Iran Believes It’s Winning—and Wants a Steep Price to End the War
Sorry, Iran, you are sadly mistaken. That is never going to happen. The US always has at its disposal tactical nuclear weapons that are ideally suited to permanently end Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile ambitions.
The use of tactical nuclear weapons is EXTREMELY CONTROVERSIAL, breaking the nuclear weapons use taboo in place since the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki to end World War 2 would be an unprecedented move. However, considering Iran’s history of terrorism, mass murder of its citizens, striking noncombatant nations, closing the Strait of Hormuz, and actively attacking the world's critical energy infrastructure, Unlimited Warfare Against Iran is Warranted, and, in fact, Deserved.
The US could accelerate an end to the IRAN war, with a brief, limited campaign of tactical nuclear strikes against nuclear and hardened missile production sites, augmenting the current conventional weapon-based war plans of Operation EPIC FURY. The end goal would be to create a demilitarized/no-fly zone in southern Iran, the permanent occupation of all the islands off the coast of Iran, including Kharg Island, and control of 90% of Iran’s oil export capacity.
The Hormuz Strait and the Persian Gulf would be opened immediately and remain open permanently. Armed with control of Iran’s Oil infrastructure, the US could force the disarmament of Iran and create conditions for Iran's people, over time, to establish a more benign representative government. Failing that, Iran’s remnant extremist government would be contained and slowly economically strangled. Iran’s underground nuclear and missile sites, along with nuclear reactors and supporting industry, would be obliterated permanently.
Radical? Certainly! Bold and audacious? Absolutely! Fraught with controversy and knock-on effects? Of course?
However, once the Iran War started, massive knock-on effects were already in place. With the closure of the Hormuz Strait, the entire world economy is at risk. At this point, any action capable of quickly resolving this situation must be on the table – Including Tactical Nuclear Weapons
The Dystopic Newsletter explores “the technology and facts behind today's news.” This newsletter will explore the details of a hypothetical escalation of the Iran War
The Weapons: What tactical nuclear weapons are in the US arsenal, and how are they delivered
The Weapon Effect: What are the blast and fallout effects of a US tactical nuclear weapon?
The Targets: What are the likely targets for nuclear destruction and why would they be selected for a limited nuclear strike package?
This Dystopic Newsletter will avoid the moral and ethical issues associated with the decision to escalate and deploy nuclear weapons - that is in the hands of the politicians, specifically the US President. Clearly, there are serious moral and ethical issues in the use of nuclear weapons. However, there were serious moral and ethical issues in going to war in the first place… we have crossed that bridge. The situation in Iran is a historic parallel to the decision to use nuclear weapons against Japan in World War 2. Then, as today, the goal was to end the war as quickly as possible, saving many more lives and livelihoods than a full-scale invasion and protracted war.
Again, using the historic parallel with Japan, Marines could walk ashore unmolested as a peaceful occupation force, with defeated Iran having experienced a limited dose of US nuclear wrath. Alternatively, the Marines would have to battle their way in against a still bellicose Iran, costing many US and Iranian lives. That is the moral dilemma, the “Faustian Choice.”
If you would like to learn more about the moral implications of the use of the Atomic bomb in World War 2, I strongly recommend reading:
“The Most Awful Responsibility: Truman and the Secret Struggle for Control of the Atomic Age” By Alex Wellerstein
Let’s start with the weapons
The Weapons: The W61-12 Tactical Nuclear Bomb
US Army training to fire a “Davey Crocket” W54 tactical nuclear rocket-propelled grenade, Fort Campbell, Kentucky, May 14, 1962 (National Archive)
Troops in the 11th Airborne Division close-range observation of a live fire of a tactical nuclear weapon in the Las Vegas desert on November 1, 1951 (National Archives)
The US at one time fielded 1000s of tactical nuclear weapons across Europe to thwart a potential massed Soviet armored invasion. The tactical arsenal included short-range missiles, gravity bombs, and even the smallest nuclear weapon in the US nuclear arsenal; the “Davy Crockett” W54 0.01Kton (10 ton) tactical nuclear rocket-propelled grenade, pictured below.
