[Polybius]

Some, including myself, initially suggested the wide-spread use of the Massive Ordnance Aerial Burst (MOAB) system, with its 18,000 lbs. of explosives and the 500ft. diameter circle of devastation it leaves in its wake. However, you have to drop a MOAB out of a slow-moving C-130 relatively near the target. A good look at the size of the Iranian nuclear facilities suggests that at least ten of these might be needed to flatten one. And there are many.

The destruction of ground surface targets is straight forward: Initial strikes blind the radar and destroy air defenses, the enemy air power is annihilated and then the ground surface targets can be destroyed at leisure by either pin-point guided munitions or by B-52 carpet bombings. A MOAB would look more impressive but is not really necessary.

The real dilemma in this air campaign will be the feasibility of destroying hardened, deep below-ground facilities with conventional bunker busters.

[Burr5]

So you believe multiple stand-off, long distance strikes after first wiping out the Iranian Air Force would be most effective?

That does take a while. It wouldn't be like the Israelis at Osirak.