Bunker Busters And Broken Promises: The Day America Chose War Over Diplomacy

How 37 hours over the Persian Gulf changed everything. The targets were as significant as they were devastating: Natanz, Fordo, and Isfahan—the crown jewels of Iran's nuclear program.

Photo Credit: Donald Trump/ Truth Social (L), @IDF/ X (R)

The mushroom clouds may not have risen over Iran this past Sunday, but make no mistake—what happened in the early hours of June 22, 2025, was nothing short of a declaration that diplomacy is dead and America's military-industrial complex is very much alive.

Thirty-seven hours. That's how long it took for U.S. B-2 Spirit bombers to fly from Missouri to Iran, refuel multiple times in mid-air, and deliver what President Donald Trump proudly called a "very successful" strike on Iran's nuclear facilities. Thirty-seven hours to potentially push the Middle East to the brink of a regional war that could engulf the world.

The targets were as significant as they were devastating: Natanz, Fordo, and Isfahan—the crown jewels of Iran's nuclear program. When the dust settled, Iran's uranium enrichment capabilities lay in ruins, centrifuges destroyed, and years of nuclear research reduced to radioactive rubble contained within facility walls.

But let's be brutally honest about what really happened here. This wasn't just about stopping Iran from getting nuclear weapons. This was about flexing America's military might with weapons that cost more than the annual GDP of small nations. Each B-2 bomber that participated in this mission carries a price tag of $2.1 billion—that's ₹17,500 crore per aircraft. The 12 GBU-57 bunker buster bombs dropped on Fordo alone represent the most powerful non-nuclear weapons in America's arsenal, each capable of penetrating 200 feet underground before detonating.

The sheer firepower deployed tells a story of overwhelming force: 30 Tomahawk cruise missiles launched from Virginia and Los Angeles-class submarines, F-22 Raptors and F-35A Lightning II fighter jets providing air support, and those massive 30,000-pound bunker busters designed specifically to destroy what conventional bombs cannot touch. This wasn't surgical precision—this was shock and awe, 2025 edition.

What makes this particularly chilling is how predictable it all was. Israel had already struck these same facilities on June 13, claiming Iran was dangerously close to weapons-grade uranium production. Israeli officials spoke of an "immediate threat" and "urgent danger." But rather than intensifying diplomatic efforts or multilateral sanctions, the response was to double down with even more devastating military action.

The timing is no coincidence. Iran had been enriching uranium to 60% purity at Natanz—not quite weapons-grade, but close enough to make Western powers nervous. The facility had already survived multiple attacks, including the famous Stuxnet cyberattack widely attributed to Israel and the U.S. This time, however, there would be no recovering from digital sabotage. The underground centrifuge cascades that were Iran's pride and technological achievement were obliterated when Israeli attacks cut power to the site.

Fordo, built deep under a mountain and protected by anti-aircraft systems, was supposed to be impregnable. It took America's most advanced stealth technology and most powerful conventional weapons to prove that assumption wrong. The facility that Iran had secretly constructed starting in 2007, only revealing its existence to the UN in 2009 after Western intelligence agencies had already discovered it, now lies in ruins beneath tons of mountain rock.

Isfahan, employing thousands of nuclear scientists and housing research reactors built with Chinese assistance, rounded out the trinity of destruction. The uranium conversion facility—where raw uranium is processed for further enrichment—was reduced to rubble, though the International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed no radiation leaked beyond the site boundaries.

The human cost of this technological devastation remains largely unspoken. Thousands of nuclear scientists, technicians, and support staff who dedicated their careers to Iran's atomic program have seen their life's work destroyed in a matter of hours. The broader Iranian population, already struggling under years of international sanctions, now faces the prospect of even harsher economic isolation and potential military retaliation.

But perhaps most disturbing is how this operation represents a fundamental shift in how the world's most powerful military addresses perceived threats. Gone are the months of diplomatic negotiations, UN resolutions, and multilateral pressure that characterized previous nuclear crises. Instead, we have a doctrine of preemptive destruction that relies on technological superiority and overwhelming force to eliminate problems before they fully materialize.

The stealth capabilities of the B-2, the precision guidance systems of the Tomahawk missiles, the advanced radar-evading features of the F-22 and F-35—all of this represents decades of military research and hundreds of billions in defense spending. It's a technological marvel designed for one purpose: to project American power anywhere on Earth with minimal risk to American lives. The question is whether this capability makes the world safer or simply makes war more tempting for those who possess such overwhelming advantages.

Iran's response, when it comes, will likely be asymmetric. Unable to match America's conventional military might, Tehran may turn to proxy forces, cyberattacks, or other forms of irregular warfare. The cycle of escalation that began with Israel's June 13 strikes has now reached a level where de-escalation seems almost impossible. Each side has crossed red lines that cannot be uncrossed.

The international community's muted response speaks volumes about the new global order. When the world's dominant military power can fly halfway around the world, destroy another nation's strategic infrastructure, and face little more than diplomatic protests, it sends a clear message about whose rules actually matter in international relations.

President Trump's description of the strikes as "very successful" will undoubtedly play well with his political base. There's something undeniably appealing about the image of American technological superiority delivering swift, decisive results against a longtime adversary. But success in military terms doesn't necessarily translate to success in strategic or diplomatic terms.

The real question is what happens next. Iran's nuclear program may be set back by years, but its government remains in power, its regional influence intact, and its motivation for revenge stronger than ever. The Middle East has just become significantly more dangerous, not less.

As the radioactive dust settles over three destroyed nuclear facilities, the world must grapple with a uncomfortable truth: in an age of technological supremacy, the temptation to use overwhelming force as a substitute for patient diplomacy may be too strong to resist. The 37-hour mission that destroyed Iran's nuclear capabilities may have solved one problem, but it has created dozens of others that bombs cannot fix.

The age of bunker busters and precision strikes has arrived. Whether it leads to lasting peace or perpetual conflict remains to be seen. 

(Girish Linganna is an award-winning science communicator and a Defence, Aerospace & Geopolitical Analyst. He is the Managing Director of ADD Engineering Components India Pvt. Ltd., a subsidiary of ADD Engineering GmbH, Germany.)