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

291–300 of 1001 posts

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#291

Post by ronnier »

tptacek wrote: post #80
markus_zhang wrote: post #69

OK what was done was done. What should we expect the political fallout in Iran?

It's really hard to say, but probably not good (there was an Atlantic article about this last week). Part of the dynamic here is the idea that the SL can't back down without losing so much domestic credibility that he puts the regime at risk; being in a shooting war with the West probably reinforces the regime's position. The flip side of this is that I don't think there were many signs that the opposition was in pos…

With all respect please type out SL. I and many others don’t know what that means. For us it’s just two random letters thrown into a sentence

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#293

Post by Havoc »

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…

Yup. Twelve at main site two at Natanz

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#294

Post by Izikiel43 »

dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #203

There are reasons why presidents have avoided attacking Iran. - massive instability in the ME. Just a few men with shoulder fired missiles can disrupt oil shipments from the biggest oil producers - the high chance of being sucked into a forever war. Iran can cause a lot of problems with limited resources and can rebuild. They have no reason to give up and the US might have to continue bombing indefinitely, or launch…

For your first point, that’s not as big of an issue as it used to for the USA thanks to fracking, now the USA is a net exporter of oil.

For the second, I don’t think anything other than an air campaign like it’s been done will happen, it’s not like the USA is out for blood like after 9/11.

For the third, yeah, that’s unfortunately possible, North Korea, Ukraine and now this show that the only way no one messes with you is by having a good enough deterrent. However, even if this hadn’t happened, if Iran got a bomb, they wouldn’t threaten like nk does to get stuff, it would just test it on Israel, so you would get nuclear war anyway.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#297

Post by hearsathought »

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…

> I think Netanyahu belongs in prison

Didn't Netanyahu perjure himself to congress about iraq's wmds two decades? Isn't that grounds for arrest? It's amazing how our media never mentions that netanyahu is a habitual liar when they push netanyahu's iran's wmds spiel.

At this point our media companies are israel's PR department. Fox news should be banned like RT for being a foreign mouthpiece.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#299

Post by bushbaba »

dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #203

There are reasons why presidents have avoided attacking Iran. - massive instability in the ME. Just a few men with shoulder fired missiles can disrupt oil shipments from the biggest oil producers - the high chance of being sucked into a forever war. Iran can cause a lot of problems with limited resources and can rebuild. They have no reason to give up and the US might have to continue bombing indefinitely, or launch…

Actually now is different. The axis of resistance that would pop up (asad, Hezbollah, Hamas, houthis) are all basically gone and unable to mount an attack.

Saudi, Egypt, Jordan, UAE, HTS, and majority of Middle East is not in favor of Iran getting a nuke.

Hatred of Iran, is a unifying force.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#300

Post by leyth »

PaulHoule wrote: post #24
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…

When I was doing a postdoc in Germany I shared an office with a woman from Morocco so my office was a meeting point for many islamic woman including one from Iran who complained bitterly about how women were treated in her country but who did get the opportunity to get an advanced education.

[flagged]
Post reply on HN