• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The United States and the World can not take the risk whether Iran has a Nuke or Not

Pyrite said:
Yeah, but not at all for Fordo/Fordow.

Post #141

So you say. But the IDF seems to have a slightly-different version: the F-15I.

`````````````````````````````````````

www.businessinsider.com

Israel's trying to wipe out Iran's nuke program. It won't be an easy kill.

Iran has many scientists with nuclear expertise and has stored its most critical facilities in bunkers that may be beyond the reach of Israel's bombs.
www.businessinsider.com www.businessinsider.com

June 13, 2025

...However, military and nuclear experts say firepower alone won't be enough to completely wipe out Iran's nuclear program....[Iran] has stored its most critical facilities in bunkers buried deep underground.

This makes the facilities particularly challenging targets that, from the air, can only be reached by the largest bunker busters, which Israel lacks, or repeated strikes in the same spots.

Natanz, home to Iran's largest uranium enrichment site, is located several floors underground in the center of the country. The Israel Defense Forces said its airstrikes damaged an underground area of the facility that contains an enrichment hall with centrifuges, electrical rooms, and additional infrastructure.

Satellite imagery captured on Friday revealed what appears to be significant damage at Natanz, but only on the surface.

Iran's other main enrichment site, Fordow, is buried even deeper in the side of a mountain and is the country's most "hardened" facility, said Darya Dolzikova, a senior research fellow for proliferation and nuclear policy at the UK-based Royal United Services Institute think tank.

In comments shared with Business Insider, Dolzikova said Fordow has not been affected by the Israeli strikes, nor have other locations. "Should Iran make a decision to produce a nuclear weapon, it would likely do that at hardened and potentially still secret sites," she said.

Later on Friday, Iranian media reported explosions at Fordow, suggesting that Israeli forces may be attacking the site in a new wave of strikes.

It's unclear what air-to-ground munitions Israel used to strike Natanz and the other targets affiliated with Iran's nuclear program. However, it would take a very large bunker-buster bomb to reach underground and destroy the more hardened sites.

The likely best weapon for the job is the US military's GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, one of the most powerful non-nuclear bombs and the largest bunker buster in America's arsenal at 15 tons. These munitions can only be carried by the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber and the B-21 Raider in development.

Israel doesn't have bomber aircraft capable of carrying the largest bunker-buster munitions. The IDF shared footage showing its fighter jets — F-35s, F-16s, and F-15s — taking off and landing during the strikes. Weapons experts pointed out that some of the aircraft appear to be carrying 2,000-pound guided bombs. Israel's F-15I, though, can carry 4,000-pound anti-bunker bombs.

Military analysts with RUSI estimated in March that the Fordow site could be as deep as 260 feet underground, likely beyond the reach of even America's MOP. Damaging it would almost certainly require repeated strikes, likely over days or weeks....
Click to expand...

As the Ukrainians have shown, when there is a burning will there is usually a way. If we are throwing out ideas, here is one possible option:

1) Assume that Israel has 100 percent air security over Fordo, the Iranian SAM sites that can reach 30,000 feet being disabled.

2) Assume that the US does not wish to be directly involved but is willing to supply the 15 ton MOP bombs to Isreal.

3) Israel, in turn, could load it on one of the C130 cargo planes, which have a 20-ton capacity. The plane can reach 30,000 feet (ceiling is 33K). The bomb could be set manually, on a pallet system, and slid out the door at 30,000 feet, its drop altitude.

4) It is guided by GPS and as Iran doesn't have jamming ability, it appears that it could hit its target.

Given that a prop plane is going to be slower and without its own radar jamming, the key to success is 100 percent suppression of nearby SAM batteries.

If Israel wants them then most likely they know how they are going to deliver them.

Finally, even if the complex were too deep it may be that subsurface destruction is sufficient to collapse the entrances that lead to the surface. In otherwards, perhaps it can be "buried alive", entombed in rubble.
 
maxparrish said:
As the Ukrainians have shown, when there is a burning will there is usually a way. If we are throwing out ideas here is one possible option:

1) Assume that Israel has 100 percent air security over Fordo, the SAM sites that can reach 30,000 feet being disabled.

2) Assume that the US does not wish to be directly involved but is willing to supply the 15 ton MOP bomb to Isreal.

3) Israel, in turn, could load it on one of the C130 cargo planes, which have a 20-ton capacity. It can reach 30,000 feet (ceiling is 33K). The bomb could be set manually, on a pallet system, and slid out the door at 30,000 feet, its drop altitude.

4) It is guided by GPS and as Iran doesn't have jamming ability, it appears that it could hit its target.

