6 ms·

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.

by ggm 1y ago

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 engineering graduates are women. A somewhat dichotomous economy, when you consider the theocratic restrictions on costume and behaviour.

arandomusername 1y ago
> I wonder if the bunker buster was used Most certainly was. It's underground (Fordow is ~60m?) so it's either that or nukes.
- tehjoker 1y ago
  the bunker buster, if used, will almost certainly be nuclear. estimated tonnage: 300 kt
  - ggm 1y ago
    This is nonsense.
  - arandomusername 1y ago
    The GBU-57 was most likely used, which is non nuclear
  - p_ing 1y ago
    MOP is a conventional weapon, 30,000 lbs. Only the B-2 is rated to carry it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-57A/B_MOP https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-57A/B_MOP
    - xnx 1y ago
      Genuinely surprised that Israel couldn't push one out of their c-130s
      - giantg2 1y ago
        Do they even have access to this variant? I thought they had access to the older ones that weren't as advanced.
        YZF 1y ago
        They do not.
        dingaling 1y ago
        The MOP isn't particularly 'advanced', it's basically refined version of the Korean-vintage Tarzon guided earthquake bombs. It's just too heavy for most military aircraft to carry. The IDF has the F-15I which has a centerline hard point rated for 5,000lb load. That's immense for a fighter but a magnitude too low for the MOP. There are a variety of smaller US penetrating bombs that the F-15 can handle, but they don't have the mass and structure to penetrate as deeply.
      - 1659447091 1y ago
        Don't think the C-130s can fly high enough with a single 30,000lb bomb. The graphic at bbc site show it would be dropped from about 12km (~40,000 ft) in order to gain the speed needed to drive it some 60m underground.
        ahazred8ta 1y ago
        From 40,000 feet, the bomb would take ~ 50 seconds to fall and would impact at mach 1.5.
      - ceejayoz 1y ago
        Israel hasn’t degraded Iranian air defenses that much. The stuff that can’t threaten a F-35 can still trouble a C-130.
  - ranger_danger 1y ago
    > almost certainly be nuclear Source:
  - tehjoker 1y ago
    those of you hating on this comment, the conventional weapons could not possibly work, the facility is too deep
    - tempestn 1y ago
      Even after everyone corrected you with information on the specific ordinance used, you're doubling down?
      - tehjoker 1y ago
        they might be right, but that's why the attack failed and why there's a risk what I said might still come true i was listening to Al Jazeera, one of the DC flaks they interviewed gave an upper estimate of the facility depth as 1000 ft. The conventional device can go to something like 60m or 200 ft. 6 devices were dropped, they would have to have everything, including geology with repeated strikes on the same point, be perfect to get past 1000 feet, and then they probably would not destroy the whole facility. As far as I know, they don't even have a good map of the layout. hence, the only real option is a nuclear weapon. this is absolutely being considered inside the pentagon. our government is psychotic. a 1 kt nuclear weapon (laughably small, hiroshima was 15 kt) is 73x more powerful than a 30,000 lb bomb. they would be like, well, it's an underground explosion! The world will forgive us. it's so crafty and smart to use a nuke to stop a nuke (that doesn't exist). https://x.com/ArmsControlWonk/status/1935741526191100181 https://x.com/ArmsControlWonk/status/1935741526191100181 "The effectiveness of GBU-57s has been a topic of deep contention at the Pentagon since the start of Trump’s term, according to two defense officials who were briefed that perhaps only a tactical nuclear weapon could be capable of destroying Fordow because of how deeply it is located." https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/19/trump-caution-on-iran-strike-linked-to-doubts-over-bunker-buster-bomb-officials-say https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/19/trump-caution-...
        tempestn 1y ago
        Ok, I see the logic, but nuclear weapon use is the brightest red line in the world. If there's anything a government wouldn't be forgiven for, it's that. I can't imagine how the calculus for the US would work out in favor given the risk. (Of course that assumes rationality, which one could certainly argue is lacking, but even still.) Also 1000ft is an upper estimate, right? It's certainly possible the MOPs were sufficient.
- ggm 1y ago
