BREAKING NEWS Trump Confirms Surprise US Airstrikes on Iran’s Nuclear Sites, Including Fordo

[Eric Loh]

1 hour ago, jerrymahoney said:

Some Israeli officials said they also believed that the Iranian government had maintained small covert enrichment facilities so it could continue its nuclear program in the event of an attack on the larger facilities.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/24/us/politics/iran-nuclear-sites.html

There were no reports indicating signs of off-site radiation or contamination in the wake of US bombings on the 3 nuclear sites. Does indicate that there were no uranium there. As for the destroyed centrifuges, Iran has demonstrated that they can build new sites with centrifuges within few months though more complex facilities might take longer. Iran has to be internationally monitored. The JCPOA between Iran and other world powers has to be brought back to prevent Iran development of nuclear weapons. It was a mistake that TRump withdraw from this agreement. 

[rabas]

"... severe, wide-ranging, and deep damage, setting it back by years."

 rough translation, you would probably need to scrape the former centrifuges off the walls.

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

17 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

There were no reports indicating signs of off-site radiation or contamination in the wake of US bombings on the 3 nuclear sites. Does indicate that there were no uranium there. As for the destroyed centrifuges, Iran has demonstrated that they can build new sites with centrifuges within few months though more complex facilities might take longer. Iran has to be internationally monitored. The JCPOA between Iran and other world powers has to be brought back to prevent Iran development of nuclear weapons. It was a mistake that TRump withdraw from this agreement. 

Not true, radiation leaks can occur deep inside, just because its not been detected outside yet means nothing

[rabas]

8 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

There were no reports indicating signs of off-site radiation or contamination in the wake of US bombings on the 3 nuclear sites. Does indicate that there were no uranium there. As for the destroyed centrifuges, Iran has demonstrated that they can build new sites with centrifuges within few months though more complex facilities might take longer. Iran has to be internationally monitored. The JCPOA between Iran and other world powers has to be brought back to prevent Iran development of nuclear weapons. It was a mistake that TRump withdraw from this agreement. 

 

Doesn't indicate much. Uranium is not very radioactive, otherwise it would not survive billions of years since it was created in some far away neutron star collision. I used to have a quarter pound on my desk for years. Bury some uranium under a mountain and see what you get.

 

Significant uranium contamination above ground would only confirm total obliteration.

[Eric Loh]

11 minutes ago, rabas said:

 

Doesn't indicate much. Uranium is not very radioactive, otherwise it would not survive billions of years since it was created in some far away neutron star collision. I used to have a quarter pound on my desk for years. Bury some uranium under a mountain and see what you get.

 

Significant uranium contamination above ground would only confirm total obliteration.

These are 60% enriched uranium which can emit alpha, beta and gamma radiation. Natural uranium are radioactive and require careful handling. Even buried under ground, it can still emit radiation. 

[Bkk Brian]

2 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

These are 60% enriched uranium which can emit alpha, beta and gamma radiation. Natural uranium are radioactive and require careful handling. Even buried under ground, it can still emit radiation. 

Suggest you read about the Israeli strike on the Natanz nuclear site and pay attention to what the IAEA says about it with regards to radiation inside and not outside.

 

 

IAEA issued an update, saying that based on continued analysis of high- resolution satellite imagery collected after the attacks on the nuclear site at Natanz, the Agency has identified additional elements that indicate direct impacts also on the underground enrichment halls at Natanz.

There has been no radiological impact outside the Natanz site, but circumscribed radiological and chemical contamination inside the enrichment facility, Director General Grossi reported.

https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/pressreleases/update-on-developments-in-iran

[Eric Loh]

5 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Suggest you read about the Israeli strike on the Natanz nuclear site and pay attention to what the IAEA says about it with regards to radiation inside and not outside.

 

 

IAEA issued an update, saying that based on continued analysis of high- resolution satellite imagery collected after the attacks on the nuclear site at Natanz, the Agency has identified additional elements that indicate direct impacts also on the underground enrichment halls at Natanz.

There has been no radiological impact outside the Natanz site, but circumscribed radiological and chemical contamination inside the enrichment facility, Director General Grossi reported.

https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/pressreleases/update-on-developments-in-iran

What I alluded to is that the bulk of the enriched uranium has been removed and not damaged which is reason no signs of radiation was detected. The damages of the sites may still have remants of small amount of uranium in the centrifuges that caused chemical release inside the affected facilities

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, Eric Loh said:

What I alluded to is that the bulk of the enriched uranium has been removed and not damaged which is reason no signs of radiation was detected. The damages of the sites may still have remants of small amount of uranium in the centrifuges that caused chemical release inside the affected facilities

No, correction, what you alluded to was more misinformation as you usually do.

