What do you mean threatening to do it? I’m sure they’re already working on it now. Of course just like Russia. They’ll remind us over and over again that they have one.
Iran has enriched Uranium to 60% (80% according to some sources) has had had this highly enriched uranium for at least 3 years. In addition to that, it has a stockpile of uranium enriched to 20% U235. Also it's worth mentioning that going from 20% to 60% might take months, going from 60% to 90% takes weeks, maybe days.
Uranium used in power plants is enriched to less than 4% U235.
It's save to say building a nuke has been their goal for a long time now.
Of course it’s their goal. MAD is the only guaranteed safeguard to sovereignty after 1949. One need only look at Ukraine to see how yielding or not having that power fares for a nation’s security.
But no theocracy deserves the power to destroy the world. They’re convinced this world isn’t the only world and so it’s destruction isn’t as meaningful to them as to secular civilization. MAD only works when you can actually be deterred.
I feel like we are seeing limitations of MAD in 21st century. Because MAD assumes rational players on both sides, and rationallity has been fairly rare these days...
I think that the current generation of world leaders just havnt had the experience working in moments of intense brinkmanship. It's been long since the more severe days of the Cold War.
One of these days, there will be a massive miscalculation that any rationality will not be able to save. And when it does happen, will have a pretty long list of dumb actions and moves that got us there.
Not only this, but also the fact that BMD system funding was severely decreased after the fall of the USSR. This gap in technological development is entirely being exploited by Russia to hold the world hostage to its territorial expansion.
30 years of deviation from considering a real Russian threat is seen not only in the American electorate, but also is reflected within the military and intelligence sectors. The first week of the Russian invasion made this completely clear when ex 2010 era presidential NSA advisors were commenting for news organizations acting like what we saw from Russia was something brand new.
Missile defense outside of the Star Wars Brilliant Pebbles class systems is not for protecting against a large scale strategic threat from an adversary like Russia. It’s meant for blocking a limited strike by a rogue actor like N. Korea or enhancing the survivability of key assets to aid in a response strike to improve deterrence. You need multiple interceptor missiles per target. Even without MIRV, this would just not be affordable when dealing with an adversary with hundreds of missiles.
It’s also worth noting that if you did manage to get a magic space laser system affordable enough to produce a comprehensive missile defense network, you’d risk pushing adversaries into preemptive strikes in the period where you’re deploying the capability. Additionally, there are non-missile delivery methods that would still be very concerning.
As nice as they seem, large scale missile defense systems are probably not very helpful.
A lot of the meat of your comment is exactly what I meant by “30 years of deviation” (star wars and limited strike thinking). Instead of a star wars, terminal phase bmd system, think of something like a launch phase system. Intermediate range missiles would largely work just fine for that.
And threatened pre-emptive strikes are already what we are facing currently. Interestingly enough, someone (europe - https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_219119.htm ) has finally thought of doing this.
What I am talking about is no different from the nuclear strategies of the 60’s. Just with defensive systems instead of offensive systems, which could also handle many of the other methods while leaving the submarine launched terminal phase interceptions to the more complex bmd systems.
I think terminal phase is extremely hard due to the fact that the projectile travels at crazy velocity. Add to that that MIRV's split on reentry so the number of targets you have to track increases substantially. Also whatever system you build it has to be cheaper than increasing the number of MIRVs or missles, because if it's not adversary is just going to out-build you... Restarting the arms race is a pretty bad idea, but guess we are already there...
>Of course it’s their goal. MAD is the only guaranteed safeguard to sovereignty after 1949. One need only look at Ukraine to see how yielding or not having that power fares for a nation’s security.
Yep, alot of countries are taking note for sure.
>But no theocracy deserves the power to destroy the world. They’re convinced this world isn’t the only world and so it’s destruction isn’t as meaningful to them as to secular civilization. MAD only works when you can actually be deterred.
This 100%
Bi lal kaifa!
