What Are Bunker Busters? 15-Ton GBU-57A/B Bomb that Cost $500 Is the Only Weapon that Could Destroy Fordow Nuclear Facility
A 15-ton "bunker buster" bomb was likely needed to destroy Iran's final remaining nuclear facility — a weapon only the United States possesses. The extremely powerful weapon is the largest conventional (non-nuclear) bomb in the U.S. military's arsenal.
The bomb was necessary because the target — the Fordow uranium enrichment plant — is buried roughly 300 feet deep within a mountain near the city of Qom, about two hours south of Tehran. The bomb, known as the GBU-57A/B Massive Ordnance Penetrator, was developed by Boeing specifically for use by the U.S. Air Force. The United States dropped six such "bunker bombs" which Trump said, "completely and totally obliterated" the highly secretive nuclear facility.
Only in US Arsenal
Due to its massive weight, the bomb can only be deployed by a B-2 Spirit stealth bomber — an advanced aircraft that is not part of Israel's air force arsenal. "The United States controls the bomber and the bomb," John Spencer, chair of urban warfare studies at the Modern War Institute at West Point military academy, recently told The New York Post.
The missile cost the U.S. Army more than $500 million to develop and was specifically engineered to burrow deep into the Fordow facility to destroy its nuclear centrifuges, according to a 2013 report by The Wall Street Journal. At the time, the report noted that 20 of these bombs had been produced for the U.S. military.
Another variant of a "bunker buster" is the GBU-37, which weighs 5,000 pounds.
While the U.S. has provided Israel with less powerful bunker-busting munitions, it has refused to share the Massive Ordnance Penetrator with any allied nation.
"I've seen 500-pounders, and they'll shake your teeth when they go off. It's like an earthquake," said Spencer. "This will be much more than that."
Trump Bombers Do the Talking
Trump stunned the world just before 8 p.m. on Saturday by revealing on Truth Social that he had authorized a strike on Iran. "We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran, including Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan. All planes are now outside of Iran air space," Trump posted on Truth Social, marking the first-ever US strike on Iranian territory.
"A full payload of BOMBS was dropped on the primary site, Fordow. All planes are safely on their way home. Congratulations to our great American Warriors. There is not another military in the World that could have done this. NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE! Thank you for your attention to this matter."
At 10 p.m. on Saturday, the president addressed the nation from the White House, saying that the mission that "our objective was the destruction of Iran's nuclear enrichment capacity and a stop to the nuclear threat posed by the world's number one state sponsor of terror."
"Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success," Trump said, flanked by Vice President JD Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
"Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated. Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace. If they do not, future attacks will be far greater and a lot easier."
Trump went on to say that "for 40 years, Iran has been saying, 'Death to America, Death to Israel.' They have been killing our people, blowing off their arms, blowing off their legs with roadside bombs — that was their specialty.
Trump said he and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu "worked as a team, like perhaps no team has ever worked before," in their efforts to dismantle Iran's nuclear program.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Times
an hour ago
- Business Times
Why global imbalances do matter
NOBODY can know either the future course of the new war in the Middle East or its possible economic effects. I wrote what I could on this in a column entitled The Economic Consequences of the Israel-Hamas War, on Oct 31, 2023. The big question, I argued, was whether the conflagration would extend to oil-related production and transport from the Gulf region. This region contains 48 per cent of global proved reserves and produced 33 per cent of the world's oil in 2022. It also has a chokepoint on exports at the Strait of Hormuz. These realities remain. The question is now mostly about Donald Trump: Does he know how to end this war? It is a question raised in other areas, too, notably the interaction of his trade policy with his fiscal policy. The aim of the former is to reduce, if not eliminate, trade deficits. The aim of the latter is to run huge fiscal deficits. These two objectives are incompatible. Large external deficits mean, by definition, that the country is spending more than its income. Since the US economy is running close to its potential, with an unemployment rate at only 4.2 per cent, no quick way to raise incomes still further exists. So reducing the external deficit will require reductions in national spending. The obvious way to do this would be with a sustained lowering of the fiscal deficit, via higher taxes and lower spending commitments. That would allow the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates, which Trump would welcome. It should also weaken the dollar, which should help increase production of