When is a B-2 Spirit strike not a B-2 Spirit strike?
When:
It's officially publicised days in advance;
Significant amounts of anticipatory information concerning signals of intent, pre-emptory political demands, and operational specifics were promulgated throughout all types of major Western media channels.1
Its timing and nature are accurately leaked and reported;
Seymour Hersh published the leaked information on June 19th, 2025, two days before the operation occurred.2
Strike limitations are publicly reported (job requires nukes), inadequate weapons used;
The limitations of the weapons used were clearly declared in the public press. This admission of inadequacy was followed by the specifications of the only suitable weapon: tactical nuclear warheads.3
Official claims don't match multisource Battle Damage Assessments (BDA);
As soon as the operation was declared, multiple OSINT sources circulated data and speculated about the operations assessable effects. General consensus leans towards a technical incapability to have achieved what the White House claims to have achieved, and a lack of conclusive proof that the Iranian nuclear facilities have been “obliterated”.4
The enemy pre-empted the operation, moved the target, countered and limited the operation's gross value.
Iranian government sources officially declared no impact on its fissile material stockpile, knowledge base or technical capabilities. It claims to have moved the materials and personnel, and at least some of its equipment. It said that the facilities have not been “obliterated”. Some OSINT image sources claim that Iran may have reinforced the sites with earth before the strikes occurred (footnote 4).
When is a B-2 Spirit strike a gift?
When it:
Has arguably zero legal basis;
The stream of USIS strikes that emanate from a claim of “Iranian nuclear threat” are subject to ongoing argument until adjudication occurs long after the conflict ends, if ever. Such is the nature of IHL and UN Charter. Deliberate framing and legal evasion of the issue and specific judgements is rife throughout USIS-UK government statements that cover both international and domestic law.5
Attacking any nuclear target is illegal absent a specific legal authorisation and framework (Macron)6
Is arguably a war crime;
Absent of a legal basis and adherence to legal process involving the UNSC, USIS strikes might constitute unlawful acts of aggression to the point that they manifest as multiple ongoing war crimes by definition under IHL. They will remain “debated and denied” as is the nature of such acts and IHL absent of any meaningful ruling by either the ICJ or ICC. If by its nature the strike is a war crime, its architects and agents are war criminals.
Violates the perpetrator's own laws;
Regarding US law, Operation Midnight Hammer is clearly illegal. It is unambiguously unconstitutional; having bypassed Congress, it lacked any form of required political authorisation (executive command is insufficient); it violated the War Powers Act. Midnight Hammer is an impeachable offense.7
Adds to internal political dissent;
Due to the operation's nature, target, effect, claimed justification, and declared intent and participants (USIS joint venture), Midnight Hammer has become a nucleus of internal and external political dissent against USIS administrations and vassal states directly or indirectly complicit.8
Exposes the admin's and system’s agendas, servitude, lies & corruption;
The response to Midnight Hammer reveals and will continue to reveal the true nature of international and domestic politics. Given the extreme violation of all norms and laws governing its enactment, the likelihood that no meaningful political opposition will emerge to hold the administration to account criminally, civilly and internationally will show (again) global citizens the true nature of power and the way it is consciously wielded.
Doesn't affect adversary as openly stated;9
The claimed intentional effects on Iran and the wider political environment have not and will not emerge. The reason for this is two-fold and simple:
This is asymmetric warfare, and elements of it are multidomain and theatrical/performative, meaning it will not follow a linear path of force-response-limit;
The operation was never able to affect Iran in ways that the Trump administration has claimed. By its nature and format (no OpSec) Iran could pre-emptively counter and therefore massively limit the operation's true effects. The proof of this is two-fold:
Iran's claims about still possessing fissile material, knowledge and abilities have been confirmed by USA and other sources;
What USIS continue to do and say reveals and will continue to reveal that the operation didn't match public claims. If the supposed threat is “neutralized” or “obliterated” then escalatory USIS political and military actions are not justified. Similarly, if Iran has truly been so impacted, its resource allocation, political and military behaviour will be overtly influenced by that new dynamic: if it continues to act independently with provable ability contradictory to the USA's claims and in defiance of the USA's demands then USA claims are false, misleading or inaccurate.
Is very expensive with questionable ROI.
Rough accounting would price the operation upwards of $300m. If all of the above is accurate, the Return on Investment calculation might ostensibly, superficially be negative. It might go more negative as Iran continues to strike Israel, and more widely counteracts the strike across multiple domains.
