weapon that can penetrate solid rock formations
> > in which a country might store nuclear weapons or other weapons of
> > mass destruction.
> > --
> >
> > Scott in Florida[/color]
>
> I'm fairly certain that the largest bomb we can deliver is 20 tons. We
> might be able to load two of those on a single B-52, but I doubt it.
> However, presuming we could, 700 tons would be 35 bombs carried by about 18
> B-52s.
>
> That's not the same as a single 700 ton strike.
>
> A different version of the article seemed to imply the detonation would be
> subterranean. If so, we don't have a way of delivering 700 tons of
> explosives to a point undergound in Iran, except by a series of trucks (17.5
> tractor-trailers at 80,000 lbs each) accompanied by tunneling equipment.
>
> I would think the Iranians would notice a thing like that.
>
> I am not saying this won't be a heckuva big bang and maybe even fun to watch
> from a respectful distance but I do wonder why this test is thought to be
> useful.
>[/color]

I think we're talking about equivalency not weight. Might just be a
matter of semantics or the lazy media. Little boy did not weigh 20K
tons, but it seemed like 20K tons when it let go.
--
"We are ready for any unforeseen event that may or may not occur."

-- Vice President Al Gore

I guess you never heard of a C5, right. One of those can carry about eight
tractor trailers. LOL


mike hunt

"DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote in message
news:442d96fd$0$16813$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...[color=blue]
>
> "DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote in message
> news:442d93ad$3$22853$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...[color=green]
>>
>> I'm fairly certain that the largest bomb we can deliver is 20 tons. We
>> might be able to load two of those on a single B-52, but I doubt it.
>> However, presuming we could, 700 tons would be 35 bombs carried by about[/color]
> 18[color=green]
>> B-52s.
>>
>> That's not the same as a single 700 ton strike.
>>
>> A different version of the article seemed to imply the detonation would
>> be
>> subterranean. If so, we don't have a way of delivering 700 tons of
>> explosives to a point undergound in Iran, except by a series of trucks[/color]
> (17.5[color=green]
>> tractor-trailers at 80,000 lbs each) accompanied by tunneling equipment.
>>
>> I would think the Iranians would notice a thing like that.
>>
>> I am not saying this won't be a heckuva big bang and maybe even fun to[/color]
> watch[color=green]
>> from a respectful distance but I do wonder why this test is thought to be
>> useful.
>>[/color]
>
> I'm not familiar with Breitbart but this is where I found the reference to
> underground detonation:
> [url]http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/03/30/060330162648.wxde5ocl.html\[/url]
>
> It's credited to AFP.
>
>
> *** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
> *** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from
> [url]http://www.SecureIX.com[/url] ***[/color]

On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 14:35:37 -0600, "DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>
>I am not saying this won't be a heckuva big bang and maybe even fun to watch
>from a respectful distance but I do wonder why this test is thought to be
>useful.[/color]

It is part of the negotiation....

If you see a mushroom cloud and think about it being over your
country...sometimes it brings people to the negotiating table.

--

Scott in Florida

"The Benev0lent dbu" <relaxan.d@smeltherose.comm> wrote in message
news:relaxan.d-2713DE.16212931032006@news-rdr-03.rdc-kc.rr.com...[color=blue]
> In article <442d93ad$3$22853$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com>,
> "DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote:
>[color=green]
> > "Scott in Florida" <MoveOn@outa.here> wrote in message
> > news:e5mq22p9qrtusjac3bpoe4jiavi68ds8ga@4ax.com...[color=darkred]
> > > [url]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060331/ap_on_re_us/mushroom_cloud[/url]
> > >
> > > LAS VEGAS - Plans for a
> > > Pentagon-led experiment that involves detonating 700 tons of
> > > explosives in the desert drew criticism from state leaders and a
> > > disarmament activist.
> > >
> > > The explosion scheduled for June 2 at the Nevada Test Site is part of
> > > an effort to design a weapon that can penetrate solid rock formations
> > > in which a country might store nuclear weapons or other weapons of
> > > mass destruction.
> > > --
> > >
> > > Scott in Florida[/color]
> >
> > I'm fairly certain that the largest bomb we can deliver is 20 tons. We
> > might be able to load two of those on a single B-52, but I doubt it.
> > However, presuming we could, 700 tons would be 35 bombs carried by about[/color][/color]
18[color=blue][color=green]
> > B-52s.
> >
> > That's not the same as a single 700 ton strike.
> >
> > A different version of the article seemed to imply the detonation would[/color][/color]
be[color=blue][color=green]
> > subterranean. If so, we don't have a way of delivering 700 tons of
> > explosives to a point undergound in Iran, except by a series of trucks[/color][/color]
(17.5[color=blue][color=green]
> > tractor-trailers at 80,000 lbs each) accompanied by tunneling equipment.
> >
> > I would think the Iranians would notice a thing like that.
> >
> > I am not saying this won't be a heckuva big bang and maybe even fun to[/color][/color]
watch[color=blue][color=green]
> > from a respectful distance but I do wonder why this test is thought to[/color][/color]
be[color=blue][color=green]
> > useful.
> >[/color]
>
> I think we're talking about equivalency not weight. Might just be a
> matter of semantics or the lazy media. Little boy did not weigh 20K
> tons, but it seemed like 20K tons when it let go.
> --
> "We are ready for any unforeseen event that may or may not occur."
>
> -- Vice President Al Gore[/color]

The article Scott linked referenced "ammonium nitrate and fuel oil
explosive."

