297
submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] [email protected] 6 points 3 days ago

I was responding specifically to your claim of there being no credible evidence of a bomb program. Whether they should have a bomb is another question entirely.

But back to the main point. Enrichment to 83.7% IS absolute proof of a nuclear weapons program. That is what you're missing. Reactor grade is 3-5%. There are no practical applications aside from bombs that require enrichment that high. There's literally no other reason to do it.

Nuclear enrichment is not something you just do for fun. It's expensive and dangerous, both in terms of worker safety and geopolitics. And the cost to enrich to bomb grade is at least an order of magnitude more than what is required to enrich to reactor grade.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago

I know the difference between highly enriched and not. You’ve avoided the point entirely. There has been no evidence provided that a bomb is or was being actively manufactured. Anyone claiming about their intentions is speculation

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

He is absolutely and deliberately misinterpreting the IAEA report that only spoke of some paricles at 83.7%.
https://thecradle.co/articles/iran-iaea-put-to-bed-allegations-of-near-weapons-grade-uranium

this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2025
297 points (97.7% liked)

United States | News & Politics

3035 readers
1057 users here now

Welcome to [email protected], where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.

If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.

Rules

Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.

Post anything related to the United States.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS