US Reportedly Assesses It Would Need to Drop Nuclear Bomb to Destroy Iran Nuclear Facility
US Reportedly Assesses It Would Need to Drop Nuclear Bomb to Destroy Iran Nuclear Facility
115 comments
-
-
If the United States drops a nuke, the world needs to unite against us.
-
The world should do that now.
They kinda already are, looking at Gaza vote in UN.
-
Eh, if threatening nukes and vetoing Gaza ceasefires in the UN is all the justification we need, then we all should have united against China and Russia. That's the real crux of the issue, here, is that even as the USA is spiraling it's really only as bad as the other two top military powers at worst.
-
-
The right has been talking about nuking the Middle East for decades. They now have “one of theirs” (a “common man” who believes in the things the common MAGA believes), who is just stupid enough to actually do it. I’m taking things day by day.
-
Maybe we need to unite against ourselves too, can’t just hope on others to do the right thing, gotta pitch in.
-
Correct. Im sure half the country will join the resistance and fight from within. We do need to handle our own, but im talking about nukes.
-
-
-
-
Sorry the be pedantic, but why not link the original source?
Since it’s their inside sources.
-
Especially, because the original article states „Trump is not considering using a tactical nuclear weapon on Fordow and the possibility was not presented by defense secretary Pete Hegseth and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff Gen Dan Caine in meetings in the White House situation room, two people familiar with the matter said.“ while the linked article here implies that this option is considered.
-
Exactly. Hence the importance of linking the original source…
-
I can't understand why anyone would believe anything a tangerine tyrant says he will or won't do, until we see it happen or not.
-
-
Did you even read the article you linked? The fuckin "source" you got your panties in a bunch over arent even cited beyond, "according to people familiar with the deliberations." They dont even say its their own source in their own article you dolt.
-
"according to people familiar with the deliberations."
Afaik that is synonymous/how journalist say "inside source".
-
To expand on Shrubbery, you can read the Guardian’s editorial standards and the base ones they follow: https://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Guardian/documents/2011/08/08/EditorialGuidelinesAug2011.pdf
according to people familiar with the…
In journalism, this is common lingo for “our journalists personally communicated with sources (more that one) that wish to remain anonymous.” It’s the guardian's legwork and integrity for shielding anon sources here, not them copying it from some other site (which they'd link if they did).
-
-
-
What a shitty country.
-
Trump cheated to win the election. Most Americans are against him.
edit: I'm not just saying this, there's evidence to suggest it
However, yes, the country is shit right now. I agree.
-
Most Americans might be against him, but the majority of those that voted voted for him. People's apathy and the DNC continually being useless helped Trump win.
-
Most Americans are against him.
I'll believe it when I see it. What I see is Trump and his ICE Brownshorts running all over the place with almost zero resistance.
-
Lol. No. Fsce rey reality of your country, otherwise you'll be unable to fix it.
-
He has an almost 50% approval rating from Americans so while you’re technically correct, that’s still a ridiculous amount of Americans who like him
-
The only voter demographic that saw a decrease in the last election compared to 2016 was white men. If you’re going to cry “rigged election,” then you’re undermining democracy in exactly the same way the MAGA crowd does.
-
-
-
Trump is as dumb as a sack of hammers, and he’s looking for a nail. He just wants to treat nukes like playthings, a rich man’s flex. Just to say he did. Like a canned trophy hunt of a Lion from the safety of helicopters and trucks with everyone around him at his paid service. No risk, no personal jeopardy. Drop the bomb for lols just to experience the fact he did it and will brag about it.
-
-
If he drops a nuke, he instantly becomes the most dangerous man in history, they only guy willing to use a nuke for normal war purposes (for which there are nearly infinite alternative options), and to flex his ego (which has no limit). Now when he threatens a country, they will have to believe him, because he's done it before.
With that in mind, I would think nearly every nation with a highly organized covert intelligence service would decide that it's time to remove that threat from the planet.
-
-
That oompa lumpa of ours just wants to drop a nuke. I vote we not and tell him we did. Also all of his press conferences and appearances henceforth will be accompanied by a 90's sitcom style laugh track.
-
We could just show him videos of nuclear tests and he would probably fall for it. Fucking idiot.
-
Jokes and laugh tracks are how humans normalize things, if anything it needs to begin with ’attention bajoran workers’ and some eerie music.
-
-
It is so odd that this info being publicized...
-
They are trying to scare Iran into giving into what they want.
He thinks this is a genius plan.
It's stupid.
-
He will chicken out and give the nukes to them... And call it the most brilliant thing anyone has ever done
-
-
they just want to test how much public outcry there would be
-
-
Seems to me, like there is EXTREMELY, next to zero, or perhaps zero reason to ever HAVE to use a nuke. Nuke's should be a defensive deterrent, not a first choice. I'm sure the military has plenty of other options.
