- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Is it reckless to bunker bomb a nuclear enrichment site?
Posted on 6/18/25 at 8:37 pm
Posted on 6/18/25 at 8:37 pm
It seems like it would lead to a disastrous, radioactive, environmental catastrophe .
I have not researched any of the above, anyone here know any of the facts on what could happen and
where the sites are located , are they close to any populated urban areas, or major waterways
I have not researched any of the above, anyone here know any of the facts on what could happen and
where the sites are located , are they close to any populated urban areas, or major waterways
29
Posted on 6/18/25 at 8:38 pm to spacewrangler
quote:
It seems like it would lead to a disastrous, radioactive, environmental catastrophe .
How so?
It's a conventional bomb actually.
Posted on 6/18/25 at 8:39 pm to spacewrangler
Perhaps they have intel saying that they better hurry up and knock it out while it is still safe to do so because if they wait any longer then it would be an epic disaster if they bombed it later
Posted on 6/18/25 at 8:39 pm to spacewrangler
Its their fault for enriching in spite of a treaty saying they wont
Posted on 6/18/25 at 8:39 pm to theballguy
I think he's asking about the nuclear material the conventional bomb will affect
Posted on 6/18/25 at 8:39 pm to Cosmo
quote:
Its their fault for enriching in spite of a treaty saying they wont
Yeah I'm afraid so.
Posted on 6/18/25 at 8:40 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I think he's asking about the nuclear material the conventional bomb will affect
Good question SFP ...
Better than possibly allowing them to build a nuclear bomb that they will obviously use.
How reckless will that be to allow that to happen?
This post was edited on 6/18/25 at 8:41 pm
Posted on 6/18/25 at 8:41 pm to spacewrangler
quote:
Is it reckless to bunker bomb a nuclear enrichment site?
I was wondering this as well, if you bomb the site with a conventional bomb and there is nuclear material in the blast, isn't it going to effectively be a dirty bomb that affects the surrounding area?
Posted on 6/18/25 at 8:42 pm to theballguy
quote:
Better than possibly allowing them to build a nuclear bomb that they will obviously use.
How reckless will that be to allow that to happen?
I don't believe he asked for GWB era neocon talking points
Posted on 6/18/25 at 8:42 pm to spacewrangler
quote:
bunker bomb a
Baby Billy’s Bunker Busters
Posted on 6/18/25 at 8:42 pm to Cosmo
quote:
Its their fault for enriching in spite of a treaty saying they wont
They’re allowed to enrich no?
Posted on 6/18/25 at 8:42 pm to thermal9221
quote:
They’re allowed to enrich no?
Not weapons grade
Posted on 6/18/25 at 8:42 pm to SlowFlowPro
AI says enriched Uranium 235 is nasty. I'm not sure it is Chernobyl nasty as it's not been in a reactor. It will likely need a significant cleanup. At least it is in the mountain.
Posted on 6/18/25 at 8:44 pm to spacewrangler
Yes
Posted on 6/18/25 at 8:44 pm to Cosmo
Does anyone know if they’re weapons grade?
Posted on 6/18/25 at 8:45 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
conventional bomb
Will not split atoms
Posted on 6/18/25 at 8:46 pm to thermal9221
quote:
Does anyone know if they’re weapons grade?
I read somewhere it is 60 enriched with a goal of going to 90%.
Posted on 6/18/25 at 8:47 pm to jrobic4
Neither would a dirty bomb, right? And that's the primary concern for an attack on the US by Iran.
Posted on 6/18/25 at 8:48 pm to spacewrangler
quote:
It seems like it would lead to a disastrous, radioactive, environmental catastrophe .
Warmongers would say it's fine, but they would go apeshit if they discovered broken asbestos in their house.
And they would never live by three mile island, Chernobyl or Fukushima but they would gladly tell your kids to.
Posted on 6/18/25 at 8:48 pm to ithad2bme
No, it wouldn’t release large amounts because the mechanism for creating nuclear fission isn’t triggered by a conventional explosion. It probably would release some radioactive material but not enough for any real damage.
Page 1 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News