US forces have executed operation “Midnight Hammer” - a bombing raid targeting Iranian nuclear development sites.
The US government has claimed an “obliteration” of Iranian Nuclear assets. However, analysts are skeptical of the actual level of damage dealt.
Senior Fellow at the Defence Priority in Washington Gil Barndollar says, “These strikes are unlikely to have destroyed everything,”
He said that it’s likely Iran would have moved key nuclear components from the raid targets, meaning they would be able to recover from the raid faster than the US would expect.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Into Operation Midnight Hammer is what they called it. In
The Americans claim it's complete success. Where we go now
is the big question. Gil Bundle, as senior fellow with
the Defense Priority in Washington, he's bank with us. Gil,
morning to you, Good.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Morning, very well.
Speaker 1 (00:11):
Indeed, the US claim obliteration and the timeline and all
of that. Is it from your point of view, the
success they claim?
Speaker 2 (00:20):
I think that's still to be scene.
Speaker 3 (00:22):
I mean, I think a lot of analysts, especially people
with serious chops on nuclear security, would tell you that
these strikes are unlikely to have destroyed everything or obliterated
the program. And even if they did, you know, it's
clear that their onions can reconstitute that they may take
a couple of years.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
But this isn't sort of the end of it, definitively.
Speaker 1 (00:40):
Some sort of suggesting they could have moved stuff. One
could they? And two if they did, would they have
seen it anyway? The Americans, Yeah, they.
Speaker 3 (00:49):
Definitely could have, and that's the story that's coming out
of some outlets. The question is, when I think, if
they did it after the Israelis began their campaign, ability
is really destroyed a huge chunk of Iranian air defenses
and had really, as far as we can tell, kind
of free reign over huge chunks of the country. So
if they were trying to move things after that, if
they were caught flat footed, which a lot of people
(01:11):
have said, then that may be less likely.
Speaker 1 (01:14):
What's that tell us about being able to fly and
do what they did and fly out and the Iranians
seemingly did nothing. I mean, what's that tell us about them?
Speaker 3 (01:22):
I think that you know, this is kind of a
continuation of a story that started two years ago now.
Speaker 2 (01:26):
But I think that the ability of the Israelis.
Speaker 3 (01:29):
In terms of their intelligence and then their strike packages
to knock out Iranian air defense and give them free
rein it speaks to a lack of capability on the
part of the Iranians and how compromised they were by
Israeli intelligence and maybe by US.
Speaker 2 (01:43):
But I think the majority of that is on the
on the Israeli side.
Speaker 1 (01:45):
What would you.
Speaker 3 (01:46):
They've had, They've had, They've had really free reigns since
that campaign started on July thirteenth, and I think people
didn't really expect that. They expected that Iranian defensive, especially
the stuff they bought from Russia, would have constrained them
more what.
Speaker 1 (01:58):
Would you expect, my wife of a response if there
is one.
Speaker 2 (02:02):
I mean, that's the that's the million dollar question. And
I wouldn't I wouldn't hazard a prediction.
Speaker 3 (02:05):
But I think that what Iron could do, even in
this severely weakened state, and even having taken the body blows,
the attrition they took to their leadership over the last week,
they have the ability certainly to to throw missiles at
and to do some damage to a lot of really
kind of key US infrastructure and US troops over there,
whether you're talking about Bahrain or Kuwait or the UAE
(02:26):
or even as far as Jordan we have we have
serious installations cutter as well.
Speaker 2 (02:31):
That's less likely because of their relationship with the Cuties.
Speaker 3 (02:33):
The other big question is whether they want to close
the straight up or moves and can sprain you know,
global oil supply, whether temporarily or as long as they can.
That's the other huge economic question that since lingering, is.
Speaker 1 (02:43):
It phase to suggest the Iranians talk a big game
and don't often do a lot.
Speaker 3 (02:48):
Yeah. Absolutely, And I think this this strike is probably
predicated in a large part on on confidence that that's
how it's going to go, you know, that are on
is two weak and doesn't want to risk a full blown,
you know, US response and strikes of indeterminate, you know,
indefinite duration. So I think that's that's one of, if
not the major thing that this White House is gambling on.
