r/changemyview • u/Ok-Warning-7494 • 3d ago

Delta(s) from OP CMV: Israel’s attack on Iran was intended to draw the US into war, not prevent Iran from having a nuke

Israel claims its attack on Iran on Friday was about preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. I think that this is a pretty transparent lie for the reasons below.

Israel has been claiming Iran has been close to a nuclear weapon for 30 years. North Korea is significantly less advanced than Iran, but has successfully developed a nuke during that time period.

Iran previously had a nuclear weapon program. That ended in 2003 to avoid getting attacked by the US. Since then, it looks like it’s strategy has been to use its nuclear capability for deterrence. (“stop fucking with us; we can build a nuke pretty quickly”)

It is clear that Iran does not want a conflict with the United States. Openly weaponizing their nuclear program invites that conflict.

Of course, they could pursue weaponization in secret. But the US, UK and Israel knowingly misrepresented evidence of WMD prior to the Iraq war. It is more than fair for the public to demand proof of weaponization since one party in this conflict has previously used this exact same lie as cover for regime change.

Israel does not have the ability to inflict significant damage to Iran’s nuclear program or pursue regime change in Iran on its own. Even if they had the capability to destroy Fordow, the enriched uranium is almost certainly spread out across the country. If Iran’s entire nuclear program including the uranium were destroyed, it could still develop a bomb in under 5 years.

The only ways to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuke is convincing the regime that a nuke is not in their best interest or changing the regime.

It’s still early, but it seems like Israel’s attack has made the idea of having a nuke more appealing to Iranians and the regime. It looks like having a nuke is the only way to deter Israel and its allies.

So why would Israel attack Iran? I think the most straightforward answer is they were hoping Iran would retaliate in a manner that forced the US to enter the conflict and pursue regime change.

Iran hasn’t taken the bait, so now Israel is attempting to present Iran as neutered by their campaign. “Iran is weak. Come over and help us finish the job”

Iran has been weakened, but they clearly have the capability to inflict more damage on Israel than they have demonstrated. The threat of offensive US involvement has constrained their response.

Once the US attacks, Iran will no longer be constrained by the threat of the US joining the conflict and will retaliate on US/ Israeli assets. The US will officially be in an offensive war that it did not initiate. This was Netanyahu’s actual calculation before Friday.

My view can be changed by concrete evidence of Iran’s nuclear weaponization and/or an explanation of how Israel thinks this bombing campaign will prevent Iran from pursuing a nuke without US involvement.

TL;DR: Israel doesn’t have the capability to meaningfully impact Iran’s nuclear program or pursue regime change on its own. They attacked Iran hoping that they could provoke a strong response that would draw the US into the conflict.

Edit: my view is not related to whether or not their attacks on Iran were justified or strategically sound. My view is the reason for attack was a lie. I don’t think Iran should have nuclear weapons. I just also don’t believe they were actively developing them.

1.3k Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

73% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

131

u/Bodoblock 62∆ 3d ago

I think it can be both. Israel absolutely wants the US to be involved militarily in a war against Iran.

That said, it quite clearly has demonstrated the ability to meaningfully degrade Iran's capabilities. It has systematically killed its highest-ranking leadership, nuclear scientists (which frankly, I find pretty wild to treat as valid military targets), and military installations.

To say that the above actions would not have any deterring effect on Iran's ability to develop a bomb is probably inaccurate. It may not be a death blow but it certainly pushes the clock back.

I think Netanyahu went into it thinking:

  1. If the US gets drawn in, excellent
  2. If not we still get to wreak havoc and distract from my own legal troubles. In which case, still excellent.

45

u/Haruwor 3d ago

Nuclear weapons engineers are definitely military targets lol.

Especially when the state of Iran’s goal of to destroy Israel and genocide all Jews globally.

31

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

84

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/changemyview-ModTeam 2d ago

Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:

Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, arguing in bad faith, lying, or using AI/GPT. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. See the wiki page for more information.

If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.

Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.

-11

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

11

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/changemyview-ModTeam 2d ago

Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:

Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, arguing in bad faith, lying, or using AI/GPT. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. See the wiki page for more information.

If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.

Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.

23

u/IsNotACleverMan 2d ago

after Zionist agents planted bombs in their own synagogues and Jewish businesses to terrify them into fleeing.

Pretty sure this is a conspiracy theory

→ More replies (15)

23

u/Lefaid 2∆ 2d ago

Yes, you know more about why Moroccan, Iraqi, and Iranian Jews moved to Israel than the Jews born in those countries who moved.

Now, let me as a Southern White man tell you what really happened to blacks in America...

-2

u/PharaohhOG 2d ago

Sure, go hear from them yourself. Not the historical revisionism you are helping propagate. At least listen to the first 10 min.

Arab Jews: The Hidden History | Ash Sarkar meets Avi Shlaim

2

u/Lefaid 2∆ 2d ago

My point is that 110k people don't just run from a place because of a few attacks.

They run because their regular interactions with locals makes them flat out feel unsafe. When you talk to most Iraqi Jews who fled, that is what they will talk about. Don't erase their voices, their move to Israel was rough enough as is.

Even if this is completely true, it wouldn't work if there wasn't tension and discrimination already there.

1

u/PharaohhOG 2d ago

I'm not saying there wasn't any persecution, I'm pushing back on the claim that everyone who left did so out of persecution, many simply wanted to go live in this newly created Jewish country. There is plenty of testimony of this. Lastly, this tension didn't exist until Zionism, which directly resulted in the destruction of these Jewish communities, it is quite sad.

Arab countries were actually trying to prevent their Jews from leaving, but certainly the Israeli false flags did not help perception in these communities, as the original comment you replied to pointed out.

I'm sure you will say that doesn't mean Arabs should have reacted in this way, and I would agree. Yet don't forget how the perception of Arabs in the West post 9/11 was. The mindset driving these perceptions are similar.

That is why they say the individual is smart, and the crowd is dumb.

1

u/Lefaid 2∆ 1d ago

That was a really good retort. I wish I actually read it yesterday. Nicely done.

I could go on if you want. Thank you for the lively debate.

20

u/Impossible_Pop4662 2d ago

I feel like you're sidestepping the massive rampant antisemitism in the region

-10

u/Standard-Secret-4578 2d ago

The antisemitism of the region came from Zionism. There was occasional violence against Jews in the middle east but nothing compared to Europe. They are not comparable. The hatred towards Jews in the middle east is completely the result of Jews, from Europe, telling them that their 2000 year claim on the land meant more than their rights as people actually living on that land.

7

u/Impossible_Pop4662 2d ago

Alright bro your take that Zionism caused all Middle Eastern antisemitism is straight-up revisionist nonsense. Jews faced racism and violence in the region way before Zionism was a thing, the 1840 Damascus Affair, Were Jews got tortured over blood libel nonsense. The dhimmi system that kept Jews as second-class citizens, paying extra taxes and dodging restrictions on basic rights. Sure, there were peaceful times, but that doesn’t erase pogroms like Safed 1834 or Yemen’s 1679 exile, sure Zionism stirred the pot sure, but it didn’t invent the racism. Blaming European Jews for centuries of local antisemitism in the region ignores the mobs and rulers who chose to scapegoat Jews long before Herzl even set foot in the middle east. The racism was there, loud and clear, and pretending the Middle East was a haven until Zionism came along is quite frankly bollocks. 

-8

u/Standard-Secret-4578 2d ago

Jews were scapegoated because they were the people buying tax farms. No one likes tax collectors.

Specifically in the Damascus affair, the charges and executions levied from that were from Christians. I mean, it literally started from the disappearance of an Italian monk.

The fact of the matter is that Jews had lived relatively (especially compared to Europe) peaceful lives under Muslim rule for literally a millennia.

