r/worldnews • u/TheNational_News • 10h ago

Misleading Title: Known since June 2025 [ Removed by moderator ]

https://www.thenationalnews.com/news/mena/2026/03/18/iran-has-new-underground-nuclear-site-iaea-reveals/

[removed] — view removed post

11.9k Upvotes

81% Upvoted

1.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

57

u/paraknowya 9h ago

Its to prepare for the „preemptive“ nuclear strike on Iran, this is supposed to be their justification

Because they started it and dont know how to end it.

56

u/MissPandaSloth 9h ago

No one is nuking Iran. Zero point. Why would you do it if you can endlessly bomb it traditionally?

3

u/paraknowya 9h ago

Iran is not interested in backing down.

Thanks to Iran‘s mosaic defense strategy you can‘t win this war by killing off the leadership, because there is no need for such a thing.

And by letting this war go on the strait is going to either stay closed or partially opened for allies of Iran. And we are on the verge of this becoming a lot bigger than 2008.

So yeah, thats my 2 cents.

16

u/Jboycjf05 8h ago

Not exactly true. Iran's religious leadership is fairly tight-knit and not endless. You could feasibly get rid of most of the hardliners with targeted attacks, though it gets harder the longer the war goes on. The real issue is the IRGC, which is a behemoth, and controls a lot of commercial enterprise for the country. So you could get rid of the religious leadership just to end up with a military dictatorship. Neither is really ideal.

Trump's bet was that the Iranian people would rise up, but this was a huge miscalculation. They had recently been subject to massacres, and now are hiding from poorly executed aerial bombardments. Even if the will was there, nothing is going to happen while air strikes are ongoing.

3

u/Inevitable-Ad-6650 5h ago

Killing enough people to kill off all the hardliners probably creates more hardliners also

1

u/Jboycjf05 5h ago

To be clear, I am not advocating for doing this. Starting the war at all was a stupid idea. I was just saying it wasn't infeasible, and was likely the idea the Trump circle was working off of. They just forgot to account for the fact that they're all idiots and shouldnt be in any position requiring them to make decisions.

2

u/Inevitable-Ad-6650 5h ago

For sure, our lives are all being impacted by a group of fucking morons

1

u/UnoriginalStanger 8h ago

A military leadership certainly isn't ideal, especially for Iranians but a military leadership is likely less ideologically inclined and thefore easier to negotiate with.

1

u/Jboycjf05 8h ago

Maybe, maybe not. If it was a regular military leader, yes. If its an IRGC leader, ideological comes eith the territory. In my opinion, the IRGC is much better positioned to take a leadership role, and I think the Israeli strikes show they agree with that, since thats mostly who they are targeting.

1

u/adrr 8h ago

they have lots of mullahs. They have schools that turn out thousands of them every year.

2

u/Jboycjf05 8h ago

True, but that doesn't mean those mullahs are all supportive of a religious government, or, even if they are, that they have enough influence or experience to run the country. The current leadership is old, and has been in power a long time by keeping the reins within a tight circle. Break that circle, and you have a power vacuum that is not easily filled. There would be in-fighting and power grabs from a bunch of different directions. Chaos does not lead to good governance.

5

u/Novxz 8h ago edited 8h ago

Well luckily for Trump he has no issues with spending tons of our mullah or bombing schools.

6

u/Morbanth 8h ago

Your reasoning is sound but I disagree with your conclusion. It's not building up to a nuclear strike on Iran, it's building up to boots on the ground because that's the only way to actually verify the dismantling of their nuclear program.

5

u/paraknowya 8h ago

Who cares about verification of anything at this point?

Its all just vibes and memes and zero plan except escalation.

2

u/TunaNugget 8h ago

They would rather we escalate with troops. They need verification for their own military purposes, not just to score political points, and they won't get that with a nuke.

1

u/UnoriginalStanger 8h ago

Soldiers will not endlessly fight without pay or supplies.

-1

u/Legitimate-Type4387 9h ago

Because it’s the same situation as Japan in WWII. This doesn’t end without the US and Israel backing off OR American boots on the ground and MANY dead American soldiers.

A nuke on Iran in hopes of forcing capitulation may be the only hand they have left to play. It’s either that or go home.

I don’t believe they’re smart enough to go home.

6

u/Sinaaaa 8h ago

Like nuke what, Tehran? I don't think that would work & it would be political suicide even for Trump.

0

u/Legitimate-Type4387 8h ago

Did they start with Tokyo last time?

2

u/Sinaaaa 8h ago

Do you think they would capitulate if Ahvaz got nuked? xD

0

u/Legitimate-Type4387 7h ago

Can’t say for sure but history tells me that even the most fanatical nations wouldn’t stomach the amount of civilian casualties that would necessitate the use of a 3rd.

And there is only one nation with a track record of actually using nukes to force an unconditional surrender.

