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

611–620 of 1001 posts

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#611

Post by czhu12 »

jameslk wrote: post #508

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…

I could be wrong in the end, but my read is that there really isn't the appetite anywhere near the levels during post 9/11 or cold war to enter a war. Not in the US, and likely not in Iran either.

Its hard to think of a full scale war that was started by the U.S. that didn't have popular approval at the time it was launched.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#612

Post by bambax »

simonh wrote: post #487
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…

It's not so much them being a theocracy IMHO. It's that they believe they have a religious duty to destroy the state of Israel. Put those Israeli shoes on. There's a state armed with ballistic missiles in easy range of you, they have the facilities necessary to enrich weapons grade Uranium, recently acquired more advanced centrifuges, they have the uranium already enriched far beyond what's necessary for civilian use…

> and they believe god has ordered them to destroy you

Maybe, but obviously the other side thinks exactly the same.

Religious wars were lots of fun five centuries ago. They will be funnier still in the nuclear age.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#613

Post by gghhzzgghhzz »

PeterHolzwarth wrote: post #533
jameslk wrote: post #508

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…

Dubious proof?! Iran has been blatantly pursuing nuclear weapons for decades - and the west (along with much of the rest of the world and the middle east) has been working to counter it the whole time. Remember that in the middle east, Iran is considered a dire enemy.

If it wanted nuclear weapons, it would just buy some from Pakistan.

Their actions do not follow the conclusion you state.

What is clear now though to any Iranian is that they should get nuclear weapons asap. Diplomacy is just a tool used by the west to string you along while they get ready to bomb you

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#614

Post by littlestymaar »

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…

> What they were doing, inching towards nukes, was a horrible move. In their position, you either sprint covertly and not play at all.

You're misunderstanding their position and that's why it seems idiotic to you: they stopped working on building nukes back in 2003, after that date all they did was using the ability to get nukes as a negotiation leverage, that's how they got JPCoA in 2015 and since the US unilaterally left it in 2018 and the rest of the Western world failed to keep it working (that would have required courage to anger the US), Iran was seeking to force a new deal by raising the bar a bit: they announced back in 2022 that they'd enrich up to 60% in order to increase their negotiation leverage, but they didn't go past that stage nor did they work on the militarization tech in the meantime, because they weren't aiming to get the bomb at all.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#615

Post by rocqua »

vbezhenar wrote: post #552
crossroadsguy wrote: post #485

As someone who absolutely hates American bullying of a hegemony. This is one case where I believe people of Iran might come out beneficial of it. In the long term? I am not so sure. But will that happen? I doubt it. A country like America likes authoritarian regimes that like to listen to America. So Iranian things in the best interest of America would be the same theocracy but docile to America at least in the near…

Trump will declare that his BIG BEAUTIFUL BOMBS won the war, nuclear facilities are no more. Israel cannot claim otherwise, because that would be against big brother. Iran will continue covertly making nuclear bomb, but that will take more years, and will continue peace talks for now. Trump will get Nobel peace prize for peaceful bombing and will be happy.

There's a whole escalation you are forgetting. Iran will retaliate, to which the US wilk respond. That yields a situation where neither side can back out, but neither is putting enough pressure in the other to force them to stop.

The way through seems limited to:

- ground invasion - nuclear annihilation - regime change (no guarantee of success)

If the regime change doesn't work, the options are horrible. And remember that the current Iran regime is the result of a US backed regime change, which allowed radical elements to mobilize hatred against the US.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#617

Post by JumpCrisscross »

dreghgh wrote: post #581
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…

> This is probably what happens when your government isn't very competent and you don't have mathematicians doing game theoretic simulations for you? Religious government or not, Iran has plenty of engineers, statisticians, scientists and intelligence analysts working for their foreign policy and war effort. Your underestimating this betrays prejudice.

> Religious government or not, Iran has plenty of engineers, statisticians, scientists and intelligence analysts working for their foreign policy and war effort. Your underestimating this betrays prejudice

America also has lots of brilliant people. Then we have Hegseth, Noem and the other fuck.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#618

Post by adastra22 »

dandanua wrote: post #587
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…

"In God we trust"

A cheap shot ignorant of the history and context of that phrase.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#619

Post by bambax »

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…

[flagged]

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#620

Post by alkonaut »

czhu12 wrote: post #611
jameslk wrote: post #508

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…

I could be wrong in the end, but my read is that there really isn't the appetite anywhere near the levels during post 9/11 or cold war to enter a war. Not in the US, and likely not in Iran either. Its hard to think of a full scale war that was started by the U.S. that didn't have popular approval at the time it was launched.

The lack of appetite in the US didn’t stop this. And the lack of appetite among normal Iranians won’t matter much.

War is better for regime survival than peace. This is a country ruled by a very scared elite that isn’t held accountable for anything and whose only means of survival is creating continuous distractions from domestic failures. And it’s similar in Iran.

Post reply on HN