Without knowing true intentions and desired outcomes, ROI calculation is based on assertion and therefore has wide error margin.
When is a B-2 Spirit strike a political, military, narrative and cognitive paveway?
When:
It has no immediate internal or external legislative risks;
It cannot be pre-emptively stopped within a command structure that is biased towards it when prior contributory requirements have been met;
It's a trigger and driver event within a Catch 22 construct for one's enemy i.e. it generates conditions that trap the enemy in a cognitive binary response pathway, any of which can be used to justify one's intended actions and pursuit of desired outcomes;
Its intended purpose was never what was claimed, indicated by it not fulfilling that publicly declared purpose by design;
It has declarative purpose i.e. it can be narrated as being anything after the fact, and it serves future narrative shaping i.e. it can be force fit onto future events as being causal;
Its ROI is priced on the medium to long term of initiating an active, regional war that takes years to play out, off which the wider warfare economy is recursively renewed and perpetuated;
It drives oil prices up, increasing profits for all oil producers and reactivating production systems that require those higher prices to be viable;
It performs strategic shaping or deterrence signalling e.g. “We proved that we can put any conventional or tactical nuclear payload anywhere in the region without loss or detection, and we are the only combatant in the conflict who can do that.”
It serves either domestic political distraction or alliance cohesion;
It is a means of battlefield shaping in preparation for follow-on operations.
Together with our ally, the nation of Israel, the United States undertook efforts to prevent the global sponsor of terror, Iran, from acquiring a nuclear bomb. The strikes obliterated its ability to achieve that. Now, we do not know where the fissile material is and Iran's behaviour and intent continues to be unacceptable.
That Iran considers closing the Strait of Hormuz, abandoning the NPT, continuing with its nuclear activities, and refuses to unconditionally surrender or engage in diplomatic activities that we dictate, is all evidence that Iran remains the number one global threat .
On that basis, the USA, Israel and its partners have no choice but to use any and all means available to neutralise the rogue Iranian terror regime, return the country to its peaceful peoples and restore order, stability and prosperity to the region.
Peace through strength through chaos.
stealth
noun
1. [military air power]
Design and operational methodology reducing an aircraft’s detectability across radar, infrared, visual, and acoustic spectrums.
— Enables penetration of integrated air defences, first-strike capability, and force multiplication.
— Involves trade-offs in cost, payload, and maintenance complexity.
→ Not invisibility, but delayed detection and degraded adversary response.
2. [cognitive warfare]
Concealment of presence, intent, authorship, or effect within an adversary’s information and decision-making space.
— Utilises perceptual evasion, attribution masking, and ambient narrative embedding.
— Operates through disinformation, memetic camouflage, and digital obfuscation.
— Exploits cognitive overload, trust erosion, and epistemic fragmentation.
— Effects are latent, decentralised, and difficult to attribute or counter.
→ Manipulation without detection; influence without recognition; conflict without declaration.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-deploys-b-2-stealth-bombers-toward-guam-amid-uncertainty-over-possible-iran-strike/
21/6/25: “American B-2 stealth bombers, the advanced aircraft known for being capable of delivering huge bunker buster bombs potentially capable of destroying Iran’s underground nuclear facility in Fordo, are heading toward Guam in the Pacific Ocean, open-source flight trackers showed on Saturday, possibly signaling that the US is preparing for a strike on the Iranian site. The B-2 can be equipped to carry America’s 30,000-pound GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, designed to destroy targets deep underground. That is the weapon that experts say could be used to strike Iran’s nuclear program, including Fordo, which is built deep under a mountain some 30 kilometers north of the city of Qom.”
https://www.timesofisrael.com/saar-iran-op-added-2-3-years-to-time-it-would-take-tehran-to-attain-nuclear-bomb/
21/6/25: “Trump on Friday reiterated that he would decide within two weeks whether to join Israel’s strikes on Iran’s nuclear program, and indicated that he was disinclined to restrain Israel “when it’s winning” the war. He was also dismissive of tentative nuclear talks that European foreign ministers held with their Iranian counterpart earlier in the day. The US president has said Israel’s June 13 opening strike on Iran after the 60-day window that he gave Tehran to strike a nuclear deal. Speaking to Bild, Sa’ar said: “I don’t really believe in diplomacy with Iran. All efforts at diplomacy have failed.””
The Iranians “usually use these talks to deceive, buy time, and make more progress” on their nuclear program, said Sa’ar.