tradeable goods and services. So, apart from the fact that Trump adores low taxes and high spending, why not go for this? The answer is that it could be worse than just politically difficult. The issue is illuminated by examination of sectoral savings and investment balances in the US economy since the early 1990s. Crucially, these have to add to zero, because domestic savings plus net foreign savings (that is, the net capital inflow) equals domestic investment. On average, the US household and corporate sectors had surplus savings of 3.5 per cent and 1.6 per cent of gross domestic product, respectively, from 2008 to 2023. Even from 1992 to 2007, they were close to balance. So, on a net basis, the US private sector does not need foreign savings. The dominant net borrower in the US economy is the federal government. This analysis suggests that the benefit to the US of its persistent net capital inflows is the ability to have a larger fiscal deficit, and so grow its public debt. This does not look like a good bargain. But if the government cut its deficit, while the external inflow continued, the outcome could be to drive the private sector into deficit, either via a slump in its income or a surge in its spending. The former means a recession. The latter means asset price bubbles. Broadly, the tendency for large and sustained inflows of foreign capital to produce wasteful borrowing, slumps, or both, is the biggest problem it creates. In a recent paper on the issue for the Carnegie Endowment, Michael Pettis and Erica Hogan focus on another downside: they argue that suppression of consumption in China and other countries leads to huge trade surpluses and so to large deficits abroad. Countries running these trade deficits, such as the US and UK, end up with smaller manufacturing sectors than those with surpluses. But, Paul Krugman argues, even eliminating the US trade deficit would only increase US manufacturing value added by 2.5 percentage points of GDP. Trade imbalances themselves are not so important. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up Pettis and Hogan also show that the size of the manufacturing sector is associated with the level of savings. But the difference between the Chinese and US average shares of manufacturing in GDP between 2012 and 2022 is 17 percentage points (28 per cent in China to 11 per cent in the US). This is far bigger than the gap between the respective trade balances. The explanation must lie with the composition of demand. The investment that the high savings finance creates heavier demand for manufactured goods than does consumption. In sum, the main reason to worry about global trade imbalances is not the impact on manufacturing, which, for a country like the US, is a second order issue, but rather on financial stability. This is also why fiscal adjustment needs to be a co-operative venture when the participants are such big economies. Americans who focus on the fiscal deficit alone ignore its impact on global demand. The US is likely to fail to cut its external deficit just by raising tariffs, unless protection is set at totally prohibitive levels. Otherwise tariffs just shift the composition of production, from exportables towards import substitutes, with little effect on the trade balance. Yet if it tried, instead, to close its external deficit by eliminating its fiscal deficits, it could generate a significant economic slowdown. The US is not a small country: it has to take global repercussions into account. If it wants to accelerate a global discussion of imbalances with a policy intervention, the obvious one would not be tariffs but a tax on capital inflows. That would at least target excess foreign lending, though the entity that needs to wean itself off that is the US government. This might, if launched, lead to a global discussion of the kind discussed in a thoughtful paper by Richard Samans for the Brookings Institution. The discussion, he suggests, should focus on fiscal, monetary, development and international trade policies. This makes sense. But it also assumes an intelligent and co-operative approach to policy. That looks unlikely. Brandishing a stick can launch a global debate. But it is what follows the threats that matters. FINANCIAL TIMES
AsiaOne
2 hours ago
- AsiaOne
Fragile ceasefire holding, Trump envoy says peace talks with Iran 'promising', World News
WASHINGTON/TEL AVIV/ISTANBUL — The ceasefire brokered by US President Donald Trump between Iran and Israel appeared to be holding on Wednesday (June 25) a day after both countries signalled that their air war had ended, at least for now. Each side claimed victory on Tuesday after 12 days of war, which the US joined with airstrikes in support of Israel to take out Iran's uranium-enrichment facilities. Trump's Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, said late on Tuesday that talks between the United States and Iran were "promising" and that Washington was hopeful for a long-term peace deal. "We are already talking to each other, not just directly but also through interlocutors. I think that the conversations are promising. We are hopeful that we can have a long-term peace agreement that resurrects Iran," Witkoff said in an interview on Fox News' "The Ingraham Angle" show. "Now it's for us to sit down with the Iranians and get to a comprehensive peace