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

371–380 of 1001 posts

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#371

Post by tptacek »

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…

CNN reports 12 GBU-57s were dropped on Fordow.

Can I say again how deeply silly this munition is? What's special about a GBU-57 isn't its explosive force. It's that the bomb casing is made out of special high-density ultra-heavy steel; it's deliberately just a super heavy bomb with a delayed fuse. It is literally like them dropping cartoon anvils out of the sky.

From what I've read, the idea is that they keep dropping bombs into the same bomb-hole that previous sorties left, each round of bombs drilling deeper into the structure.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#372

Post by soraminazuki »

le-mark wrote: post #222

[flagged]

The worst part is, it's only been half a year since Trump took office. We're experiencing crisis after crisis in the world stage, and it's the worst possible time to have someone unstable as him in charge of the world's most powerful military. Who knows what's going to happen in the next, sigh, 3.5 years with this shortage of adults who know patience and diplomacy.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#373

Post by slv77 »

vaughands wrote: post #6

Seriously, what is the benefit to the US here? I can't understand how this benefits the country at all.

This paper from 1999 provides some context about the US and Israel relationship in the context of nuclear weapons in the Middle East.

The third temple's holy of holies : Israel's nuclear weapons

https://dp.la/item/525bc46d51878c5e285d9069a80246d0

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#374

Post by mieses »

HAL3000 wrote: post #368
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…

Thinking that doing something like that will stop Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon is naive. It's not a technical challenge for them, it's a political decision, only a political decision. If they really wanted to, they would already have it. Enriched material was transported from these centers some time ago, as news outlets have already reported. As for the facts, and not just the narrative: 60% enrichment is not…

There isn't anything special about Iran. It's anyone's political decision to use a nuke. So you make diplomatic decisions, war inclusive, to increase chances that you will not be nuked.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#375

Post by akdev1l »

HAL3000 wrote: post #368
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…

Thinking that doing something like that will stop Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon is naive. It's not a technical challenge for them, it's a political decision, only a political decision. If they really wanted to, they would already have it. Enriched material was transported from these centers some time ago, as news outlets have already reported. As for the facts, and not just the narrative: 60% enrichment is not…

> If they really wanted to, they would already have it. Enriched material was transported from these centers some time ago.

…

> 60% enrichment is not considered weapons-grade enrichment.

So which is it?

1. They already have enriched uranium and can just make a bomb now

2. They don’t have weapons-grade enriched uranium (and now probably cannot enrich it)

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#376

Post by Ozzie_osman »

I imagine every reasonably-sized country looking at this and thinking: "well, we'd be idiots not to have nuclear weapons by any means necessary."

This will be one of the single-most proliferation-inducing events in history, maybe save Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#377

Post by 827a »

jmward01 wrote: post #331

[flagged]

What? Do you really believe the world seriously beholds itself to "do as I say not as I do"? There's no such thing as international law. There's just self-interested nations who have always only done what is in their best interest. There's no higher authority.

So, in your reality, China says "but, but, you guys got to invade Iraq and attack Iran unprovoked, that means we get to invade Taiwan" and we just have to sit back and let it happen because... reasons. Nope. That's not how it works. We don't hold everyone to the same standards, and we certainly don't hold ourselves to the standards we police the world to hold itself to. That's the way it works.

Life isn't fair. Get used to it.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#378

Post by WaxProlix »

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.

Even if the regime doesn't survive, what's our track record in Iranian regime change like? What are the chances people there swallow their pride and roll over? If anything, Khomeini is probably a moderate compared to a lot of what we could end up with after 'regime change' (lol)

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#379

Post by tourist2d »

aaron695 wrote: post #18

The bunker busters will not have worked on Fordow. (It will be the first time a GBU-57A/B has been used in war, which is interesting) They needed troops on the ground. Israel was going to do this. It's possible they have just collapsed the entrances. Trumps comments - https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump You have a loop, @Osint613 reposted Trump as "Fordow is gone" which Trump reposted. Neither of them have any i…

[dead]

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#380

Post by r0m4n0 »

HAL3000 wrote: post #368
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…

Thinking that doing something like that will stop Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon is naive. It's not a technical challenge for them, it's a political decision, only a political decision. If they really wanted to, they would already have it. Enriched material was transported from these centers some time ago, as news outlets have already reported. As for the facts, and not just the narrative: 60% enrichment is not…

Just curious where the enrichment fact you are claiming comes from. I see the NPT outlined 3% max while watchdogs detected over 80%. I didn’t think there were debates about them breaking the NPT

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-...

Post reply on HN