Bunkerbusters are mini-nukes

[el_chavista]

The United States has used tactical nuclear weapons in its military campaign against Iraq and Afghanistan, a Middle East expert tells Press TV.


“Tactical nuclear weapons were used, at least one in Iraq and several were used in Afghanistan --in the Tora Bora mountains,” Peter Eyre, a Middle East consultant, said.

press tv (http://www.presstv.ir/detail/212827.html)

[danyboy27]

no.

[rundontwalk]

I'm not finding this Peter Eyre guy anywhere on the Google.

[~Spectre]

http://petereyrepatch.blogspot.com/

[~Spectre]

"Rothschild Globalist Killers Pour
DU On Libyans In Nuclear War
US, UK Butchers Extend Talons Of Death Over Libya
By Peter Eyre"

This guy is a crackpot.

[Rusty Shackleford]

a mushroom cloud does not mean a nuclear explosion.

[piet11111]

I think he got confused over the robust nuclear earth penetrator a proposed nuclear bunkerbuster that as far as we know was scrapped because using it would cause massive radioactive fallout as the blast could not be reliably contained underground causing the explosion to blow out radioactively contaminated soil.

[Agathor]

You do realize that Press TV is the Iranian government's TV network, right?

[Leonid Brozhnev]

The high-penetrating bunker-busters are thought to use depleted uranium due to it's strength and weight. DU is heavier than lead and is a little less dense than Tungsten. This means you can manufacture very slim, yet heavy and robust Bombs, capable of smashing through pretty much anything intact. Plus, it burns with the fury of a thousand suns.

Still, even if they have been using DU bunker busters, not like anything is going to be done. When Israel was accused of using DU bunker-busters against Lebanon in 2006, the WHO basically said "Use of DU will make a negligible contribution to the overall natural background levels of uranium"... so use all the DU ya like guiz!

[Black_Rose]

The high-penetrating bunker-busters are thought to use depleted uranium due to it's strength and weight. DU is heavier than lead and is a little less dense than Tungsten. This means you can manufacture very slim, yet heavy and robust Bombs, capable of smashing through pretty much anything intact. Plus, it burns with the fury of a thousand suns.

Still, even if they have been using DU bunker busters, not like anything is going to be done. When Israel was accused of using DU bunker-busters against Lebanon in 2006, the WHO basically said "Use of DU will make a negligible contribution to the overall natural background levels of uranium"... so use all the DU ya like guiz!

I understand that U-238 has a superior ballistics profile due to its high density, but I don't understand how 238 as a projectile can be an effective bunker-buster if, for instance, the bunker is ensconced one-hundred feet below the surface.

Nukes can be used as bunker-busters, but I don't comprehend how 238 can be used a nuclear weapon or a bunker-buster. (I looked at the Wikipedia articles "bunker buster" and "nuclear bunker buster" and it didn't even mentioned depleted uranium of U-238.) 238 is incapable of supercriticality, thus it is unable to cause if chain reaction is a critical mass of material is brought into close proximity, either through the gun method, by rapidly colliding two subcritical masses to form a critical mass, or implosion, by compressing a hallow mass of material. 238 can be used as part of the "tamper" in the "secondary"* of Tellum-Ulam devices (hydrogen bombs), but 238 undergoes fission in this case due to the high neutron flux due to the neutrons emitted by the fusion of the lithium-deuteride content of the secondary. Hydrogen bombs seem rather supererogatory in any tactical anti-personnel application, except as a means of terrorizing civilians and an intimidating deterrent (the philosophy of mutually assured destruction) simply through the mere possession of a device and the means to deliver it.

*The primary is a standard implosion type device. The ignition of the primary causes fusion by compressing the secondary through ablation of the tamper due to Newton's Third Law.

[Yazman]

You do realize that Press TV is the Iranian government's TV network, right?

That doesn't necessarily invalidate their claims. You'll need a lot more than just "it might be propaganda" to convince me it's bullshit, not that I believe the claim either, but neither side of this debate seems to have anything of substance to back up their ideas.

[socialistjustin]

The fact that I have never heard this claim before is reason enough for me to doubt this. I know that the US is brutal, but I don't see them using mini nukes nowadays. It would cause an unnecessary shitstorm in the international community.

[piet11111]

I understand that U-238 has a superior ballistics profile due to its high density, but I don't understand how 238 as a projectile can be an effective bunker-buster if, for instance, the bunker is ensconced one-hundred feet below the surface.

Due to its higher density its heavier without a larger body meaning more energy is put on a smaller size area allowing it to penetrate deeper.
However this is easily defeated by placing bunkers deeper underground safely out of reach of bombs.

However a RNEP would create a massive blast that would send shockwaves that would destroy the bunker even when its really deep underground where normal bunker busters couldn't reach it.


While conventional bunker busters utilize several methods to penetrate concrete structures, these are for the purpose of destroying the structure directly, and are generally limited in how much of a bunker, or system of bunkers they can destroy by depth and their relatively low explosive force (versus nuclear weapons). The primary difference between conventional and nuclear Bunker Busters, is that while the conventional version is meant for one target, the nuclear version can destroy an entire underground bunker system in one hit.
The main principles in modern bunker design are largely centered around survivability to nuclear war. As a result of this both American and former Soviet sites reached a state of "super hardening" involving principle defenses against the effects of a nuclear weapon, spring or counterweight (in the case of the R-36) mounted control capsules, thick (3-4 feet for the Minuteman command capsule) heavily reinforced with rebar and steel. These systems were designed to survive at their base a near miss of 20 megatons. The reason for this is that the seismic forces of an air burst of 20 megatons does not impart shockwaves strong enough to overcome their countermeasures, and due to things like depth, soil type, rock formations, etc, the predictability of the outcome is highly variable.
A nuclear bunker buster negates most of the countermeasures involved in the protection of underground bunkers. By penetrating the ground it directs all of its energy into it, this means that a relatively low yield may be able to produce seismic forces beyond those of an air burst or even groundburst of a weapon with twice its yield. Additionally the weapon by imparting the kinetic energy at depth has the ability to impart more severe horizontal shockwaves which many bunker systems are not explicitly designed to combat. Further, the explosive force being expelled into the ground directly and at depth keeps the fission and fusion products more limited in immediate distribution, as opposed to carrying them high into the upper atmosphere along with the rest of the vaporized debris. This means while there is fallout, it is extremely localized, making the weapon especially appealing to tactical planning, as opposed to strategic planning.

[Agathor]

That doesn't necessarily invalidate their claims. You'll need a lot more than just "it might be propaganda" to convince me it's bullshit, not that I believe the claim either, but neither side of this debate seems to have anything of substance to back up their ideas.

I wasn't trying to debunk the story. I was just worried that El Chavista appears to be getting his news from the Iranian Pravda.

[el_chavista]

.. I was just worried that El Chavista appears to be getting his news from the Iranian Pravda.
Hello... http://www.eltiempo.com/mundo/medio-oriente/IMAGEN/IMAGEN-8153961-0.png