  As I understand it enrichment is by gas centrifuge or thermal diffusion. An earthquake bomb would disrupt both. You wouldn't be starting the feed cycle up rapidly, but since we're told Iran has stockpiles, this goes to sustainable delivery of materials more than specific short term risk. As a strategy, I see this as flawed. A dirty bomb remains viable with partially enriched materials. (This does not mean to imply I support either bombing or production of weapons grade materiel. It's a comment to outcome, not wisdom)
  - arandomusername 1y ago
    Iran is prone to earthquakes, would an earthquake bomb do more damage than that? Even if it just damages the centrifuges, as far as I see it, it would just delay their enrichment process, severely less than total destruction of their underground base.
    - ggm 1y ago
      Yes that's basically my point. They recalibrate, tighten the pipes, and flush the contamination back out of the chain. 6 to 8 weeks/days/whatever later it's back in cycle.
      - firesteelrain 1y ago
        If they can even get back in
  - gh02t 1y ago
    Uranium, especially highly enriched uranium, is not very radioactive. That's one of the reasons its useful for weapons. UF6 is chemically really nasty, but it's heavy and also you have criticality issues that limit how much you can pack into a confined space before it explosively disassembles. That is to say, it would make an extremely poor dirty bomb that would do very little. It'd scare people of course but there are far easier things they could use to achieve that. Far more concerning is the possibility that they give it away to someone else. Enrichment is nonlinear, going from 60% to the 90% needed for weapons is a fairly trivial amount of work.
- nopelynopington 1y ago
  Whatever about bombing Iran with conventional weapons, being the first president since Truman to nuke another country would split Trumps support base, and also legitimize using nuclear weapons in regional conflicts which would be extremely bad news for Ukraine
PaulHoule 1y ago
When I was doing a postdoc in Germany I shared an office with a woman from Morocco so my office was a meeting point for many islamic woman including one from Iran who complained bitterly about how women were treated in her country but who did get the opportunity to get an advanced education.
- megous 1y ago
  How is this relevant to Trump bombing Iran?
  - bigyabai 1y ago
    It's the most-salient comment you can write without being [flagged] [dead] for "off-topic" conversation.
    - PaulHoule 1y ago
      The parent post was about Iranian women jobs getting jobs in engineering. Whatever restrictions are on them, they don't seem to have trouble getting STEM education.
      - owebmaster 1y ago
        You said it in a way that sounded like no woman is oppressed if they can get high level education.
        anonymars 1y ago
        I took the contradiction as the point: that they are oppressed and yet, surprisingly, not with respect to educational opportunity > including one from Iran who complained bitterly about how women were treated in her country but who did get the opportunity to get an advanced education
  - jordanb 1y ago
    Consent isn't going to manufacture itself.
FridayoLeary 1y ago
Thanks for trying to make this into a technical discussion. I just realised that this bomb is not the same as the so called Mother of all bombs, which by the way has so far only been used once also by trump. That's the gbu 43. Why did they find it necessary to build an even bigger bomb? I wonder if they anticipated strikes on the me. As to your other point iran seems to have a decent level of education. Building an entire home grown nuclear program under sanctions is impressive.
- ggm 1y ago
  Different outcomes. Moab is fuel air explosion and causes massive pressure wave disruption, it's usable against tunnels but operates on a different principle. Bunker buster is an earth penetration weapon to make a camouflet happen and destroy structural integrity.
  - anonymars 1y ago
    Today's word of the day for me https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camouflet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camouflet > A camouflet, in military science, is an artificial cavern created by an explosion; if the resulting structure is open to the surface it is called a crater.[1]
- jandrewrogers 1y ago
  The GBU-57 used here is an outgrowth of the demonstrated inadequacy of traditional bunker busters bombs used in the Middle East after 9/11. They needed something more specialized for deep penetration than the old bunker busters. This was kind of a stopgap weapon that works pretty well but the size limits the practicality. US is developing a new generation of purpose-built deep penetration bombs that are a fraction of the size of the GBU-57.