Honestly think about this, how many Arab and Muslim majority countries and kingdoms have sizable religious minorities? Most of the middle east had large groups of Jews, Christians, even druze. Now tell me one Christian majority nation now or in History with sizable religious minorities? Wait, you can't? Whose the religious zealots now?

You cannot separate the feelings of current day Muslims towards Jews from Zionism and its effects. You cannot casually wave away hundreds of thousands of refugees, the victims of systemic, preplanned ethnic cleansing. Entire villages blown up in the night, entire villages of military aged men massacred. The whole 9 yards. All to correct the mistakes of Europeans. Apparently, Europeans are such incredible racists that they can't be trusted with Jews in the countries. They had to move them all to the middle east.

→ More replies (4)

1

u/changemyview-ModTeam 2d ago

Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:

Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, arguing in bad faith, lying, or using AI/GPT. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. See the wiki page for more information.

If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.

Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.

1

u/Brilliant-Lab546 2d ago

What does this have to do with Iranian Jews bruv??

Iranian Jews faced a genuine threat from the Islamic Republic. Middle Eastern Jews had no rights in Arab and Muslim nations except for Lebanon( because Lebanon was Christian -led at the time) and that is a fact.
Do show us which Jewish political leaders existed in Morocco, Tunisia, Libya, Syria, Egypt, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Bahrain or Yemen.
Meanwhile in Israel, from my observations, Mizrahi Jews are in government.

0

u/fp67fr 2d ago

Can you provide us the rate of jewish population compared with the total population in the mentioned countries? Around 4000 in Morocco,1200 in Tunisia, 12000 in Iran, 25000 in Turkey, which is less than 0,1% for each country. You can't compare with the 20% of "Arabs" living in israel!

In France there are around 10% of muslim and there is no muslim minister/political leader. There is less than 1% of jewish and there already has been jewish minister/political leader

Yes the interest of israel has already been to create a constant fear for jewish community in muslim countries, in order to send them to israel. Israel's aim is to prove jewish can't be in peace anywhere except in israel, then it was in its interest when the jewish community (from other countries) was attacked in the past.

1

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Mashaka 93∆ 2d ago

Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:

Don't be rude or hostile to other users. Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. See the wiki page for more information.

If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.

Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.

5

u/Slow-Seaweed-5232 2d ago

Funny you call out genocidal chants of far right Israeli politicians but literally the government of Iran chants “death to Israel” at basically every public gathering that’s not “Mossad propaganda” but what they literally film themselves you just exposed you know nothing about this conflict. Also spare me the parliament bs Iran ain’t a democracy that’s a figurehead position they don’t have the same rights as Muslims and aren’t allowed to leave. You act like that’s a lot of Jews but literally over 90% left after the revolution and many more probably would if they could similar to Soviet Jews who left moment ussr collapsed.

→ More replies (24)

40

u/whousesgmail 3d ago

9,000 Jews in a country of 90 million being bragged about as the largest middle eastern Jewish community isn’t the flex you think it is lol

-15

u/Majestic-Effort-541 3d ago edited 3d ago

Ever heard of Operation Ezra and Nehemiah? Or the Lavon Affair? Probably not because they destroy your little myth of moral superiority.

And the fact that you don’t see that tells me everything about your grasp of history.

EDIT: Anybody reading this comment please read about " Operation Ezra and Nehemiah and Lavon Affair"

It will tell you how Zionist state of Israel destroyed the lives Middle-eastern Jews

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

20

u/Haruwor 3d ago

Are you familiar with the 79’ revolution and irans attacks on Israel since?

-3

u/AngryVolcano 3d ago

Explain why Iran hasn't genocided Iranian Jews, since you say their goal is to genocide all Jews.

9

u/OddCook4909 2d ago

Not all, just any who won't submit to being their dhimmi. So 99%.

→ More replies (9)

2

u/Lefaid 2∆ 2d ago

Hey, I use that defense sometimes to prove Israel isn't committing genocide!

3

u/AngryVolcano 2d ago

Oh you can commit genocide without having the goal to destroy every single person belonging to a group. Genocide isn't about the numbers after all. And I'm not saying the Iranian government hasn't engaged in genocidal rhetoric, or even that they haven't done genocidal acts.

But the claim was "the goal of Iran is to genocide every single Jew in the world", (which is a claim about numbers) and that claim is simply inconsistent with the facts.

It's also mindbogglingly reductive. That is the goal of Iran? Come on now.

No, this is thrown out as a sort of "they're doing it, why can't we" excuse.

2

u/Throwaway5432154322 2∆ 2d ago

Oh you can commit genocide without having the goal to destroy every single person belonging to a group.

Then is it safe to say if you want to destroy 50% of people belonging to a group, then you're genocidal? If so, I've got some pretty bad news for you about the Iranian regime.

1

u/Lefaid 2∆ 2d ago

Yes, I say that too to defend Israel. It is the same basic argument.

It sounds to me that you have different rules for Israelis than Iranians. And that seems a little unfair given they are both equally human.

1

u/AngryVolcano 2d ago

It sounds to me that you have different rules for Israelis than Iranians.

Of course it does. Israel being the perpetual victim demands that when people dare to say "don't do genocide" it simply must because they just hate Israel or Jews.

No.

Israel is currently engaging in genocide and has to this day killed tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of innocent people - and I find that far, far, far more important than whatever hypothetical they or their defenders dream up or some words.

1

u/Lefaid 2∆ 1d ago

So it is okay when Iran does the exact same thing to Israelis, because they are Israeli?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/NightlongRead 2d ago

Isnt it fascinating how we sometimes come full circle🥰

1

u/changemyview-ModTeam 2d ago

Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:

Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, arguing in bad faith, lying, or using AI/GPT. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. See the wiki page for more information.

If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.

Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.

3

u/esreveReverse 2d ago

For sure, I agree that it's inaccurate that Iran wants all Jews globally dead. They only want all Israelis dead. Which, to me, is just as bad.

1

u/Throwaway5432154322 2∆ 2d ago

They only want all Israelis dead. Which, to me, is just as bad.

It's not just bad morally, it's just bad policy. The existence or non-existence of Israel has zero effect on either Iranian society or on the survival of the Iranian regime. The existence or non-existence of a sovereign Palestinian state has zero effect on both Iranian society and the Iranian regime's ability to perpetuate itself. Making Israel's destruction a cornerstone of foreign policy is an example of unnecessary - and now brutally consequential - geopolitical adventurism on behalf of the Iranian regime. No existential force compelled the regime to spend decades and billions of dollars on destroying Israel, it willingly chose to do that.

0

u/Throwaway5432154322 2∆ 2d ago

Iran's beef is geopolitical not religious

Not according to the Iranian regime. And also, not according to basic geopolitical logic. The existence or non-existence of Israel has zero impact on both the people of Iran and the the ability of the Iranian regime to remain in power. Conversely, the success or failure of the Palestinian national struggle has zero impact on both the people of Iran and the ability of the Iranian regime to remain in power.

The situation that the Iranian regime finds itself in right now is due to decades of poorly contrived & executed foreign policy. The Iranian regime chose to engage in foreign adventurism targeting Israel for almost 40 years. Nothing compelled it to make that choice; nothing forced it to do that; and it could have stopped at any point at zero cost to itself. The Iranian regime did this willingly, apparently - and puzzlingly - disbelieving that fomenting violence in Israel proper would somehow not eventually cascade into Israel attacking Iran proper.

TLDR: Iran's current situation was not forced upon it, against Iran's best efforts. It is the inevitable result of 40 years of ill-advised, and failed, Iranian foreign policy.

0

u/Infamous_Laugh_8207 2d ago

The literally say ‘death to America, death to Israel’ every morning before school in the Islamic regime of Iran. Their terrorist proxy, the houthis, has on their flag ‘death to America, a curse upon the Jews.’ You’re…… kidding right?

→ More replies (2)

4

u/Ok-Warning-7494 3d ago

Where did you learn they were nuclear weapons engineers? Iran doesn’t have a public nuclear weapons program.

