from Hacker News

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

by jbegley on 6/24/25, 7:04 PM with 164 comments

• by barbazoo on 6/24/25, 8:04 PM

  If they weren't planning on making nukes before, they for sure are now. Good job everyone involved!

  Just couldn't wait for diplomacy to play out.

• by cluckindan on 6/24/25, 7:26 PM

  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.

• by gip on 6/24/25, 8:37 PM

  The status of Iran’s nuclear sites (and more importantly, its stockpile of enriched uranium) is anyone’s guess at this point. It’s likely that no one truly knows, not even the Iranians. It will take significantly more time to get a clear answer.

  That said, it may not matter much. Restarting their nuclear program in secret would likely be far more difficult now and would almost certainly be detected. Ideally, a political agreement will soon render the issue moot.

• by lenerdenator on 6/24/25, 8:56 PM

  It probably damaged them to some extent. Sensitive machines don't like dust and vibration. Bombs are known to cause a lot of both.

  From a negotiation standpoint, you're in a weaker position if the enemy's killing machines can cross into your territory virtually unopposed and strike what should be three of the most secure locations in Iranian territory. Both the Israelis and US managed to seriously compromise Iranian territory recently, and while the Iranians could probably draw blood and destruction on American territory if they wanted to, they couldn't do it to the same extent.

• by neuroelectron on 6/24/25, 8:25 PM

  This is just a repeat of what they said the likely outcome of using bunker busters on these facilities would be, likely using advanced modeling and simulation. There's not any new intel and if there were some sort of future tech, ground penetrating vision, they certainly wouldn't use it for public statements.

• by perihelions on 6/24/25, 8:23 PM

  > "“The ceasefire came without either Israel or the United States being able to destroy several key underground nuclear facilities, including near Natanz, Isfahan and Parchin,” Lewis said,

  Here's more about these (not-widely-discussed) additional underground sites from Professor Lewis,

  https://bsky.app/profile/armscontrolwonk.bsky.social/post/3l...

• by omegaworks on 6/24/25, 8:59 PM

  Worth it to keep in mind as well, that Iran was committed under the NPT to limit nuclear development to non-weapons based usage. They were inspected regularly by UN bodies like the IAEA and the conclusions of our own intelligence agencies did not support the assertion that they were developing a weapon.

  They were using it to support a legitimate nuclear energy and radiotheraputics industry. They are in the part of the planet that will be most impacted by climate warming, so nuclear is critical for them to support baseline power needs.

  The United States striking these sites throws the entire international system of non-proliferation into question. If there is no commitment any country can make to any system of governance that allows for peaceful development of nuclear energy, there is no controlling nuclear weapons development and proliferation.

  Nowhere in this CNN brief are we informed about whether the sites were or were not used for weapons development. If we take the lessons of mainstream media's coverage of the Iraq war, it is likely CNN is stating this because their owners have been told that it would be better for their bottom line to manufacture consent for a second round of strikes than to preserve the President's assertion that the strikes were successful.

• by xnx on 6/24/25, 8:07 PM

  If it was an obvious success, Trump would be tweeting spy satellite photos (again): https://www.npr.org/2022/11/18/1137474748/trump-tweeted-an-i...

• by dantillberg on 6/24/25, 8:19 PM

  > Two of the people familiar with the assessment said Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium was not destroyed.

  Is it even possible to "destroy" enriched uranium? It would seem to me that the most one might achieve by blowing it up with bombs is to spread it out a little bit.

• by bitsage on 6/24/25, 10:16 PM

  Are people really going to pick and choose which unsubstantiated reports[1] to believe instead of just waiting for actual proof? The narrative has shifted with breakneck speed from “WW3” to “it was pointless anyways”.

  1. https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/israeli-intel-a...

• by blotfaba on 6/25/25, 12:00 PM

  Sounds like Israel and the United States have "no idea what the fuck they are doing," as one sage was heard saying..

• by jauntywundrkind on 6/25/25, 2:51 AM

  Even assuming your big expensive heavy bunker busters can penetrate & trigger as designed:

  Throwing big darts X square miles of mountain & hoping you hit a valuable target seems absurd.

  This feels like trying to depth charge a submarine, you just have to pour out endless charges & hope hope hope you get lucky. When those charges weigh 15 tons a piece, that's extra hard.

• by fusionadvocate on 6/25/25, 2:05 AM

  Enriching uranium to levels like 60% is hard. But from there on you don't need thousands of centrifuges anymore. This means that they can set up covert enriching plants and get weapons grade uranium without drawing attention.

• by giardini on 6/25/25, 4:30 PM

  How deep would a nuclear bunker-buster penetrate?

• by impossiblefork on 6/24/25, 11:03 PM

  Can they try again? Build some kind of ultra-buster and use a Falcon Heavy to deliver it?

  Obviously this has been presented as done, but it doesn't seem ideal to allow a situation where Iran gets nuclear weapons.

• by luke-stanley on 6/25/25, 7:44 PM

  The title is wrong: the word "intel" should not start with a capital, the original site doesn't do this.

• by Tronno on 6/24/25, 8:49 PM

  > Karoline Leavitt: “This alleged assessment is flat-out wrong and was classified as ‘top secret’ but was still leaked to CNN by an anonymous, low-level loser in the intelligence community. The leaking of this alleged assessment is a clear attempt to demean President Trump, and discredit the brave fighter pilots who conducted a perfectly executed mission to obliterate Iran’s nuclear program. Everyone knows what happens when you drop fourteen 30,000 pound bombs perfectly on their targets: total obliteration.”

  All the juicy intel is right here in this press statement. The bombs struck bullseye and killed satire dead.

• by TheAlchemist on 6/24/25, 10:00 PM

  "Democratic Rep. Pat Ryan of New York said on X on Tuesday that “Trump just cancelled a classified House briefing on the Iran strikes with zero explanation. The real reason? He claims he destroyed ‘all nuclear facilities and capability;’ his team knows they can’t back up his bluster and BS.”"

  This one is quite telling...

  If this assessment is true, then I would expect the situation to get really bad in less than a year. What would you do if you were Khamenei ? Trump already said he doesn't raelly care if he needs to do a 'regime change'. The only way to ensure that this doesn't happen, given the dramatic air superiority of Israel / US, is to get nukes and get them quickly... What are his other realistic options ?

• by 2Gkashmiri on 6/25/25, 1:31 AM

  Uh....did trump not say "its all gone", Bibi said the same while Iranians said "a few months setback, nothing more"......

  So.... whose lying now? Still the Iranians ?

• by iJohnDoe on 6/25/25, 4:42 AM

  Great, so we pissed them off. Now they’ll just be more determined and we’ll have another 9/11.

• by selfselfgo on 6/24/25, 8:16 PM

  I don’t support the bombing of Iran, but where is the US media that reflects my opinions? I will literally throw money at any publication using the “T” word to describe Trump’s actions here.