-
If you are not ready to use a nuke ever, it stops being a deterrent. Game theory.
But this situation is not the kind where a nuke is used as a deterrent. If Israel was saying they're sorry and asking for ceasefire, while Iranians would be absolutely destroying what remains of it and not listening, then yes.
Or, if Iran had a nuke and Israelis were succeeding in destroying Iran.
But neither are true.
-
There are 13k ton bombs that can penetrate pretty deep dropped by B2 bombers, which might be headed to the ME right now.
-
The B2s will be flown into Diego Garcia. The only time they will be in the middle east is if they are over a target. Hopefully they stay in Diego Garcia.
-
-
I’m sure the military has plenty of other options.
The other option is the GBU-57 bunker buster bombs, which is what they used - but a single bomb like that isn’t capable of reaching deep enough on its own. So they had to use a significant portion of their stockpile to achieve their objective that way.
The alternative would have been to drop in special forces and have them break into the heavily defended facility the traditional way.
-
Oh honey, read some of the norbert weiner type of nuke cult guys, and their Soviet counterparts.
This is a rabbit hole nobody wants anybody to ho down.
-
-
Indeed, on Tuesday Trump said, “I don’t care” that the U.S. intelligence community has assessed that Iran isn’t building a nuclear weapon, according to his own top intelligence official.
-
Well, they did it. Now Iran will lash out and close the straits of Hormuz. It's the only threat that they can carry out now...
-
US Reportedly Assesses It Would Need to Drop Nuclear Bomb to Destroy Iran Nuclear Facility
Well, they did it.
No they didn't. It was conventional bombs, not nuclear.
-
Sorry forgot about the nuclear bit of the bomb. Regardless, I want to be drafted into the psychic corps for the upcoming world war regardless of talent
-
-
-
Pakistan saying they would nuke Israel if Israel nuked Iran probably was the only thing holding Israel back from pulling the trigger. If there was ever a group of people who should never be permitted to have nuclear weapons, its the Israelis.
-
President Donald Trump is not considering using a nuclear weapon, The Guardian reported on Wednesday
There’s no need to lose one’s mind over this. The headline isn’t saying a nuke should be used - it’s simply pointing out that a nuclear weapon would be the only thing capable of reaching a facility buried that deep under a mountain. The next best option would be the GBU-57 bunker-buster, but the U.S. would need to use a significant portion of its stockpile, since you’d have to hit the same spot multiple times to drill that deep. And even then, you’d likely only damage one section of the facility, with other parts protected behind blast doors.
-
Trump isn't "considering" anything. He's not a rational actor, he's a narcissistic egomaniac, unable to ask or take advice, unable to think about anything that isn't about how cool he is perceived.
-
So basically the won't destroy it and Iran will though horrible expensive an even deeper facilty and go for the bomb, now for real.
-
-
Yeah no hipocrisy and double standards whatsoever /s
-
US reportedly also forgets the arithmetic of AD and MD efficiency, and the fact that there are countries capable of nuking it in response, and in case it uses a nuke against Iran those will multiply like mushrooms after a rain.
-
If they use a nuke on Iran then Russia will start popping a bunch of them on Ukraine. Maybe that's Putin's plan all along, get Trump to drop a nuke so it becomes a free for all.
Anyways, hope you know where your nuclear shelter is and you like canned food and iodine tablets.
-
I live in Russia, in Moscow, in a kinda golden (in Stalin's time) place, so the shelter is right under me, its ventilation shaft exit is near the playground.
The problem is - nobody knows how the hell do you get in.
I do like canned food. I even had a small stockpile in 2022 when I thought things had gotten real and it's time to prepare. Have eaten through it.
If it becomes a free for all, though, hiding from the physical effects will be easier than hiding from the social ones.
-
-
What do those acronyms mean
-
Air defense, missile defense
-
-
-
I checked if this was the onion after reading the title
-
I would have to think using nukes on a country that doesn't have nuclear power would be a slam dunk illegal order. Like, I mean, if he says to do it, the guys that make that happen, top to bottom, should say, "No, this is an illegal order, and i am not going to follow it."
If such an order is followed and nothing is forthcoming from some checking force in the federal government, I think i may have lost faith in humanity as a concept. This is the great filter. Can we be trusted as a species?
-
Upfront: it should be obvious that no sane person wants us to drop a nuke or thinks there's any connotation of "okay" to any aspect of it.
Why do you think it would be an illegal order? There are very clear rules on what makes an order legal or not and, horribly, attacking a nation that poses no real threat isn't on the list. What nations we attack is a policy matter, and the rules are very clear that the military doesn't get a say in policy.
