←back to thread

Early US Intel assessment suggests strikes on Iran did not destroy nuclear sites

(www.cnn.com)
122 points jbegley | 3 comments | 24 Jun 25 19:04 UTC | HN request time: 0.615s | source
Show context
cluckindan ◴[24 Jun 25 19:26 UTC] No.44369995[source]▶
You don’t need to be a genius to figure out that centrifuges installed 70–80 meters underground will be largely unaffected by bombs which are believed to have an effect down to a depth of 60 meters.
replies(8): >>44370297 #>>44370428 #>>44370451 #>>44370592 #>>44370714 #>>44371331 #>>44372376 #>>44375665 #
buildbot ◴[24 Jun 25 20:01 UTC] No.44370428[source]▶
Really? I think calculating the achieved overpressure to whatever structure underground after 6x 30k pound bomb impacts is far into the “genius” category. I’d wager you’d need a team of pretty smart people to even begin to get a wrong model of that.
replies(2): >>44370489 #>>44370520 #
cjbgkagh ◴[24 Jun 25 20:11 UTC] No.44370520[source]▶
No genius needed, but all those involved are motivated to lie about it. The bombs have a depth range and 200ft (60m) is the optimistic depth for ideal conditions. These were far from ideal conditions as the location was specifically chosen to resist this. That and ultra high performance concrete is now a thing. This is why the entrance and exists were bombed and those are easy enough to dig back out again. The attack was telegraphed so advanced preparations were made. It is rumored that the entrances and exits were packed with dirt in advance to minimize the damage.
replies(2): >>44370550 #>>44370575 #
1. RationPhantoms ◴[24 Jun 25 20:17 UTC] No.44370575[source]▶
I don't know if it's only effective depth of the ordinance that matters here. Positive interference could be used to amplify the explosive wave of the 6 bombs that were dropped with accurate-enough timing.
replies(2): >>44370607 #>>44372153 #
2. cjbgkagh ◴[24 Jun 25 20:21 UTC] No.44370607[source]▶
If you were going to do that you wouldn’t waste energy breaking the rock to begin with. I highly doubt it’s feasible to time things that accurately and even if you could there is a lot of mountain in the way to soak up the energy.

The depth assumptions for the facility are often with a shallow gradient roads for the entrance and exits, but there is no need for the gradient to be shallow.

3. Tadpole9181 ◴[24 Jun 25 23:25 UTC] No.44372153[source]▶
And yet the leaked reports don't say that happened, they say it didn't work and that most of the material and equipment was likely already moved.

Is this where we are? Just making up technobabble to glorify the US war machine in a supposedly intellectual forum? All the while the white house says the report is real, but they disagree with the contents of their own intelligence report because "we want big bomb make big boom work good"?

After 25 years it has become abundantly clear that Iraq (the concept) is what the US is, and what it deserves.