You're viewing a single thread.
Iraq, after the Gulf War, was never found by the IAEA to be in possession of or active production of uranium in excess of 20% target enrichment. That's a level consistent with civilian-only use.
The IAEA has repeatedly confirmed Iran has enriched uranium to 60% in increasingly large quantities. Iran has also admitted it, and provides nebulous excuses when pressed about it. There is zero modern civilian purpose for that level of enrichment, and it doesn't take much time to refine from 60% to 85% for high yield weapons grade uranium. Days to months, not years.
Assessments have concluded that Iran does not yet have a functional nuclear weapon, but once they do possess one, now your hands are tied. The only winning move is a pre-emptive strike to prevent nuclear proliferation. Talks are meaningless and not in good faith - Iran sees Israel as a mortal enemy that already has nuclear weapons. Like with North Korea, Iran's nuclear proliferation was used as an indefinite negotiating tool and never intended to be off the table. Iran also does not have a plausible defense purpose for nuclear weapons. If they think the US or Israel would wage war to topple the Iranian state, wouldn't those countries have done it already over the past 50 years? Iran's leadership has, over and over, declared their intent to destroy Israel. They provide weapons and support for proxy groups fighting Israel. Who's to say they wouldn't deliver a nuclear device to a proxy group that sneaks it into Tel Aviv and detonates it, then denies responsibility?
Should have dunked on North Korea before they completed their bomb too, but I guess unlike Iran, their regional partner China wasn't already preoccupied losing another war.
Days to months, not years.
If Iran is days to months away from a nuclear bomb, then for all intents and purposes they already have a nuclear bomb. The fact they don't have a nuclear bomb already despite having 60% enriched uranium for years can only mean that they simply don't want a nuclear bomb.
The only winning move is a pre-emptive strike to prevent nuclear proliferation.
The only winning move is diplomacy to prevent nuclear proliferation, aka JOCPA. I wonder how that went. Also I find claims that Iran is so close to a nuclear bomb very doubtful given that they've been around for literal decades.
No, days to months away from weapons grade enriched uranium if they so chose. If you don't trust what the International Atomic Energy Agency has to say about nuclear proliferation from on-site assessments, I guess there's no convincing you of anything else.
they don't want a bomb
Then why the fuck are they enriching uranium beyond what's necessary for energy purposes?
To point to if and when America wants to invade? There's a difference between "yo we can make a nuclear bomb so play nice" and actually making a nuclear bomb. Also because they have literally no reason to not enrich uranium given that they're already sanctioned to hell and back, so they might as well go the potentially nuclear-powered pariah route.
Iran also does not have a plausible defense purpose for nuclear weapons. If they think the US or Israel would wage war to topple the Iranian state, wouldn't those countries have done it already over the past 50 years?
Shills straight up denying not just reality but the events they're spewing propaganda about. Gotta love the gung ho 15 year old attitude by people who have managed to lose every engagement they had in Asia since 1945 with even that mostly because they didn't have to worry about the other axis countries. Ever thank China and USSR fot taking care of Japan on the mainland while you were busy drowning and flapping about in the Pacific? No, you recruited Unit 731 criminals instead.
Anyway reminder for delulu revisionists like you, you tried to dunk on Korea already back when "their regional partner" was vastly weaker than now and failed miserably. You'd have tried it if failing again wasn't inevitable. That's why NK has nukes, not because you supposedly allowed them to have them or were neglectful lmao.
Iran also does not have a plausible defense purpose for nuclear weapons
Hmm, that's an interesting argument, but I read something recently that challenges that idea, it was some user who said something like, uhh, "once they do possess one, now your hands are tied."
Warmongering psycho can't even keep their arguments straight without self-contradicting in the same paragraph.
How anybody can take these insane positions so casually is beyond my comprehension. No one like you should ever have a voice in politics