“I don’t believe they’ll change their behavior,” he added, reaffirming Israel’s position that Iran must give up uranium enrichment entirely — a key obstacle in the suspended Iran-US nuclear talks.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/19/trump-caution-on-iran-strike-linked-to-doubts-over-bunker-buster-bomb-officials-say
19/6/25: “Donald Trump has suggested… it would make sense for the US to launch strikes against Iran only if the so-called “bunker buster” bomb was guaranteed to destroy the critical uranium enrichment facility at Fordow… dropping the GBU-57s, a 13.6-tonne (30,000lb) bomb would effectively eliminate Fordow but he does not appear to be fully convinced… The effectiveness of GBU-57s has been a topic of deep contention… perhaps only a tactical nuclear weapon could be capable of destroying Fordow because of how deeply it is located…. Trump is not considering using a tactical nuclear weapon on Fordow and the possibility was not presented by…two people familiar with the matter said… Using conventional bombs, even as part of a wider strike package of several GBU-57s, would not penetrate deep enough underground… to completely destroy Fordow… it would likely require the US to first soften the ground with conventional bombs and then ultimately drop a tactical nuclear weapon from a B2 bomber.”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/17/us-military-assets-missile-launch-sites-iran-fordow
17/6/25: “clues that the Pentagon is considering a long-range air raid came from the movement of more than 31 US Air Force refuelling aircraft. The planes… were tracked… as they headed east towards Europe on Sunday. B-2 bombers attacked five underground Houthi weapon facilities from Whiteman, 8,000 miles away, last October. Diego Garcia is far closer to Fordow, a 3,200-mile trip each way, which would require refuelling on the return leg once a bombing run on Iran’s nuclear sites had been completed.”
“This is a report on what is most likely to happen in Iran, as early as this weekend, according to Israeli insiders and American officials I’ve relied upon for decades. It will entail heavy American bombing… I have been told that the White House has signed off on an all-out bombing campaign in Iran, but the ultimate targets, the centrifuges buried at least eighty meters below the surface at Fordow, will, as of this writing, not be struck until the weekend.”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/19/trump-caution-on-iran-strike-linked-to-doubts-over-bunker-buster-bomb-officials-say
“Trump was told GBU-57s would effectively eliminate Fordow… he also awaits the possibility that the threat of US involvement would lead Iran to talks… perhaps only a tactical nuclear weapon could be capable of destroying Fordow because of how deeply it is located… even as part of a wider strike package of several GBU-57s, would not penetrate deep enough underground… to completely destroy Fordow, which Israeli intelligence estimates to go down as far as 300ft, it would likely require the US to first soften the ground with conventional bombs and then ultimately drop a tactical nuclear weapon from a B2 bomber.”
https://www.foxnews.com/world/full-breakdown-operation-midnight-hammer-largest-b-2-operational-strike-us-history
22/6/25: “U.S. forces launched approximately 75 precision-guided munitions, including 14 GBU 57 massive Ordnance penetrators, which weigh 30,000 pounds each. The operation marked the first-ever operational use of this weapon, Caine said… Caine called the operation the "largest B-2 operational strike in U.S. history," and that "no other military in the world could have done this." "This mission demonstrates the unmatched reach, coordination and capability of the United States military in just a matter of weeks," Caine said. "This went from strategic planning to global execution."“
https://x.com/ArmchairW/status/1936849301617152103?t=QZzJ_bLuRXmR8QwYI2ry0w&s=19
“What effect did these WWII earthquake bombs have on the ground? Well, they left GIGANTIC craters, as wide as 40 meters and as deep as 25 meters (see figure 2). If MOPs were used in Iran last night - particularly multiple rounds delivered into the same hole - we would expect to see massive cratering, the sides of mountains blown out and landslides. These are not subtle weapons… figure 3, showing polite six-meter bomb scars… what you would expect from a Tomahawk or JASSM. It's enough, however, for Trump to declare victory and go home… Iranians had so much warning of an impending attack - possibly via official or semi-official channels - that they evacuated Fordow (figure 4, showing a large truck convoy spotted on the road outside prior to the strike) but they then buried the entrances to the facility… if the Iranians did in fact evacuate centrifuges and other critical machinery or even enriched uranium from Fordow then the Israelis would have had an opportunity to hit them in transit - an opportunity which they do not appear to have been able to close despite likely knowing about it given the scale of the operation and the amount of surveillance on Fordow.”