But I think that's a dangerous assumption given that we're
(03:10):
talking about actual regime regime stability and the continuing continuation
of the Iranian regime.
Speaker 1 (03:15):
That's my next question, what chance regime change.
Speaker 3 (03:18):
I'm very skeptical, and most of the folks I talked
to who are legitimately kind of iron experts of all
the internal politics and the state of that country, are
skeptical that that's this is going to work.
Speaker 2 (03:27):
I think for two reasons.
Speaker 3 (03:28):
One that the Iranians have done it, or the Iranian
regime the government has done a great job of decapitating
not usually not literally, but decapitating opposition movements. You know,
we saw when they had the serious protests last couple
of years. They've they've done a good job of delegitimizing
and stopping opposition movements. And so if you're taking the
word of kind of emigres, whether it's whether it's raizopoalavian
(03:49):
Is people, or whether it's the m K or some
other groups, if you think they have a serious constituency,
let alone kind of people inside I on that can
make things happen.
Speaker 2 (03:56):
I'm skeptical of that. And the second piece, of course,
is that this.
Speaker 3 (03:59):
Is happening at the you know, on the back of
foreign bombs, and those have generally a tendency to unit
a country, at least temporarily.
Speaker 1 (04:05):
I don't know if this is a new wheelhouse, but
Trump domestically, does he have trouble with the dams and
you know, America First and all that stuff or not?
Speaker 2 (04:13):
I think it all. I think it all depends on
how this goes.
Speaker 3 (04:15):
If this is it, If it's what they're saying it is,
and there's a there's this one strike package and that's it,
and then the US does nothing further and there is
no major running in response, then I don't think he
has much of a problem, certainly within his own party.
Speaker 2 (04:28):
Being said, I can't remember a.
Speaker 3 (04:30):
US military intervention that went forward with this little over
public supporting. If you believe the polls you're talking about,
ten to twenty percent of the country is actually in
favor of this so that you know, we went into
the Iraq War, which was obviously a disaster on multiple levels.
You had two thirds of Americans had come to support
that through whatever means, and this is very different.
Speaker 1 (04:49):
Well, it's a pleasure, Gil, Guy. Well, and we'll catch
up soon. Gil Bundla, who's the former Marine and senior
fellow at the Defense Priority in Washington. For more from
the Mic Housking Breakfast, listen live to news talks. It'd
be from six am weekdays, or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.
Into Operation Midnight Hammer is what they called it. In
The Americans claim it's complete success. Where we go now
is the big question. Gil Bundle, as senior fellow with
the Defense Priority in Washington, he's bank with us. Gil,
morning to you, Good.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Morning, very well.
Speaker 1 (00:11):
Indeed, the US claim obliteration and the timeline and all
of that. Is it from your point of view, the
success they claim?
Speaker 2 (00:20):
I think that's still to be scene.
Speaker 3 (00:22):
I mean, I think a lot of analysts, especially people
with serious chops on nuclear security, would tell you that
these strikes are unlikely to have destroyed everything or obliterated
the program. And even if they did, you know, it's
clear that their onions can reconstitute that they may take
a couple of years.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
But this isn't sort of the end of it, definitively.
Speaker 1 (00:40):
Some sort of suggesting they could have moved stuff. One
could they? And two if they did, would they have
seen it anyway? The Americans, Yeah, they.
Speaker 3 (00:49):
Definitely could have, and that's the story that's coming out
of some outlets. The question is, when I think, if
they did it after the Israelis began their campaign, ability
is really destroyed a huge chunk of Iranian air defenses
and had really, as far as we can tell, kind
of free reign over huge chunks of the country. So
if they were trying to move things after that, if
they were caught flat footed, which a lot of people
(01:11):
have said, then that may be less likely.
Speaker 1 (01:14):
What's that tell us about being able to fly and
do what they did and fly out and the Iranians
seemingly did nothing. I mean, what's that tell us about them?
Speaker 3 (01:22):
I think that you know, this is kind of a
continuation of a story that started two years ago now.
Speaker 2 (01:26):
But I think that the ability of the Israelis.
Speaker 3 (01:29):
In terms of their intelligence and then their strike packages
to knock out Iranian air defense and give them free
rein it speaks to a lack of capability on the
part of the Iranians and how compromised they were by
Israeli intelligence and maybe by US.
