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

821–830 of 1001 posts

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#821

Post by kaycebasques »

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 is my honest assessment of the calculus of the move. Please don't interpret any of this as me personally supporting or approving of these motives. I'm just trying to have a genuine intellectual discussion about the potential thought processes of our collective leaders.

* Quick, victorious wars can be incredibly popular domestically, regardless of whether surveys say that only 16% of the US population supports the war. Trump needs an approval ratings boost. The global tariff shock was a PR disaster. A quick, victorious war is a tried-and-true approval rating booster over the last 200-300 years. The key, of course, is actually keeping the war truly short and victorious. If it drags on, or if people start asking "have we truly won?", then that's a whole different matter.

* We have moved out of a unipolar geopolitical world and into a multipolar one. The USA is checking the ambitions of the rival powers. Want to invade Ukraine? Sure, go ahead and try, but it will be a multi-year slog. Want to go for years maybe developing nuclear weapons, maybe not, and making US antagonism a central part of your political platform? Watch us systematically attack your nuclear program and and air power and do highly targeted assassinations of your political elites over the course of two weeks. Want to invade Taiwan? Look at what happened in Ukraine and Iran and maybe reset your expectations about how that will pan out.

* There has been a lot of questioning lately around whether the US will actually help their allies when they're in a pinch. This is sending a pretty strong message of reassurance to allies.

* Trump may actually want things to escalate to a point where he can reasonably declare martial law within the US. How do you stay in power when you've already hit your two-term constitutional limit?

Your question was "how does it benefit the US?" but I don't think that's answerable because everyone has a different take on what's best for the US. It's much more feasible to discuss "how does it benefit Trump?" or "how does it maintain US's position as a world power?"

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#822

Post by danh1979 »

totetsu wrote: post #543

And meanwhile the biggest threat to all our security, the climate crisis goes unaddressed.

The Conflict and Environment Observatory published an article outlining actual and potential environmental consequences of this war: https://ceobs.org/the-emerging-environmental-consequences-of...

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#823

Post by lazyant »

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…

"a genocidal smart evil man convinced a stupid evil man to attack a country with an evil regime" (paraphrasing)

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#824

Post by Rover222 »

Obviously complicated and dangerous, but I’m surprised (or, not really) how many people here are quick to condemn Israel and the US, with no consideration that the official Iranian policy is the ELIMINATION of Israel. Of course Israel cannot allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon. Israel has many nukes, and in fact does not commit genocide, despite being capable. Some Islamic regimes would be much more likely to use that power, IMO.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#825

Post by daveguy »

kyrra wrote: post #818
Ciantic wrote: post #659

The only way out of this in the long term is via negotiations. The US and Israel were lucky that Iran built their Fordow plant only 50 meters underground. What will the US do when Iran rebuilds it far deeper? They have a coal mine going 1200 meters deep. Iran is technologically far more capable than North Korea, which ultimately succeeded in building the bomb. The US knows this and wouldn't have started this war if I…

> The first Iran deal in 2015 was not perfect, but it would have provided some guarantees for 15 years. And then what? They have nuclear weapons? Which is what Israel and the US doesn't want. Also, Iran didn't even let inspector into all of the enrichment sites they had, so they were breaking the original deal with Obama from the start.

15 years is a lot better than immediately resuming enrichment. Which happened as soon as Trump scrapped the previous agreement. It still took them 7+ years to get to where they are now. So, it would have been 22 years, not 15. Trump is a short-sighted fool.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#826

Post by sepisoad »

As Iranians, we are exhausted and frustrated with the Islamic regime in Iran, which has proven to be more destructive than any weapon. Despite numerous attempts to peacefully change the regime, each effort has been met with brutal violence, mass killings of civilians, and imprisonment of anyone who dares to oppose them. Over time, we’ve realized that protests alone cannot overthrow this regime; it requires a force stronger than them to bring about change. Now, after 45 years, Israel’s strikes on the regime’s key figures and military installations have given us a glimmer of hope. When my non-Iranian friends ask how I feel, I tell them I’m overjoyed—this is something we’ve dreamed of for decades. War is not ideal, but in a far-from-perfect world, it can sometimes prevent greater harm. This conflict is doing just that by challenging a regime that promotes a toxic ideology, one that disregards human life and thrives on death and destruction to achieve its goals. While many Iranians feel hopeful that this could pave the way for real change, it’s disheartening to see left-leaning activists worldwide aligning with apologists for the mullahs’ regime, chanting “Stop the war.” This is deeply troubling. Where were they during the past 45 years when the regime slaughtered thousands, forced countless people into exile, oppressed women and minorities, executed LGBTQ individuals, and held Western travelers hostage to extort foreign governments? To those who believe they’re doing good by opposing this war, you are, at best, a useful idiot supporting the mullahs’ regime. You cannot fathom the consequences if this conflict ends without decisively weakening them—Iran’s people would face an even darker era. I’m not here to glorify Netanyahu or Trump, but their actions have achieved something we’ve long hoped for. My hope is that this leads to the complete dismantling of the regime and its proxies.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#827

Post by tayistay »

austin-cheney wrote: post #705

I see a lot of nonsense in the comments. Here are the facts: 1. Iran may or may not have been building a nuclear weapon. US intelligence says they were at least 3 years away. 2. Iran did not attack Israel. Israel attacked Iran. 3. Iran did not attack the US. The US bombed Iran only because Israel asked the US to do so.

Re 2: Iran previously launched drones and missiles at Israel about a year ago. See https://apnews.com/article/strait-of-hormuz-vessel-33fcffde2...

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#828

Post by croes »

Rover222 wrote: post #824

Obviously complicated and dangerous, but I’m surprised (or, not really) how many people here are quick to condemn Israel and the US, with no consideration that the official Iranian policy is the ELIMINATION of Israel. Of course Israel cannot allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon. Israel has many nukes, and in fact does not commit genocide, despite being capable. Some Islamic regimes would be much more likely to use tha…

The question is if Iran really was nearly capable of building nukes.

Everything else doesn’t matter as long the words aren’t followed by action.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#829

Post by dekelpilli »

FilosofumRex wrote: post #540
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…

Israel defines itself as a "jewish" state, and at least 50% of members of current governing parties in parliament are from religious parties and zionist parties. In what sense Israel is not a theocracy.

It would quite concerning if Israel had non-Zionist (read: not in favour of the existence of Israel) parties.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#830

Post by croes »

ianks wrote: post #711

No one in their right mind wants the Supreme Leader armed with nukes… but there are many ways to prevent this outcome.

Would it change much if Iran had nukes?

Israel has nukes too so as soon Iran bombs Israel they strike back, not to mention the US reaction.

MAD would lead to a stalemate

Post reply on HN