Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 1001 posts

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#501

Post by missedthecue »

ggm wrote: post #5

I wonder if the bunker buster was used. It has a somewhat indirect lineage to the ww2 grand slam designed by Barnes Wallis. Iran has massive earthquake risks. For reasons unassociated with nuclear bunkers they do a lot of research into (fibre, and other) strengthened cement construction. With obvious applications to their nuclear industry of course. Another unrelated point, a significant number of Iranian civil engin…

By a wide margin, the majority of Iranian university students are women. The ratio is over 60/40

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#502

Post by birn559 »

mrtksn wrote: post #366
tptacek wrote: post #23

I think Netanyahu belongs in prison, and Trump, the less said the better, but: couldn't have happened to a nicer unauthorized weapons-grade uranium enrichment facility dug into the side of a mountain hours outside of population centers. If you haven't already, I highly recommend reading up on the GBU-57 "bunker buster" bomb, because it is some Merrie Melodies Acme brand munitions. It's deliberately as heavy as they c…

Let’s hope that the destruction of facilities comes with the regime change in Iran. otherwise it may have just given a brief pause and further escalation. If the regime survives, now Iranian people have a very good reasons to ignore its shortcomings and tyranny and Do a proper sacrifice. It’s a natural resources rich nation of 90 million people. If they want to get serious, they can get serious.

Iranian people won't suddenly start to like the regime just because certain sites were destroyed.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#503

Post by PeterHolzwarth »

cmurf wrote: post #85

https://bsky.app/profile/brma64.bsky.social/post/3ls5ntn5bns... It could be worse. But this is still bad, may be illegal, and isn't over yet. We don't actually know what they hit, if those sites were empty, and what's happened to ~1/2 ton of highly-enriched uranium or the regime's ability to produce more.

Very definitely is not illegal in American law.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#504

Post by seydor »

I don't think it's going to end here. US wants to control Iran , to starve China of its oil. US+Israel already have set up rich middle east countries as bulwarks. The whole middle east is setting up the stage for future proxy wars between US & china/russia

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#505

Post by cryptonector »

batmaniam wrote: post #384

How the heck does a US president have military powers so powerful and broad? If congress can only declare war, it doesn't make sense to me that the president can put the entire country at risk of war by directly bombing another country. Like then at that point, congress has to approve right..? Because the damage is already done. It's a big slap on the face at the global stage, with no room for political face-saving.…

> How the heck does a US president have military powers so powerful and broad? If congress can only declare war [...]

It's been this way since the Vietnam war, it not the Korean war. Every president since then has been able to engage in relatively small military operations without congressional approval. And the UN is what ended formal declarations of war, too. Basically Congress can stop military actions started by the President by taking the money away or not providing it to begin with, but if the operation is small then it's a fait accompli before Congress can do anything about it.

See the Bay of Pigs, Vietnam, Cambodia, Grenada, Iraq, Somalia, Serbia, Libya, Syria, etc.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#506

Post by stickfigure »

alkyon wrote: post #476
cakealert wrote: post #465

Iran never had the deterrent North Korea had. And by being a theocracy they heavily skewed any threat calculus against themselves. What they were doing, inching towards nukes, was a horrible move. In their position, you either sprint covertly and not play at all. I suspect that after their nuclear program was discovered and set back they fell victim to the sunk cost fallacy and convinced themselves they could repurpo…

If anything, the lack of competence is on the other side. Was enriched uranium destroyed? I doubt it. Have they even "obliterated" Fordow site buried 90 m deep inside the mountain? I have serious doubts. Iran's nuclear program was set back some months if anything.

I'm willing to bet that the Americans can build another one of those GBU-57 bombs every some months if they had to.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#507

Post by Ekaros »

drecho wrote: post #71

Some in the U.S. want peace. I guess no one else gives a shit and is just going to jettison us into a war for millennia.

Nuclear proliferation is best way to world peace. Anyone saying else is just pure evil who want to subjugate and genocide other nations. More nukes the better and safer world is.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#508

Post by jameslk »

This is not the end. This is the beginning of another Iraq war, set up exactly the same way: claiming, with dubious proof, an imminent risk from weapons of mass destruction.

Iran’s options here are to bomb US bases, which are a lot closer by, mine the Strait of Hormuz, blow up oil infrastructure in nearby countries who are harboring US bases.

This might risk Iran a much larger war but the alternative of doing nothing and showing the world they won’t defend themselves is worse.

The US will again bankroll another big, more expensive war to the tune of trillions more in debt. Another decade of war ahead with no end in sight.

Meanwhile, new enemies will be made for the US as a young generation grows up living through this. The cycle repeats.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#509

Post by seydor »

neilv wrote: post #362

In that reporting stream, at 22:58, "White House releases photos of Trump in Situation Room"[1], I'm struck that we are in a timeline that is not only dark, but surreal. It sounds trite to say from a position of relative comfort and distance, but I can only hope that someday our better selves will find peace with each other, around the globe. But we won't be able to undo all the injustices and atrocities that we infl…

Remote War photos are now commonplace. The striking thing is that he is wearing his MAGA hat, as if he purposely wants to piss off his base who had delusions of "no wars president"
Post reply on HN