By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Reps. Josh Gottheimer and Mike Lawler have proposed the “Bunker Buster Act,” which would authorize former President Donald Trump to transfer B-2 stealth bombers and 30,000-pound “bunker buster” bombs to Israel if Iran restarts its nuclear weapons program. This proposal follows U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, which have been partially successful but may not have eliminated Iran’s nuclear capabilities. The bill aims to provide Israel with the necessary tools to deter Iran, as experts suggest Iran could resume uranium enrichment within months. The proposal highlights concerns about Iran’s potential to rebuild its nuclear program.
Read the original article here
Trump could arm Israel with US B-2s and bunker busters if Iran tries to go nuclear under new proposal. The idea itself, that’s where we need to start. It’s a scenario where, hypothetically, if Iran were to make a dash for a nuclear weapon, a new proposal suggests the United States could offer Israel some of its most advanced weaponry, including the B-2 stealth bomber and bunker-busting bombs. Now, the B-2 is not just any aircraft. It’s a marvel of engineering, a flying wing designed to evade radar and strike targets deep within enemy territory. The bunker busters are specialized bombs designed to penetrate heavily fortified underground facilities.
The immediate reaction is likely a mix of surprise and skepticism. The United States only has a relatively small number of B-2s, and they represent a significant investment of resources and technology. These planes are complex machines, requiring highly trained pilots and specialized maintenance. Giving them away is not the same as handing over a few off-the-shelf rifles. It’s akin to loaning the crown jewels.
There is a significant risk involved. Giving a B-2 to Israel could compromise America’s strategic advantage. The technology that makes the B-2 stealthy is highly classified. If one were shot down over Iran or elsewhere, the plane and the secrets it holds could fall into enemy hands. Russia and China would be very interested in reverse-engineering the B-2’s technology. That would give them a significant boost in their own military capabilities, and it is something the United States cannot afford.
Placing these bombers in Israel also raises concerns about their security. Any airbase in Israel is a potential target for Iran and its proxies. Having expensive, high-tech bombers sitting on a base in a high-threat zone would create a tempting target. It’s putting a giant bullseye on American technology, an unacceptable risk to American security.
The logistics of such a move are also challenging. The B-2 requires specialized facilities, runways, and maintenance crews. Israel does not currently have the infrastructure to support these aircraft. Training Israeli pilots to fly the B-2 would take years. How long would it take to get this going? It’s not a process that happens overnight.
The implications of this proposal extend far beyond just the transfer of aircraft. It raises questions about American strategic priorities and how far the United States is willing to go to deter Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. It also brings to the forefront the debate about the balance of power in the Middle East and the level of support the United States is willing to provide to Israel. The idea has been met with a considerable amount of negative criticism, and not without reason. There’s a real concern about risking America’s most advanced technology. It’s a gamble with potentially catastrophic consequences for U.S. national security.
There’s also the question of whether such a move would actually deter Iran. Some might argue that it would be seen as a provocation, possibly leading to an escalation of tensions. Others might see it as a strong signal of American resolve.
The United States could assist Israel in other ways, such as providing intelligence or coordinating military exercises. These actions would not risk the compromise of the B-2’s technology or present the same security risks.
Ultimately, whether or not this proposal is a good idea depends on a variety of factors, including a thorough assessment of the risks and benefits. One can’t ignore the possibility that the technology could be compromised, potentially jeopardizing the United States’ military advantage. It’s an important debate, with high stakes, and it’s something that needs to be considered very carefully.