agreement, and I am very confident that we are going to achieve that," he added. Trump said over the weekend that US stealth bombers had "obliterated" Iran's programme to develop nuclear weapons. Iran says its enrichment activities are for civilian purposes only. But Trump's claim appeared to be contradicted by an initial report by one of his administration's intelligence agencies, according to three people familiar with the matter. One of the sources said Iran's enriched uranium stocks had not been eliminated, and the country's nuclear programme, much of which is buried deep underground, may have been set back only a month or two. The White House said the intelligence assessment was "flat out wrong." According to the report, which was produced by the Defence Intelligence Agency, the strikes sealed off the entrances to two of the facilities, but did not collapse underground buildings, said one of the people familiar with its findings. Some centrifuges remained intact, the Washington Post said, citing an unnamed person familiar with the report. Trump's administration told the United Nations Security Council on Tuesday that its weekend strikes had "degraded" Iran's nuclear programme, short of Trump's assertion that the facilities had been "obliterated." Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Tuesday that the attack had removed the nuclear threat against Israel and he was determined to thwart any attempt by Tehran to revive its weapons programme. "We have removed two immediate existential threats to us: the threat of nuclear annihilation and the threat of annihilation by 20,000 ballistic missiles," he said. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said his country had successfully ended the war in what he called a "great victory," according to Iranian media. Pezeshkian also told Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman that Tehran was ready to resolve differences with the US, according to official news agency IRNA. Israel launched the surprise air war on June 13, attacking Iranian nuclear facilities and killing top military commanders in the worst blow to the Islamic Republic since the 1980s war with Iraq. Iran, which denies trying to build nuclear weapons, retaliated with barrages of missiles on Israeli military sites and cities. Iran has arrested 700 people accused of ties with Israel during the 12-day conflict, the state-affiliated Nournews reported on Wednesday and Iran executed three men on Wednesday, convicted of collaborating with Israel's Mossad spy agency and smuggling equipment used in an unnamed assassination, the Iranian judiciary's Mizan news agency reported. Restrictions lifted Israel's military lifted restrictions on activity across the country at 8pm local time (1.00am on Wednesday in Singapore time) on Tuesday, and officials said Ben Gurion Airport, the country's main airport near Tel Aviv, had reopened. Iran's airspace likewise will be reopened, state-affiliated Nournews reported. Oil prices edged higher on Wednesday, finding some respite after plummeting in the last two sessions, as investors assessed the stability of the ceasefire and the diminished prospect of an Iranian blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. The truce appeared fragile: Both Israel and Iran took hours to acknowledge they had accepted the ceasefire and accused each other of violating it. Trump scolded both sides but aimed especially stinging criticism at Israel, telling the close US ally to "calm down now." He later said Israel called off further attacks at his command. Israel's defence minister, Israel Katz, said he told his US counterpart, Pete Hegseth, that his country would respect the ceasefire unless Iran violated it. Pezeshkian likewise said Iran would honour the ceasefire as long as Israel did, according to Iranian media. Israeli armed forces chief of staff Eyal Zamir said a "significant chapter" of the conflict had concluded but the campaign against Iran was not over. He said the military would refocus on its war against Iran-backed Hamas militants in Gaza. Iranian authorities said 610 people were killed in their country by Israeli strikes and 4,746 injured. Iran's retaliatory bombardment killed 28 people in Israel, the first time its air defences were penetrated by large numbers of Iranian missiles. [[nid:719458]]
Business Times
3 hours ago
- Business Times
Trump baffles with sudden U-turn on China buying Iranian oil
[WASHINGTON] US President Donald Trump on Tuesday (Jun 24) appeared to undermine years of US sanctions on Iran, giving its biggest customer, China the green light to carry on buying its oil as he seeks to bolster a ceasefire with Israel. The announcement on social media, which surprised both oil traders and officials in his own government, could undermine the central element of Washington's Iran policy under multiple administrations, which have sought to cut the regime's main source of revenue by making its top export off limits. 