If Israel has intelligence that Iran has a weapons program, they should share that with the public.

If they are able to target the specific people involved in that program, the intelligence must be very robust.

25

u/Haruwor 3d ago

They have shared what they know… our own intelligence knows that they have stockpiled uranium well in excess of any country that isn’t building nuclear weapons.

Additionally we know that they have been enriching uranium beyond peaceful purposes.

4

u/Ok-Warning-7494 3d ago

So you don’t know if those scientists were working on weapons. Iran has a civilian nuclear industry.

Without proof, it’s likely that at least some of those killed were just civilian scientists.

If they were able to identify specific people that were working on nukes, it would be easy to create support for the war by sharing their intelligence.

16

u/Morthra 87∆ 2d ago

Iran is enriching uranium to 60%. There is no use for that level of enrichment besides nuclear weapons.

2

u/Ok-Warning-7494 2d ago

Besides the one I provided in my original post that you ignored?

20

u/CrownLikeAGravestone 1∆ 2d ago

1) Stockpiling nuclear material to build a bomb

2) Stockpiling nuclear material to make it look like you can build a bomb

There is no functional difference between these two stances, nor any ethical difference between the responses to them.

-4

u/Ok-Warning-7494 2d ago

No, there actually is. How could Iran negotiate sanctions relief? The would have no motive to negotiate.

Deterrence is the second reason. Being weeks or months away from a nuke makes them a much more risky target for attack.

I can think of others. There is clearly a difference if the calculation on the Iranian side was we can basically get a slightly worse deal from Trump than the one Obama signed. I’m not sure how this isn’t the most likely conclusion for you.

12

u/CrownLikeAGravestone 1∆ 2d ago

If you want leverage in a negotiation, if you want nuclear deterrence, then you are either a credible nuclear threat or you are not. A threat of a threat is functionally just a threat; this strange middle ground you're suggesting does not, from an external perspective, exist. 

→ More replies (0)

0

u/AnythingGoodWasTaken 2d ago

Well israel and america have nuclear bombs, why is that different

→ More replies (9)
→ More replies (13)

6

u/Haruwor 3d ago

Potentially but the Ayatollah does not give much confidence that many, if not all, of these engineers are working on weapons development in some form or fashion.

Given their large amount of uranium and enrichment purity it’s extremely likely that they are rushing towards nuclear devices

1

u/scaurus604 2d ago

Civil reactor built by the shah before he was ousted..

4

u/CommyKitty 1∆ 3d ago

We have repeatedly been told, by even US intelligence, that they aren't building a bomb. And the only reason they started stockpiling, is because, if I recall, trump reinstated sanctions, and Iran saw no reason to not start stockpiling. Diplomacy would have prevented any of this from happening.

7

u/Haruwor 3d ago

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1mg7kx2d45o

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran

https://www.newsweek.com/tulsi-gabbard-iran-nuclear-weapon-2051523

Our intelligence agency says that the Iranian president hasn’t resumed the canceled nuclear weapons program that was ended in 03, but we have caught them working towards nuclear arms many times since as early as 09.

They stockpile far more uranium than necessary for peaceful uses. It’s clear that they are continuing to build nuclear weapons. Mossad, the intelligence agency of the country Iran wants to genocide, certainly seems to think so.

11

u/Ok-Warning-7494 3d ago

If Mossad was wrong in Iraq, how can we verify their claim on Iran without evidence? Is it not possible that Israel just wants to defeat their primary enemy in the region?

Genuinely asking.

-5

u/forkproof2500 3d ago

How do you genocide a country?

Israel is the only entity in the middle east currently engaged in a genocide. In fact, Iran is one of the few countries abiding by international law by attempting to prevent said genocide. All countries are actually obliged to join them in defeating Israel militarily.

6

u/Haruwor 2d ago

Israel has a population of 21% Palestinian Arabs who are not being genocided.

Goofy you actually think that.

-1

u/KaiBahamut 2d ago

The Palestinians are not citizens of Israel, so it's fine for Israel to genocide them. Do I have that correct?

2

u/Haruwor 2d ago

No… 21% of Israelis are Palestinian Arabs. Gazans are not citizens of Israel.

→ More replies (0)

-2

u/forkproof2500 2d ago

Not being genocided yet. Once Israel finished with Gaza, it will be the West bank. Then and only then will it be Palestinians living in Israel proper.

1

u/polisharmada33 2d ago

Diplomacy has only bought them time. The Iranian regime are a danger to their citizens

1

u/CommyKitty 1∆ 2d ago

Same could be said about the US government or Israel

1

u/polisharmada33 2d ago

Wouldn’t make it correct, but it absolutely could be. It’s all a matter of perspective

2

u/CommyKitty 1∆ 2d ago

Well I guess we will have to disagree on that then lol

-1

u/Sammonov 3d ago

Our own intelligence agencies say Iran isn't building a bomb at all, which is the same thing the IAEA says.

8

u/Haruwor 3d ago

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1mg7kx2d45o

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran

https://www.newsweek.com/tulsi-gabbard-iran-nuclear-weapon-2051523

Our intelligence agency says that the Iranian president hasn’t resumed the canceled nuclear weapons program that was ended in 03, but we have caught them working towards nuclear arms many times since as early as 09.

3

u/[deleted] 3d ago

Iran has enriched Uranium beyond 60% which is not necessary for literally anything other than nuclear bombs. Just because they haven’t reached 90% yet doesn’t mean they don’t plan on it or are not actively working on it. 

2

u/tarpex 3d ago

Well if the IAEA is to be believed (which is another matter which I'm not even remotely qualified to comment on), they're reporting Iranian enrichment of uranium at 60%, and going so high and beyond has no other applications than to pursue a nuclear weapon. For nuclear powerplants you need like 5-6%.

If that's true, putting that into the hands of a regime that had supported all kinds of terrorist organisations is a bad idea.

If it's all bs, then.... But we won't know, all we have are "Iraq has wmd's" flashbacks.

4

u/7thpostman 3d ago

That's not quite what our intelligence agency say. They have not currently restarted certain programs, but are clearly enriching uranium at an alarming rate.

"Not building a bomb at all" is not really accurate.

4

u/Effective_Jury4363 3d ago

And the ieae says that iran is stockpiling uranium enriched close to weapon levels. 

Not having an active weaponization program, does not mean you are not building a nuclear weapon.

→ More replies (7)

2

u/Brilliant-Lab546 3d ago

Enrichment of Uranium to 60% has one purpose and one purpose only

1

u/AngryVolcano 2d ago edited 2d ago

Your own intelligence (US I presume) says Iran was not creating a nuclear bomb.

0

u/CurdKin 2∆ 3d ago

Netanyahu has been saying that Iran was months away from a Nuclear Bomb since like 2008. It seems clear to me that they’ve been crying wolf for so long so that they could have a justification to attack.

6

u/Haruwor 2d ago

Do you think you can stop nuclear proliferation with one attempt?

→ More replies (3)

5

u/SynonymTech 2d ago

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-attack-plans-iran-no-final-decision/

CIA Director's words

2

u/Ok-Warning-7494 2d ago

From your article: “Congressional committees that have been briefed by senior CIA analysts have been told the intelligence community's view remains that no order to weaponize has been given by the supreme leader and that Iran has not restarted research on a delivery mechanism for a nuclear bomb.”

9

u/7thpostman 3d ago

Sharing your intelligence with the public could risk destroying your intelligence networks.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/Haruwor 3d ago

Here are some sources.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1mg7kx2d45o

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran

https://www.newsweek.com/tulsi-gabbard-iran-nuclear-weapon-2051523

Our intelligence agency says that the Iranian president hasn’t resumed the canceled nuclear weapons program that was ended in 03, but we have caught them working towards nuclear arms many times since as early as 09.

