By John Q. Hosedrinker Following Friday morning’s successful Israeli airstrikes on Iran’s Natanz nuclear facility, reports emerged of further Israeli action near Fordow. Iranian media documented explosions near Fordow and claimed interception of an Israeli drone. The IDF possesses the technological capacity to inflict significant damage, potentially causing a cave-in at the mountain-based Fordow facility. These events represent a significant escalation of the ongoing conflict surrounding Iran’s nuclear program.
Read the original article here
Israel reportedly striking the Fordow nuclear site after the Natanz incident raises many questions about the capabilities involved. The depth of Fordow, buried 90 meters underground beneath a mountain, suggests a need for exceptionally powerful weaponry to achieve significant damage. The commonly understood weapon for such deep penetration is the Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP), a 30,000-pound bomb typically carried only by US B-2 or B-52 bombers. However, reports suggest that Israel is attempting a different tactic, aiming for cave-ins rather than direct penetration of the facility. This approach suggests using multiple, smaller bombs to destabilize the structure.
This strategy seems to hinge on overwhelming the site with enough explosive force to cause significant structural damage, potentially collapsing the entire complex rather than relying on precise, deep penetration. The question of air vents as a potential point of attack also comes up. Sealing these vents and effectively trapping personnel inside could be an alternative approach. The effectiveness of such a tactic depends on the robustness of the facility’s infrastructure and its internal ventilation systems.
The reported destruction of Natanz, however, needs further scrutiny. There’s conflicting information. Some sources suggest that the Natanz facility wasn’t even targeted, or at least that satellite images show no significant damage. This casts doubt on the overall success of the reported operations against Iran’s nuclear facilities. It raises questions about the capabilities of Israeli weaponry to effectively target deeply buried facilities and the credibility of reports surrounding the earlier Natanz strike.
The discussion then shifts to the feasibility of the Fordow strikes with different kinds of weaponry. Some suggest using multiple, smaller, bunker-busting bombs, perhaps 20, 30, or even 50, 2,000-pound penetrators, concentrated at the entrance to create a cascading effect and collapse the structure. Others believe that a sufficient quantity of bombs, regardless of individual yield, could achieve a similar result, essentially overwhelming the facility’s defenses through sheer volume of explosive power. The possibility of US involvement in the operation is also raised; after all, they may help disable Iranian air defenses to allow for more concentrated attacks.
The strategic rationale behind Israel’s actions is also heavily debated. While Iran repeatedly asserts that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, Israel remains deeply concerned about its potential for weapons development, leading to the continued attacks. A variety of potential delivery methods, from modified F-15EXs carrying GBU-57s to the fantastical (like a helicopter carrying a MOP), are mentioned. The practicality of each is discussed, along with the overall challenges of transporting such massive payloads.
The discussion moves to the reliability of news sources, with some expressing skepticism about reports from sources like The Jerusalem Post. The potential for further escalation is also considered. The possibility of retaliation from Syria or Iran is addressed, as are the potential internal destabilizing effects of any long-term disruption of Iranian operations. The consequences of bombing enriched uranium are considered, highlighting the differences between detonation and the release of nuclear waste or fallout. The possibility of a successful strike leading to the loss of knowledge of the site’s location by eliminating personnel is also mentioned. And finally, even the participation of unlikely allies like the Taliban, a highly improbable scenario, is raised humorously. The overall tone is one of speculation and analysis, based on fragmented information and a considerable amount of speculation.