Israel has pushed the US to use its ‘bunker buster’ bomb on Iran. Here’s what the weapon can

[jts-khorat]

1 hour ago, GinBoy2 said:

So I think from what I read these US bunker buster bombs can burrow themselves 200ft before they explode.

 

The enrichment chamber is 290ft in the mountain.

 

But i suspect that with  multiple strikes that concrete shell ain't gonna work

 

This is, if more than one bomb can be put exactly in the hole the first bomb opened.

 

More critical: the bomb needs to actually work as advertised. It would not be the first time, that an aggressive regime like the US believed in their own propaganda a bit too much.

 

Wars are really expensive. If the tariffs will not already crack the US economy, this one surely will.

[blaze master]

3 hours ago, still kicking said:

Why so nasty? Sometimes it does not work the first time I have seen posters posting 6 times or more 

 

You are talking about replying to one single comment. This is replies to separate comments. 

[daveAustin]

Don’t really want the US getting involved, but what’s the alternative here in getting this plant shutdown? If Iran does its usual tactic of coming to the table and stalling, it’ll eventually have the bomb. They won’t give up that goal. From Israel’s perspective, short of the US chucking a couple bunker busters at it or a full scale invasion, last resort is Israel nuking the site… and we definitely don’t want that.  

[jimmybcool]

On 6/19/2025 at 8:19 AM, newbee2022 said:

Mate, you're too childish for me. Sorry.

If you like to play games it's ok. Look for a fool. It's not me.

Good bye

 

What is horrible about this bomb?  I read it.  Did you?  I am expecting the same retarded replies you gave Yellowtail.  

[Bert got kinky]

On 6/19/2025 at 10:21 PM, newbee2022 said:

Mate, you're too childish for me. Sorry.

If you like to play games it's ok. Look for a fool. It's not me.

Good bye

 

Off topic

 

[Bert got kinky]

On 6/19/2025 at 10:16 PM, newbee2022 said:

Are you crazy? Or mad? I just try to find an audible for you. I can't fix all your issues. Sorry

 

Off topic

 

[Bert got kinky]

On 6/19/2025 at 10:11 PM, newbee2022 said:

Sorry, I didn't know you can't read. Maybe I can find an "audible" for you 

Off topic

[BexMan]

On 6/19/2025 at 3:04 PM, newbee2022 said:

Read here how this horrible bomb works and what can be destroyed.

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2025/06/18/politics/bunker-buster-weapon-explained-dg?iid=cnn_buildContentRecirc_end_recirc

 

 

• I suspect it wouldn’t be as horrible as Iran getting nuclear weapons. The ability to pass a dirty bomb on to Hamas or Hezbollah for use against Israel or the US is really more concerning.

[sqwakvfr]

It is  a false premise to believe one bombing mission will be enough.  Granted we are talking  about the GBU -57 (MOP-Massive Ordnance Penetrator bomb) but history of war and combat says rarely does dropping one bomb accomplishes the mission. I hope the Commander in Chief knows this but I doubt it.  Let's say in two weeks a B-2 drops the GBU-57 from 50,000 feet on the underground Iranian nuclear faciity and executes a direct hit.  The logical next step is to conduct a BDA (Bomb Damage Assessment). An aerial or a distant BDA will not tell the complete story.  Is Netanyahu willing to order his special forces to conduct a ground level BDA? This could be a one way mission. 

 

The true state of Iran's nuclear program is not known. Maybe they are weeks from building a bomb? Maybe they are years away?  I just keep thinking about what Secreaty of State Colin Powell said at the UN about Iraq's WMD program?  

 

But then of course if we see a large mushroom cloud then we can say "Mission Accomplished? 

 

 

[newbee2022]

5 minutes ago, sqwakvfr said:

what Secreaty of State Colin Powell said at the UN about Iraq's WMD program?

Only lies

[fredwiggy]

On 6/19/2025 at 10:14 PM, newbee2022 said:

Yeah, Livestream is wonderful. To see the human bloody parts flying through the air. 👎😡

There are certain people in this world who are called sociopaths, terrorists, etc , who have no place in society. The US has developed weapons to rid the earth of these types as they kill, without provocation, many innocents who aren't doing anything wrong to them. Any way you can find and exterminate these individuals or groups is necessary. If they see body parts flying and scattered around the landscape, maybe the next ones might think a few minutes longer before they spread their havoc. 

[Yellowtail]

2 minutes ago, newbee2022 said:

Only lies

What did he lie about? 

[newbee2022]

4 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

What did he lie about? 