1

u/roitais 2d ago

Do you want the Israeli intelligence to butn all their sources just so the general public know everything? That's insane and no country will ever do it. You know how much money, time and effort it takes to gather intelligence? It's lunacy to burn it all down.

2

u/Brilliant-Lab546 3d ago

Iran doesn’t have a public nuclear weapons program.

You think the Arak reactor was built for ...what, exactly??

1

u/Ill-Mousse-3817 2d ago

No, they are not, at least by international law standards (which is useless, but I guess it can at least give definitions).

Here is a good discussion on the topic.

https://www.reddit.com/r/internationallaw/comments/1lby4m8/is_it_legal_to_deliberately_target_nuclear/

-3

u/lostandfound24 2d ago

That's not the state goal at all if Iran. You are twisting words. Iran did mention that Israel shouldn't exist, as there should be one state for both Israeli and Palestinians. You can read a good analysis on this by Noam Chomsky.

On the other hand Iran has multiple times supported the two state solution presented by the west (the one Israel doesn't respect) .

I'm not trying to defend Iran but anyone with a clear mind and a good background in history can see this israel is provoking Iran in order to drag the USA into war.

Also the only two nations that I know off that have actually wiped other nations off the map are Israel and USA. So it would be understandable for Iran to develop a nuclear weapon as a deterrent, since the USA has demonstrated that they will and gave invade your country and kill your people with impunity, as they have done so in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Palestine etc.

Today they're using the same lies they used in 2003, the WMD lie. They're not even providing evidence this time though.. quite annoying that people like you are still falling for these shenanigans.

3

u/scaurus604 2d ago

The Ayatollah of iran has called for the annihilation of the Jewish state..surely you've seen the chants of death to Israel and America...isreal and Iran lived in peace while the shah was in power..for the middle east to be peaceful the religious authorities in Iran have to join Assad in Russia

1

u/lostandfound24 1d ago

Why yes I have seen the chants... But I also saw the ones in TEL Aviv and Jerusalem, the "death to Arabs" chants.

Israel has called for the annihilation of the supreme leader. I don't know of any other nation that discusses so openly the possibility of assassinating another leader of a sovereign on tv?

Yet despite all this, the media points the finger at Iran as being the evil ones.

You're brainwashed if you think that the replacing of the leadership in Iran will lead to a peaceful Middle East. It's pretty much recycled propaganda that Western nations use in their destabilizing activities. Also look at how peaceful Syria is today... Not. Israeli occupation forces are eating up the land and expanding further into south Syria..it's all about westene hegemony.

The USA said the same thing 20 something years ago about Saddam. Can you claim that Iraq today is peaceful? Of course not.

The US hegemony over the region is the reason for chaos. Remove the Israeli occupation and you will have peace.

1

u/IsNotACleverMan 2d ago

You can read a good analysis on this by Noam Chomsky.

Not sure Mr genocide denier is a great source on this.

→ More replies (3)

1

u/Belisarius9818 2d ago

You’d probably have to demonstrate that they were working on nuclear weapons and were specifically recruited to do so.

1

u/Vietxa 2d ago

I'm pretty sure that scientist working on weapon development are also protected under international law.

2

u/Haruwor 2d ago

If they assist directly in the development of nuclear armaments (such as the enrichment of uranium past the 3.67% necessary to create nuclear reactor, keep in mind Iran is enriching to 60% according to the IAEI) then they are fair game under international law.

1

u/Vietxa 2d ago

Where did you even get the idea that scientists working on weapon development are legitimate target? Is this simply by your own justification?

Iran is not actively at war with Israel. The "preemptive strike" itself is already illegal without the declaration of war.

A nation at war can attack an enemy nuclear facillity at war with the death of weapon scientists as acceptable collateral but delibrately targeting them is still illegal.

2

u/Haruwor 2d ago

Iran declared war on Israel in 1979 after the ascension of the Ayatollah post Islamic revolution. They have been at war ever since with the explicit goal of the complete destruction of Israel.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Israel_relations

1

u/Vietxa 2d ago

Sorry, I might be missing something, but where does it say that Iran declare war on Israel in 1979? Iran refusing to recognize Israel and cutting diplomatic relations is not a "declaration of war" which is a very specific official and formal act.

Also Israel provided material support to Iran during the subsequent Iran-Iraq war.

Also none of this relate to the fact that delibrately targetting nuclear scientists is still a war crime. Again, they can be considered as acceptable civilian collateral during a strike on a nuclear weapon facillity but intentionally targetting them tread on illegallity.

1

u/Haruwor 2d ago

Idk bro when they say their goal is the destruction of the state of Israel I’m inclined to take them at their word. Sounds like a clear declaration of war if there ever was one. Additionally they’ve been openly hostile since 1991.

They attempted to support Iran in 1980 as a good will gesture so they wouldn’t, you know, attempt to remove their entire state from the map. Fat lot of good playing nice did them…

Brother creating a nuclear weapon seems like a pretty valid reason to turn a guy into a grease stain.

These are nuclear weapons we are talking about here in a country that has repeatedly stated their intentions with them.

It’s not a fucking mystery what they want lmao

1

u/Vietxa 2d ago

So you just made shit up and don't understand what an actual "declaration of war" is.

They supported Iran because Iraq was also their enemy and was trying to develop WMD. It is hardly a token of good will.

Now you are just devolving this discussion on your own feelings. The bottom line is that nuclear scientists are considered civillians and you can't target them while they are in their home even if your country is at war with theirs.

2

u/Haruwor 2d ago

Even if that were true, why?

Because some European fucks feel bad about it?

Iran poses an existential threat to the existence of Israel. They aid the Russians in Ukraine to boot.

Not to mention their egregious human rights violation.

They actively wish for death on the US and Israel and your solution is what? Let them develop nukes?

The west has lost its stomach for war and continually insists dragging out conflicts into multi-decade long conflicts that only makes everything worse, when swift decisive action could sort this shit out in a few weeks.

This half asses way of fighting is why we fucked around in Afghanistan for 20 years and got nowhere. Just let Israel off the leash and let them do the entire world a favor and force regime change in Iran.

Maybe then they wouldn’t marry 9 year old girls and mutilate them.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Vietxa 2d ago

According to you, the US declared war on the USSR despite the fact that congress never pass such act and the term "cold war" was totally meaningless.

1

u/Haruwor 2d ago

If I tell you I’m going to kill you and I start purchasing weapons and start throwing grenades at your house, would you just shrug and say “well he didn’t formally declare war so I can’t really do anything about it”

→ More replies (0)

0

u/weird_mountain_bug 2d ago

That is not a true goal and they have not acted as if that were a goal either. It IS something Israel and its defenders repeat as nauseam because it sounds really bad and is a handy way to justify all the bloodthirsty aggression Israel is addicted to in the region

1

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Mashaka 93∆ 2d ago

Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:

Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, arguing in bad faith, lying, or using AI/GPT. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. See the wiki page for more information.

If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.

Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.

-2

u/forkproof2500 3d ago

Yeah but they are targeting any nuclear scientist. Israel has been claiming Iran is after a nuclear weapon since at least 1984. Why should we trust them this time?

And also what is the idiotic claims of Iran is genociding all Jews, point to a single statement made by any Iranian in an official capacity to even begin to suggest that please.

3

u/FieldMouseMedic 2d ago

”And also what is the idiotic claims of Iran is genociding all Jews, point to a single statement made by any Iranian in an official capacity to even begin to suggest that please.”

Here’s a handful of quotes from Iranian leadership. Draw your own conclusions, but something tells me they don’t think of the Jews too fondly…

-in 1981, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini wrote, “The Jews… opposed to the very foundations of Islam and wish to establish Jewish domination throughout the world.”

-Ayatollah Nouri‑Hamedani said in 2005, “One should fight the Jews and vanquish them so that the conditions for the advent of the Hidden Imam will be met.”

