The "mother of all bombs" is just the unavoidable nickname.

...M.O.A.B. was in use here and there as an abbreviation for Saddam Hussein's hyperbolic boast "Mother Of All Battles".

as mentioned above the actual name is Massive Ordnance Air Burst.

But sensationalism sells, so how many news reports have you seen that used the actual name and how many have you seen using the nickname the originated in the media anyway?

Nonetheless, it's the kind of idiotic phrase that seems to be chosen by someone who has a desperate need to feel like "A Real Man".

rights for men and their warmongering.

It is a weapon of mass distruction.
(Yeah yeah war is hell.)

War is DEATH.

Keep "Mother" out of it.
And just why are these so GD expensive?
Men making obscene profit from obliterating things.

Since it's technology, something will definitely come along that overshadows it someday and its title will be stupider.

$14 million for one bomb is just insane and frankly evil. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/14/moab-attack-isis-baffling-choice-cold-blooded-terms-cost-afghanistan

NY Times puts it at $170,000.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/aponline/2017/04/14/us/politics/ap-us-mother-of-all-bombs.html

That seems more likely. It isn't a missile or rocket so it's not nearly as expensive as those are.

the program was like $314 million, and if you divide the number of bombs they made into that, it gives like $14 million a bomb.

The larger point is military shit and wars are ridiculously expensive and no one in power ever seems to care about that.

Those figures from every source I see are for the MOP, not the MOAB.

The MOP did end up at $14 million per example. I think some of the first ones actually used leftover battleship gun barrels to make the case from.

But that's not the same system and I think a lot of media sources are confusing the two.

This is the source I used-- https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/14/moab-attack-isis-baffling-choice-cold-blooded-terms-cost-afghanistan

MOP is Massive Ordnance Penetraor , the "bunker buster".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massive_Ordnance_Penetrator

It seems the media is mixing the two up, out of either incompetence or intentionally for more sensational coverage.

This 2011 LA Times article quotes the same costs exactly for the MOP that media sources are now attributing to the MOAB.

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/nov/16/business/la-fi-bunker-buster-bomb-20111117

Before the 91 Gulf War Saddam Hussein, the then leader of Iraq, warned that the allied troops against him would be destroyed in "The mother of all battles".

That war went poorly for Mr. Hussein.

Then the name was tweaked in the media for this thing.

The M.O.A.B. and the M.O.P* might be effective in destroying the hardened artillery positions that are aimed across the DMZ at Seoul. To deploy these weapons against NK would be very risky. But one never knows with the buffoon in chief. Now some in military leadership are probably itching to try out their toys.

The MOAB is not a penetrator weapon and is primarily intended for soft to medium surface targets covering extended areas and targets in a contained environment such as a deep canyon or within a cave system.[15]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-43/B_Massive_Ordnance_Air_Blast

... about "The Mother of all Battles" which would finally establish his dominance of the region.

And the cost of this MOAB thing isn't working out too well for us.

Ya the Mother of all.........so what do they call the one they have that's 50% bigger "This is THE mother fucker"

The explosive diarrhea I get when I eat salmonella-tainted chicken--stink and all!

MOAB Blast yield: 11 tons TNT
Little Boy Blast yield: 15 kilotons of TNT

It is a bunch of bragging and I assume this was the best way to blast into the rocks without directly going into the caves themselves.

Just another tool......