'China can now continue to purchase oil from Iran,' the president said on Truth Social, amid a flurry of posts demanding Israel and Iran cease hostilities. The statement landed only hours after Trump declared the Middle East rivals had agreed to a ceasefire, which got off to a shaky start with early breaches by both sides. It follows massive US airstrikes on several of the Islamic Republic's nuclear facilities on Sunday, an offensive aimed at stopping Tehran from obtaining an atomic weapon. Oil prices extended losses on Tuesday after Trump's comments, with West Texas Intermediate futures sinking 6 per cent to settle near US$64 a barrel. Futures plunged as the threat to crude flows from the Israel-Iran conflict faded. US Treasury and State department officials handling Iranian oil sanctions were surprised by Trump's statement and uncertain how to immediately interpret it, according to sources familiar with the situation. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up In the meantime, however, Treasury will continue to strictly enforce related sanctions, said one of the sources, who asked not to be identified given the political and market sensitivity of the issue. The Treasury Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment, while the State Department referred questions to the White House. A senior White House official later signalled that sanctions would remain, saying that the president continues to call on China and others to import American oil rather than Iranian, which would be a violation of US sanctions. The official added that Trump's post was only intended to highlight that his actions over the past several days ensured that the Strait of Hormuz was not impacted, which the official said would have been devastating for China. Tammy Bruce, State Department spokeswoman, declined to provide further specifics during a briefing on Tuesday. 'I'm not going to get ahead of the president or try to guess what his strategy will be,' she said when asked about the comment. 'Things happen quickly and I think we will find out sooner rather than later.' The apparent shift also comes as the Trump administration seeks to hammer out a new trade framework with China and climb down from a tariff war that saw duties reach levels high enough to cut all trade between the world's two biggest economies. The comments appeared to be Trump 'throwing a bone' to China and Iran for cooperating in their respective talks with the US, said Mark Malek, chief investment officer at Siebert. 'Most of us are thinking that it's just rhetoric at this point. But it definitely took me by surprise.' Allowing a specific carve out for China may be an effort by Trump to send positive signals to Beijing as he seeks a new tariff deal, said a source familiar with the president's thinking, also asking not to be identified. While the potential shift may ease some legal risks around China's buying of Iranian oil, it's unclear what impact the change would have on actual flows. China, the world's biggest importer, gets about 14 per cent of its crude from Iran. But that figure is likely higher as some imports are masked as shipments from Malaysia, as well as the United Arab Emirates and Oman, in order to circumvent US sanctions, which Beijing does not recognise. While China has not officially purchased Iranian barrels since June 2022, third-party data providers and traders signal flows have been resilient despite broad US sanctions. That's because the Chinese have built a supply chain outside of Western control, which includes dark fleet ships and yuan-denominated payments, supporting imports of more than one million barrels a day. Iran's oil, often purchased at a discount, is vital for China's substantial private refining sector and a crucial source of fuel for its economy, which has struggled under the weight of a slumping property sector. 'The Iranian oil sanctions have been so significant for so long, but also with relatively muted enforcement,' said Daniel Tannebaum, former Treasury official and partner at Oliver Wyman. 'It would be premature to think that this policy, which would benefit both China and Iran, would go ahead without a longer-term view of ensuring stability in the region, before just literally opening up the spigots to allow legal trade of Iranian oil by China.' Trump as recently as last month, insisted all purchases of Iranian oil or petrochemical products 'must stop, NOW!' and that buyers would be subject to secondary sanctions and prevented from engaging in any business with the US. That threat built on previous warnings from his administration. In February, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Washington intended to squeeze Iran's oil exports to less than 10 per cent of current levels, as it renewed the 'maximum pressure' campaign deployed during Trump's first term. As part of that effort, the US has sanctioned hundreds of oil tankers for their role in handling Tehran's petroleum and, absent an easing in those measures, some buyers may still take a more cautious approach. The White House has also targeted Chinese entities that bought Iranian oil, something that could make other buyers wary. Likewise, secondary sanctions on Iran's sales remain in place and it's not clear where the president's remarks will leave those. The sanctions were intended to force Iran to voluntarily give up uranium enrichment so that it would never be in a position to obtain a nuclear weapon. It's still unclear if US airstrikes over the weekend seriously damaged the country's nuclear facilities, while the International Atomic Energy Agency still does not know what happened to Tehran's stockpile of 409 kilogrammes of highly-enriched uranium – potentially enough for 10 nuclear warheads. BLOOMBERG