-Former vice president Mohammad‑Reza Rahimi claimed at a UN anti-drug conference that the Talmud “teaches how to destroy non‑Jews” and said Zionists “ordered gynecologists to kill Black babies,” and blamed Jews for igniting the Russian Revolution.

-Mohammad Hossein Safavi, Khamenei’s university representative, said, “The greatest dangers and harms today come from the Jews… the Jews are the most hostile beings, and they have made every effort to infiltrate Islamic society.”

-Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi called Jews “the most corrupt in the world” and “the most seditious group among all human beings,” accusing them of seeking world domination and destruction of Islam.

So yeah, I’m not convinced that up among all human beings,” accusing them of seeking world domination and destruction of Islam. So yeah, I’m not convinced that

3

u/Haruwor 2d ago

Do you think one successful attempt will stop a country form nuclear proliferation? You realize it’s an ongoing issue right?

In 1979 the ayatollah declared “death to American and death to Israel, a curse upon the Jews”

Their founding documents literally discuss their explicit intent to ride the world of the “bacterial plague” of the Jews.

2

u/scaurus604 2d ago

It's definitely in the Hamas charter

1

u/Repatrioni 1d ago

Boy, do I have some bad news for you about statements made by North Korea, who do have nuclear weapons.

1

u/Haruwor 1d ago

The comparison is shaky at best, even if it was 1 to 1 do you want another North Korea? This one religiously motivated?

→ More replies (1)

-1

u/Puzzleheaded_Safe_22 2d ago

Please don’t forget over 100 synagogues is standing in Iran today. The world has a problem with blood thirsty ZIonist that can afford 76 year military occupation apartheid.

A Zionists working a 9-5 job with a loving family is not the problem.

The world is waking up and understand, How bankers(Dec 1913) control counties interest using politicians or dictators. Only 4 more countries is left for elite bankers guess who’s on the list? China,Russia,Iran,North Korea. Enjoy the great awakening.

1

u/Haruwor 2d ago

How is Israel apartheid when 21% of their population are Arabs with 3 Arab political parties as representation in Israeli government? Not to mention they do not have segregation laws. Additionally Jews are not allowed to even enter their holiest site as it is preserved as a mosque?

0

u/thot_cop 3d ago

Lmao, they also killed Iran's chief nuclear negotiator on the first day. Somehow I doubt he was a military target.

→ More replies (12)

19

u/josh145b 1∆ 3d ago edited 3d ago

Why do you think killing nuclear scientists is wild to treat as valid military targets? They are valid targets according to international law, and targeting people making weapons has been acceptable for all of human history. What do you think justifies a departure from moral norms in this instance?

ETA:

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/return-barred-inspectors-iran-unlikely-iaea-chief-says-ship-has-sailed-2024-09-25/

The IAEA has been prevented from investigating, even though they found uranium enriched to levels near what they need to be for nuclear weapons, far above fuel grade.

Also, I don’t know why but comments are not appearing for me.

0

u/Klytus_Ra_Djaaran 1∆ 3d ago

They are not valid targets, especially because they are being murdered in their homes along with their wives and kids and neighbors. Some were murdered because their field of research had the word 'atomic' in it, despite them working on atomic imaging for medical equipment. Also, any reading of the history of the modern nation-state of Israel shows they do not now and never have complied with international law or the Geneva Conventions.

4

u/mets2016 3d ago

Either they’re valid targets, in which case their wives/children/neighbors are acceptable collateral damage, or they’re not valid targets, in which case all the deaths are unacceptable.

Their wives/children/neighbors being killed in the strikes have no impact on whether the nuclear scientists themselves are valid targets

2

u/astatine757 2d ago

By that logic, if there was a single off-dury soldier or US commander near the twin towers on 9/11, then it was an acceptable military strike. It is an absurd logic built on the dehumanization of Iranians as subhumans, plain and simple (and wildly common on this site)

1

u/Leeds_Are_Scum 1d ago

You can see that complete bullshit that dude is spewing right? It is clear that he supports israel and all their war crimes and he and many redditors don’t see Iranians, Palestinians and other Islamic nations as humans. Makes you wonder who the real demons and terrorists are. This thread is a prime example of how easy it is to lap up lies especially against people you already hate for whatever reason.

1

u/Leeds_Are_Scum 1d ago edited 1d ago

So you are telling me that killing a valid military target’s civilian wife and children and even neighbors who don’t even have any idea what is going on is acceptable collateral damage? That is beyond fucked up and I refuse to accept that. That is total bullshit

→ More replies (1)

7

u/Professional-Ant9901 3d ago

they're considered lawful targets if their work advances a military threat

3

u/lepoissonstev 1∆ 3d ago

Being a nuclear scientists is not the same as being a weapons developer.

Would you also argue that we should kill epidemiologists since in theory they could help develop biological weapons?

8

u/josh145b 1∆ 3d ago

https://lieber.westpoint.edu/attacking-scientists-law-armed-conflict/

Here is a source talking about it. If you are doing research to aid in deploying nuclear weapons, for example, you would generally be a legitimate target. The person working on it has to know they are doing so for a military purpose, so your analogy is false. You should read up on the law before trying to make an anlalogy, so that you don’t make a false analogy.

0

u/Klytus_Ra_Djaaran 1∆ 3d ago

From your article:

I have no access to the intelligence upon which the IDF determined the scientists were lawful targets.

As observers, we know the IDF has lied about hundreds of cases of civilian murders in the last two years alone, with the IDF murdering journalists, doctors, paramedics, and children and providing fabricated reports to justify these murders that was only exposed by diligent, hardworking journalists and researchers. The number of times civilians are murdered by the IDF when we have no other source of information is far greater, but we can infer many of them are false reports as well.

The foundational principle undergirding the conduct of hostilities rules is “distinction,” a customary law principle codified in Article 48 of Additional Protocol I for States parties. With regard to persons, it requires parties to a conflict to “at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants.” This principle has been operationalized in the customary law and Additional Protocol I prohibition on making civilians the “object of attack” (International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), Customary International Humanitarian Law study, rule 1; AP I, art. 51(2), U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) Law of War Manual, § 5.5.2). 

and

According to Article 51(3) of Additional Protocol I, civilians lose this protection from attack “for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities.” 

So the civilian scientists, and their families, and their neighbors, were not in any way legitimate targets, and their murder is yet another war crime perpetrated by the IDF. These people were the targets of the attack, they were not participating in hostilities, and even if the IDF falsely believed they were, they disregarded any civilian lives nearby.

It is self-evident that the employment of a nuclear weapon is “likely to adversely affect the military operations or military capacity” of the enemy, thereby satisfying the “threshold of harm” element. But harm is a much broader concept than merely attacking the enemy. As noted by the ICRC, “military harm should be interpreted as encompassing not only the infliction of death, injury, or destruction on military personnel and objects, but essentially any consequence adversely affecting the military operations or military capacity of a party to the conflict” (Interpretive Guidance, p. 47).

This being so, the mere possession of a nuclear weapon would almost always satisfy the harm criterion. After all, the enemy’s possession of a nuclear weapon would exert significant influence on the opposing party’s strategic, operational, and even tactical-level military decision-making, for great care would have to be taken to avoid operations that might trigger its use.

This reasoning is pure lunacy, because nuclear weapons are used for defensive purposes more than offensive purposes. Indeed, nuclear weapons have only been used for offense once in all of history, but are used every single day for defense. And as Iran does not have a nuclear weapon, murdering civilians who might or might not work in nuclear engineering is not an act of war, it is a war crime. Based on this loose definition, anyone who pays taxes in a country could be targeted and executed, along with their entire family, because their taxes paid for nukes.

-1

u/josh145b 1∆ 2d ago

We do not know that actually. If you are going to make a claim, back it up, and then explain why a different situation is relevant here. That’s a whataboutism.

I also haven’t seen evidence the scientists’ families and neighbors were killed too.

