bombing Iran's nuclear facilities?

Question

some people said that we should bomb Iran's nuclear facilities
but would this not just cause a lot of radioactive crap to spread everywere. I would like to know from someone who knows

Answer 1

There is that risk of spreading nuclear radiation, but the level of risk depends on the specific target. An attack on a fully-operational reactor (as opposed to a half-built or inoperable reactor like the Osirak one in Saddam's Iraq which the Israelis took out back in 1986) would have a high risk of nuclear fallout especially if that reactor was poorly designed, whereas an attack on the enrichment facilities (which are if I remember correctly is the precise thing that the IAEA and the EU have problems with) would have significantly lower risk of nuclear fallout since the attack would just level the building, destroy the enriching equipment and trap most of the radioactive material is inside.

If any fallout does occur, then the spread of the fallout would depend primarily on the weather patterns, particularly wind speed and direction.

Answer 2

this may well be purely a splash stupid question and you're able to examine up on present day information formerly asking questions like this. Israel does no longer want to assist the U. S. while they bombed an Iranian facility by way of fact the U. S. and Israel have very distinctive motives. Secondly you have mentioned that China and Russia will help Iran, as though they are nonetheless soviet states. China is fastly transforming into probable the main effectual superpower interior the international. yet i dont think of they have any hobbies somewhat in Iran. immediately, they have their eyes set upon uncooked materials, like copper, coal etc. finally why would the U. S. bomb a nuclear facility? have you ever no longer amassed by making use of now that the U. S. are purely involved in oil? They dont care approximately nuclear palms. And fairly frankly, that's stupid to think of that Iran would want to apply them against the U. S., as even nevertheless in a nuclear conflict everybody loses, the U. S. would nonetheless have some style of 'greater floor' after the fallout in any case.

Answer 3

I just can't help but feel that President Bush is just itching to do this. The agenda of the elite Illuminati is to start world war 3. I think it very likely that the bombing of Iran is an integral part of this plan, and will probably be carried out in the near future. True, it will contaminate the area with radioactive fallout, but that's already being done in Iraq, with depleted uranium weapons.

Answer 4

I Say We Use Nuclear War Heads To Start With,And Do A Couple Of Their Major Cities To Set An Example Of What Happens To D*mbass Troublemakers

Answer 5

Bombing the facilities would not spread near the amounts of fatal radiation that an all out nuclear war would. The fall out we would have to worry about would be from fanatical Muslim groups that would once again spread their message of hate throughout the world.

Answer 6

We wouldn't do a nasty thing like bombing Iran's nuclear facilities, it would be more like bombing their capital of
Tehran.

Answer 7

No unless we use the bunker busting, non-nuclear bombs, which carry the same yield as the smaller tactical nukes.

Answer 8

That would depend on the amount of material and the type of bomb used.

Answer 9

USA have nuclear facilities too. Why should USA be allowed to have nuclear weapons but not Iran? You can't exactly say that USA doesn't have a history of warmongering (e.g. Vietnam, Iraq, Cuba etc)

Answer 10

Wait a nuclear bomb detonates you will really have to worry about a lot of radiation everywhere.