Talking without evidence. Fake facts

[Yellowtail]

5 minutes ago, newbee2022 said:

Talking without evidence. Fake facts

About what? Or is this just another case of you making claims that you can't back up and know nothing about? 

[sqwakvfr]

14 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

What did he lie about? 

Powell is an honorable man and he relied on intel that was provided to him.  Of course I don't know about George Tenet (CIA director). 

[newbee2022]

7 minutes ago, sqwakvfr said:

George Tenet (CIA director

A fly <deleted>e in a sinistral American history 

[Yellowtail]

13 minutes ago, sqwakvfr said:

Powell is an honorable man and he relied on intel that was provided to him.  Of course I don't know about George Tenet (CIA director). 

Did virtually every intelligence agency in the free world not agree? 

[sqwakvfr]

29 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Did virtually every intelligence agency in the free world not agree? 

Possibly but back then it seemed like all were just agreeing with what the CIA said about Iraq.  Even back then most western intel agencies had few actual human agents inside of Iraq. The same could be said about Iran today. . Long range intel gathering is useful but nothing beats an actual human being on the ground to confirm or deny the intel.  Who knows mabye Mossad has a high level Iranian governmental type on their payroll. Doubt the CIA has anoyone inside of Iran.   When I was in the Army we called military intel "oxymoron".  Most intel reports or as the agencies called them "assessments" are mostly educated guesses. 

 

Also, this was back in 2002 when most of the world had sympathy for the US and supported us after 911.  Most of the world actually believed what the US actually said about looming threats.  AKA America actually had credibility back then. It all changed after the Iraq war.  America has never regained that level of support and trust from the world. 

Tony Blair and Bush were BFF's back then and were vitually in lock step about Iraq. 

[Yellowtail]

16 minutes ago, sqwakvfr said:

Possibly but back then it seemed like all were just agreeing with what the CIA said about Iraq.  Even back then most western intel agencies had few actual human agents inside of Iraq. The same could be said about Iran today. . Long range intel gathering is useful but nothing beats an actual human being on the ground to confirm or deny the intel.  Who knows mabye Mossad has a high level Iranian governmental type on their payroll. Doubt the CIA has anoyone inside of Iran.   When I was in the Army we called military intel "oxymoron".  Most intel reports or as the agencies called them "assessments" are mostly educated guesses. 

 

Also, this was back in 2002 when most of the world had sympathy for the US and supported us after 911.  Most of the world actually believed what the US actually said about looming threats.  AKA America actually had credibility back then. It all changed after the Iraq war.  America has never regained that level of support and trust from the world. 

Tony Blair and Bush were BFF's back then and were vitually in lock step about Iraq. 

In any event, as I remember, that Iraq was thought to have WMD, was pretty far down on the list of reasons to invade. 

 

As I understand it, that Iran is enriching uranium is not in dispute, nor is their desire to develop both a weapon and a delivery system. 

 

I ran has been at war via their proxies for years and have been calling for the eradication of Israel and the US for decades. 

[PatThaiM]

1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

In any event, as I remember, that Iraq was thought to have WMD, was pretty far down on the list of reasons to invade. 

 

As I understand it, that Iran is enriching uranium is not in dispute, nor is their desire to develop both a weapon and a delivery system. 

 

I ran has been at war via their proxies for years and have been calling for the eradication of Israel and the US for decades. 

Hmmm,
 

You have a bad memory. WMD was the main reason.

Hamas is not an Iranian proxy, it’s more of an ally. It received Iranian support but has its own agenda and does not take orders from Iran. Also, Hamas are Sunni.

 

[Bkk Brian]

3 minutes ago, PatThaiM said:

Hmmm,
 

You have a bad memory. WMD was the main reason.

Hamas is not an Iranian proxy, it’s more of an ally. It received Iranian support but has its own agenda and does not take orders from Iran. Also, Hamas are Sunni.

 

Of course Hamas is an Iranian proxy! Iran is the head of the snake for many terrorist proxies

 

"The lack of a meaningful response from the so-called “Axis of Resistance” to the Israel-Iran war reveals how exhausted it is after months of fighting the United States and Israel. Iranian proxy and partner militias appear either unable or unwilling to support Iran in any serious way. Hezbollah and Hamas are probably unable. The Houthis and Iraqi militias appear largely unwilling"

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/deafening-silence-iran’s-proxies

[PatThaiM]

12 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Iranian proxy and partner militias

I suggest you look up partner militia as you can’t differentiate from proxy.

As I said, Hamas is not a proxy but a partner militia, or ally.