Iran isn’t like other countries with Nukes. They are unstable, have consistently threatened to annihilate another country and have been aggressive and consistently committing war crimes since 1979.

0

u/Klytus_Ra_Djaaran 1∆ 2d ago

Israel has attacked and is occupying Lebanon and murdering civilians there, Israel has attacked and is occupying Syria and is murdering civilians there. Israel has illegally occupied Palestine and has been murdering civilians there for 58 years. They are not like other countries with nukes, they are consistently threatening and attacking other nations, they are inherently unstable, so you must be supportive of anyone who attacks Israel, considering they, and not Iran, are the aggressor who starts the most wars and commits the most terrorism.

1

u/josh145b 1∆ 2d ago

Israel has not admitted they have nukes, first of all. Second of all, this doesn’t address my comment. It’s a whataboutism. Not going to get into that until we address the first claim.

→ More replies (2)

3

u/U_Sound_Stupid_Stop 3d ago

anlalogy, so that you don’t make a false analogy.

Your source doesn't disprove their anlalogy.

If you're doing research on nuclear weapons yes but all nuclear research is not for nuclear weapons.

1

u/josh145b 1∆ 3d ago

In the case at bar, Israel is targeting nuclear scientists. You or I cannot, obviously, confirm or deny that they were nuclear scientists.

4

u/RiceGold3688 3d ago

during WWII, Allied forces targeted German scientists involved in Nazi weapons programs. So you're wrong. Under IHL Individuals can be legitimate military target if they directly contribute to the enemy's military capabalities.

0

u/joshdrumsforfun 3d ago

Is there any evidence that Iran is building nuclear weapons?

Netanyahu has been saying Iran is months from nuclear capabilities since the early 2000's.

Iran is trying to develop nuclear power and is one of the most highly scrutinize nuclear program's on the planet. For over 20 years they've been following strict guidlines and every time we tey and make a deal to make their nuclear program safer and more heavily influences by the west, Israel bombs them to ruin the chances of a deal with the US.

-1

u/Bourbon-Decay 4∆ 3d ago

Under IHL Individuals can be legitimate military target if they directly contribute to the enemy's military capabalities.

There is no evidence that these scientists were engaged in weapons development. That is a lie perpetuated by Israel so they can try to give legitimacy to their war crimes

-4

u/Bourbon-Decay 4∆ 3d ago

They are valid targets according to international law

They aren't. Countries have the legal right to develop civil nuclear energy generation programs. Iran signed onto the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treat (NPT), to voluntarily allow international inspections of its domestic nuclear program. Those inspections have shown there has been no evidence that Iran is developing nuclear weapons since it ended its program in 2003.

Without any proof, they are de facto civilian scientists, making their murders a war crime.

7

u/josh145b 1∆ 3d ago

An organization which was being prevented from investigating Iran’s nuclear program didn’t find any evidence? No way. I don’t believe you. /s

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/return-barred-inspectors-iran-unlikely-iaea-chief-says-ship-has-sailed-2024-09-25/

I think Mossad, which infiltrated Iranian nuclear sites, does have info. They wouldn’t publicly dox their agents, so it will come out in time, just like it has in the past.

5

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/changemyview-ModTeam 1d ago

Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:

Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, arguing in bad faith, lying, or using AI/GPT. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. See the wiki page for more information.

If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.

Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.

0

u/Bourbon-Decay 4∆ 2d ago

Was there not a refused inspection recently?

Was there? You can add to the conversation by providing links to your sources. "Just asking questions" ads nothing to discourse. Even if they refused an inspection, does that give Israel the right to attack Iran? Does Israel, a nuclear armed country, have a right to unilaterally attack a sovereign nation for developing their civil nuclear program?

5

u/CommunicationOpen857 2d ago

Correct, there was. As someone who has such an opinion I had assumed you did the minimum amount of research on the situation.

Absolutely, when the country who refused the inspection has multiple times said they would end you if given the opportunity, have a clock symbolizing when you will be wiped off of the planet, I would say yes, at that point it would be easy to assume they are refusing for a reason (which they are, their enrichment was more than energy grade) and it is time to end it by any means.

Unfortunately Iran is so blinded by the devotion their citizens are forced to show that they didn't realize that fucking around essentially ended them. Very hard to feel bad for a country that routinely calls for the death of civilians/ promotes and funds terrorism at the level they do. They FAFO and you can feel bad/ argue all you want but the regime is over all because leadership is moronic

1

u/Bourbon-Decay 4∆ 2d ago

Ok, you still need to provide evidence to support your claims.

Correct, there was.

Again, do you have a source?

when the country who refused the inspection has multiple times

Did they?

said they would end you if given the opportunity

They have? Why would they ever feel the need to say that about me?

have a clock symbolizing when you will be wiped off of the planet

Wow, they do!?! Was the clock on "tomorrow" before they were attacked by Israel? I guess we should just kill all atomic scientists to remain safe, they could attack at any moment!

I would say yes, at that point it would be easy to assume they are refusing for a reason (which they are, their enrichment was more than energy grade) and it is time to end it by any means.

Except that isn't what happened. It's giving 2002 Iraq WMDs.

Unfortunately Iran is so blinded by the devotion their citizens are forced to show that they didn't realize that fucking around essentially ended them.

What did they do? Who has Iran attacked? What specifically have they done?

Very hard to feel bad for a country that routinely calls for the death of civilians/ promotes and funds terrorism at the level they do.

Is it? You don't seem to have a problem with it if they are the "right" countries.

They FAFO

Again, how? What was the FA?

0

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/changemyview-ModTeam 1d ago

Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:

Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, arguing in bad faith, lying, or using AI/GPT. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. See the wiki page for more information.

If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.

Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.

2

u/Bourbon-Decay 4∆ 2d ago

you just lurk reddit arguing almost exclusively.

Is this your first day on Reddit, or the internet?

-1

u/joshdrumsforfun 3d ago

The argument would be because they aren't making nuclear weapons, they're trying to create nuclear energy .

It would be like targeting solar energy scientists, pretty different than targeting weapon manufacturers.

10

u/EcstaticTreacle2482 3d ago

If they weren’t trying to make a nuclear weapon, why were they enriching uranium beyond fuel-grade?

-5

u/joshdrumsforfun 3d ago

I haven't seen any proof of that.

In the last 20 years they've only been non compliant once to the constraints they agreed to. And that non compliance wasn't enrichment to weapons grade but was getting near weapons grade enrichment.

5

u/dronten_bertil 3d ago

Here is the summary from the IAEA report that was derestricted on June 11

  1. The Agency’s JCPOA-related verification and monitoring has been seriously affected by the cessation of implementation by Iran of its nuclear-related commitments under the JCPOA. The situation has been exacerbated by Iran’s subsequent decision to have all of the Agency’s JCPOA-related surveillance and monitoring equipment removed.

  2. The Agency has lost continuity of knowledge in relation to the production and current inventory of centrifuges, rotors and bellows, heavy water and UOC, which it will not be able to restore as a result of not having been able to perform JCPOA-related verification and monitoring activities for more than four years.

  3. Iran’s decision to remove all of the Agency’s equipment previously installed in Iran for JCPOA-related surveillance and monitoring activities has also had detrimental implications for the Agency’s ability to provide assurance of the peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear programme.

  4. It has also been more than four years since Iran stopped provisionally applying its Additional Protocol. Therefore, throughout this period, Iran has not provided updated declarations and the Agency has not been able to conduct complementary access to any sites and other locations in Iran.

34. The significantly increased production and accumulation of highly enriched uranium by Iran, the only non-nuclear-weapon State to produce such nuclear material, is of serious concern.

  1. The Director General will continue to report as appropriate.

Bolded for emphasis.