Given that a prop plane is going to be slower and without its own radar jamming, the key to success is 100 percent suppression of nearby SAM batteries.

If Israel wants them then most likely they know how they are going to deliver them.
Click to expand...
Perhaps trump will go for this option in order to deny that American pilots in American B-2 stealth bombers delivered the American MOP munitions.
 
Pyrite said:
If you can provide that (via copies and pastes of excerpts from credible sources to which you provide the links), I'll gladly correct my records.
Click to expand...
Looking up 15 year old articles will have to wait until tomorrow. I need to get to bed for tonight. But I'll see what I can find tomorrow.
 
VySky said:
Its unacceptable risk.

The point of no return has been crossed.

The United States needs to finish this. We must reach a confidence level to where we can reasonably conclude Iran does hot have a nuclear weapon or the capacity to make one any time soon.

What say you. Is it worth the risk to do nothing?
Click to expand...
Warmonger.
 
RetiredAtLast said:
Had a democracy under the Ayatollahs? Maybe what passed for a Muslim religious "democracy" in the 14th century. Or was that our fault, too?
Click to expand...
Iran certainly had a democracy in 1953 before the US destroyed it....no matter how inconvenient that is for your narrative.
 
BirdinHand said:
Loyalty to Dear Leader above all else, right?

From “stay out of it” a year ago…to cheering for the US to get involved…
Click to expand...
You understand the difference between defensive and offensive ops right?
 
VySky said:
You understand the difference between defensive and offensive ops right?
Click to expand...
Ukraine comes to mind....heck, Iran and Israel don't even share a border.

And how, exactly, does Iran "completely surrender" to Israel or the US....since there is no way for either to put troops there?
 


 
VySky said:
Its unacceptable risk.

The point of no return has been crossed.

The United States needs to finish this. We must reach a confidence level to where we can reasonably conclude Iran does hot have a nuclear weapon or the capacity to make one any time soon.

What say you. Is it worth the risk to do nothing?
Click to expand...

More or less of a risk than N. Korea having a bomb - and estimated 50 of them?

More or less of a risk than Israel having the bomb?

Trump and Bibi are just proving to Iran that the only way to stop the attacks on Iran is for Iran to, you know, have the A-bomb.

Trump by ripping up - wholly unilaterally - ripping up a negotiated deal with Iran and several other countries...so, from Iran's perspective, diplomacy doesn't work.

Bibi by his constant saber rattling and attacks on Iran.
 
VySky said:
You understand the difference between defensive and offensive ops right?
Click to expand...


VySky said:
The United States needs to finish this
Click to expand...

VySky said:
We can’t take the risk. Therefore, bomb and bomb again.
Click to expand...


You want “bomb and bomb again” and the United States to “finish this”

Then you sign up and go “finish it” and “bomb and bomb again”

You can follow Cadet Bone Spurs and Bibi into this bullshit.
 
VySky said:
So its acceptable risk for you then. How else were they planning to wipe Israel off the map?
Click to expand...
just the govt not the country which an ample case can be made for that
 
Toggle Almendro said:
Pakistan's nuclear weapons are legal. Iran's and North Korea's are not.
Click to expand...
Legal. Right.
Bullshit. If Canada decided to produce nuclear weapons, would that be legal?
 
BirdinHand said:
You want “bomb and bomb again” and the United States to “finish this”

Then you sign up and go “finish it” and “bomb and bomb again”

You can follow Cadet Bone Spurs and Bibi into this bullshit.
Click to expand...
Only if you could be queen for a day no?
 
Toggle Almendro said:
That is incorrect. Enforcing the NPT is important.
Click to expand...

enforcing NPT is not the argument being made

the argument being made is

"We must attack now because Iran will use it's NON-EXISTENT nukes if we wait"

e.g. the thread title

"The United States and the World can not take the risk whether Iran has a Nuke or Not"
 
Tigerace117 said:
Iran certainly had a democracy in 1953 before the US destroyed it....no matter how inconvenient that is for your narrative.
Click to expand...
Let me see if I've got this straight.

75 years ago we were behind a coup that took out a democratic government. 20 years later, the Ayatolla's pulled off a coup that got rid of the Shah. Then, instead of re-instituting democracy, they set up a Muslim theocracy in which they are the dictators. So now they are in control of the country.

And they're mad at us because they have control of the country and all of its wealth?
 
VySky said:
Its unacceptable risk.

The point of no return has been crossed.

The United States needs to finish this. We must reach a confidence level to where we can reasonably conclude Iran does hot have a nuclear weapon or the capacity to make one any time soon.

What say you. Is it worth the risk to do nothing?
Click to expand...

All of a sudden, war isn't "bloodthirsty" anymore.

Amazing how Taco's followers will lie down for him, allow him to literally dictate their opinions...no matter what.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom