
Could The US Use GBU-57 Bunker Buster On Iran's Nuclear Facility? What Makes This Bomb Unique
The spotlight is on a US bomb never used in combat, the 30,000-pound GBU-57 bunker buster, potentially the only conventional weapon capable of reaching Iran's Fordow nuclear site
As tensions rise between Israel and Iran over Tehran's suspected nuclear ambitions, attention has shifted to one of the most powerful weapons in the American arsenal — the GBU-57A/B 'bunker buster" bomb. Developed to destroy deeply buried and heavily fortified targets, this precision-guided weapon may be the only conventional option capable of neutralising Iran's Fordow nuclear facility, hidden under a mountain near Qom.
Israel does not possess the GBU‑57 or the B‑2 Spirit stealth bomber required to deliver it. For this reason, some observers argue that the US could be drawn into the conflict, should a strike on a hardened site like Fordow be deemed necessary. Yet, using this weapon would represent a major shift — not just militarily, but diplomatically and regionally — signalling that the conflict has entered a far more dangerous phase.
The GBU-57A/B Massive Ordnance Penetrator, or MOP, is the most advanced bunker buster bomb ever built. While the term 'bunker buster" broadly refers to any munition designed to penetrate hardened targets, the GBU-57 stands apart for its sheer size, power, and specificity.
Weighing nearly 30,000 pounds and stretching over 20 feet in length, the bomb is engineered to breach deep earth or reinforced concrete before detonation. It carries more than 5,000 pounds of high explosives and can penetrate up to 200 feet of earth or 60 feet of concrete, a depth unmatched by any conventional bomb.
Its casing, made from a specialised high-strength steel alloy, is built to survive immense pressure upon impact. Its guidance system, enabled by GPS-aided inertial navigation, ensures accuracy against fortified underground bunkers, including those surrounded by mountainous terrain.
At the centre of the current speculation is Iran's Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant, located near the city of Qom. The facility is believed to be buried deep within a mountain and is reportedly engineered to withstand conventional airstrikes. While Israeli officials claim that Fordow is being used to enrich uranium to levels approaching weapons-grade, Tehran has repeatedly denied pursuing a nuclear weapons programme.
Fordow's heavily fortified location makes it nearly impervious to standard munitions. Military analysts believe that only a precision-guided, deep-penetration weapon like the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator could realistically damage the site without resorting to nuclear force.
In an interview with ABC News, retired US Marine Corps Colonel and defence analyst Steve Ganyard said the bomb was designed for exactly such scenarios: 'You make sure you save them for places like Iran and North Korea because you don't need something that goes that deep [in normal circumstances]," he noted. That is why it has come back into global focus amid the escalating Israel-Iran conflict.
Could The US Use GBU-57 In A Strike Against Iran?
Currently, only the United States possesses both the GBU-57 and the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber, the only aircraft capable of carrying the bomb. While Israel has the military expertise and aerial capabilities to conduct precision strikes, it lacks both this specific munition and the required delivery platform.
The B-2 stealth bomber, based at Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri, US, has been tested carrying two GBU-57 bombs, which together make up a 60,000-pound payload. A hypothetical mission to Iran would take around 15 hours, depending on the flight path and aerial refuelling logistics.
That said, authorising a US strike on Iranian soil would represent a serious escalation, likely drawing Washington directly into a wider regional conflict. US President Donald Trump has voiced support for Israel's operations and warned Iran repeatedly, but he has not publicly committed to using the GBU-57.
Has The GBU-57 Ever Been Used In Combat?
Despite its development starting in 2004 and successful tests in later years, the GBU-57 has never been used in an actual combat mission. According to Steve Ganyard, the bomb is not intended for large-scale destruction. 'It wouldn't be a massive blast," he said. 'It would penetrate the ground and shoot up some debris, but it won't be a massive cloud."
The weapon was built for strategic deterrence, not everyday battlefield use. That's also why its stockpile is believed to be relatively small — at least 20 were delivered by Boeing by 2015, though the current number remains classified.
What Would Be The Consequences Of Striking A Nuclear Facility Like Fordow?
Striking a nuclear facility, whether operational or inactive, entails significant risks, not just to military stability but to civilian safety, environmental integrity, and global non-proliferation norms. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has explicitly warned against such actions. In a statement issued on June 13, IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi said, 'Such attacks have serious implications for nuclear safety, security and safeguards, as well as regional and international peace and security."
While Grossi did not refer to any specific site, his remarks followed reports of military activity targeting nuclear-related infrastructure.
Though the current status of uranium enrichment at Iran's Fordow facility is disputed—Iran denies pursuing a nuclear weapon—analysts note that the site is designed to house advanced centrifuges and operate in highly fortified conditions. A strike using the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator could potentially disrupt sensitive systems.
According to a 2021 report from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, damage to such facilities carries risks of localised radioactive contamination, particularly if enriched material is present and containment structures are compromised. Experts also warn of potential Iranian retaliation, whether against American interests in the region, Israeli territory, or commercial shipping routes such as the Strait of Hormuz.
Is The GBU-57 A Tactical Weapon Or Political Signal?
While the GBU-57 is a military asset, it also serves as a strategic message. It is, in essence, a demonstration of what the US can do without crossing into nuclear warfare. Its mere existence raises the bar for any adversary trying to shield sensitive infrastructure.
But with that power comes consequence. The use of a MOP against a nation like Iran, particularly on a nuclear site, would mark a dangerous precedent. It could encourage other countries to build even deeper and more secure underground bunkers, triggering a new kind of arms race not in missiles, but in mountains.
There's also a diplomatic cost. The Trump administration, like its predecessors, has walked a fine line — supporting Israel while calling for restraint and de-escalation. A strike using the GBU-57 would almost certainly draw condemnation from Tehran and its allies, and could derail fragile backchannel negotiations over Iran's nuclear future.
What Comes Next?
top videos
View all
As the situation unfolds, it remains unclear whether the GBU-57 could come into play, but given the nature of the target and the limits of conventional weapons, the possibility cannot be entirely ruled out. While military experts agree that it is the only conventional bomb capable of reaching Fordow, the choice to use it would hinge on more than just engineering. It would reflect a momentous policy shift and raise the stakes in an already volatile region.
Until that line is crossed, the MOP remains both a powerful tool and a geopolitical wildcard, one whose presence alone has changed the contours of modern deterrence.
About the Author
News Desk
The News Desk is a team of passionate editors and writers who break and analyse the most important events unfolding in India and abroad. From live updates to exclusive reports to in-depth explainers, the Desk d...Read More
Get Latest Updates on Movies, Breaking News On India, World, Live Cricket Scores, And Stock Market Updates. Also Download the News18 App to stay updated!
tags :
Iran nuclear facility Israel-Iran tensions
Location :
New Delhi, India, India
First Published:
June 18, 2025, 09:49 IST
News explainers Could The US Use GBU-57 Bunker Buster On Iran's Nuclear Facility? What Makes This Bomb Unique

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time of India
25 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trump goes after Thomas Massie for criticizing Iran attack, says MAGA should drop him
Thomas Massie criticized Trump's Iran attack; the President attacked him scathingly. While the MAGA is massively split over Donald Trump's decision to attack Iran, the president Sunday targeted Kentucky Rep Thomas Massie and said MAGA should drop him. 'Congressman Thomas Massie of Kentucky is not MAGA, even though he likes to say he is,' Trump wrote. 'Actually, MAGA doesn't want him, doesn't know him, and doesn't respect him. He is a negative force who almost always Votes 'NO,' no matter how good something may be. He's a simple minded 'grandstander' who thinks it's good politics for Iran to have the highest level Nuclear weapon, while at the same time yelling 'DEATH TO AMERICA' at every chance they get.' After Trump announced the successful strike of the US Air Force on Iran and the destruction of the nuclear facilities, Massie denounced it and wrote on X that it was not Constitutional. 'It was a good week for the neocons in the military industrial complex who want war all the time,' Massie said on CBS. He added, 'What happens when Israel gets bombed again? Is Trump going to sit by and say, no, we're not going to further engage in this war?' 'MAGA should drop this pathetic LOSER, Tom Massie, like the plague!' Trump wrote. 'The good news is that we will have a wonderful American Patriot running against him in the Republican Primary, and I'll be out in Kentucky campaigning really hard. MAGA is not about lazy, grandstanding, nonproductive politicians, of which Thomas Massie is definitely one.' On CBS, Massie appeared with Democrat Ro Khanna and said it was a "good week for the neocons and the military-industrial complex, who want war all the time".. Massie said his 'side of the MAGA base' is made up of 'non-interventionists" who are "tired from all these wars." Massie and Ro Khanna on June 17 had introduced a resolution to prohibit US involvement in the Israel-Iran war without Congressional approval.


India.com
35 minutes ago
- India.com
Iran-Israel Conflict: What Gamble Has U.S President Donald Trump Taken By Striking Tehran's Nuclear Facilities?
