Ok but stay with me. Maybe the bombing was so good it blew up all the radiation?
Exactly. Just nuke the radiation.
thanks, mr trump
If there’s supposed to be an article link it’s not showing up for me, so here’s a link: https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/pressreleases/update-on-developments-in-iran-4
“I have repeatedly stated that nuclear facilities should never be attacked,” Director General Grossi of IAEA.
For those who aren't aware, the existence of an Iranian nuclear weapons program really isn't something that can be debated. I strongly oppose this war. In fact, I think an Iranian bomb might actually be a good thing. Could really serve to stabilize the region.
But people are taking the Iraq war metaphor way too far. Iran has undeniably had a nuclear weapons program. Now, whether the program is actually currently active? That's a whole other question. It's quite possible it's been dormant, I'm not aware of what the most reliable sources say on the current state of things.
But one thing that is undeniable is that Iran has had a nuke program. The smoking gun was found in 2023. It was found by the IAEA to have enriched uranium up to 83.7%.
https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/documents/gov2023-8.pdf
Bomb grade is 90%. Reactor grade is around 3-5%. And the enrichment process, already a logistical nightmare, becomes exponentially more difficult to do the higher the enrichment you want. Imagine the difference between a household allergy air filter and a computer chip fab clean room. Same fundamental job, completely different levels of difficulty.
There is just no reason to go to all that effort except if you want a bomb. Sure, having a domestically sourced fuel supply, all under your control, is a nice boon. But adding bomb-making capability to that boon is not just some minor add-on to a reactor enrichment plant. You're increasing the cost by an order of magnitude at least. Beyond any doubt, Iran has at least put a lot of effort in to obtaining a nuclear weapon.
If you wanted to be the most generous to Tehran, you could argue that they were trying to position themselves in a near-breakout state. So they enrich a stockpile just right up to the edge of bomb capability, and then stop there. Don't actually cross the line fully to bomb grade but put yourself a short bit of effort away from one. If you wanted to be the most generous to Iran, based on what we indisputably know, you could argue they paused their race to the bomb with their toes a meter shy of the finish line.
Good faith arguments can be made about the current state of Iran's weapons program. But the existence of a nuclear bomb program is indisputable. There are no more credible sources on these matters than the IAEA. They do not fuck around. The IAEA was built to ensure compliance with nuclear nonproliferation treaties. It was built so that nation states and their paranoid military leaders would have faith on their reports. Imagine the level of credibility that requires. If the IAEA said that Iran enriched to 83.7%, you can be damn sure Iran enriched to 83.7%. They are way more credible than any national government.
Do not take the Iraq war metaphor too far. It is indisputable that Iran has poured enormous resources into producing bomb-grade material, or, at the very least, near-bomb grade material.
In fact, I think an Iranian bomb might actually be a good thing. Could really serve to stabilize the region.
This is correct and why they're upset, having a nuke means they can't easily be fucked with which is why nk doesn't do much time and money developing theirs.
Now, whether the program is actually currently active? That's a whole other question. It's quite possible it's been dormant, I'm not aware of what the most reliable sources say on the current state of things.
Our own intelligence says it's not active but they are or were enriching to industrial levels for power generation.
The smoking gun was found in 2023. It was found by the IAEA to have enriched uranium up to 83.7%.
Not really, they found experiments to enrich and very small volumes of highly enriched uranium which in itself is not illegal, many universities have access to enriched uranium so a country should have no issue possessing amounts far far to small to be used in a bomb. You're basically saying they can't even experiment in particle physics which is insane and immoral.
But the existence of a nuclear bomb program is indisputable.
You seem to know a lot about the situation. Could you shed some light on why the IAEA as well as the American intelligence community are disputing this? Do you know why and how they came to the assessment that Iran hasn't been trying to build nukes since 2003, given everything you just said (which, obviously, they're aware of)?
Tbf... Iraq indisputably had WMDs as well in the past. They had and had used them against Iran and the Kurds, they were dismantled and destroyed during Operation Desert Storm. The lie was that they were rebuilding them.
Because.there was never any nuclear arms facilities. We bombed random shit.
They were confirmed nuclear enrichment sites though. Iran openly admits that’s what those sites were. Definitely not “random shit.”
Here's the thing about refined uranium. It's a whole lot more portable than unrefined uranium. That's even more true of uranium that's been refined to the point where it could be used to make a nuclear weapon within weeks. There's no reason to think it would be stored on site, especially after a week of Israeli bombardment.
Make a nuclear weapon within weeks? What?
Yeah, enrichment is the hardest part... That doesn't mean the rest is easy
I don't actually think they were weeks away, but don't you think they would be working on the other parts in parallel? It's not like they are going to end up with an arsenal worth of weapons grade uranium then suddenly remember that there are other steps.
No, they're not working on the other parts as far as we know, and it's not exactly something you can do in a garage
They could get the high explosives easy enough, but you need a strong and precisely made casing to make sure you're launching everything together to make it as angry as possible for a split second. You also need someone who understands the engineering well enough to actually do it, particularly without testing
And all that to get the bomb... A bomb they'd basically have to drive in. They don't have icbms, the missiles they do have are often intercepted, and they don't have a plane that could get past nearly anyone's air defense.
