Ok but stay with me. Maybe the bombing was so good it blew up all the radiation?
this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2025
305 points (100.0% liked)
United States | News & Politics
3073 readers
1195 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
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.
load more comments
(10 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
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.
load more comments
(1 replies)
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.
load more comments
(6 replies)
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.
If the US and pisrahell terrorist states have them so can Iran.
They didn't have a nuclear WEAPON program for decades.
They honored the JPCOA, the US broke it.
I really hope they get one from Pakistan, as they said they may deliver them.
Not that they need them since they're doing fine turning pissrahell into Gaza with just balistics.
Heartwarming.
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.
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)?
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.
Show your source. Prove the positive (that they have a weapons capable program.)
Wanting electricity or cancer treatment is not the same. Having that type of program does not make the Israel/US bombs ok.
Additionally, if the US, who has used nukes on civilians, can have weapons, why can’t another sovereign nation have them?
Nothing Iran has done or does is as bad as the US’ history regarding nukes. Them having a weapons program does not make the Israel/US bombs ok.
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.
load more comments
(1 replies)
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.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I find it a little hard to swallow that since inspections ended (thanks to Trump) that Iran hasn't started enriching some weapons grade uranium. It's not like it takes different equipment.
The "intelligence" that Iran is weeks away from getting a weapon is obviously complete bullshit. I'm just saying that I'm sure they have been working that direction, maybe just preparing for a time when it made more strategic sense to start building them. If they ever want nukes, they will need to make a whole lot at once, just to avoid getting invaded after the first test.
Indeed, I agree. I phrased that sentence with great care, to point out that there are plenty of legitimate, non-weapons reasons for Iran to have a nuclear materials enrichment program, and it is well-documented that it has been using its program for exactly that. That's the important point, here: Iran has a right to enrich uranium for domestic use, and had been doing so under the supervision of IAEA inspectors who verified that it was for domestic use, but the U.S. regime is deploying propaganda to bury that fact.
Maybe the government also had a secondary aim of maintaining a "breakout capability" to be able to produce material for weapons in a relatively short time. I wouldn't be surprised, because... that's exactly what I think I would do were I in their shoes, facing a genocidal, revanchist enemy enabled by a superpower that spends stunning amounts of money on invading and destroying other nations.
and had been doing so under the supervision of IAEA inspectors who verified that it was for domestic use,
This part is just wrong. The IAEA has continued to report on Iran as best they can, but their monitoring equipment has been removed and there have been no inspections for over four years. I don't want to repeat myself, but elsewhere in this discussion I included excerpts from the most recent IAEA quarterly report that back this up.
How is this wrong? If the monitoring equipment was removed, it had to have been there at some point. Thus, Iran had been doing enrichment under IAEA supervision, which is what the JCPOA was all about until TACO tanked it.
I don't think anybody is saying Iran didn't have inspectors and monitoring at some point, but four years is a lot of time.
I also think it's pretty common knowledge that Trump tore up Obama's agreement. I still think it should be mentioned more, as well as Biden's 180 on his campaign promise to reinstate it.
load more comments
(7 replies)
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.
I don't know (I try to ignore such news) but I was just writing in generic terms
That's why I point it out. The Mind Trick is working, and they're successfully shaping the story so that folks who aren't paying close attention (that is, the majority of us) start imagining silos with ICBMs.
There wasn’t any uranium there to leak. It was moved before this.
view more: next ›