Ryan Bridge: Were the US strikes on Iran really a success?

So we now know the Americans used seven B-2 Stealth bombers to attack Iran's three nuclear sites.  They used a dozen bunker-buster bombs - the first time these massive 140o KG big boys have been used in combat. They flew in the dark of night, dropping the payload just after 2 AM local time.  They fired Tomahawk missiles from US Navy ships nearby. Decoys were used to throw the Iranian off the scent - some of the B-2's attacked from the US East Coast, while others flew across the Pacific.  B-2 bombers that attacked flew from Missouri while a different set of B-2s flew west over the Pacific to throw off Iran They called it Operation Midnight Hammer. They claimed it was successful. But what we don't actually know is how successful and what success means.  Satellite imagery doesn't show you what's happening underground.  The bunker buster bombs are designed to blow stuff up around 60 metres underground.  Nobody but the Iranians know exactly how deep their enrichment facilities are hidden. Nobody knows how thick the concrete is they put on top of it.  It's possible the main guts of their facilities haven't been hit at all.  And then you ask, what does success mean?  If success is destroying Iran's nuclear capability, well that hasn't happened. Some scientists were taken out in Israel's first strikes but not all of them.  Iran has very smart people with knowledge of nuclear weapons and enrichment. China has been sending them uranium. This strike will have set them back, but this is a country who's shown time and again  not just how capable they are, but how determined they are to have nuclear Weapons.  It doesn't mean the strike wasn't worth it it if they wouldn't negotiate, but also, success depends on how you define it. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.