Explicitly targeting civilians for a strike on a city is where the line would be. Targeting something else in the city and deciding the civilians are acceptable collateral damage is right on the line. Legally, it's entirely unambiguously evil morally.There are checks that keep the president from unilaterally launching a nuke. Unfortunately, the intent of those is to ensure the president is legally competent and actually the president, not to ensure he's wise or rational.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Hering
The system has been explicitly designed to minimize the risk of conscience preventing a launch. Issue training orders where the firing crews have no idea if it's real or not. Keep them on two week rotations where they don't have access to the outside world so they wouldn't know. Specifically select for people who will follow the order because it's validcand legal, without considering the greater context. People who are legitimately confused but ultimately unconcerned with protests against them specifically doing what they do, including clergy from their own religion. (Actual story of an ICBM operators reaction to nuns protesting and attempting to block access to the missile site he was stationed at)
There is no doubt in my mind that if the order were given and the VP and cabinet didn't remove him, that the order would be followed.
-
I mean, technically, Congress has to declare wars. But no president cared about this since WW2
-
I suppose what I mean is that he doesn't just have a big red button on his desk labeled Iran that he can press when he chooses.
We've stood up a system over many years, and he's just barrelled through every norm/law/etc. up to and including having his sentence reduced to 0 on felonies, simply because he's a politician. If we cannot protect ourselves from this man launching a nuclear weapon, or even hold him responsible, then we don't deserve to survive beyond our planet and the resulting catastrophic collapse of society may be the best thing for the universe overall.
-
People think everything they don't like is illegal.
-
-
-
Dumbo with the big ears is pulling the strings of the empty-headed Scarecrow.
-
Don't let Kegseth drunk drop it
-
Shit who's this vputin guy in our group chat?
-
-
Western humanity at play
-
Humanity? I didn't have a say in any of this shit.
But I have to ask, why is it that easterners are so ready to blame everyone on this side of the world in bulk every time? I've even heard "the hubris of the west". No, fuck that, the hubris of the few in the West.
Do you realize there's more going on than the US over here? If you mean the US administration, then say the US administration. Why involve everyone else?
-
I get tired of people in the US and in Europe always flexing on others and always playing the moral high ground. Of course, this is not everyone but I see it enough.
Meanwhile, many of these people cheer for Israel and other western countries whenever in a conflict and always make excuses for why it's "good".
I will admit, looking at the polls people seem to finally be shifting away from some of these notions.
I know I threw a slogan out, so I won't actually blame everyone, but some acknowledgement of the wrongs would be nice by those who insist the west is better than everyone else.
-
-
-
What if you bomb the entrances?
-
It would help to some extent, but they’d have to keep bombing the facility consistently - and indefinitely - to keep it out of service.
-
I wonder what the rate of bombing would be needed to keep up with modern excavation techniques. Though I imagine there are too many variables to say anything meaningful.
-
-
-
-
None of us really have any power to change what's coming. It is what it is.
I like to take comfort in the fact climate change is going to collapse civilization and drive the human race to functional extinction anyway, so none of this really matters.
Let the nukes fly. Better to die in a fireball than from starvation.
LFG.
-
Someone got a few inches away from changing it, fwiw. Get your ecofascist doomer shit out of here.
-
115 comments
Trump just desperately wants to nuke something. Anything's fine, he just wants to drop a nuclear bomb on stuff. I mean, he was floating nuking a goddamned hurricane before.
He's like a toddler that sees a big red button and just HAS to push it, because it's just there and it's so big and red and it will make things go boom!
While you're not wrong, in general, I personally think this might be an excuse for us not to bomb the place. Trump has got himself caught in a civil war between his own cult members, and he hates not being at the center of attention and obeyed unconditionally. This might be a way to placate both sides. He can tell the pro-war side that he can't use a weapon that'll do the job, and he can tell the no-war side that he's not gonna nuke it.
That way the Orange Jackass can wrench the conversation back to about how "he's more peaceful than anyone's ever seen before" or whatever bullshit he decides to vomit up.
You're giving him waaay too much credit.
All he does is rant and complain, while doing what the Heritage Foundation people tell him to sign.
It isn't anything more complicated than that.
Not even a complete day later and we've used B2 bombers to bomb them
This aged poorly lol
Tucker is only against this because he’s been paid by Putin right?
I assumed most of the Magats that are against the bombing Iran are paid shills. What’s Tim Pool’s take on it? (Disclaimer, I actually couldn’t give two shits what any of them think, we should be negotiating and solve this like fucking adults).
I don't trust him not to nuke even NYC.
I don’t disagree with your sentiment, but I think NYC would be off limits because it’s his “home” where he “has the tallest building because of 9/11” and other dumbass beliefs. Basically, he wouldn’t want to harm his precious Trump Tower.
LA though? Yeah, he might just fuckin do it.
He should start a youtube channel that tests dropping nukes on various things
Just like the original video for Land Of Confusion where senile Reagan in a hospital bed pushing the NUKE button that's next to the NURSE button.
Not desperate enough, apparently. I’ve yet to see any of the people who were absolutely certain yesterday that a nuke was going to be dropped admit they were wrong.
Project plow share the border?