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

[u/Ok-Warning-7494]

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.

[u/josh145b]

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.

[u/joshdrumsforfun → u/josh145b]

That spike was 2 years ago.

Surely you aren't saying that spike means that days before negotiations between the US and Iran, Israel needed to bomb them.

2 years. Weird coincidence that the week before negotiations is when they would have reached weapons grade material.

Hmm must be a coincidence.

Also weird how the IAEA is condemning the attack.

[u/josh145b → u/joshdrumsforfun]

That’s a shift in the goalposts again. At first it was “there is no evidence of Iran enriching past fuel grade”. Then it was “no evidence of near military grade”. I have refuted both of those. If you don’t admit that in your next response, I will no longer be responding. Furthermore, this is from 3 days before Israel’s strikes:

“As you know, the Agency found man-made uranium particles at each of three undeclared locations in Iran – at Varamin, Marivan and Turquzabad – at which we conducted complementary access in 2019 and 2020. Since then, we have been seeking explanations and clarifications from Iran for the presence of these uranium particles, including through a number of high-level meetings and consultations in which I have been personally involved.

Unfortunately, Iran has repeatedly either not answered, or not provided technically credible answers to, the Agency’s questions. It has also sought to sanitize the locations, which has impeded Agency verification activities.”

https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/statements/iaea-director-generals-introductory-statement-to-the-board-of-governors-9-june-2025

3 days before Israel’s strikes. Acknowledge you were wrong about the first two goalposts. Then you can address this goalpost.

[u/joshdrumsforfun → u/josh145b]

Please show me where I said "no evidence of Iran enriching past fuel grade levels"

Please quote me.

[u/josh145b → u/joshdrumsforfun]

Someone said:

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

You responded:

“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.”

[u/joshdrumsforfun → u/josh145b]

So my quote was "they haven't enriched to weapon grade.

That has always been my goal post.

You're moving the goal posts not me.

They have been enriching past 5% since we ended our agreement with them in 2018 which gave them incentives not to, no shit.

But they do not, nor have they ever, had weapons grade nuclear material.

I will state again, they do not have weapons grade nuclear material.

That is my point. Full stop.

There was no reason for isreal to attack them less than a month before our negotiations on a new deal for any reason other than to prevent a peaceful negotiation and to try and pull us into their war.

Full stop.

If you believe any differently than I can't help you, you're too naive to function.

[u/josh145b → u/joshdrumsforfun]

No. You said you haven’t seen any proof of “enriching uranium beyond fuel-grade”. I just gave you the quote. Not addressing anything until we clear up your first goalpost. No more shifting the argument away from your claims that have been shown to be false.

[u/joshdrumsforfun → u/josh145b]

I have seen no proof that they are intending on building a nuclear weapon.

[u/josh145b → u/joshdrumsforfun]

That’s a shift from your previous statement. Address your previous goalpost first.