  - hooo 1y ago
    What’s the core technology that enables them? It is crazy how deep the GBU-57 can get before detonating
Havoc 1y ago
Yup. Twelve at main site two at Natanz
- benwills 1y ago
  I've heard 6 at Fordow, and 30 or so Tomahawks across Natanz and Isfahan.
  - _heimdall 1y ago
    I heard the same as well, the reference was to an interview Trump gave on Fox. My expectation is that it was 3 rounds of 2 MOPs, hedging bets and potentially cresting a larger hole than drilling a hole one bomb at a time.
  - Havoc 1y ago
    They carry 2x each, so 6 planes 12 bombs. And then single plane natanz, 2 bombs
tiffanyh 1y ago
Yes, bunker buster was used. Per a different source: > It included a strike on the heavily-fortified Fordo nuclear site, according to Trump, which is located roughly 300 feet under a mountain about 100 miles south of Tehran. It's a move that Israel has been lobbying the U.S. to carry out, given that only the U.S. has the kind of powerful "bunker buster" bomb capable of reaching the site. Known as the GBU-57 MOP (Massive Ordnance Penetrator), the bomb can only be transported by one specific U.S. warplane, the B-2 stealth bomber, due to its immense 30,000 pound weight. https://www.npr.org/2025/06/21/nx-s1-5441127/iran-us-strike-nuclear-trump https://www.npr.org/2025/06/21/nx-s1-5441127/iran-us-strike-...
- throwaway2037 1y ago
  I read the article in full. There is no confirmation of using GBU-57 in the strike. Re-read your quoted section. The English is a bit convoluted, but does do not confirm usage. Tin foil hat engaged: For all we know special forces detonated plastic explosives deep on site after doors were blown off. More seriously: Nothing has been confirmed except a Truth Social post.
  - firesteelrain 1y ago
    It’s the only bomb types that make sense given how deep Fordow is buried
coliveira 1y ago
Bunker buster is not necessarily a solution for this. It was created for normal bunkers, WW2 style of construction. What they have in Iran are construction sites very deep in the mountains. I wouldn't be surprised if this type of bombs can't do more than superficial damage to the sites.
- trhway 1y ago
  GBU-57 reaches 200ft depth, Fordow is 300ft. The seismic wave of explosion at 200ft of several tons of TNT would reach 300ft with pretty damaging energy. And, if it weren't enough, you can always put a second bomb into the hole made by the first one. To the commenters below: - nobody would let Iran to come even close to remilitarizing again. No centrifuges, and no placing them or anything similar under ground, etc. - I do think that US may get involved in enforcement of no-fly zone over Iran. The no-fly is necessary, and Israel just doesn't have enough resources. The further scenario that i see is https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44343063 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44343063 - jugding by, for example, the precise drone strikes on the top military commanders, Israel has had very good intelligence from Iran, so i'm pretty sure that general parameters like the depth were well known to them (the public statement of 300ft may be a lie, yet the point is that US and Israel know the depth and thus weapons to use)
  - SllX 1y ago
    Supposedly we dropped six, but I'm interested in any information that comes out about the final damage to see if this was sufficient. Ideally this would be the beginning and end of our direct engagements in this conflict. EDIT: I kind of wish you had broken your "commenters below" piece into separate replies, but I assume this one was directed at me: > - I do think that US may get involved in enforcement of no-fly zone over Iran. The no-fly is necessary, and Israel just doesn't have enough resources. The further scenario that i see is https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44343063 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44343063 I didn't even consider a no-fly zone, and perhaps. I mean at this point, the current Iranian regime is in the most precarious situation it has ever been in whether they go for the kill against Ali Khamenei or just keep picking out the people below him and the IRGC's ability to fight. But if we do this, then we, and I guess I mean we now that we've actually bombed them, then we're committing to more than just taking out their nuclear capabilities, but we're committing to seeing a full regime change come to fruition. To be blunt, given our most recent history in Iraq and Afghanistan, I'm still very much of the opinion that the least amount of American involvement, the better. If our bombs help curtail Iran's nuclear weapon R&D and we didn't lose a single B-2 in the process, then great, we've done some good for the world[1], but our track record on seeing regime changes through to the end has been less than fabulous. [1] Still waiting to see how successful the mission was towards this goal by the way.
