California Republican Duncan Hunter to Nuke Iran

This is moments after impact outside Homs, Syria
This is moments after impact outside Homs, Syria
This is how the mushroom forms minutes later.
This is how the mushroom forms minutes later.

So, the Republican from California, a Congressman, named Duncan Hunter suggested in an interview with C-Span, an alternative to Obama's still unknown deal with Iran to restrain them from further acquiring the nuclear bomb.

Yes, his plan, while not on the minds of all Republicans, probably has crossed the minds of Democrats and the White House team as the military option that Obama claims is still viable. His plan is to use tactical nuclear bombs on the sites to set Iran back 10 years or more. Using the conventional mountain penetrating bombs might work, but that is the difference. A tactical nuclear weapon, well placed, will wreck havoc on the Iranian site developing a nuclear bomb. Tactical nuclear bombs are far less destructive than the typical A-bomb that most think about and radiation lasts for 70 years. Tactical nukes are do not have the same levels at all.

Modern tactical nuclear warheads have yields up to the tens of kilotons. Battlefield tactical nukes can be fired as artillery shells in one kiloton, this amounts to about 70 tons of TNT. other shells can contain 5 kilotons. Some tactical missiles have 15 kilotons. Aircraft could drop such bombs containing.

It has been confirmed by some that at least one, maybe four tactical nuclear weapons have been used in Syria already. One was confirmed occurring in May, 2013. Probably a 15-20 kiloton. Video shows what experts look for a small mushroom cloud reaching high into the sky and explosions in the sky from combustion. It seemed to have happened again in August, 2013 near Homs. Assad was in a bitter struggle then to hold it. News reports stated that it was caused by hitting an ammunition dump and refueling depot, but experts doubt this. Who has such weapons? Israel, maybe Assad acquired some from Russia or Iran. Some even question if one was used at Benghazi, maybe a 1 kiloton.

Tactical nukes are very destructive with little radiation residue. Strategic nukes, like those on ICBMs, are quite the opposite. So, cruise missiles can easily be in this category when armed to do so. F-15's can carry them and use them.

Thus, it is not as crazy as it sounds to use them to seriously delay Iran's project. That said, you still have the retaliation issue, the regional war issue, the Persian Gulf area, and precise locating the underground facilities Iran has. The far left make light of this on MSNBC, showing how crazy the Republicans are, while being in denial about that a few have been used in Syria and Obama and his team no doubt have this option to use should Iran be just jerking America around to buy time until they get it or a few more of them.

More by this Author


Comments 7 comments

Thief12 profile image

Thief12 2 years ago from Puerto Rico

The idea of an American politician, and you for that matter, considering nuking another country, with which the US has already reached an agreement, says more about the US - and you for that matter - than it says about Iran. What a shame.


MG Singh profile image

MG Singh 2 years ago from Singapore

IIt is easy to suggest this. The backlash may well be a nuclear device at some stage on America itself. How silly to even think of this.


perrya profile image

perrya 2 years ago Author

Well, it is silly and yet the word nuclear invokes a over response as i tried to indicate. Almost immediately, one thinks of the strategic nukes, the kind dropped on japan. Tactical nukes are not these. There is also a fine line between a non-nuke bomb load and a tactical nuke. Anything over 1 kiloton of TNT is a tactical "nuke", if 900, a conventional bomb. Cruise missiles can be them. There is no radiation.

But, like I said, while it might delay Iran for years, the ramifications are unpredictable. I guess those oppose to striking first are saying, "Let Iran use it first" then, it will be okay.


Thief12 profile image

Thief12 2 years ago from Puerto Rico

If someone made a hub titled "Ahmadinejad considers nuking the US", I'm sure your reaction would be quite different, regardless of what kind of nuke was suggested.

But anyway, you're talking about the possibility of attacking a foreign country that has already agreed to whatever the US wanted. The US won this "battle" without throwing a nuke. Why do people still feel the need to shake the tree?


perrya profile image

perrya 2 years ago Author

I am talking when it becomes obvious that Iran was playing the US and P5 for more time. This will come to pass, at some point. The US won? are you kidding?


Thief12 profile image

Thief12 2 years ago from Puerto Rico

Oh, so we are talking about wild guesses and assumptions about the future? not trusting an agreement reached with a foreign country and striking first? Gee, if every country reacted that way, where would we be?


perrya profile image

perrya 2 years ago Author

Sometimes, it does work. Don't argue just to argue.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working