nuclear-news

A bunker buster bomb on Iran’s nuclear site – not the answer

military action against Iran’s nuclear work would be their last and worst option. Not only would this risk civilian casualties, but Iran would seek to retaliate against Western targets in the region, raising the risk of a regional war and risking global economic turmoil.

A strike, furthermore, would only delay, not destroy, an Iranian nuclear program whose known sites are widely dispersed and fortified against attack….

Iran nuclear sites may be beyond reach of “bunker busters”, LONDON   Jan 12, 2012   (Reuters) – With its nuclear program beset as never before by sanctions, sabotage and assassination, Iran must now make a new addition to its list of concerns:

One of the biggest conventional bombs ever built. Boeing’s 30,000-pound Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP), an ultra-large bunker buster for use on underground targets, with Iran routinely mentioned as its most likely intended destination, is a key element in the implicit U.S. threat to use force as a last resort against Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

The behemoth, carrying more than 5,300 pounds of explosive, was delivered with minimal fanfare to Whiteman U.S. Air Force Base, Missouri in September. It is designed for delivery by B-2 Stealth bombers.

Would that weapon, delivered in a gouging combination with other
precision-guided munitions, pulverize enough rock to reach down and
destroy the uranium enrichment chamber sunk deep in a mountain at
Fordow, Iran’s best sheltered nuclear site?

While the chances of such a strike succeeding are slim, they are not
so slim as to enable Tehran to rule out the possibility of one being
attempted, according to defense experts contacted by Reuters.

A “second best” result might be merely to block the plant’s surface
entrances, securing its temporary closure, some said.

One U.S. official, speaking to Reuters on condition of anonymity,
described an attack on the underground site, about 160 km (100 miles)
south of Tehran near the Iranian holy city of Qom, as “hard but not
impossible.”

The United States is the only country with any chance of damaging the
Fordow chamber using just conventional air power, most experts say.
Israel, the nation seen as most likely to attempt a raid, has great
experience in long range bombing include its 1981 raid on the Osirak
nuclear reactor in Iraq and a 2007 strike on a presumed nuclear
facility in Syria.

But it lacks the air assets to reach Fordow’s depths, and has no
MOP-sized bunker buster. An Israeli raid would therefore likely
require other elements such as sabotage or special forces. TURMOIL

Western powers suspect the program is aimed at developing the capacity
to build a nuclear weapon. Iran says it is strictly for civilian uses.

Critics of Iran’s nuclear program tend to agree that military action
against Iran’s nuclear work would be their last and worst option. Not
only would this risk civilian casualties, but Iran would seek to
retaliate against Western targets in the region, raising the risk of a
regional war and risking global economic turmoil.

Once it had recovered it would probably decide unequivocally to pursue
a nuclear bomb.

Critics of the military option further point out that non-military
pressure is increasing. Apart from tools of statecraft such as
sanctions and diplomacy, covert means against Iran’s nuclear work
probably include sabotage, cyber attacks, measures to supply Iran with
faulty parts and interception of nuclear supplies. It may also involve
assassinations of nuclear experts such as Wednesday’s killing of a
scientist in Tehran.

A strike, furthermore, would only delay, not destroy, an Iranian
nuclear program whose known sites are widely dispersed and fortified
against attack….
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/12/us-iran-nuclear-strike-idUSTRE80B22020120112

January 13, 2012 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | Iran, politics international, weapons and war