3 ms·
This headline has been circulating but it's "technically correct but entirely wrong". You don't destroy a facility by bombing through concrete and exploding it
by vorpalhex 1y ago
This headline has been circulating but it's "technically correct but entirely wrong".
You don't destroy a facility by bombing through concrete and exploding it. This isn't an action movie.
You overpressure the structure with a shockwave.
By targeting the vents, we've produced a 200m crater showing that the shockwave did violate the facilities containment. That place is gone.
This is the same sort of silly as "but they didn't blow up the reactors!" No, they intentionally avoided them to avoid throwing radiological material into civilian areas.
We can detect a pencil size rod of uranium from satellite and plane - because we've informed countries when they have had radiological leaks. If Iran moved any meaningful material (doubtful, uranium is hard to transport when enriched..) then the US knows where.
- adrianN 1y agoCan we detect uranium when it is transported in shielded containers?
- vorpalhex 1y agoIt's uranium gas (because this is part of enriching) so it has to be shielded gas containers. Those require special handling. If they had moved a few KG it's reasonable for the containers to be heavily shielded but 400KG? Not a chance, that would be hundreds of trucks and tons of specialized equipment.
- Akasazh 1y agoOk. So it's just tactical that the commander in chief foreshadowed the bombing?
- vorpalhex 1y ago1. With 40+ refueling craft in the air, everybody understood what was happening 2. The facilities are dual use. Bombing IRGC is fair game, bombing Bobby the Janitor or James the Steam Engineer is not. Giving a warning so personnel can evac is normal.