 

1 hour ago, Eric Loh said:

There were no reports indicating signs of off-site radiation or contamination in the wake of US bombings on the 3 nuclear sites. Does indicate that there were no uranium there. As for the destroyed centrifuges, Iran has demonstrated that they can build new sites with centrifuges within few months though more complex facilities might take longer. Iran has to be internationally monitored. The JCPOA between Iran and other world powers has to be brought back to prevent Iran development of nuclear weapons. It was a mistake that TRump withdraw from this agreement. 

 

[Hawaiian]

3 hours ago, Bkk Brian said:

Is "wiped out" about the same as obliterated’? Its about the same to me. Why so focused on obliterated?

 

"You can't do a nuclear weapon without a conversion facility, yet we can't even find where it is, where it used to be on the map - because the whole thing is just blackened out… it's gone… wiped out."

 

 

Can't be found on the map?  Show me a map that shows a clear picture of something 300 ft beneath the surface.

[Bkk Brian]

7 minutes ago, Hawaiian said:

Can't be found on the map?  Show me a map that shows a clear picture of something 300 ft beneath the surface.

Did you even read the link posted earlier, what makes you think this particular facility was 300ft underground?

[rabas]

15 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

These are 60% enriched uranium which can emit alpha, beta and gamma radiation. Natural uranium are radioactive and require careful handling. Even buried under ground, it can still emit radiation. 

 

How much, the forgotten question.  Most of the radiation is alpha particles that barely penetrate anything.  So how much gamma ray radiation reaches the surface through 80 meters of limestone? Even ignoring shielding already used in the facility so that people work in safely. I wait your calculations. My guess is nothing detectable beyond 30m.

[Eric Loh]

28 minutes ago, rabas said:

 

How much, the forgotten question.  Most of the radiation is alpha particles that barely penetrate anything.  So how much gamma ray radiation reaches the surface through 80 meters of limestone? Even ignoring shielding already used in the facility so that people work in safely. I wait your calculations. My guess is nothing detectable beyond 30m.

You probably right about Alpha particles because they are relatively large and charged, causing them to interact strongly with matter and lose energy fast. Gamma radiation penetrates rock far better than alpha. Beta is between alpha and gamma in terms of rock penetration. 

[theblether]

Always entertaining to see people fall for clear trolls. You'd need to be touched in the head to believe CNN had an exclusive insight. 

 

Just fantastic to behold. 

[Jingthing]

11 minutes ago, theblether said:

Always entertaining to see people fall for clear trolls. You'd need to be touched in the head to believe CNN had an exclusive insight. 

 

Just fantastic to behold. 

I would trust CNN over propaganda site "Truth" Social any day of the week.

But agreed that people need to curate their information sources carefully and critically.

[Yellowtail]

3 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

I would trust CNN over propaganda site "Truth" Social any day of the week.

But agreed that people need to curate their information sources carefully and critically.

Truth Social is not pretending to be unbiased news, and the people posting are not pretending to be "journalists". 

[rabas]

1 hour ago, Eric Loh said:

You probably right about Alpha particles because they are relatively large and charged, causing them to interact strongly with matter and lose energy fast. Gamma radiation penetrates rock far better than alpha. Beta is between alpha and gamma in terms of rock penetration. 

 

You again ignore how much. Would 400kg of 60% U235 under 80+ meters of limestone be detectable outside, notwithstanding it's not a health hazard inside. My 30 meters or less than half way was based on calculation.  

 

But moving on, I would love to understand your concern about the well being of Iran's bomb plans.  Is it that you would like to see the worst ever sponsor of state terrorism get one soon? Or the opposite, you are concerned that they do and hope  they are stopped?. An interesting question for a poll. 

[Yagoda]

8 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

“Iran lovers and Jew haters”

 

We’ve arrived at the baseless ad hominem accusations already.

 

Perhaps we should be discussing the military attack not making personal attacks on those who have a different view of the reported events 

It's not a personal attack, nor is it basless, if you support Iran you're a Jew hater and an American hater simple as that. You should have the courage of your convictions