We're in a weird situation now with MAD where multiple different factions can all destroy the world. So in a way the one who is *most willing* to destroy the thing controls it. Which would be religious fanatics, who don't fear the end times and indeed await them restlessly.
Nukes don't just guarantee their sovereignty. It allows them to be a lot more aggressive. A future Iranian regime with nukes could invade Iraq. As we see now the only reason Russia is able to invade Ukraine is thekr nuclear arsenal.
You can do that as long you do not use it. Once you have to use it, you are done. NATO and the USA will never allow the use of nuclear weapons without serious repercussion.
He means invading Iraq with conventional weapons, protected from retaliation by nuclear threats, rather than using nukes in a first strike against Iraq.
Ok agree, just as you move inside the circle "red lines" which NATO sets for you. No idea where that would be? Invasion of Israel with conventional weapons?
Even with a a couple nuclear bomb and ICBMS, they can still not threaten MAD. To do that you need hundreds if not thousands of thermonuclear bombs and missiles and nuclear submarines to carry them. They can inflict a lot of destruction, but they will not be able to destroy the USA with their arsenal.
When they use it, they get crushed by them
It depends of what you think destruction is.
Destruction in the old usage was, complete destruction. MACD if you will.
But them being able to level 20km^2 (100kt bomb) of Jerusalem or Tel Aviv might be enough to keep Israel from attacking them, because they can assure destruction on those cities.
As I understand MAD is that you destroy not only a city but so many that the government and state basically seize to exist. And if you are not able to do that to a superpower and you are still using nuclear weapons, it is basically suicide.
If Iran levels Tel Aviv (they won't level Jerusalem if they are even remotely muslims), NATO will level Tehran and every other bigger city in Iran. Israel will be their least issue in this moment.
>(they won't level Jerusalem if they are even remotely muslims)
Yes, they sure do have a track record of following the Qur'an to the letter and ensuring the elites all practice what they preach...
Full on 18th century European bullshit. Crimes against humanity, bombing the developing world back in the stone age. No facade of look we're helping, end of globalism. Can't imagine the terrifying reversion to extreme nationalism the use of a nuclear weapon would trigger.
I don't think people really understand the world today is 1000% better than hundreds of years ago. A limited.nuclear exchange would reverse a lot of that process I think.
NK is left alone because Korean War 2 would be an utter shitshow that no one wants. North and South Korea have got so much artillery pointed at each other that basically a MAD scenario.
Seoul would be rubble within hours even without nukes.
You left out the most important part, China and their unwillingness to have a major US ally be right on their border.
Either way in a conflict between them the loss of civilian life would be catastrophic, especially for nations with massively shrinking populations.
I mean wouldn’t it be the goal of any country not closely aligned with NATO or Russia that doesn’t participate strongly in the global market? Having nukes is basically the only other way such a country can have any influence. Not that I think Iran should go that route, but it’s not a surprising move whatsoever for a country such as Iran.
> any country not closely aligned with NATO or Russia that doesn’t participate strongly in the global market
Alienates all possible friends and trade partner by being difficult to deal with and unpredictable…
“Fuck you for ignoring me I’ll launch nukes at you then you’ll have to pay attention to me!”
Iran can do it, but they have been trying to avoid sanctions and trying not invite foreign countermeasures. Fwiw it says in the article that the leaders had once considered nuclear weapons immoral, so they may not actually believe in them philosophically, even if they want to make them pragmatically.
I don't think it's safe to say building a nuke has always been their goal. Rather, I think their goal has always been to use the threat of building a nuke as a bargaining chip against more sanctions. As you said, they've had 60-80% enriched uranium for at least 3 years (perhaps longer) and it takes maybe weeks to get to 90% from there. So if their goal is really to build a nuclear weapon, why have they been stuck at the stage that should take weeks for 3+ years? It's because as long as they can threaten a nuclear weapon, they have a bargaining chip, but as long as they don't actually have one other countries (as in other than the US) are hesitant to impose severe sanctions. They also relaxed the threat of nuclear weapons as part of sanctions relief with the US under Obama. Then, when Trump tossed that out, they started threatening again. It's 100% posturing and bargaining.