coliveira 1y ago
[flagged]
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
jmyeet 1y ago
So facts are thin on the ground currently. More will become clear in the coming days. I've heard different accounts all the way from 12 bunker busters were used on Fordo to none were used and the entrance was bombed after Iran was warne, kinda like a warning shot, to say "we can get you". What Iran does next depends on the extent of the damage. It could be nothing. It could be a token response. It could be escalation. But so far Iran has been the only rational actor in this region. Iran has been attacked with justification. Anytime someone says "preemptive strike" they mean "attack without justification". Their responses have been measured, rational, justified and proportionate. When Israel tried to previously escalate the conflict with Iran and drag the US into war with Iran, Iran just didn't take the bait. And this is despite Israel assassinating government officials, bombing Iranian embassies and bombing Iran for absolutely no reason.
- tbrownaw 1y ago
  > But so far Iran has been the only rational actor in this region. Iran has been attacked with justification. Anytime someone says "preemptive strike" they mean "attack without justification". Their responses have been measured, rational, justified and proportionate. Either I'm misunderstanding (or misreading) something, or at least one of these sentences accidentallied a negation.
tbrownaw 1y ago
> 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 places with higher disparities in well-paying occupations?
- senderista 1y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-equality_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-equality_paradox
tptacek 1y ago
CNN reports 12 GBU-57s were dropped on Fordow. Can I say again how deeply silly this munition is? What's special about a GBU-57 isn't its explosive force. It's that the bomb casing is made out of special high-density ultra-heavy steel; it's deliberately just a super heavy bomb with a delayed fuse. It is literally like them dropping cartoon anvils out of the sky. From what I've read, the idea is that they keep dropping bombs into the same bomb-hole that previous sorties left, each round of bombs drilling deeper into the structure.
- stogot 1y ago
  So many armchair quarterbacks in this thread. You haven’t defined how silly this is beyond your feelings. Are you a munition expert? If you were an AF general given this order, what tactic would you choose excluding a nuke? The same bomb hole tactic is an untested theory (which may be ineffective but not silly) but we’ll know more later this week once MAXAR surveillance and other independent or IAEA analysis rolls in.
  - tptacek 1y ago
    I'm not an expert. I just think dropping giant anvils from the sky is Loony Toons tactics. Maybe it works great! I don't know! But it's worth knowing how these things work, and how they work is: they're just super super heavy.
  - Dylan16807 1y ago
    You are reading the wordy "silly" incorrectly.
- ReptileMan 1y ago
  >Can I say again how deeply silly this munition is? If it is silly and it works, then it is not silly. If I remember correctly you have good cryptography skills. Rectothermal/rubber hose cryptoanalysis is quite silly too, but breaks AES,RSA,ECC and post quantum crypto schemes in 30 seconds.
- foobarian 1y ago
  > keep dropping bombs into the same bomb-hole I wonder how practical this part is.
hwillis 1y ago
> 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. Iran does not have the same degree of sexist restrictions as eg Saudi Arabia. It's a very different climate from places where salafism is more common. Female education in particular is highly supported eg: https://x.com/khamenei_ir/status/1869369086142296490 https://x.com/khamenei_ir/status/1869369086142296490
missedthecue 1y ago
By a wide margin, the majority of Iranian university students are women. The ratio is over 60/40
- Narretz 1y ago
  I guess because many men are needed for the IRGC and related organisations.
  - inglor_cz 1y ago
    I doubt that the intersection of IRGC volunteers and potential university students is too big. The gender ratio is similar in other Middle Eastern countries. Once women in the Islamic world get the legal right to educate themselves, they tend to make use of it much more than men do. It is a pathway towards personal independence.
    - Slava_Propanei 1y ago
      [dead]