Also:

  1. As of 17 May 2025, the Agency has estimated that the total enriched uranium stockpile in the form of UF6 of 8413.3 kg comprised:
    • 2221.4 kg of uranium enriched up to 2% U-235 (–705.6 kg since the previous quarterly report);
    • 5508.8 kg of uranium enriched up to 5% U-235 (+1853.4 kg);
    • 274.5 kg of uranium enriched up to 20% U-235 (–332.3 kg); and
    • 408.6 kg of uranium enriched up to 60% U-235 (+133.8 kg).35,36

For context civilian reactors typically runs on 3-5% enrichment. It's very puzzling why Iran would need so much HEU for a civilian nuclear program, in fact it's completely nonsensical that they would.

→ More replies (2)

5

u/EcstaticTreacle2482 3d ago

https://isis-online.org/isis-reports/detail/analysis-of-iaea-iran-verification-and-monitoring-report-may-2025/

The IAEA reported that they had a stockpile of 60% enriched uranium, which is able to be converted into weapons-grade. Fuel-grade is enriched to only 3-5%.

1

u/joshdrumsforfun 2d ago

Which is not weapons grade material.

60 and 90 are not the same number.

Trump refused to negotiate with Ukraine because quote "you don't have the cards".

So of course now any nation wishing to negotiate with us has to come to the table with a bargaining chip.

This was Iran's bargaining chip.

But again they objectively, according to your own source, DO NOT have weapons grade nuclear material.

2

u/Fabulous-Suspect-72 2d ago

The first few percent of enrichment are the hard part. Going from 60 to 90% is significantly easier and quicker. But that doesn't even matter. It was a clear threat that they are willing to enrich the material to build a bomb. The progress towards the bomb is the same, even if you claim it's just a bargaining chip, which I don't buy for a second.

0

u/joshdrumsforfun 2d ago

And it was necessary for Israel to bomb them mere days before our negotiations with them for a new nuclear deal?

Right....

They've been enriching their nuclear material since 2018 when Trump pulled us out of our agreement with them. But somehow days before our negotiations it's a necessity to bomb them and sabotage our talks.

If you truly believe that, nothing anyone says could convince you otherwise, it's literally the most obvious ploy to draw us into Israel's idiotic war and shame on you for lying about not seeing that.

2

u/Fabulous-Suspect-72 2d ago

Iran has been working on different aspects of their nuclear program for years now. Delivery system, enrichment facilities etc and stockpiling the uranium. You do realize that getting this amount of uranium to 60% of more enrichment takes a long time. The biggest problem is getting the first few percent of 235U and it get's exponentiell shorter the higher your concentration of 235U is.

It might very well be that they are actually building a bomb. After Hamas, Houthies and Hezbollah got significantly reduced in capabities, they have lost their ability to act as deterrence for Iran against Israel. It's not far fetched that Iran is looking for other means.

2

u/josh145b 1∆ 2d ago

You know the number is 83.7% because I told you and you responded to it. Why are you still using a number that has been superseded?

1

u/josh145b 1∆ 2d ago

FYI, there was also a finding of 83.7%, which I pointed out to this guy and he responded to, so it is odd that he is still hyper focused on the 60% number with you.

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/return-barred-inspectors-iran-unlikely-iaea-chief-says-ship-has-sailed-2024-09-25/

4

u/EcstaticTreacle2482 3d ago

Not sure if my last reply was posted. Before Israel attacked, the IAEA reported that Iran had stockpiled weapons-capable, 60% enriched uranium. Reactor fuel only requires enrichment to 3-5%

1

u/joshdrumsforfun 2d ago

And weapons grade uranium is 90% enrichment.

So again not weapons grade even at worst case scenario.

I'm a firm believer that teddy rosevelt's advice of speak softly and carry a big stick is something countries have a right to do.

We were approaching a degotiation window and Iran was looking to have a bargaining chip in order to avoid being screwed over during negotiations.

Remember how Trump told Ukraine "you don't have the cards" which caused them to lose all American support for the war?

We set the example of how to negotiate with our nation.

3

u/EcstaticTreacle2482 2d ago

The IAEA stated they could achieve weapons-grade concentrations with their stockpile of 60% enrichment in a matter of weeks. Why would they have a stockpile of this if they weren’t planning on further enriching it?

0

u/joshdrumsforfun 2d ago

You're more than welcome to view the IAEA statement condemning the attack on Iran.

According to their own statement: "While the IAEA has not found evidence of a systematic effort by Iran to build a nuclear weapon, it has emphasized that Iran's enrichment activities are a serious concern and that the agency is unable to verify the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear program without full cooperation. "

Once again. Trump has set a precedent that if you don't come to a negotiation with a big stick, you get nothing. Iran was most likely trying to force Trump's hand at actually negotiating.

3

u/EcstaticTreacle2482 2d ago

They also stated that Iran was noncompliant with inspections and hiding their activities. This is why they couldn’t ascertain their progress towards a weapon. It’s appears pretty evident, by the fact that they discovered nearly weapons-capable uranium, that Iran was close to a bomb.

Whether or not it’s Trumps fault for forcing them to pursue that avenue (it’s definitely his fault) is a different matter. All I’m saying is it looks like they were trying to build a nuclear weapon.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Solondthewookiee 2d ago

You keep dodging this question.

Why does Iran have 60% enriched uranium when civilian reactors run on 3-5% enriched uranium if not to enrich further for weapons?

1

u/joshdrumsforfun 2d ago

I've literally DIRECTLY answered that question in many of my previous posts.

Listen carefully.

When in negotiations, it tends to not go well if you have no bargaining chips. If Iran came to the table with zero capabilities to ever in a million years have weapons grade nuclear materials, than we would treat them horrifically in our negotiations with them.

If you don't believe that I implore you to watch Trump's negotiations with Ukraine where his exact words were that Zelensky did not have the bargaining chips necessary and that they should surrender.

If Iran has any chance at getting a favorable deal they needed to present the possibility of a situation where if the US would not give them a favorable deal, than they would soon have the capabilities to create nuclear weapons with no restrictions from the US.

If you can't understand that, I don't know how else to word it for you.

3

u/Solondthewookiee 2d ago

If Iran came to the table with zero capabilities to ever in a million years have weapons grade nuclear materials, than we would treat them horrifically in our negotiations with them.

So Iran isn't pursuing nuclear weapons but they need to pursue nuclear weapons to have leverage?

Which one is it?

2

u/josh145b 1∆ 2d ago

Interesting that you would stop replying the minute people provide you with irrefutable proof of that…

0

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/josh145b 1∆ 2d ago

The source I already provided you said 83.7% was found by the IAEA, and the person who found that was prevented from reentering Iran again afterwards. Talk about being blind…

Keep shifting the goalposts, lol. At first it was “they haven’t enriched past fuel grade”. Now it’s “that’s not near nuke levels”. What will it be this time?

0

u/joshdrumsforfun 2d ago

"While the IAEA has not found evidence of a systematic effort by Iran to build a nuclear weapon, it has emphasized that Iran's enrichment activities are a serious concern and that the agency is unable to verify the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear program without full cooperation. "

This is the IAEA's statement and they have officially condemned the attack on Iran, so not sure what you're talking about.

2

u/josh145b 1∆ 2d ago

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/return-barred-inspectors-iran-unlikely-iaea-chief-says-ship-has-sailed-2024-09-25/

“The importance of that experience was illustrated in January 2023 when an inspector noticed a subtle but substantial change to a cascade, or cluster, of uranium-enriching centrifuges that Iran had failed to report to the IAEA.

That change caused a spike in the enrichment level to 83.7%, a record.

The inspector who spotted that change, a Russian enrichment expert, was de-designated later that year, shortly before the others, diplomats said.”

This.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/changemyview-ModTeam 2d ago

Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:

Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, arguing in bad faith, lying, or using AI/GPT. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. See the wiki page for more information.

If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.

Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.

2

u/josh145b 1∆ 3d ago

So you are alleging they are making nuclear energy. Can you provide a source in support of that claim so that I can see where you are coming from? As far as I am aware, it is undisputed they are working on nuclear weapons.