Wind tunnel testing of W61-12 Nuclear Glide Bomb (FAS – Federation of American Scientists)
Today, the US fields between 200 and 230 W61-12 tactical nuclear glide bombs. It is our only nuclear weapon in the US arsenal. Completed in 2024, the W61-12 is a modernized and enhanced replacement for all the older W61 nuclear gravity bombs. The B61-12 has a number of advantages over thet weapons it replaced:
Four selectable, variable-yield options: 0.3, 1.5, 10, and 50 kilotons (kt). The B61-12 can use a lower explosive yield (0.3 to 50 kilotons) to achieve the same military effect as older, higher-yield unguided bombs. As a reference, the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima had a yield of 15 kilotons
Glide and Maneuverability: A new tail kit assembly with four maneuverable fins allows the bomb to glide toward its target after release. This glide capability provides a limited standoff range.
Precision Accuracy: A jammer-proof guidance system, which uses an Internal Navigation System (INS), not GPS, with a Circular Error Probable (CEP) of roughly 30 meters. This is five times more accurate than the older gravity-bomb version of the B61, with a CEP in the range of 110 to 170 meters.
Delivery Aircraft Survivability: As a guided glide bomb, the W61-12 provides standoff capability, allowing the delivery aircraft to release the weapon further from the target and its air defense systems, increasing the safety and survivability of the pilot and aircraft.
Reduced Collateral Damage: the combination of glide/maneuverability, precision accuracy, and dial-in-yield reduces collateral damage and radioactive fallout while maintaining lethality against hardened targets versus old nuclear gravity bombs.
The B61-12 has another feature, perhaps its most important: Ground Penetration
F-15E Drops a B61-12 guided nuclear bomb at Tonopah Test Range, Nevada, October 2015 (FAS: Federation of American Scientists)
As shown in the images extracted from unclassified testing videos of the B61-12 in the Nevada Desert by the Federation of American Scientists, the B61-12 can be configured for ground penetration. Unlike a surface or air-burst nuclear explosion that spreads its energy in a broad sphere, a nuclear weapon that detonates after penetrating the earth "couples" its shock wave more effectively, transmitting most of its energy within the earth. This makes the W61-12 an ideal weapon to destroy deeply buried targets at
reduced nuclear yield and military targets in Iran with greatly reduced fallout. A perfect match to the underground nuclear and and missile facilities in Iran.
A 2005 National Academies’ study, Effects of Earth-Penetrator and other Weapons, quantifies the benefits of ground penetrating nuclear weapons:
“The yield required of a nuclear weapon to destroy a hard and deeply buried target is reduced by a factor of 15 to 25 by enhanced ground-shock coupling if the weapon is detonated a few meters below the surface … Nuclear earth-penetrator weapons (EPWs) with a depth of penetration of 3 meters capture most of the advantage associated with the coupling of ground shock.”
Based on these findings, a 50 kiloton configured B61-12 targeting Iranian underground facilities would have the equivalent destructive power of a 750 kiloton to 1,250 kiloton traditional surface-burst weapon.
As Al Jazeera and other news outlets have reported, the US may be planning a mission to recover the store of 60% enriched uranium from Iran’s Isfahan underground nuclear site. Thet mission would be highly risky and require 1000 or more troops. Why put these troops at risk? A single B61-12 would ensure the Isfahan facility and the enriched uranium were completely obliterated.
Delivering the Strike
The B61-12 is not deployed on US Navy aircraft carriers or qualified with the Navy’s primary fighter/bomber aircraft; the F/A18 Hornet and F-35C Lightning II (Navy version). It is currently qualified for the following aircraft:
European NATO bases with WS3 nuclear weapons vaults and B61-12 weapons stock (FAS- Federation of American Scientists)
Today, based on the Federation of American Scientists' findings, approximately 100 B61-12s are forward-deployed across six air bases in five NATO member nations. These weapons are part of a nuclear-sharing agreement where U.S. personnel maintain custody, but allied aircraft are "dual-capable" and can deliver them if authorized. The primary bases are:
Büchel Air Base, Germany
Aviano Air Base, Italy
Ghedi Air Base, Italy
Kleine Brogel Air Base, Belgium
Volkel Air Base, Netherlands
İncirlik Air Base, Turkey
The nearest joint air base outside of Europe with WS3 nuclear weapons vaults and B61-12 weapons stock is the UK’s Diego Garcia air base in the Indian Ocean, which is a qualified base of operations for the B2 stealth bomber.
Assuming permission for use at each of these joint bases, a US nuclear strike force would like a combination of F-15/F-35C fighter-bombers from Aviano Air Base, Italy, and İncirlik Air Base, Turkey, along with B-2 bombers from Diego Garcia. Logistically, these are the closest bases to Iran. Alternatively, an air armada consisting solely of B-2 bombers from the US could be used for the strike, mirroring the massive “Midnight Hammer” operation during the 12 Day War in June 2025.