by ggm 1y ago

arandomusername 1y ago

> I wonder if the bunker buster was used Most certainly was. It's underground (Fordow is ~60m?) so it's either that or nukes.

tehjoker 1y ago
the bunker buster, if used, will almost certainly be nuclear. estimated tonnage: 300 kt
- ggm 1y ago
  This is nonsense.
- arandomusername 1y ago
  The GBU-57 was most likely used, which is non nuclear
- p_ing 1y ago
  MOP is a conventional weapon, 30,000 lbs. Only the B-2 is rated to carry it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-57A/B_MOP https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-57A/B_MOP
  - xnx 1y ago
    Genuinely surprised that Israel couldn't push one out of their c-130s
    - giantg2 1y ago
      Do they even have access to this variant? I thought they had access to the older ones that weren't as advanced.
      - YZF 1y ago
        They do not.
      - dingaling 1y ago
        The MOP isn't particularly 'advanced', it's basically refined version of the Korean-vintage Tarzon guided earthquake bombs. It's just too heavy for most military aircraft to carry. The IDF has the F-15I which has a centerline hard point rated for 5,000lb load. That's immense for a fighter but a magnitude too low for the MOP. There are a variety of smaller US penetrating bombs that the F-15 can handle, but they don't have the mass and structure to penetrate as deeply.
    - 1659447091 1y ago
      Don't think the C-130s can fly high enough with a single 30,000lb bomb. The graphic at bbc site show it would be dropped from about 12km (~40,000 ft) in order to gain the speed needed to drive it some 60m underground.
      - ahazred8ta 1y ago
        From 40,000 feet, the bomb would take ~ 50 seconds to fall and would impact at mach 1.5.
    - ceejayoz 1y ago
      Israel hasn’t degraded Iranian air defenses that much. The stuff that can’t threaten a F-35 can still trouble a C-130.
- ranger_danger 1y ago
  > almost certainly be nuclear Source:
- tehjoker 1y ago
  those of you hating on this comment, the conventional weapons could not possibly work, the facility is too deep
  - tempestn 1y ago
    Even after everyone corrected you with information on the specific ordinance used, you're doubling down?
    - tehjoker 1y ago
      they might be right, but that's why the attack failed and why there's a risk what I said might still come true i was listening to Al Jazeera, one of the DC flaks they interviewed gave an upper estimate of the facility depth as 1000 ft. The conventional device can go to something like 60m or 200 ft. 6 devices were dropped, they would have to have everything, including geology with repeated strikes on the same point, be perfect to get past 1000 feet, and then they probably would not destroy the whole facility. As far as I know, they don't even have a good map of the layout. hence, the only real option is a nuclear weapon. this is absolutely being considered inside the pentagon. our government is psychotic. a 1 kt nuclear weapon (laughably small, hiroshima was 15 kt) is 73x more powerful than a 30,000 lb bomb. they would be like, well, it's an underground explosion! The world will forgive us. it's so crafty and smart to use a nuke to stop a nuke (that doesn't exist). https://x.com/ArmsControlWonk/status/1935741526191100181 https://x.com/ArmsControlWonk/status/1935741526191100181 "The effectiveness of GBU-57s has been a topic of deep contention at the Pentagon since the start of Trump’s term, according to two defense officials who were briefed that perhaps only a tactical nuclear weapon could be capable of destroying Fordow because of how deeply it is located." https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/19/trump-caution-on-iran-strike-linked-to-doubts-over-bunker-buster-bomb-officials-say https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/19/trump-caution-...
      - tempestn 1y ago
        Ok, I see the logic, but nuclear weapon use is the brightest red line in the world. If there's anything a government wouldn't be forgiven for, it's that. I can't imagine how the calculus for the US would work out in favor given the risk. (Of course that assumes rationality, which one could certainly argue is lacking, but even still.) Also 1000ft is an upper estimate, right? It's certainly possible the MOPs were sufficient.
ggm 1y ago
As I understand it enrichment is by gas centrifuge or thermal diffusion. An earthquake bomb would disrupt both. You wouldn't be starting the feed cycle up rapidly, but since we're told Iran has stockpiles, this goes to sustainable delivery of materials more than specific short term risk. As a strategy, I see this as flawed. A dirty bomb remains viable with partially enriched materials. (This does not mean to imply I support either bombing or production of weapons grade materiel. It's a comment to outcome, not wisdom)
- arandomusername 1y ago
  Iran is prone to earthquakes, would an earthquake bomb do more damage than that? Even if it just damages the centrifuges, as far as I see it, it would just delay their enrichment process, severely less than total destruction of their underground base.
  - ggm 1y ago
    Yes that's basically my point. They recalibrate, tighten the pipes, and flush the contamination back out of the chain. 6 to 8 weeks/days/whatever later it's back in cycle.
    - firesteelrain 1y ago
      If they can even get back in
- gh02t 1y ago
  Uranium, especially highly enriched uranium, is not very radioactive. That's one of the reasons its useful for weapons. UF6 is chemically really nasty, but it's heavy and also you have criticality issues that limit how much you can pack into a confined space before it explosively disassembles. That is to say, it would make an extremely poor dirty bomb that would do very little. It'd scare people of course but there are far easier things they could use to achieve that. Far more concerning is the possibility that they give it away to someone else. Enrichment is nonlinear, going from 60% to the 90% needed for weapons is a fairly trivial amount of work.
nopelynopington 1y ago
Whatever about bombing Iran with conventional weapons, being the first president since Truman to nuke another country would split Trumps support base, and also legitimize using nuclear weapons in regional conflicts which would be extremely bad news for Ukraine