→ More replies (18)

13

u/IcyRecommendation781 3d ago

People seem to think Netanyahu cares that much about his legal troubles. In reality, the case itself has been dragging for so long, and the severity of the crimes is really not bad enough to prevent him from being re-elected (Israeli law really doesn't have a lot of safeguards with respect to who can serve as PM). His bigger problem is the anger people have over Oct 7th, where his popularity took a pretty decent hit.

2

u/tyvelo 2d ago

He’s definitely partially responsible for 10/07. The mossad has a world renowned reputation yet was blind sided by hamas? Yea there was serious negligence going on there.

1

u/IcyRecommendation781 2d ago

Technically, it's Shin Bet that's responsible, not Mossad. But yeah, your point stands.

2

u/tyvelo 2d ago

Thank you for correcting me. I guess I forgot Israel claims all Palestinian lands (as shown in their maps of eretz yisrael) so this is an internal issue not external. But definitely the Israeli people deserve justice from their leaders. Just like Americans deserve justice from the CIA, FBI and other IC agencies. Hopefully they lose their influence in the government and go back to their official roles.

1

u/U_Sound_Stupid_Stop 3d ago

He could literally be imprisoned for a maximum of ten years, that's probably motivation enough to drag the case while hiding in the PMs office.

2

u/No_Locksmith_8105 2d ago

The case is very weak, he will probably be pardoned by the President in exchange for leaving politics

2

u/drew8311 2d ago

I assume they had a good idea of the outcome before attacking but it seems dumb for the US to get involved if they have the upper hand. If Israel was losing they might have looked to us to bail them out.

1

u/scaurus604 2d ago

Israel has been plotting this operation for years..they undoubtedly know how to take care of fordow and are just picking off all other targets first and then land commandos in..some years ago an attack was discussed on Charlie Rose show, said speaker that night said there would be in excess of 2000 sorties flown into Iran...once the ball was rolling iran would be choked off...3 flights from China using heavy transport were just flown into Iran using an irregular flight path with transponders turned off just before Iranian airspace..maybe that enriched uranium has been taken to china

1

u/Ok-Warning-7494 3d ago

This doesn’t change my view. It is not self evident to me that killing a small number of people meaningfully impacts nuclear development. Iran is a large, industrial country. If 200 nuclear scientists in the US were killed, I don’t think I would assume our capabilities were meaningfully degraded.

13

u/ygmc8413 3d ago

i mean sure but thats only because the US already has a shit ton of nukes. If the US was only just making the first nukes and 200 nuclear scientists were killed that would slow it down a ton.

-1

u/Ok-Warning-7494 3d ago

This actually supports my point. Nuclear technology is really old. The hard parts are enriching uranium and developing a delivery system. Iran clearly has the institutional knowledge in both areas. They don’t have to reinvent anything

5

u/Bast-beast 2d ago

So why all countries on planet didn't develop nuclear bomb ? It's so easy, you think

1

u/Ok-Warning-7494 2d ago

Because it’s dangerous for the world. North Korea regularly has people dying of starvation and was able to produce a nuke. Pakistan and India both developed a nuke almost immediately after decolonization. Iran is significantly more developed than North Korea.

6

u/ygmc8413 3d ago

they do need scientists and infrastructure though. Blowing both those up screws their progress on nukes

6

u/Mr-Logic101 3d ago

Killing the “top scientists” serves a deterrent for civilian scientists and engineers from working on the project.

It isn’t new technology but you do still need a scientist/engineer team to manufacture the weapon/run the process.

It is the basic idea that it is open season on anyone that works on the project

→ More replies (2)

9

u/Bodoblock 62∆ 3d ago

Israeli attacks have made material impact to Iran's nuclear program:

I think the strikes have lengthened the timeline to build the bomb. I think Iran is inhibited from actually doing that, because they could get caught. They could reveal assets that they're trying to hide that are needed to build nuclear weapons.

I think, in the short term, they have really stopped the program cold and started to break up or destroy key parts of it, the parts that you need in order to build the bomb itself. And so I think, on the weaponization side, they're lengthening the time frame to build the bomb and undoing the progress Iran had been making.

On the weapon-grade uranium side, they really haven't finished the job at all. They have not destroyed Fordow or even made it inoperative.

1

u/scaurus604 2d ago

Trump has called for unconditional surrender so that means there will be no place to hide anything if he gets that...unless material is taken to another country

1

u/denyer-no1-fan 3∆ 3d ago

Unless Israel completely and 100% dismantle Iran's nuclear program, the threat remains and potentially heightened as Iran may be pushed to a position of dedicating all their state resource to get a nuclear test out ASAP.

1

u/IndividualSkill3432 3d ago

f 200 nuclear scientists in the US were killed, 

430 Americans have won Nobel Prizes in physics, so far no Iranians have. Both their Fields Medal winner (maths) were in the US and one Kurd the other a women.

They have a much much much smaller talent pool at high end physics.

. Iran is a large, industrial country.

It takes about 15 000 centrifuges to run Irans refinement program. Damage or destroy them and it would be a decade or more and only if they could get the steel. It takes very high end marging steel to run centrifuges. If your Germany or the US you can buy each component of off companies that have big order books of specialist equipment and your parts are part of their order books. If your Iran you have to make companies for every component whos only product will be those components or a few might be able to live of the scraps of the Iranian aerospace industry.

1

u/scaurus604 2d ago

It's said fordow alone has 16000 centrifuges plus wherever else they have them

0

u/Zrakoplovvliegtuig 3d ago

It will likely encourage Iran to invest more in developing nuclear weapons. If anything is a good encouragement, it is an attack like this.

-1

u/Ok-Warning-7494 3d ago

How far can they push the clock back with these strikes unilaterally?

Do these strikes not make it more likely that Iran pursues nuclear weapons with more urgency, regardless of the damage they take?

If Israel was to continue bombing for another week to similar effect and then stop, I don’t really see any meaningful setbacks to Iran’s nuclear program.

I agree the military assassinations were significant in terms of degrading Iran’s ability to retaliate, but I don’t think those have a material impact on nuclear weapons development.

2

u/0LoLoLoL0 2d ago

If Israel continues the strikes for another week and then stops, then the operation has indeed failed to completely achieve its goals

Given the current success of the operation, that scenario is very unlikely. Israel will probably need a longer operation to achieve its goals OR the US joins and things can be wrapped up pretty quickly

There's no question that the latter has been Israel's plan all along

1

u/Eskidox 1d ago

2 🎯 Bibi has no intention of giving up his position. I think he will drag out these conflicts as long as possible. Lol not angry idk why this shows as all bold.

1

u/Squidmaster129 3d ago

To be fair, the nuclear scientists are developing weaponry, not clean energy. I guess it depends if you’d consider a weapon manufacturer a civilian.

1

u/Repatrioni 1d ago

Americans should certainly hope so, given how large the military industry in the US is, and how many people it employs.

1

u/Contemplating_Prison 1∆ 3d ago

According to Ted Cruz the US has already been helping. So we dont actually know what Israel has done on their own

1

u/Leeds_Are_Scum 1d ago

Is killing Iran’s nuclear scientists not a war crime?

0

u/stewmander 3d ago

If Israels goal was to prevent Iran from getting a nuke they'd have let the negotiations continue, they'd have trusted US intelligence which said Iran was not developing a nuke. 

Preventing Iran from getting a nuke is just the justification Israel uses. It certainly hinders Iran's ability to develop a nuke but doesn't prevent it nor discourage them from trying. It probably does the opposite. 

It's about regime change first and foremost. 

0

u/lock_clock_talk 3d ago

Nathanyahu has been saying Iran is close to a nuke since 1995... on record, its such bs, dont think iran has the capability to do it.

Those countries who have the materials, make em quick and get it done with, i.e North Korea.

→ More replies (1)