Speaking in an interview broadcast on Thursday night, Trump described the weapon, popularly called the Mother of All Bombs, as exceptionally powerful but stressed that it was not nuclear. He did not announce an attack, identify a target or specify when a decision might be made.
“Well the mother of all bombs is not nuclear,” Trump said. “It’s not nuclear at all, just an extremely large bomb. It’s like a tiny nuclear bomb. But the mother of all bombs is one big bomb, but it’s not nuclear.”
His remarks came as US military planners examined options for strikes involving the GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast bomb, known as MOAB. Planning does not establish that the president has authorised its use, and the administration has not publicly confirmed a final decision to deploy the weapon against Iran.
The White House and Pentagon have prepared scenarios for striking military facilities should Trump order further operations. Asked about such planning, a Pentagon official said the department prepares for a broad range of operational situations to carry out presidential and senior defence leadership directions.
Potential strike packages under consideration include attacks on Iranian energy infrastructure and nuclear-related facilities. One location discussed in military planning is Pickaxe Mountain, a site believed to be associated with Iran’s nuclear programme. The exact status and purpose of activities there remain uncertain.
Officials familiar with the planning have also raised questions about whether the bomb could achieve the desired results against installations buried deep underground. The MOAB produces a powerful blast over a wide area, but it is not designed principally to penetrate heavily fortified subterranean structures.
That distinction matters because some of Iran’s most sensitive facilities are protected by rock and reinforced construction. A large surface explosion does not necessarily destroy equipment located far below ground. The effectiveness of any strike would depend on the target’s depth, construction and surrounding geology, as well as the weapon employed.
Trump’s description of the bomb as resembling a small nuclear weapon referred to its destructive scale rather than its mechanism. The MOAB uses conventional explosives and produces neither a nuclear chain reaction nor the radioactive effects associated with a nuclear detonation. Its blast cannot be treated as equivalent to a nuclear weapon merely because both can cause extensive destruction.
The US Air Force identifies the GPS-guided GBU-43/B as weighing approximately 21,600 pounds, or 9,800 kilograms, with roughly 18,700 pounds of explosive material. It is delivered from a specially adapted transport aircraft rather than carried by a conventional fighter jet.
The possibility of using it has emerged as Trump faces political pressure over the prolonged conflict with Iran ahead of the November 3 midterm elections. The elections will determine control of Congress, while the administration’s handling of the war and its economic consequences have become issues in the campaign.
Any expansion of American attacks on Iranian infrastructure could also carry implications beyond the immediate military objectives. Energy facilities are economically important, and damage to them could affect production and supply at a time when the conflict has already heightened concerns over regional shipping and oil markets.
The military options are being considered against a difficult operational backdrop, with questions surrounding the effectiveness of further strikes and their capacity to change Iran’s position. Officials have not publicly detailed the specific military objectives assigned to the proposed weapon, the number of bombs potentially involved or the safeguards envisaged for limiting damage beyond designated targets. Those questions remain unresolved in public statements.
No publicly announced order establishes that the MOAB will be used either before or after the vote. Nor has the administration disclosed a timetable for approving the options under review. Military contingency plans can be revised, retained without action or discarded as circumstances change.
The weapon was developed by the Air Force Research Laboratory and first tested in 2003. Its first operational use came in April 2017, when US forces dropped one on a tunnel and cave complex used by Islamic State militants in Afghanistan. That operation demonstrated its intended role against large-area targets, although it offered no direct test of its effectiveness against Iran’s deeply buried installations.
Follow Arabian Post
Select Arabian Post as your preferred source on Google and MSN News for trusted business news and Arab politics and updates.