Like Operation Midnight Hammer, a limited nuclear strike would involve hundreds of support aircraft, including tankers for refueling, electronic warfare, and fighter escorts. The nature and armament of the attacks should be held top secret. Coordination with 3rd-party countries to ensure clear airspace and flyover permission, as with any mission, would be required, although no details of the specific mission would be provided. As with all major operations, the attacks would be tightly coordinated in time to maximize the psychological impact on the Iranians. Terms and conditions for surrender would be delivered after the attacks.
Before we turn to target selection for a nuclear strike on Iran, let's take a moment to look at the specific blast effects of W61-12.
The Weapon Effect: Destruction, Casualties, & Fallout
Strategic nuclear weapons like the land-based US Minuteman III, armed with 475-kiloton W87 warheads, and the submarine-based Trident D5, armed with 475-kiloton W88 warheads, use one of two methods to destroy their targets:
Surface-Burst: Generally used to strike hardened military targets like the enemy’s missile silos. The primary destructive force is driven by direct radiation and blast energy.
Air-Burst: Used to maximize the area of destruction of the nuclear weapon. Typically used against population centers (cities) with the strategic intent to cause massive destruction, often termed by war planners as counter-value strikes. The primary destructive force is the air overpressure generated by the nuclear blast. Fallout from an air-burst nuclear is greatly reduced form the fallout created by a surface-burst
As we previously discussed, the W61-12 tactical nuclear glide bomb can be configured for ground penetration burst, conducting much of the bomb's energy into the Earth. It is ideal for destroying underground facilities like those used for Iran's nuclear and missile development. A 50-kiloton W61-12 will have the below-ground destructive force nearly 2.5 times that of either W87 or W88 strategic missile warheads.
Fallout, while greater than an air-burst weapon, is greatly reduced compared to a surface-burst attack. The destructive force of the ground-penetration burst is contained and concentrated, limiting wide-area collateral damage and casualties.
The US is seeking to destroy the military and the military supply chain targets with a goal of minimal collateral damage to civilian infrastructure and the absolute minimum of civilian casualties possible. This is not a war against the Iranian people. A nuclear strike has strictly military objectives against the Iranian nuclear and missile with the end result being an end to the war. The US will have met its declared goals from the start of the war
Deploying the W61-12 would be the fastest and surest way to achieve closure that is permanent.
To get a feel for the destructive power of the W61-12, we turn to the Nuke Map simulator developed by Alex Wellerstein and Windfinder to determine the direction and extent of fallout from an attack on the Iranian missile development center located at the port of Bandar Abbas .
Based on Windfinder, the wind over Bander Abbas is steady at 5 knots blowing approximately North West at 104 degrees.
Wind map of the area surrounding Bandar Abbas, Iran (Windfinder)
Based on Nuke Map, the explosion results in 2,780 fatalities with an additional 15,270 injured. It is one of the few strategic sites near a population zone and is an outlier in terms of collateral damage. Other targeted sites will have significantly fewer fatalities and casualties.
The area of heavy destruction from a surface burst would be limited to the area within the red ring, which has a ~2,600ft radius and covers 0.78 square miles. The W61-12 would be a ground-penetrating burst with much higher energy coupling, causing heavy subsurface damage within the neon green ring, which has a ~1-mile radius and covers 3.45 square miles.
a Detailed view - B61-12 with 50 Kiloton yield on Bandar Abbas with fallout. The radiation zone, in green, would be destroyed base on a ground penetrating nuclear blast. (NukeMap)
The fallout contour extends down range from Bander Abbas 81 miles, with the heaviest fallout for a distance of 30 miles with a maxium width of 3 miles. NukeMap can only model a surface burst for fallout effects. While the area of fallout, which is principally a function of local wind and wind direction, would be the same the fallout radiation levels would be significantly lower.
B61-12 with 50 Kiloton yield on Bandar Abbas with fallout – fallout extends up to 81 miles downwind of the target (NukeMap)
Fortunately, the strategic targets for a limited nuclear strike lie well within Iran's borders. Little or no fallout would fall on neighboring countries.
The Targets: What Sites Should be Selected for a Limited Strike Package?
There is a wealth of information published in unclassified national reports and available from commercial Earth Observation satellite companies such as Black Sky, ICEYE, Planet Labs, and MAXAR Technologies, which provide detailed information and imagery of Iran’s Nuclear and missile sites. The CIA publishes unclassified maps of Iran’s principal missile sites and infrastructure as shown below:
Map of Iran’s principal missile sites (CIA.gov)
The Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) publishes an interactive map of nuclear, military, and regime infrastructure targets that have been targeted and attacked during Operation Epic Fury. Specific nuclear targets are shown from the FDD interactive map.
