The 'Mother of All Bombs' Is Massive Overkill and Won't Lead to Peace

“I’m really very good at war. I love war, in a certain way,” bragged candidate Donald Trump at a campaign rally in Iowa. This is the same Donald Trump who avoided the Vietnam draft by claiming a bone spur in his foot, a medical problem that never kept him off the tennis or golf course and miraculously healed on its own. 


But with the escalation of U.S. military involvement in Syria, the record number of drone attacks in Yemen, more U.S. troops being sent to the Middle East, and now, the dropping of a massive bomb in Afghanistan, it looks like Trump may indeed love war. Or at least, love playing war.

In Syria, Trump went for 59 Tomahawk missiles. Now, in Afghanistan, he has opted for a “super weapon,” the second largest of the U.S. military’s non-nuclear bombs. This 21,600-pound explosive, never before used in combat, was used to blast a bunch of tunnels and caves in an Afghan province near the border of Pakistan. Officially called a Massive Ordinance Air Blast Bomb (MOAB), its nickname—the "mother of all bombs"—reeks of misogyny, as no mother on earth loves bombs.

The military is still assessing the results of the MOAB blast and insists it “took every precaution to avoid civilian casualties.” But given this weapon’s colossal size and power (simulator calculations show the effects of the bomb reaching as far as a mile in each direction), damage to the surrounding area is probably enormous.

In an unconfirmed report, a parliamentarian from Nangarhar, Esmatullah Shinwari, said locals had told him one teacher and his young son had been killed. One man, the MP recounted, had told him before the phone lines went down: “I have grown up in the war, and I have heard different kinds of explosions through 30 years: suicide attacks, earthquakes different kinds of blasts. I have never heard anything like this.”

The idea that the U.S. military can vanquish the enemy with ferocious air power is certainly not new, but history tells a different story. The U.S. military dropped over seven million tons of explosives in Southeast Asia and still lost the Vietnam war.

In the first days of the Afghan war, we were told U.S. airpower was no match for the ragtag, poor, uneducated Taliban religious fanatics. Indeed, we saw the precursor to the MOAB used right after the U.S. invasion in 2001. It was the so-called Daisy Cutter, named after the shape of the crater it leaves, weighing 15,000 pounds.

The U.S. military also dropped 5,000-pound bunker busters to blow up caves where Osama bin Laden was hiding in the Tora Bora mountains. The Bush administration bragged that this awesome airpower would ensure the Taliban’s demise. That was 16 years ago, and now U.S. military is not only fighting the Taliban but ISIS, which first appeared in this wartorn nation in 2014.

So, are we really supposed to believe that releasing the deadly power of the MOAB will be a game changer? What will happen when it becomes clear, yet again, that airpower is not enough? There are already about 8,500 U.S. troops in Afghanistan. Will Trump drag us deeper into this endless war by granting the U.S. Afghan commander, Gen. John Nicholson, his request for several thousand more troops?

More military intervention won’t win the war in Afghanistan, but it will probably win Trump more favorable ratings in the polls, as he discovered with the Syria missile strike.

Bombing other countries certainly takes the attention off Trump’s domestic woes, but perhaps instead of the congratulatory adulations by Trump himself, and his fans and critics alike, we should be asking: just where is this escalation leading?

This president does not have a track record for deep thinking or long-term planning. Trump told reporters that this bombing was “another very, very successful mission,” but when asked about long-term strategy he remained elusive. He deflected a question about whether or not he himself had ordered the bombing by offering one of his canned responses about having the world’s greatest military.

In a statement immediately after the MOAB explosion, Democratic congresswoman Barbara Lee from California said: “President Trump owes the American people an explanation about his escalation of military force in Afghanistan and his long-term strategy to defeat ISIS. No president should have a blank check for endless war, especially not this president, who is acting without any checks or oversight from the Republican-controlled Congress.”

This “mother of all bombs” and Trump’s newfound penchant for war will not help Afghan mothers, many of whom are widows struggling to take care of their families after their husbands have been killed. The $16 million cost of this one explosion could have provided over 50 million meals for Afghan children.

Alternatively, with Trump’s original playbook of “America First," the money spent on this one bomb could have helped American moms by easing Trump’s proposed cuts in the after-school programs so critical for their children.

Trump’s trigger-happy finger is careening the world down a reckless and dangerous path, not only deepening U.S. involvement in ongoing conflicts but threatening new ones with nuclear powers from Russia to North Korea. Perhaps it’s time for a new resistance movement called MOAB: Mothers of All Babies, where women come together to stop this misogynist, war-loving president from blowing up all our babies and starting World War III.

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. AlterNet’s journalists work tirelessly to counter the traditional corporate media narrative. We’re here seven days a week, 365 days a year. And we’re proud to say that we’ve been bringing you the real, unfiltered news for 20 years—longer than any other progressive news site on the Internet.

It’s through the generosity of our supporters that we’re able to share with you all the underreported news you need to know. Independent journalism is increasingly imperiled; ads alone can’t pay our bills. AlterNet counts on readers like you to support our coverage. Did you enjoy content from David Cay Johnston, Common Dreams, Raw Story and Robert Reich? Opinion from Salon and Jim Hightower? Analysis by The Conversation? Then join the hundreds of readers who have supported AlterNet this year.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure AlterNet remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to AlterNet, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

DonateDonate by credit card

Close

Don't Sit on the Sidelines of History. Join Alternet All Access and Go Ad-Free. Support Honest Journalism.