Speaker 2 (01:43):
But I think the majority of that is on the
on the Israeli side.
Speaker 1 (01:45):
What would you.
Speaker 3 (01:46):
They've had, They've had, They've had really free reigns since
that campaign started on July thirteenth, and I think people
didn't really expect that. They expected that Iranian defensive, especially
the stuff they bought from Russia, would have constrained them
more what.
Speaker 1 (01:58):
Would you expect, my wife of a response if there
is one.
Speaker 2 (02:02):
I mean, that's the that's the million dollar question. And
I wouldn't I wouldn't hazard a prediction.
Speaker 3 (02:05):
But I think that what Iron could do, even in
this severely weakened state, and even having taken the body blows,
the attrition they took to their leadership over the last week,
they have the ability certainly to to throw missiles at
and to do some damage to a lot of really
kind of key US infrastructure and US troops over there,
whether you're talking about Bahrain or Kuwait or the UAE
(02:26):
or even as far as Jordan we have we have
serious installations cutter as well.
Speaker 2 (02:31):
That's less likely because of their relationship with the Cuties.
Speaker 3 (02:33):
The other big question is whether they want to close
the straight up or moves and can sprain you know,
global oil supply, whether temporarily or as long as they can.
That's the other huge economic question that since lingering, is.
Speaker 1 (02:43):
It phase to suggest the Iranians talk a big game
and don't often do a lot.
Speaker 3 (02:48):
Yeah. Absolutely, And I think this this strike is probably
predicated in a large part on on confidence that that's
how it's going to go, you know, that are on
is two weak and doesn't want to risk a full blown,
you know, US response and strikes of indeterminate, you know,
indefinite duration. So I think that's that's one of, if
not the major thing that this White House is gambling on.
But I think that's a dangerous assumption given that we're
(03:10):
talking about actual regime regime stability and the continuing continuation
of the Iranian regime.
Speaker 1 (03:15):
That's my next question, what chance regime change.
Speaker 3 (03:18):
I'm very skeptical, and most of the folks I talked
to who are legitimately kind of iron experts of all
the internal politics and the state of that country, are
skeptical that that's this is going to work.
Speaker 2 (03:27):
I think for two reasons.
Speaker 3 (03:28):
One that the Iranians have done it, or the Iranian
regime the government has done a great job of decapitating
not usually not literally, but decapitating opposition movements. You know,
we saw when they had the serious protests last couple
of years. They've they've done a good job of delegitimizing
and stopping opposition movements. And so if you're taking the
word of kind of emigres, whether it's whether it's raizopoalavian
(03:49):
Is people, or whether it's the m K or some
other groups, if you think they have a serious constituency,
let alone kind of people inside I on that can
make things happen.
Speaker 2 (03:56):
I'm skeptical of that. And the second piece, of course,
is that this.
Speaker 3 (03:59):
Is happening at the you know, on the back of
foreign bombs, and those have generally a tendency to unit
a country, at least temporarily.
Speaker 1 (04:05):
I don't know if this is a new wheelhouse, but
Trump domestically, does he have trouble with the dams and
you know, America First and all that stuff or not?
Speaker 2 (04:13):
I think it all. I think it all depends on
how this goes.
Speaker 3 (04:15):
If this is it, If it's what they're saying it is,
and there's a there's this one strike package and that's it,
and then the US does nothing further and there is
no major running in response, then I don't think he
has much of a problem, certainly within his own party.
Speaker 2 (04:28):
Being said, I can't remember a.
Speaker 3 (04:30):
US military intervention that went forward with this little over
public supporting. If you believe the polls you're talking about,
ten to twenty percent of the country is actually in
favor of this so that you know, we went into
the Iraq War, which was obviously a disaster on multiple levels.
You had two thirds of Americans had come to support
that through whatever means, and this is very different.
Speaker 1 (04:49):
Well, it's a pleasure, Gil, Guy. Well, and we'll catch
up soon. Gil Bundla, who's the former Marine and senior
fellow at the Defense Priority in Washington. For more from
the Mic Housking Breakfast, listen live to news talks. It'd
be from six am weekdays, or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy And Charlamagne Tha God!
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.