Iran’s Major Military Missile Facilities (Foundation for Defense of Democracies )
The problem for the US military is that a significant number of missile and nuclear sites are constructed deep underground, and while we do have bunker buster bombs, the most important Iranian sites are too deep for these to be effective. Yet, they must be destroyed and made completely unusable to end the war. Iran has a set of underground “Missile Cities” that continue to store and launch Drones, cruise missiles, and Ballistic missiles. In particular, the following missile sites are prime candidates for a nuclear strike package:
Khorramabad: the largest "missile city" in Iran, this facility serves as a primary storage and launch site for surface-to-surface and cruise missiles like the Shahab-3 and a set of ballistic missile silos.
Kermanshah Cluster: Strategically located near the western border to reach targets in Israel and the Gulf, comprised of bases for land mobile launchers
Kenesht Canyon Base: A hidden valley depot with numerous tunnel entrances believed to hold mobile missile launchers.
Panj Pelleh Base: An underground facility housing Qiam-1 and Fateh-110 missiles.
Bakhtaran Missile Base: Positioned for launches against Europe and the Gulf, containing two storage areas and launch pads.
Tabriz Cluster; Iran's second-largest silo complex, this northern base utilizes underground silos for long-range ballistic assets capable of reaching parts of Europe.
Shiraz Cluster: A sprawling military reserve with underground silos for drones
There is an additional set of regional centers with underground missile storage and launch facilities, several of which threaten the Hormuz Strait:
Khorgo: Located in rocky terrain near the coast, this base features hardened vertical silos and launch positions.
Qeshm Island: This facility houses striking capabilities designed to control or potentially close the Strait of Hormuz.
Imam Hussein Strategic Missile Base: An underground tunnel facility used to store and launch long-range Khorramshahr ballistic missiles, which were just fired at the US-UK Diego Garcia base.
Haji Abad : A suspected hardened launch site.
Khormuj: Believed to have nine underground silos that use a mechanical loader on train tracks to move missiles for firing.
Iran Nuclear Installation Facilities (Foundation for Defense of Democracies )
There are 10 to 12 underground missile targets that are ideally suited to be part of the strike package for a limited nuclear strike. The uranium enrichment sites at Fordow, Natanz, Esfahan, and a new site, Pickaxe Mountain, along with nuclear reactors at Bushehr, Arak, and the Tehran Research Reactor, add 7 additional targets to the strike package. If we include Iran's uranium mines in the region north of Bandar Abbas, we have a strike package of 20 to 22 targets across Iran
The Tehran Research Reactor is located in a heavily populated suburb of Tehran, and should be struck from the target list and eliminated using conventional ordinance. Based on NUKE MAP simulations, an estimated 175,540 fatalities and 461,770 injuries would result from a W61-12 attack. This could only be viewed as a deliberate counter-value attack on a civilian population, which is totally unacceptable. The Tehran Research Reactor will have to be dealt with using conventional strikes.
Given the remote location and staffing levels of the remaining sites, the nuclear strike package would result in under 10,000 fatalities and an additional 20,000 to 30,000 injuries.
Conclusions
War is brutal. This newsletter walked through the cold calculus of the weapons, targets, and effects, including fatalities and casualties, for a military nuclear strike to end the Iran conflict permanently. Every day, over 1000 sorties, military planners define strike packages to be delivered by Air Force, Navy, and Marine pilots, as well as by ship- and shore-based missile batteries. Every day, despite having air superiority, these brave crews face great risk.
On the receiving end, every day, Iranian military personnel (the intended target) face roughly 2 kilotons of ordnance being dropped on them. There is always collateral damage in war, and an unfortunate small number of Iranian civilians are killed or wounded in the crossfire. This will continue day after day until the war objective is obtained and the US empties critical weapons stocks.
Iran has proven its ability to temporarily close the Persian Gulf and inflict major damage on its neighbors, despite massive and continuing airstrikes from Israel and the US. It is clear that an Iran that retains even a remnant of its former military power represents an unacceptable danger to the region. Despite America's newfound energy independence, Iran’s ability to close the Strait of Hormuz has massive global economic implications that can still harm the US economy. The reality is that American interests remain inextricably bound to the security of the Gulf and Missile East
It is counterintuitive, but between 20 and 22 sorties in a limited nuclear-strike package would end the war. Terrible violence to stop an unending cycle of violence. Overkill, perhaps, but the destructive power attack would ensure that the Iranian nuclear and missile facilities threatening the Middle East and the world’s economy would be permanently and completely destroyed.
