Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

but why use a nuke? we have all sorts of non-nuclear weaponry. we have bunker busters that can penetrate hundreds of feet.

even if iran can't retaliate with nukes, the geopolitical cost would be insane.




>"Iran’s underground nuclear facility could be between 80 meters (260 feet) and 100 meters (328 feet) below the surface... That could be a problem for the GBU-57 since the US Air Force stated that the bomb could rip through 60 meters (200 feet) of cement and ground before detonating. US officials have talked about detonating two of these bombs consecutively to guarantee the destruction of a location. However, the new depth of the Natanz tunnels still poses a significant obstacle." [1]

[1] https://www.eurasiantimes.com/us-flaunts-massive-ordnance-pe...


The US military has a long history of making technically true statements about it's weapons, but which are still misleading.

If a bomb can actually rip through 200 meters of cement and ground, then the 60 meter statement is also true.

It also has a history of revealing the actual limits of weapons systems, but only after better capabilities exist (with the limits of those still classified or understated) - that is the 60M limit was the max of the old bomb and they don't need to know about the new one.


This feels overly dismissive of the difficulty, but here is a more detailed article if you are interested.

https://www.twz.com/iranian-underground-nuclear-facility-may...


I can see how it comes off as dismissive my bad - it was intended to be a "take such analyses with a grain of salt if you aren't privvy to classified, relevant information".


Iran has some ultra tough concrete. I question if even our best bunker busters can penetrate them.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: