= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
MrMind comments on Open Thread, Jul. 13 - Jul. 19, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (297)
I think you're underestimating Iran's defences.
At the present time, with Natanz's plant fully bunkered, there's no way to disable it and the couple of other support plants with a surgical attack. If you want to disable Iran's nuclear capacity (not even considering its military or industrial facilities) you need to go heavy tactical or nuclear, which will mean full scale war (ugliness ensues).
Besides, international sanctions were much more effective at destroying Iran's economy, which is the only reason why they accepted the terms under the present treaty.
The current deal will lift international sanctions. The Massive Ordnance Penetrator bomb might be able to destroy any of Iran's nuclear plants.
All that you say is true. My point was that it won't be a tiny cost: the use of heavy weapon (like the one you indicate) doesn't allow plausible deniability, it will mean a full scale war with Iran, and that could very well tip a third global war.
I don't see how since Iran has almost no friends and lacks the logistical capacity to attack forces far away.