 

[Bkk Brian]

14 minutes ago, PatThaiM said:

I suggest you look up partner militia as you can’t differentiate from proxy.

As I said, Hamas is not a proxy but a partner militia, or ally.

 

No I prefer the facts, they are part funded by Iran, they are Iranian proxies

 

How much influence does Iran have over its proxy ‘Axis of Resistance’ − Hezbollah, Hamas and the Houthis?

https://theconversation.com/how-much-influence-does-iran-have-over-its-proxy-axis-of-resistance-hezbollah-hamas-and-the-houthis-221269

 

Understanding Iran's Use of Terrorist Groups as Proxies

The current conflicts in the Middle East involving Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis all demonstrate the control that Iran exerts over conflicts in the region—without ever becoming officially involved in the conflicts. With Iranian backing as a common denominator among these terrorist groups

https://www.american.edu/sis/news/20240205-understanding-irans-use-of-terrorist-groups-as-proxies.cfm

[sqwakvfr]

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

In any event, as I remember, that Iraq was thought to have WMD, was pretty far down on the list of reasons to invade. 

 

As I understand it, that Iran is enriching uranium is not in dispute, nor is their desire to develop both a weapon and a delivery system. 

 

I ran has been at war via their proxies for years and have been calling for the eradication of Israel and the US for decades. 

But the $64,000 question is "how close are they to a bomb?".   If it is two weeks, a month then a first strike against this threat seems justified. If current DNI (the one Donald Trump appointed just months ago) says they are not close to a bomb and Donald Trump disagrees then why even have a DNI.  My guess is John Ratcliffe(CIA director) is up next.  I wonder what he will say about Iran and the Bomb?   It is always preferable to have your people  say what needs to be saId rather than what their boss wants to hear. 

[JAG]

On 6/19/2025 at 10:03 PM, Smokin Joe said:

 

Your post makes no sense. Your link describes a very efficient weapon that can destroy a hardened military target without damage to anything just a short distance away.

 

Nothing horrible about it. 

If you are underneath it when it is dropped, then I should imagine it is pretty horrible.

[rabas]

11 hours ago, jts-khorat said:

This is, if more than one bomb can be put exactly in the hole the first bomb opened.

 

More critical: the bomb needs to actually work as advertised. It would not be the first time, that an aggressive regime like the US believed in their own propaganda a bit too much.

 

Yes, they can put more than one bomb in one hole. It's an old trick, they do it with smaller weapons to penetrate steel reinforced concrete aircraft shelters.

 

As for working, swarms of US fighters are violating all of Iran's airspace night and day, even though Iran has been designing missiles for decades and have top Russian anti aircraft technology. That should tell you how well US designed technology works.  Not to mention that Russia has lost much of its weapons export market after their poor performance in the Ukraine war.

 

But there is an easier option to bunker busters, change the regime. That's what the majority of Iranian's want.

[sqwakvfr]

1 minute ago, rabas said:

 

Yes, they can put more than one bomb in one hole. It's an old trick, they do it with smaller weapons to penetrate steel reinforced concrete aircraft shelters.

 

As for working, swarms of US fighters are violating all of Iran's airspace night and day, even though Iran has been designing missiles for decades and have top Russian anti aircraft technology. That should tell you how well US designed technology works.  Not to mention that Russia has lost much of its weapons export market after their poor performance in the Ukraine war.

 

But there is an easier option to bunker busters, change the regime. That's what the majority of Iranian's want.

Anything that flies can be shot down. Even with the simplest of weapons and with a little luck even the Soviets downed a U2 that was flying at over 60,000 and even the Bosnians downed an F117,  All flying machines can develop technical problems whiile airborne.   If the B2 is actually sent on the bunker busting machine, I hope it goes smoothly because Air Force PJ's would have to fly a long way to rescue them. Just flying in Iranian airspace is one thing but actually dropping bombs on them is on a way different level. A different level with more risk. 

[Bkk Brian]

2 minutes ago, sqwakvfr said:

Anything that flies can be shot down. Even with the simplest of weapons and with a little luck even the Soviets downed a U2 that was flying at over 60,000 and even the Bosnians downed an F117,  All flying machines can develop technical problems whiile airborne.   If the B2 is actually sent on the bunker busting machine, I hope it goes smoothly because Air Force PJ's would have to fly a long way to rescue them. Just flying in Iranian airspace is one thing but actually dropping bombs on them is on a way different level. A different level with more risk. 

Just flying in Iranian airspace is one thing but actually dropping bombs on them is on a way different level. A different level with more risk.

 

Iran's air defense has already been knocked out, Israel currently controls the sky over Iran