PaulHoule 1y ago

When I was doing a postdoc in Germany I shared an office with a woman from Morocco so my office was a meeting point for many islamic woman including one from Iran who complained bitterly about how women were treated in her country but who did get the opportunity to get an advanced education.

megous 1y ago
How is this relevant to Trump bombing Iran?
- bigyabai 1y ago
  It's the most-salient comment you can write without being [flagged] [dead] for "off-topic" conversation.
  - PaulHoule 1y ago
    The parent post was about Iranian women jobs getting jobs in engineering. Whatever restrictions are on them, they don't seem to have trouble getting STEM education.
    - owebmaster 1y ago
      You said it in a way that sounded like no woman is oppressed if they can get high level education.
      - anonymars 1y ago
        I took the contradiction as the point: that they are oppressed and yet, surprisingly, not with respect to educational opportunity > including one from Iran who complained bitterly about how women were treated in her country but who did get the opportunity to get an advanced education
- jordanb 1y ago
  Consent isn't going to manufacture itself.

FridayoLeary 1y ago

Thanks for trying to make this into a technical discussion. I just realised that this bomb is not the same as the so called Mother of all bombs, which by the way has so far only been used once also by trump. That's the gbu 43. Why did they find it necessary to build an even bigger bomb? I wonder if they anticipated strikes on the me. As to your other point iran seems to have a decent level of education. Building an entire home grown nuclear program under sanctions is impressive.

ggm 1y ago
Different outcomes. Moab is fuel air explosion and causes massive pressure wave disruption, it's usable against tunnels but operates on a different principle. Bunker buster is an earth penetration weapon to make a camouflet happen and destroy structural integrity.
- anonymars 1y ago
  Today's word of the day for me https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camouflet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camouflet > A camouflet, in military science, is an artificial cavern created by an explosion; if the resulting structure is open to the surface it is called a crater.[1]
jandrewrogers 1y ago
The GBU-57 used here is an outgrowth of the demonstrated inadequacy of traditional bunker busters bombs used in the Middle East after 9/11. They needed something more specialized for deep penetration than the old bunker busters. This was kind of a stopgap weapon that works pretty well but the size limits the practicality. US is developing a new generation of purpose-built deep penetration bombs that are a fraction of the size of the GBU-57.
- hooo 1y ago
  What’s the core technology that enables them? It is crazy how deep the GBU-57 can get before detonating

