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

901–910 of 1001 posts

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#901

Post by sanderjd »

zild3d wrote: post #676
Simon_O_Rourke wrote: post #633

That's an all around bad move for the US. Getting dragged into an Israeli war and probably having to carry the can for the next few years alone after getting into a mess not of our own making (well directly anyway). This is going to hit gas prices, the markets and US security considerations all in order to help keep the current Israeli leadership out of Israeli prisons. Bad move.

> the US. Getting dragged into an Israeli war A lot of people saying this, what would this actually entail? My money is much more on this being a "1 and done" exchange. Iran poses very little threat now, launchers being taken out everyday, leadership chain wiped out, seemingly no other Iran allies getting pulled into the fold

This episode has demonstrated that diplomacy is not a credible option. So with that off the table, the only two options now are 1. A series of "1 and done" engagements every few years or months, as the regime tries to race toward a bomb, or 2. Regime change.

It's possible that #2 will happen via domestic uprising, but not at all clear whether the result of that would be a friendlier regime that is less interested in going nuclear. It could very plausibly instead be hardliners who are pissed the regime failed to put up a strong enough fight. (I think that would be what would predictably happen in the US in this scenario, for instance!)

And if it's not a domestic uprising, it's a bloody regime change war like the ones fought in the 00s, which ... didn't turn out great, if you recall!

Possibly #1 is a better outcome. But I'm very skeptical that "we'll just bomb a big country periodically" is a strategy that will never escalate into protracted war.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#902

Post by devoutsalsa »

amai wrote: post #873

A country like Iran doesn‘t need nuclear energy. It could be like Norway and produce all its energy from renewables/solar, sell its oil and get rich easily. Instead they threaten neighbors, support terrorism and suppress their own people. But if the Israeli/US bombs will convince them to become smarter I really don‘t know.

I wonder what the economics of solar are like Iran. As I understand it, the cost for gasoline/benzine is something like 0.04 USD per liter because of state subsidies. It must be hard to justify investing in solar panels when burning dino juice is so inexpensive. I guess you could argue nuclear makes even less sense in that case.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#903

Post by vlod »

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…

>They should have shaped it like a giant piano.

I immediately thought about Wile E. Coyote and the Road Runner.... wasted youth

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#904

Post by zorobo »

herbst wrote: post #565

> No increase in radiation levels have been detected, the UN's nuclear watchdog says If true they failed to destroy the material (just like last time when the US brought chaos over the world by creating a war out of "they have bombs" lies) If not true, did they actually try to make the world a more poisonous place?

The material cannot be destroyed. However, uranium hexafluoride is very heavy and won't go far. Also, it reverts into a solid at ≤ 56 °C. Finally, it has a very long half life, meaning it is not super radioactive.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#906

Post by senderista »

tbrownaw wrote: post #351
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…

> Another unrelated point, a significant number of Iranian civil engineering graduates are women. A somewhat dichotomous economy, when you consider the theocratic restrictions on costume and behaviour. I thought it was generally known that richer societies with me equal treatment - where people are generally more able to choose jobs they like rather than needing to take whatever's a ticket to a decent life - are the…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-equality_paradox

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#907

Post by bjourne »

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.

Why are you swallowing the propaganda you've been spoon-fed?

"Gabbard: Iran is not currently developing nuclear weapons"

https://jewishinsider.com/2025/03/gabbard-iran-is-not-curren...

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#908

Post by bentobean »

> It is the mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to erase Israel from the map of the region.

> Israel is a hideous entity in the middle east which will undoubtedly be annihilated.

> Iran's stance has always been clear on this ugly phenomenon (Israel). We have repeatedly said that this cancerous tumor of a state should be removed from the region.

> Western countries allow no freedom of expression, which they claim to advocate, with regard to the myth of the massacre of Jews known as the holocaust, and nobody in the West enjoys the freedom of expression to deny it or raise doubts about it.

- Ali Khamenei, Supreme Leader of Iran

Those who defend the Iranian regime or suggest that the Israeli government is the greater threat do so to their disgrace. SMH.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#909

Post by that_guy_iain »

timhigins wrote: post #845
VikingCoder wrote: post #836

"The U.N. nuclear watchdog says there's 'no increase in off-site radiation levels' after US strikes on Iran nuclear sites" https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-n-nuclear-watchdog-says-0510491... That's the whole article. If we blow up a place filled with enriched uranium, shouldn't there be an obvious spike in off-site radiation levels, as the uranium settles to the ground? Meaning, isn't this damning evidence that there was…

Based on satellite imagery from Maxar and reports from Iran state news agencies, they moved the uranium in about 50 trucks to a “safe location” [1]. From Reuters [2]: > Hassan Abedini, deputy political head of Iran's state broadcaster, said Iran had evacuated the three sites some time ago. > "The enriched uranium reserves had been transferred from the nuclear centres and there are no materials left there that, if tar…

Those sites getting blown up was kinda obvious. I would have been shocked if they didn't move everything once Israel sneak attacked them.

Re: U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites

#910

Post by boston_clone »

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…

Gonna need a source for that whole "weapons-grade uranium" claim, otherwise you sound like the New York Times for the last 30 years.

It's also very likely, and so far an exact figure is yet to be reported, that several smart, kind, and non-hostile scientists working towards a clean energy program were killed by this strike.

Celebrating death for the sake of a hypothetical is a very dangerous attitude, and is frankly repugnant to see as a top comment.

Post reply on HN