https://x.com/IggySemz/status/1936941821734879315?t=YZbqkxn-NChU6SV-TVwrzw&s=19
“Don't forget there's a direct comparison with a surface burst MOAB from Afghan, which gives a sense of transposable force into the subterrainian context i.e. You would expect massive subterrain shockwave that transposes up to the surface via wave. This means it's reasonable to expect omnidir wave that will move to surface. Given 1MOP = 4.6k lb 1MOAB=18.7k lb, single MOP blast might attenuate. Media doesn't flag MOP must penetrate total of TERRAIN + STRUCTURE, Which isn't described in just "this gets to 200'".”
https://x.com/MenchOsint/status/1936826902565535914?t=KAXrh3vsztcon5qRB0JOzQ&s=19
“Fordow entrance tunnels were filled with earth before the attack. Nothing moved”.
https://x.com/MenchOsint/status/1936701604331131296?t=OcqmP0GoP9wFnC6Rz2wTTw&s=19
“Multiple trucks were spotted at Fordow's tunnel entrance on June 20-21, suggesting Iran was preparing the nuclear facility for a strike. The facility's entrance tunnels were filled with earth by trucks and diggers. (OpenSourceCenter)”
https://x.com/iwasnevrhere_/status/1936795685111656696?t=zsyW5JeZeycG_KW1SQ40gA&s=19
“Maxar confirms… Despite the drop of at least 6 GBU-57A/B Massive Ordnance Penetrators damage pattern skirts the outer shell of the site. Crater geometry and spacing are consistent with volley-mode sequencing designed to minimize shock front overlap, but all visible penetrations hug the periphery, either due to mis-queued coordinates or deliberate decoying via the site’s curved adit network. The visible ejecta tells its own story. Opacity is low in the VNIR band, indicating a dust-only loft, no oxidized blast pattern, no epithermal signature, no heat venting. This means the warheads expended most of their energy in the overburden. No concentric spalling rings, no radial fractures exceeding 50 meters, and no post-strike IR bloom to indicate a breach of the core’s thermal envelope.”
“And who are you exactly that we should accept this?”
https://x.com/osc_london/status/1936729353003450564?t=RX2KCaGP2hyBtaIAjD90tA&s=19
“Comparison of imagery before and after the strikes reveal changes to the terrain above the Fordow Nuclear Facility. Including subsidence, or the collapse of earth, along the ridgeline above the site and possible missile entry points on the side of the mountain… The strike appears to have targeted parts of the facility that Iran had constructed into the mountain and then later covered. Historical imagery from 2009 shows these buildings under construction at these locations.”
https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2025/06/22/750024/iran-condemns-illegal-us-assault-nuclear-sites-vows-legal-measures
“According to Press TV sources, air defenses around the three underground nuclear sites were activated and the attack was successfully thwarted, except for minor exterior damage at the entry and exit points… The source added that all three sites had long been evacuated and the enriched uranium had also been relocated to a safe location.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/22/us/politics/iran-uranium-stockpile-whereabouts.html
“after President Trump declared that Iran’s nuclear program had been “completely and totally obliterated”… senior officials conceding they did not know the fate of Iran’s stockpile of near-bomb-grade uranium… “We are going to work in the coming weeks to ensure that we do something with that fuel and that’s one of the things that we’re going to have conversations with the Iranians about,” Vice President JD Vance… contended that the country’s potential to weaponize that fuel had been set back substantially…The Iranians have made it clear they are not interested in having conversations with the United States, accusing Washington of deceiving Tehran during the last set of negotiations while planning the air attack. Moreover, that stockpile of fuel is now one of the few nuclear bargaining chips in Iranian hands.”
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/6/20/are-israels-attacks-against-iran-legal
The question of the legality of Israel’s strikes on Iran, therefore, revolves around whether Israel – and any allies coming to its aid – can justify its attacks on Iran as “anticipatory” self-defence… Israel cannot make the case that an attack is imminent, argued Milanovic…“Even if the broadest possible [legally plausible] understanding of anticipatory self-defence was taken as correct, Israel’s use of force against Iran would be illegal,” he concluded…Israel might try to make the case that its “continued existence was at stake and they had to act”, she said. To make this case, Israel would need “warranties, some kind of evidence offered by the International Atomic Energy Agency”, the UN’s nuclear watchdog.”