New Delhi: In January, US President Donald Trump returned to office projecting himself as a man of peace. But less than six months into his term, that image is facing its biggest test yet. By ordering direct U.S. military strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, he has entered a volatile conflict between Israel and Iran and dragged Washington into its most dangerous Middle Eastern escalation in years. Just two hours after American warplanes struck targets in Iran, Trump addressed the nation from the White House. With Vice President J.D. Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth by his side, he called the strike a 'resounding success'. He claimed it would stop Iran's nuclear ambitions and pave the way for a more stable future. Iran, however, downplayed the attack, stating only minor damage occurred at its Fordow nuclear facility. Whether Trump's assessment holds true remains to be seen. The U.S. president did not stop at celebration. He issued a warning to Tehran – abandon your nuclear program or the next attacks will be 'more devastating and much easier'. He added that many of Iran's military sites remain on the radar and could be hit with 'speed, precision and skill'. But the boldness of the move raises real fears. UN Secretary-General António Guterres has cautioned that such a strike could spark a dangerous cycle of escalation. The Middle East, already on edge, now risks slipping into a new phase of instability. Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei had earlier warned that any U.S. strike would not go unanswered. Now the world waits to see whether Iran retaliates and how far this conflict might spiral. From 'Two Weeks' to Two Days Just days ago, Trump had said Iran would have 'two weeks' to comply. That ultimatum dissolved in less than 48 hours. On June 22, the president announced the operation had already taken place. Was the two-week deadline just a ruse? A diplomatic bluff to lull Tehran into a false sense of safety? Or had the back-channel efforts led by Trump's peace envoy, Steve Witkoff, already collapsed? So far, few details have emerged. Trump's public remarks framed the strike as an effort to open the door for negotiations. But that may be overly optimistic. Israel's recent military moves against Iran were meant to weaken Tehran's capabilities. Yet Iran still has missiles and allies ready to respond. With the Fordow facility hit, Iran now has even greater incentive to strike back. Trump hopes Iran will now come to the table and offer concessions. But it is unclear why a nation that refused diplomacy after Israeli airstrikes would suddenly bow after American bombs. And if these latest attacks failed to cause significant damage to Iran's deeply buried nuclear sites, pressure will grow for Trump to launch more strikes. That could force him into a bigger gamble with unpredictable consequences. Political Fallout in the U.S. Back home, Trump's decision has ignited both Democratic outrage and skepticism from within his own 'America First' base. Critics say the president has abandoned his core promise to keep the United States out of foreign wars. Trump's decision to appear with his top aides may have been designed to show party unity. Vice President Vance, who has long championed a restrained foreign policy, recently said Trump remains a non-interventionist. If the strike remains a one-off, Trump might patch over internal rifts. But if America gets pulled deeper into conflict, the same president who once slammed endless wars may face growing rebellion within his ranks. The action of June 22 marked a dramatic shift for a leader who took pride in avoiding war during his first term. It also stood in sharp contrast to his 2024 campaign speeches, where he repeatedly criticised past presidents for entangling America in overseas military ventures. Trump has now chosen his path. What happens next may no longer be entirely in his hands.


Economic Times
an hour ago
- Economic Times
Could China and North Korea join Iran in attacking the US? Defense Secretary blames Biden's failed policies
The United States military attacked Iranian nuclear sites amid the Iran-Israel conflict. US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth criticised the previous administration's (Biden) policies. He suggested these policies pushed Iran, North Korea, and China closer. There is worry about a possible coordinated response from these nations. The US military has increased alert levels in the Middle East and Indo-Pacific. US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth blamed the Biden administration for driving Iran, North Korea, and China into closer strategic alignment, and didn't rule out the possibility of a coordinated attack from them. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Following the United States ' military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities amid the ongoing Iran-Israel war, US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth blamed the Biden administration for driving Iran, North Korea, and China into closer strategic a press briefing after the operation, Hegseth did not rule out the possibility that the three countries could coordinate a retaliatory attack on the United States, a concern within the defense establishment over an emerging anti-US axis, especially after the US attacks on Iran.'Unfortunately, with the policies of the previous administration, it drove those together, which created a challenging environment,' Hegseth said, referring to growing military cooperation between Iran and North added that the current military operation on Iran is focused solely on Iran and its nuclear elaborating on China's potential role, Hegseth shifted focus to reiterate President Trump's long-held stance that Iran must never obtain a nuclear said Trump views the current moment, after prolonged diplomatic deadlock, as the 'perfect opportunity' to pursue a direct military remarks clarify Washington's worry about deepening ties among adversarial states. Iran and North Korea have long been reported to share missile technology and nuclear research, while China has maintained strong diplomatic and economic relations with Beijing has not made any military commitments, analysts warn that a coordinated backlash from these countries cannot be ruled Pentagon has raised alert levels at several American military installations across the Middle East and Indo-Pacific region, anticipating possible retaliation through both state and proxy US military conducted ' Operation Midnight Hammer ' on Saturday, an operation against Iran involving over 125 aircraft. This mission included a deception tactic: bombers were deployed over the Pacific as a operation involved seven stealth B-2 bombers. The bombers dropped more than a dozen 30,000-pound Massive Ordnance Penetrator bombs on two Iranian nuclear facilities, Fordow and Natanz, Caine said. Tomahawk missiles were launched at foreign minister accused Washington of crossing a "very big red line" and expressed skepticism about the prospects for diplomacy. President Donald Trump has warned that the US may launch further attacks if Iran does not seek peace.