In breaking news, the BBC, Al Jazeera, and other major news outlets report that President Trump has extended his deadline for opening the Hormuz Strait from 48 hours to 5 days. After which, Iran's power plants and energy infrastructure would be targeted. As President Trump provides Iran “one more chance at peace.”
There is concern that the President is seeking a diplomatic off-ramp without achieving the stated war objectives. In short, the famous Trump “TACO” - Trump Always Chickens Out. I doubt that media narrative. I believe the President is planning a major conventional or nuclear strike on purely military targets as I have outlined here. We will know the results in a few days as events unfold. Unfortunately, only limited nuclear strikes have the power to criple Iran’s strategic missile and nuclear facilities.
No matter how the Iran war ends, if the US means to ensure a lasting peace, a degree of occupation, peacekeeping, and military/weapons inspection personnel will be required in the country. “Boots on the ground,” despite what any politician will tell you to the contrary. For the safety of the Hormuz Strait, a demilitarized zone in Southern Iran would be required.
Nuclear operations have potential geo-political knock-on effects so it is fair to ask:
If the US used nuclear weapons in Iran, what’s to stop Russia from using them in Ukraine?
Would US nuclear use lead to North Korea, Chinese, Iran, or Pakistan's use of weapons?
Are we reopening the nuclear Pandora’s box? A box that has been closed since the end of World War 2?
All of these questions can be answered with a single word: Deterrence
Each of the questioned outcomes is possible today with or without a limited nuclear strike on Iran. Only the US‘s deterrence posture stops these “knock-on effect” actions from taking place. Iran represents an example of where deterrence failed. What will it take to deescalate the conflict with a theocratic Iran? A limited nuclear strike may just be the answer.
A final important factor for the president to weigh is the weakened security posture in the Pacific resulting from the redeployment of both aircraft carrier groups and air defenses to the Middle East. In addition, the US is burning through critical ordnance and air defense interceptors needed to maintain our deterrence posture against China. As Politico reports, Congress and the Department of War are requesting $200 billion to rebuild weapons stockpiles. With weeks of conventional warfare still in play, the nuclear off-ramp will halt the burn down of our weapons stockpiles.
The U.S. President needs to weigh all of these factors and make a difficult decision to exit the conflict while securing a victory.
Learn More About Deterrence
I specifically wrote, How The Hell Did We Get Here? A Citizen's Guide to The New Cold War and Rebuilding of Deterrence as a comprehensive overview and primer on the subject. You can’t understand the modern world if you don’t understand deterrence
If you’d like to learn more, the book is Available on Amazon USA HERE, Amazon Internationally (on your local Amazon page), or through Barnes & Noble and other major retailers online
In Other News …
Range of modified Iranian Khorramshahr-4 IRBM – now able to strike most of Europe (Modern Arms Philippines)
It's time for Europeans to take the Iranian threat seriously. As the BBC, Al Jazeera, and other major news outlets reported on Friday, March 20th, Iran 2 launched two Intermediate Range Ballistic Missiles 2500 miles (4,000 km) targeting the Joint US-UK base on Diego Garcia. Diego was used as a staging area for the US’s long-range B-1, B-2, and B-52 bombers. One of the missiles malfunctioned in flight. The second fell harmlessly into the Indian Ocean and failed to hit the island base.
While it was known in intelligence circles that Iran was working on an IRBM, it was not believed that Iran had produced a working weapon. It is now obvious that their IRBM program is much further along than intelligence estimates had predicted.
With a range of 2500 miles. Iran's modified Khorramshahr-4 IRBM puts all of Europe, including the UK, within range of attack. As the Economist noted in their War Room newsletter:
“The remarkable range, far in excess of Iran’s declared inventory, suggests that Iran either used a missile with little or no payload, allowing it to travel further, or used a space launch vehicle (SLV), given the technology is similar and Iran has used its space programme as a cover for missile development.”
It is not a coincidence that shortly after this attack, a number of European countries agreed to assist the US in opening the Hormuz Strait.
Yet another reason to ensure Iran's missile program is completely and permanently eliminated.
That’s a wrap for this week …
Dystopic- The Technology Behind Today's News
Thank you for your readership and support. Please recommend Dystopic to friends and family who are interested, or just share this email.
Not on the Dystopic mail list? New Readers can sign up for Dystopic HERE
If you have missed a Dystopic News letter, you can find select back copies HERE
