1. Bunker busters

The Iran Fordo (Qom) uranium enrichment facility which became operational in January is under 90 meters of rock. The 5,000 lb GBU-28 US bunker buster can penetrate 20 ft of concrete, the new 30,000 lb GBU-57 MOP 60 ft (not 200 ft) of concrete. Either way, Iran is home free.

2. The U.S. Navy has doubled the number of mine-hunting vessels in the Persian Gulf and equipped its warships with Gatling guns, according to The Hill.

Oh wow. Four more iddy-biddy little ships to the east and civil-war era guns on carriers.
The largest threat in the Persian Gulf is the traditionally disproportionate effect of mines and submarines in any theater of naval combat. Even if not a single ship hits a single mine, insurance costs for shipping in areas where minefields exist will skyrocket in the future, threat alone is all it takes. In the Falklands War, submarines deployed by Argentina had an enormous effect on the Royal Navy, determining where and how it would operate in the early stages of the war.

Mines and submarines are not easily addressed. Countering threats in underwater warfare requires time consuming training that the US most likely has not appropriately allocated for sufficient proficiency.

Iran operates a number (assumed somewhere around a dozen) of mini-submarines, 3 Kilo class submarines, and a number of different types of mines that create huge problems for any nation that engages Iran in combat.

Iran is thought to have the 4th largest sea mine inventory (around 5000) in the world behind the United States, Russia, and China. Up to 1000 of the sea mines are of the Chinese EM11 bottom-influence mine; the EM31 moored mine; and the EM52 rocket-propelled rising mine. All of these mines are of Chinese domestically produced designs, and the Chinese are the largest supplier of mines to Iran since 1998.

The most dangerous mine in the Iranian inventory is probably the EM-52. As a bottom dwelling rocket-propelled mine, up to 4 can be laid by a single small boat or dhow, and dispersed properly could heavily influence the channels in and out of the Persian Gulf.

Unless the US ships retreated out of the Gulf and south of the Strait, they would be trapped by the mines. These mines range from those that float on the surface and those that sink and are detonated by sound or remotely. The latter are more sophisticated Russian and Chinese mines. The floater mines are quick to spread and flow with the tides and currents unless anchored. By themselves, they are enough to halt all ship movement through the Straits.

The worse part of this passive Iranian strategy is time. When Iran last mined the Straits in 1991 with only 1300 mines, it took a full year to clear it completely. Any transit during that time was at a snail's pace and dangerous for oil tankers.

Iran with no nuclear weapons is zero military threat against nuclear superpower Israel, and much less a threat to the USA.

Israel (which refuses to sign or abide by the NPT) is in possession of many hundreds of nuclear warheads. More importantly, it possesses the most advanced delivery systems in the world including nuclear powered ballistic missile firing submarines. A nation with zero nuclear weapons does not attack another with hundreds. Even if (a hypothetical) Iran did some day acquire a nuclear weapon (to secure itself from vicarious nuclear attack) it could never use it against Israel because of the intertwined nature of the Palestinian and Israeli populations. Al-Aqsa Mosque, the third holiest site in world Islam is in Jerusalem and they would never risk its destruction.

But lets just ignore all of that. I ask all to seriously consider the CONSEQUENCES of an Israeli attack.

If you are paying attention, Syria is currently and steadily sliding into chaos. What originally was a movement in support of democracy is now steadily moving into a sectarian conflict between the Shiia and the Sunni. The Saudis are going to finance weapons for the insurgency. The Shiia of Lebanon and Iran are fearful of major political loss in this, and reluctantly but to date resolutely, continue to back Al-Assad.

On top of this, a war against Iran initiated by Israel would spread to our interests in about half an hour. Iran would certainly hit back to the best their abilities. Prices for petroleum would certainly skyrocket to who knows what level, collapsing our fragile economy like a house of cards. Same for the whole world's economy for the same reasons. Mass chaos from Lebanon to Pakistan. Things quickly spiral out of control. Afghanistan explodes. Al-Qaeda claps its hands in glee in Yemen and Somalia. China and Russia get quite hostile. Radioactive clouds drift eastward over India. And of course in this event, Iran would conclude that it must quickly obtain a nuclear WMD capability. Achieving exactly what you claim you want to avoid!

Great! An Israeli attack slams the whole world into what? A bridge too far? Total global chaos? Choose your own apocalyptic metaphors.

But if the Zionist posters care for nothing else, consider this: An Israeli attack would certainly result in consequences so horrendous, their current political support in the US could evaporate literally overnight.