https://www.icj.org/israel-iran-israels-attack-on-iran-violates-international-law-threatening-peace-and-security/
“Israel/Iran: Israel’s attack on Iran violates international law, threatening peace and security”
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/20/world/middleeast/iran-israel-airstrikes-legal.html
“But if Israel’s actions are illegal, then the United States’ participation in them would be too, unless there was an independent justification such as a separate need for self-defense against Iran. International tribunals move slowly, so it is unlikely that Israel or the United States will answer for their decisions before a court soon, if ever. But the laws of war still matter. The shared expectations they create are part of the foundations of the international order, helping to preserve peace and stability. The rules have never been perfectly followed, and the international order never perfectly peaceful or stable. But every time the rules are violated, those shared expectations weaken, making the world more uncertain and dangerous.”
https://lieber.westpoint.edu/assessing-legality-israels-action-iran-international-law/
“Israel invoked intelligence information supporting the view of Iran planning to attack Israel, with the Defence Minister characterising Israel’s response as an act of pre-emptive self-defence to avert the attack. The only viable opportunity to defend when threatened with a nuclear armed attack is to act before the attack occurs because acting after a nuclear strike may be practically impossible, rendering the right to self-defence effectively meaningless.Israel’s use of force constitutes a lawful act of self-defence. It meets the criterion of imminence not only under the temporal interpretation but even more convincingly under its contemporary, contextual understanding… while self-defence provides a jus ad bellum justification for the initial use of force, the legality of targeting nuclear scientists must be assessed under the law of targeting. Such targeting may be lawful if the individuals in question are integrated into Iran’s armed forces or if they directly participate in hostilities.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/06/23/macron-trump-air-strikes-against-iran-illegal/
“Macron: Trump air strikes against Iran ‘illegal’ Emmanuel Macron has branded Donald Trump’s air strikes against Iran “illegal”. The French president said it could be considered legitimate to bomb nuclear facilities that pose a potential threat but that there was no legal framework, so strikes conducted by the United States and Israel were not legal. His intervention came as Sir Keir Starmer and a succession of ministers declined to explicitly state the US president had acted within international law or in a correct manner. Sir Keir was warned by Lord Hermer, his Attorney General, last week that joining a US attack on Iran could breach international law. However, the Prime Minister is coming under increasing pressure to “get off the fence” and say whether the UK backs Mr Trump’s action. the Norwegian prime minister Jonas Gahr Store echoed the sentiment. “International law has some clear principles on the use of force. It can be granted by the Security Council or it can be in pure self-defence,” he said, noting that this meant the strikes were “outside the realm of international law”. Mr Macron’s comments were at odds with both Germany and Mark Rutte, the Nato secretary general, who said that pre-emptive US air strikes on Iran were not illegal.”
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/unconstitutional-congress-evokes-new-war-powers-resolution-reject-trumps-strikes-iran
Co-sponsors of the War Powers Resolution, Reps. Ro Khanna, D-Calif, and Thomas Massie, R-Ky., were quick to criticize President Donald Trump for greenlighting attacks on three nuclear sites in Iran Saturday night. "This is not constitutional," Massie said… "This is not our war. But if it were, Congress must decide such matters according to our Constitution," Massie said.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/6/22/patently-illegal-critics-dispute-legality-of-trumps-iran-strikes
“Trump said he would end wars; now he has dragged America into one,” Senator Christopher Van Hollen Junior said in a statement. “His actions are a clear violation of our Constitution – ignoring the requirement that only the Congress has the authority to declare war.”
“profoundly unconstitutional, absolutely unlawful, am impeachable offense, a war crime.”
https://apnews.com/article/us-attack-iran-israel-reaction-united-nations-c10cc46ec236816d958ced2497a11464
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/22/world/middleeast/world-leaders-react-iran-strikes.html
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/nations-around-the-world-react-to-u-s-strikes-on-iran-with-many-calling-for-diplomacy
bbc.com/news/articles/cvg9r4q99g4o
https://dsm.forecastinternational.com/2025/06/23/operation-midnight-hammer-u-s-strikes-iranian-nuclear-sites/
Iran still retains a stockpile of over 400 kilograms of uranium enriched above 60 percent… Iran may not be able to rush towards a weapon, but could still have the technical ability to assemble one even in wake of the strikes. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated that Iran reserves the right to respond and that "the door to diplomacy is absolutely closed," indicating defiance.
Perhaps the moguls are finding the world a bit less cooperative.
Another good analysis. They don't call it the "theatre" of war for nothing.