**Trump Considers Deploying Massive ‘Bunker Buster’ Bomb Against Iran: Doubts Remain Over Effectiveness**
US President Donald Trump is reportedly deliberating an unprecedented move in the ongoing tensions with Iran: the use of a gargantuan bomb, specifically designed to penetrate the world’s most fortified underground facilities. The weapon in question, the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP), colloquially dubbed the “bunker buster,” has captured headlines for its formidable destructive potential and the historic implications should it be deployed for the first time in a live conflict.
During remarks delivered to journalists aboard Air Force One, President Trump hinted at the prospect of targeting Iran’s deeply buried nuclear sites, signalling a possible escalation in the struggle to halt Tehran’s nuclear ambitions. “I may do it. I may not do it; nobody knows what I’m going to do,” Trump remarked cryptically, reinforcing the unpredictability that has characterised much of his foreign policy approach.
The GBU-57 MOP weighs an astonishing 13.6 tonnes (30,000 pounds) and is engineered to blast through hundreds of feet of reinforced concrete and rock. To date, only about 20 of these bombs have been manufactured for the US Air Force, and, notably, none have been utilised in combat. The bomb’s design allows it to be launched exclusively from B-2 stealth bombers—a platform uniquely capable of carrying such heavy payloads over long distances without detection.
At the heart of concerns is Iran’s Fordow nuclear enrichment facility, buried deep within a mountain near the city of Qom. Intelligence sources suggest that US officials view Fordow as one of the most resilient threats, capable of withstanding conventional munitions. Situated under approximately 80 to 90 metres of granite and extensive concrete reinforcements, Fordow has long been regarded as all but impregnable to anything short of a nuclear strike.
International observers have long speculated on whether any conventional weapon could truly neutralise Fordow’s operations. Some experts suggest that, even if the MOP were successfully deployed, it might only serve to collapse tunnels and temporarily disrupt operations, rather than fully destroy Iran’s capacity to enrich uranium. Ryan Brobst, a munitions analyst at the Foundation for Defence of Democracies, points to the bomb’s innovative design, saying, “What really sets these bombs apart is their hardened steel casing. They function like a drill, burrowing deep before detonation, but several hits, one after the other, may be needed to accomplish the mission at a place like Fordow.”
Iranian authorities have already vowed to retaliate harshly to any attack. Iran’s Supreme Leader warned that any assault on the country’s sovereign facilities would be met with a “firm and decisive response.” The rhetoric has been echoed by international voices: Russia’s Kremlin has strongly cautioned Washington, with spokesperson Dmitry Peskov stating that military intervention would “dramatically destabilise the whole situation.”
Meanwhile, the regional situation has grown more perilous. In recent developments, Iranian missile strikes have resulted in casualties and infrastructure damage in both Israel’s southern cities and busy metropolitan districts, further fuelling apprehension about potential escalation. Civilian injuries and the spectre of broader conflict have intensified calls for restraint from multiple sides.
Technical data about the MOP bomb reveals the extent of its destructive capacity. With over 2,400 kilograms of high-powered explosives, the bomb is crafted for delayed and controlled detonation in confined spaces. When dropped from high altitudes, it can exceed the speed of sound, striking with immense force intended to pierce even the most well-concealed bunkers.
Yet, military analysts remain sceptical as to whether even the MOP can fully achieve its intended goal at Fordow. The facility, built with advanced countermeasures following historical attacks on nuclear sites in neighbouring countries, represents a formidable challenge. Some believe only repeated strikes or even a nuclear device could guarantee total destruction—a prospect that carries grave humanitarian and diplomatic risks.
Critics and observers alike caution that, even if a strike were successful, it may only delay Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Ali Vaez, director of the International Crisis Group’s Iran Project, underscored the enduring nature of nuclear knowledge: “Even if Fordow is completely destroyed, Iran retains the expertise and ability to rebuild. Thus, bombing is unlikely to offer a definitive solution to the underlying proliferation crisis.”
As tensions remain volatile and the world watches for the Trump administration’s next move, the debate raises pressing questions about military efficacy, diplomatic alternatives, and the far-reaching consequences of escalation in the Middle East.