- 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
re: Is it reckless to bunker bomb a nuclear enrichment site?
Posted on 6/18/25 at 9:06 pm to Lieutenant Dan
Posted on 6/18/25 at 9:06 pm to Lieutenant Dan
quote:
Israel started this war by attacking 1st with a cache of drones that were strategically planted in Iran. This took years to place and setup.... Make of that what you will.
Good planning?
0
Posted on 6/18/25 at 9:08 pm to Lieutenant Dan
quote:
No one knows. As far as we know, they haven't been enriching to weapons grade at all. Let's not forget, Israel started this war by attacking 1st with a cache of drones that were strategically planted in Iran. This took years to place and setup.... Make of that what you will. Oh, and for good measure.... Bibi - it was IRAN that was trying to assassinate Trump. Now please destroy Iran for us America! The propaganda works. Look at the dummies on this site falling for it.
It was a rhetorical question.
I know nobody knows.
I know Israel is behind all of this awful shite.
It’s about regime change.
It was never about nukes.
Just like last time when we did this.
Posted on 6/18/25 at 9:09 pm to spacewrangler
A few variables. Mostly depends on if there is a neutron source available to initiate the fission process and does the impact kick start that source.
Posted on 6/18/25 at 9:10 pm to spacewrangler
quote:
Is it reckless to bunker bomb a nuclear enrichment site?
Most people tend to draw an association with the core of a nuclear reactor and imagine Chenobyl. Nothing like that will happen if we strike an underground enrichment site.
Any contamination would be somewhat minimal.
Posted on 6/18/25 at 9:12 pm to thermal9221
quote:
Is it reckless to bunker bomb a nuclear enrichment site?
AI says the amount of uranium used by us in WWII was about 140 pounds. Uranium is denser than lead. The volumetric amount of material is not large. It could probably fit in your closet.
Posted on 6/18/25 at 9:12 pm to spacewrangler
Benjy doesn't care
Posted on 6/18/25 at 9:12 pm to spacewrangler
Not if it's in a bunker. Fill the hole with concrete and walk away.
Posted on 6/18/25 at 9:13 pm to hwyman108
By all means lets destabilize a country of 90 million because they feel that way.
Posted on 6/18/25 at 9:14 pm to FatBaldandGray
Here is a video on bunker buster bombs. It doesn't look like the blast would be contained under ground.
Posted on 6/18/25 at 9:15 pm to McChowder
Yeah, nuclear core explosions are really water explosions, and usually due to runaway chain reaction
Posted on 6/18/25 at 9:18 pm to thermal9221
They been destabilized for almost 50yrs.
Posted on 6/18/25 at 9:18 pm to thermal9221
quote:
It was a rhetorical question.
I know nobody knows.
I know Israel is behind all of this awful shite.
It’s about regime change.
It was never about nukes.
Just like last time when we did this.
100% correct sir. Yes, it's about toppling their regime. The nuke bullshite is just an added bonus to sucker the US. Again.
Posted on 6/18/25 at 9:25 pm to hwyman108
Ok you’re just making up stuff now.
Posted on 6/18/25 at 9:35 pm to thermal9221
And you’re are speculating.
Posted on 6/18/25 at 9:38 pm to spacewrangler
quote:
It seems like it would lead to a disastrous, radioactive, environmental catastrophe .
Without a reaction to disperse the material, all you would be doing is burying a very dense radioactive metal under a lot of dirt.
Uranium isn’t like chalk that will bust up into a dust. They fire depleted uranium at tank armor.
Posted on 6/18/25 at 9:49 pm to ithad2bme
quote:
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?
Possibly but I think the facility is so far underground the bunker bombs won’t destroy the facility itself, they’ll destroy the tunnels and ventilation making it inaccessible
Posted on 6/18/25 at 9:49 pm to spacewrangler
The problem is we don't know what's under the ground. L
Posted on 6/18/25 at 9:55 pm to spacewrangler
Ask John Kerry!
Posted on 6/18/25 at 9:57 pm to spacewrangler
It’s not reckless. Next question.
Posted on 6/18/25 at 10:00 pm to spacewrangler
the concept involves bringing down the mountain on top of the site, in effect burying it under a pile of earth and cutting off electrical sources within a given radius. As I've read, there is still risk of radiation leaks, but it is thought to be the most conservative approach from a bio hazard standpoint.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News