Havoc 1y ago

Yup. Twelve at main site two at Natanz

benwills 1y ago
I've heard 6 at Fordow, and 30 or so Tomahawks across Natanz and Isfahan.
- _heimdall 1y ago
  I heard the same as well, the reference was to an interview Trump gave on Fox. My expectation is that it was 3 rounds of 2 MOPs, hedging bets and potentially cresting a larger hole than drilling a hole one bomb at a time.
- Havoc 1y ago
  They carry 2x each, so 6 planes 12 bombs. And then single plane natanz, 2 bombs

tiffanyh 1y ago

Yes, bunker buster was used. Per a different source: > It included a strike on the heavily-fortified Fordo nuclear site, according to Trump, which is located roughly 300 feet under a mountain about 100 miles south of Tehran. It's a move that Israel has been lobbying the U.S. to carry out, given that only the U.S. has the kind of powerful "bunker buster" bomb capable of reaching the site. Known as the GBU-57 MOP (Massive Ordnance Penetrator), the bomb can only be transported by one specific U.S. warplane, the B-2 stealth bomber, due to its immense 30,000 pound weight. https://www.npr.org/2025/06/21/nx-s1-5441127/iran-us-strike-nuclear-trump https://www.npr.org/2025/06/21/nx-s1-5441127/iran-us-strike-...

throwaway2037 1y ago
I read the article in full. There is no confirmation of using GBU-57 in the strike. Re-read your quoted section. The English is a bit convoluted, but does do not confirm usage. Tin foil hat engaged: For all we know special forces detonated plastic explosives deep on site after doors were blown off. More seriously: Nothing has been confirmed except a Truth Social post.
- firesteelrain 1y ago
  It’s the only bomb types that make sense given how deep Fordow is buried

coliveira 1y ago

Bunker buster is not necessarily a solution for this. It was created for normal bunkers, WW2 style of construction. What they have in Iran are construction sites very deep in the mountains. I wouldn't be surprised if this type of bombs can't do more than superficial damage to the sites.

trhway 1y ago
GBU-57 reaches 200ft depth, Fordow is 300ft. The seismic wave of explosion at 200ft of several tons of TNT would reach 300ft with pretty damaging energy. And, if it weren't enough, you can always put a second bomb into the hole made by the first one. To the commenters below: - nobody would let Iran to come even close to remilitarizing again. No centrifuges, and no placing them or anything similar under ground, etc. - I do think that US may get involved in enforcement of no-fly zone over Iran. The no-fly is necessary, and Israel just doesn't have enough resources. The further scenario that i see is https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44343063 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44343063 - jugding by, for example, the precise drone strikes on the top military commanders, Israel has had very good intelligence from Iran, so i'm pretty sure that general parameters like the depth were well known to them (the public statement of 300ft may be a lie, yet the point is that US and Israel know the depth and thus weapons to use)
- SllX 1y ago
  Supposedly we dropped six, but I'm interested in any information that comes out about the final damage to see if this was sufficient. Ideally this would be the beginning and end of our direct engagements in this conflict. EDIT: I kind of wish you had broken your "commenters below" piece into separate replies, but I assume this one was directed at me: > - I do think that US may get involved in enforcement of no-fly zone over Iran. The no-fly is necessary, and Israel just doesn't have enough resources. The further scenario that i see is https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44343063 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44343063 I didn't even consider a no-fly zone, and perhaps. I mean at this point, the current Iranian regime is in the most precarious situation it has ever been in whether they go for the kill against Ali Khamenei or just keep picking out the people below him and the IRGC's ability to fight. But if we do this, then we, and I guess I mean we now that we've actually bombed them, then we're committing to more than just taking out their nuclear capabilities, but we're committing to seeing a full regime change come to fruition. To be blunt, given our most recent history in Iraq and Afghanistan, I'm still very much of the opinion that the least amount of American involvement, the better. If our bombs help curtail Iran's nuclear weapon R&D and we didn't lose a single B-2 in the process, then great, we've done some good for the world[1], but our track record on seeing regime changes through to the end has been less than fabulous. [1] Still waiting to see how successful the mission was towards this goal by the way.

