Technology

There's also the fact that the majority of Iran's nuclear facilities were built before UHPC, the concrete discussed in the article, was available!

I thought we do know the depth of the bunkers though. And that American bombs can’t go that deep, even multiple of them

tactical

Lol, they're gonna do the strategic one next

That's impossible. "Make America Great Again" is a slogan that he can only abuse as long as there are problems. If he wants to stay in power it's in his best interest to create problems. It's what fascists dictators have been doing since forever. Even if there are no problems they will point towards something and make you think it is a problem, so they can market themselves as the solution. If he would "win" he would lose his power, which is obviously the opposite of what somebody like Trump wants.

We dropped a big boom worth 120000 hamburgers and the explosion was many football fields big. Salute to the brave troops.

Your comment is informative but now all I can hear in my head is Green Day’s “American Idiot”.

Sorry bud, you're straight up wrong. Aerospace and defense in the US very much still uses the inch-pound-second system of units.

I'm not a concrete guy, but I know that metals and composites have material properties certified for use in civil and commercial aviation are given in psi in MMPDS and CMH-17. I would be willing to bet that concrete specifications in the US are no different.

I could keep going. Our bolts are specified in ultimate tensile strength by psi. Structural steel standards use minimum yield strengths in psi. There is literally a type of steel called A36 because its minimum required yield strength is 36,000 psi.

I prefer my mechanical stress calculations in millidynes per square kiloparsec thank you very much.

It is not that it can do what concrete cannot. It is just that digging a tunnel under a mountain is much easier than making a mountain out of concrete.

And no bomb is irresistible.

Except copeium.

And I read that the US used more than half of its stock of these bunker-buster bombs in this attack, the largest conventional bunker-busters in existence. So they can't simply try again.

I mean they usually only do about 30 damage anyways.

Source

The article is 3 years old

My guess: that bunker buster attack was twice as successful as the missile attack on the the airfield in Qatar.

2 x 0 = 0.

Now accepting bets on when we will find out that Trump had a secret call with Ali Khamenei where they negotiated the whole thing ahead of time, thus explaining the movement of the Uranium out of the facility, the movement of our servicemen out of the airbase, etc. etc.

Why? The kinds of UHPC being discussed in the article weren't available even in the United States until the year 2000 but most of Iran's nuclear facilities were built between 1974 and 2005. Even their primary enrichment facility in Fordow, which was struck with MOPs, was started no earlier than the mid-2000s as it was still unfinished in 2009.

Basically the majority of Iran's facilities, even their major ones, are too old to have the kind of concrete being discussed in the article.

Hardly. Did you read the article?

I doubt it's a recent thought, knowing civil engineers, they're absolute perverts when it comes to concrete.