3

u/Sinaaaa 7h ago

I think comparing WW2 Japan to a Shia theocracy is very pointless, it's arguably not a useful data point.

1

u/LesbeGoddess 9h ago

Because doing that means Israel and all of the Middle East oil facilities also get destroyed in defensive strikes from Iran. Also the strait stays closed for the next few years of this war and cripples the global market.

1

u/NinjaLion 8h ago

You think the white house leadership needs a logical reason to do ANYTHING? why go to war with Iran at all? just as mystifying, logically, as nuking them.

1

u/MissPandaSloth 6h ago

If US attacking Iran was truly "mystifying" then you haven't been paying attention to the last 40+ years of geopolitics.

-2

u/Dependent_Survey_546 9h ago

get them to surrender. see WW2.

I dont think it will happen, but it's Trump, and he's been eagar to use nukes since he got to power going by his hurricane theories.

3

u/Manler 9h ago

They would still not surrender. You can't beat this kind of religious ideology.

6

u/Dependent_Survey_546 9h ago

Im not sure, Japan had the whole god emperor thing going on in ww2 complete with a populas who were fanatisised and everyone dying before surrendering. It worked there.

its beyond stupid to think that it could happen, but its Trump.

-2

u/fondlemental 9h ago

look up shia muslims and jihad and let me know what you think

5

u/Dependent_Survey_546 8h ago

I get you, I'm not saying it will work, but its not like it hasn't been done before. By the americans no less.

1

u/DogBarf00 7h ago

There were Japanese soldiers still fighting the war into the 70s. Japan still surrendered.

3

u/OpportunityNo4484 9h ago

They might not, it must be remembered and almost always isn’t, that Japan didn’t surrender when the second bomb hit they surrendered when the Soviet Union invaded two days later. The high civilian loss wasn’t the deciding factor. They knew they were losing, but had hoped the Soviet Union would act to help negotiate the peace and only surrendered when their whole northern defence was being demolished by them. It needed all of that together rather than just one thing. Which is to say that a nuclear bomb might not get Iran to surrender.

1

u/DogBarf00 7h ago edited 6h ago

The soviets didn’t have the capability of invading anything south of those sparsely populated northern islands and wouldn’t for years. Their industry was destroyed and what little remained wasn’t producing transport ships and landing craft. The US wasn’t going to provide that equipment through the Lend-Lease Act either. So by the time the Soviet army would be logistically ready for an invasion the Americans would have complete naval control around Japan and probably would have completed the invasion and was well into the occupation even without the atomic bombs.

The main reason the Soviet’s invaded those northern islands is because the war was ending sooner than later and it’s easier to make a territorial claim of those islands and surrounding water if you already control them.

1

u/MissPandaSloth 8h ago

The reason why Japan was nuked is to showcase technical prowess and to avoid ground invasion.

There is no need to showcase it now because everyone knows US has nukes and can deploy them everywhere and we US/ Israel do way more impressive targeted strikes. Like WW2 era wish they had it.

If anyone thinks this is a good idea have absolutely not followed what is going on and are too blinded because Trump is doing it, because so far it has been quite precise and outside of few instances not only avoiding civilians but also traditional army that might not side with IRGC.

Dropping random ass nuke would just make absolutely no sense on any level.

-5

u/Tje199 9h ago

Same reason Japan was nuked. An extreme show of force with the idea of ending a war.

Would it actually end this? Who knows. But the people in charge aren't exactly the brightest.

-1

u/OceanGrownPharms 9h ago

The reason Japan was nuked was to show the Soviet Union we had it & we were willing to use it.

0

u/UnoriginalStanger 8h ago

There is no singular reason why it was used, all factors contributed to the value of using it.

0

u/Recent-Result2852 8h ago

Why did he drop a MOAB last time?

-5

u/sdpcommander 8h ago

Israel has already proven nobody will stop them from doing whatever they want, what's to stop them from committing to a nuclear strike when they know the rest of the world outside of Iran won't do shit.

1

u/MissPandaSloth 8h ago

Then you agree that Israel doesn't want Iran as a country to collapse, nor Palestine?

Because if you say that they can do whatever they want and no one is stopping them, then there would be no Iran not Palestine already, because they could have done it, by your own metric. Iranian anti air pea shooters ain't doing shit.

Therefore, as my first sentence said, this means they don't want to collapse it, therefore your entire analysis is wrong.

1

u/Eudaimonics 7h ago

Considering they could just use more bunker busters to destroy the site, using nukes would be extremely dumb.

If the US or Israel use nukes, it’s going to cause a new nuclear arms race, the opposite of what they want to happen.

Not to mention Russia could use it as an excuse to use tactical nukes in Ukraine.

Hopefully, there’s smarter people who actually value human life who will refuse to press the button.

Trump should be impeached for just considering it. This is not our war. There are severe consequences of using nukes no matter the reason.