And at the end of the day, they could just lie and say they have it... The fact the intelligence community doesn't think they're working on the rest of the bomb matters just as much as the ability to make one
Does Israel have nukes? Who knows... So many rumors have gone around about them having them that it's just accepted as true
Do Russia and China have working nukes? What about India and Pakistan? Do the US nukes even still work? No one is sure
It also just doesn't really matter... The only people who actually would ever need their nukes to work are the French, because their nuclear doctrine includes a warning shot
they're not working on the other parts as far as we know
I agree, but we wouldn't know. Iran is a modern world power that's perfectly capable of doing things in secret that don't fit in a garage.
We know with certainty that Iran has enriched a stockpile of 60% uranium. That's not sufficient to say that nuclear capabilities are imminent, but it's enough to say that they have long term goals in that direction. (Which makes perfect sense, and should not itself be provocative).
You also need someone who understands the engineering well enough to actually do it, particularly without testing
The US did it 75 years ago with no instruction book. Iran's population is about the same as the US's was at the time, and they have the benefit of all those years of manufacturing advancements. It's borderline racist to assume this would be a problem for them.
They don't have icbms
They have IRBMs, and Israel has been far from 100% successful at shooting them down. That's with heavier payloads that have to reach the ground before detonating. Their IRBMs also include a small number of more modern systems that are nearly impossible for Israel to shoot down.
they could just lie and say they have it
Like in high school? "I swear, she used her tongue and everything!". I'm not so sure that's going to buy them much leverage. (Which would be the real point of having them.)
Do Russia and China have working nukes? What about India and Pakistan? Do the US nukes even still work? No one is sure.
I don't think there is any plausible doubt about any of those but Russia. Even Russia is still certain to have some functional nukes. The only doubts are about how many. Also, Fission bombs have a really long shelf life. It's fusion bombs that require tons of ongoing and expensive maintenance.
Wow. +23 -3 on a verifiably false claim. So this place can be as dumb as reddit. Iran has known enrichment facilities, remember the whole " Iran nuclear deal" last time?
Is enrichment the same as weapons?
Nope. No way to tell them apart without in person inspection. It's like the difference between vodka and everclear; both use the same distillation gear but with different goals
Too bad we tore up the treaty that allowed us to do those inspections and then launched a sneak attack instead of finishing the talks that we're about to establish another treaty.
It's almost like war was the goal the whole time.
if only there were some international treaty body that recently did an in person inspection in Iran and did find that they were enriching uranium with the goal of getting weapon grade uranium.
I think you're all missing the significance of not observing an increase in radiation levels. That would absolutely cause a detectable rise in radiation if the site were active recently.
The obvious scenario would be enriched uranium getting blown up and scattered. But even if they removed the enriched stuff, doesn't everything else get blown to smithereens?
What about the U238? What about the uranium hexaflouride gas? What about contamination or contaminated parts from the equipment?
Or they just missed the target. It's known the enrichment centre is there, but exactly where you'd need to bomb a 100 meters deep target is not. So yes, either the site is inactive, or the bombing was ineffective.
There wasn’t any uranium there to leak. It was moved before this.
well duh. there was as much “nuclear material” there as there was “wmds” when bushy wanted to invade iraq.
Dude stop. Iran did/does have a nuclear program. It’s not secret and is something they’re quite proud of. There’s a difference from having a nuclear program, which they definitely did have and no one disagrees, and having a nuclear weapons program, which has been widely up for debate largely bc of how secretive Iran has been about it.
They either don't really build a nuclear weapon or it's a red herring
Iran was enriching nuclear material, which it has been using for civilian nuclear power generation. This is an important distinction. The American regime is "flooding the zone" with bullshit, so that when we hear "nuclear," your mind sort of auto-completes the phrase with "weapons." But Iran has (had?) a nuclear enrichment program that was verified by the IAEA to be used for things like radiation therapy to treat cancer, and power generation.
The idea that it has to be "weapons" is implanted in your mind with propaganda techniques, like Goebbels' big lie.
Well, to be fair, they were found by the IAEA to have enriched to 83.7%. That's not US propaganda, that's the IAEA. Bomb grade is around 90%. Reactor grade is around 3-5%. And the enrichment process is exponential. It takes far, far more effort to enrich the higher U235 concentration you get. It's like trying to remove finer and finer impurities from a glass of water. The point being there is absolutely zero reason to enrich Uranium to those levels, unless you are aiming for a bomb. It's an incredible amount of extra effort, a whole lot more diplomatic and political risk, all for something that is completely unnecessary for a reactor program.
Though frankly, I think we should just let them have their bomb. They would be a lot more responsible with it than Israel has been with theirs.
It's possible to strike nuclear power plants in such ways that on-site staff are at high risk of death but nearby population is not. I'd assume it's the same for nuclear silos? Or, they didn't do much damage?
What silos? If you're envisioning nuclear-armed missiles, the Fascist Mind Trick is working on you.
They anti-radiation smart bombs.
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.