But I think you're thinking what I'm thinking. If it comes to a strike,
that the bomb actually used won't use "ammonium nitrate and fuel oil
explosive" and the test is just to get an idea of what sort of aerosol
dispersal, etc, is involved in the detonation of a nuclear penetrator bomb.




*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from [url]http://www.SecureIX.com[/url] ***

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:s-2cnQS6Mf6OMrDZUSdV9g@ptd.net...[color=blue]
> I guess you never heard of a C5, right. One of those can carry about[/color]
eight[color=blue]
> tractor trailers. LOL
>
> mike hunt[/color]

Sure. I've heard of a C5. I vividly remember the discussions of the cost
overruns and the wing cracking issues when it was in development.

[url]http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/c-5.htm[/url]

Of course, it's not a bomber.

Further, 700 tons is 1,400,000 pounds. That's 7 times the C5's payload.

So, we could certainly use C5s to blow up an underground installation; just
fly 7 of them over to Iran, land, dig a big tunnel, stuff the tunnel with
explosives, light the fuse and take cover.

Sure. Makes perfect sense.
[color=blue]
> "DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote in message
> news:442d96fd$0$16813$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...[color=green]
> >
> > "DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote in message
> > news:442d93ad$3$22853$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...[color=darkred]
> >>
> >> I'm fairly certain that the largest bomb we can deliver is 20 tons. We
> >> might be able to load two of those on a single B-52, but I doubt it.
> >> However, presuming we could, 700 tons would be 35 bombs carried by[/color][/color][/color]
about[color=blue][color=green]
> > 18[color=darkred]
> >> B-52s.
> >>
> >> That's not the same as a single 700 ton strike.
> >>
> >> A different version of the article seemed to imply the detonation would
> >> be
> >> subterranean. If so, we don't have a way of delivering 700 tons of
> >> explosives to a point undergound in Iran, except by a series of trucks[/color]
> > (17.5[color=darkred]
> >> tractor-trailers at 80,000 lbs each) accompanied by tunneling[/color][/color][/color]
equipment.[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >>
> >> I would think the Iranians would notice a thing like that.
> >>
> >> I am not saying this won't be a heckuva big bang and maybe even fun to[/color]
> > watch[color=darkred]
> >> from a respectful distance but I do wonder why this test is thought to[/color][/color][/color]
be[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >> useful.
> >>[/color]
> >
> > I'm not familiar with Breitbart but this is where I found the reference[/color][/color]
to[color=blue][color=green]
> > underground detonation:
> > [url]http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/03/30/060330162648.wxde5ocl.html\[/url]
> >
> > It's credited to AFP.
> >
> >
> > *** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
> > *** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from
> > [url]http://www.SecureIX.com[/url] ***[/color]
>
>[/color]



*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from [url]http://www.SecureIX.com[/url] ***

In article <s-2cnQS6Mf6OMrDZUSdV9g@ptd.net>,
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
> I guess you never heard of a C5, right. One of those can carry about eight
> tractor trailers. LOL[/color]

Yes, but guiding a weight like that precisely on target would be a very
vexing challenge to say the least. I'm not saying it is impossible, but
highly impractical? Maybe a whole new delivery system would be employed.



[color=blue]
>
>
> mike hunt
>
> "DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote in message
> news:442d96fd$0$16813$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...[color=green]
> >
> > "DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote in message
> > news:442d93ad$3$22853$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...[color=darkred]
> >>
> >> I'm fairly certain that the largest bomb we can deliver is 20 tons. We
> >> might be able to load two of those on a single B-52, but I doubt it.
> >> However, presuming we could, 700 tons would be 35 bombs carried by about[/color]
> > 18[color=darkred]
> >> B-52s.
> >>
> >> That's not the same as a single 700 ton strike.
> >>
> >> A different version of the article seemed to imply the detonation would
> >> be
> >> subterranean. If so, we don't have a way of delivering 700 tons of
> >> explosives to a point undergound in Iran, except by a series of trucks[/color]
> > (17.5[color=darkred]
> >> tractor-trailers at 80,000 lbs each) accompanied by tunneling equipment.
> >>
> >> I would think the Iranians would notice a thing like that.
> >>
> >> I am not saying this won't be a heckuva big bang and maybe even fun to[/color]
> > watch[color=darkred]
> >> from a respectful distance but I do wonder why this test is thought to be
> >> useful.
> >>[/color]
> >
> > I'm not familiar with Breitbart but this is where I found the reference to
> > underground detonation:
> > [url]http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/03/30/060330162648.wxde5ocl.html\[/url]
> >
> > It's credited to AFP.
> >
> >
> > *** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
> > *** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from
> > [url]http://www.SecureIX.com[/url] ***[/color][/color]
--
"We are ready for any unforeseen event that may or may not occur."

-- Vice President Al Gore

700 tons of conventional explosive, if properly placed, i.e. in drill
holes, could break somewhere over a million cubic yards of rock. It
wouldn't move it though. Problem the test hopes to solve is how to
get it to the proper spot to destroy the target.

But it is working anyhow. Notice the new stealth missile the Iranians
tested today, invisible to radar.

This same stealth technology caused the earthquake damage to be
invisible also.

Ron