coliveira 1y ago

[flagged]

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

jmyeet 1y ago

So facts are thin on the ground currently. More will become clear in the coming days. I've heard different accounts all the way from 12 bunker busters were used on Fordo to none were used and the entrance was bombed after Iran was warne, kinda like a warning shot, to say "we can get you". What Iran does next depends on the extent of the damage. It could be nothing. It could be a token response. It could be escalation. But so far Iran has been the only rational actor in this region. Iran has been attacked with justification. Anytime someone says "preemptive strike" they mean "attack without justification". Their responses have been measured, rational, justified and proportionate. When Israel tried to previously escalate the conflict with Iran and drag the US into war with Iran, Iran just didn't take the bait. And this is despite Israel assassinating government officials, bombing Iranian embassies and bombing Iran for absolutely no reason.

tbrownaw 1y ago
> But so far Iran has been the only rational actor in this region. Iran has been attacked with justification. Anytime someone says "preemptive strike" they mean "attack without justification". Their responses have been measured, rational, justified and proportionate. Either I'm misunderstanding (or misreading) something, or at least one of these sentences accidentallied a negation.

tbrownaw 1y ago

> 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 places with higher disparities in well-paying occupations?

senderista 1y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-equality_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-equality_paradox

tptacek 1y ago

CNN reports 12 GBU-57s were dropped on Fordow. Can I say again how deeply silly this munition is? What's special about a GBU-57 isn't its explosive force. It's that the bomb casing is made out of special high-density ultra-heavy steel; it's deliberately just a super heavy bomb with a delayed fuse. It is literally like them dropping cartoon anvils out of the sky. From what I've read, the idea is that they keep dropping bombs into the same bomb-hole that previous sorties left, each round of bombs drilling deeper into the structure.

stogot 1y ago
So many armchair quarterbacks in this thread. You haven’t defined how silly this is beyond your feelings. Are you a munition expert? If you were an AF general given this order, what tactic would you choose excluding a nuke? The same bomb hole tactic is an untested theory (which may be ineffective but not silly) but we’ll know more later this week once MAXAR surveillance and other independent or IAEA analysis rolls in.
- tptacek 1y ago
  I'm not an expert. I just think dropping giant anvils from the sky is Loony Toons tactics. Maybe it works great! I don't know! But it's worth knowing how these things work, and how they work is: they're just super super heavy.
- Dylan16807 1y ago
  You are reading the wordy "silly" incorrectly.
ReptileMan 1y ago
>Can I say again how deeply silly this munition is? If it is silly and it works, then it is not silly. If I remember correctly you have good cryptography skills. Rectothermal/rubber hose cryptoanalysis is quite silly too, but breaks AES,RSA,ECC and post quantum crypto schemes in 30 seconds.
foobarian 1y ago
> keep dropping bombs into the same bomb-hole I wonder how practical this part is.

hwillis 1y ago

> 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. Iran does not have the same degree of sexist restrictions as eg Saudi Arabia. It's a very different climate from places where salafism is more common. Female education in particular is highly supported eg: https://x.com/khamenei_ir/status/1869369086142296490 https://x.com/khamenei_ir/status/1869369086142296490

missedthecue 1y ago

By a wide margin, the majority of Iranian university students are women. The ratio is over 60/40

Narretz 1y ago
I guess because many men are needed for the IRGC and related organisations.
- inglor_cz 1y ago
  I doubt that the intersection of IRGC volunteers and potential university students is too big. The gender ratio is similar in other Middle Eastern countries. Once women in the Islamic world get the legal right to educate themselves, they tend to make use of it much more than men do. It is a pathway towards personal independence.
  - Slava_Propanei 1y ago
    [dead]