Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

harumph

(2,852 posts)

4. Of course the Fordow facility was damaged... but we can only be sure of surface damage.

Reply to WarGamer (Original post)

Tue Jun 24, 2025, 04:41 PM

Jun 24

Judging from the estimated depth, I'm sure military advisors qualified the use of the "penetrator" as a means to
destroy the facility. But hey, if it makes Trump look tough I guess it's worth the treasure and risk. Also, I'm sure the whole
area that Fordow sits in/on has interesting rheological properties. But yes, you're right regarding the removal of materials and
secreting them elsewhere. Yet, we have shown our cards, so to speak... and that cat's outa the bag. Oops.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

okaawhatever

5 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Let me clarify all the mis/disinformation about the efficacy of the Iranian Nuke Facility Strikes. [View all] WarGamer Jun 24 OP

Good info. underpants Jun 24 #1

Predicting the attack. Norrrm Jun 24 #2

Uh oh. AloeVera Jun 24 #3

Of course the Fordow facility was damaged... but we can only be sure of surface damage. harumph Jun 24 #4

trump did a "Hegseth"....neither of them know anything about OpSec. albacore Jun 24 #5