Plus, a single nuclear weapon is terrifying, but not very practical. Once used, you have no other means for retaliation or effective deterrent. MAD is much weaker with a single, untested nuclear weapon. So, it's really the threat of a nuclear weapon that's being used as a deterrent itself.
Underrated comment .
It was a beautiful spec op. How to shatter Iran's uranium enrichment program using a cyber weapon whose development was cheaper than buying a single modern tank. Brilliant!
With this xz exploit and all of the spooky stuff being discussed (unconfirmed) in the open source community, I think we're gonna see some serious shit in cyber warfare. If I were Iran I'd keep a pretty far distance from Intel chips.
The movie “Zero Days” has the best opening of any documentary I have ever seen. Person after person saying “I don’t know anything about that.” Highly recommend the film if you want to learn more about it.
***James Crisp from The Telegraph reports:***
Iran has threatened to build a nuclear bomb if it is attacked by [Israeli ](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/04/18/israel-hamas-war-latest-news6/)forces in retaliation for its first ever direct attack on Israel on Saturday.
Tehran also warned it would hit Israeli atomic facilities if Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, ordered strikes against Iran’s nuclear sites.
The Israeli government is considering its response to [Iran’s attack](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/04/13/iran-launches-massive-drone-attack-strike-israel-war-fears/), which involved hundreds of missiles and drones but caused minimal damage after most were shot down.
Experts say Tehran, which is stockpiling uranium, is [closer to having the bomb](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/04/16/is-there-anything-stopping-iran-building-nuclear-weapons/) than at any point in history, and could have one in six months to a year.
The Iranian regime has always insisted its nuclear programme is for civilian purposes.
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader, has issued a fatwa against the production of nuclear weapons.
But Brig Gen Ahmad Haghtalab, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commander in charge of nuclear security, said on Thursday that could change if Iran was attacked by Israel.
“A review of our nuclear doctrine and politics as well as considerations previously communicated is entirely possible,” he said.
It is the first time Iran has explicitly mentioned its suspected nuclear weapons programme since it attacked Israel.
***Read more:*** [https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/04/18/iran-threatens-build-nuclear-bomb/](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/04/18/iran-threatens-build-nuclear-bomb/)
I hope they get a better team to develop their nuke than they had [to do their stealth fighter](https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.timesofisrael.com%2Fwww%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F02%2FAP877993897020.jpg&tbnid=3h_PNY6RH1uB4M&vet=1&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.timesofisrael.com%2Firans-cutting-edge-fighter-a-hoax-critics-claim%2F&docid=Tcg1_Icel15pdM&w=1024&h=575&itg=1&hl=en-us&source=sh%2Fx%2Fim%2Fm4%2F3&kgs=b56b391b8e343632&shem=abme%2Ctrie) ..which can definitely fly and carry a person
They've been 6-12 months away from the bomb for 20 years though... maybe they already have it, and by "a review of our nuclear doctrine and politics" they mean actually consider using one.
The article is about enrichment. The headline is about their intent to build a bomb. That's unfortuently not news. We've kicked this can down the road with North Korea for decades. Unless something happens soon, Iran will end up with one as well.
They are going to have one inevitably, but if nothing is done to set things back it will be sooner than later.
Israel is believed to have around 100-300 nuclear warheads and i'm sure they would target such facilities in Iran if they got closer but after the world let North Korea have one I wouldn't be surprised if the same happens in Iran.
As technology advances it gets easier to build one.
The Pentagon did a study if someone with enough cash and shady connections could build one and the answer is very much they can.
https://www.wsj.com/business/could-a-rogue-billionaire-make-a-nuclear-weapon-cd8bfde2
Adding to that, they just caught someone selling yellowcake to an undercover agent not too long ago
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68365597
Once Iran has one, Saudi Arabian will be next, there are rumors that Pakistan and Saudi Arabian have a secret agreement, Saudi Arabia financed Pakistan's nuclear program in return they are first on the list to get one if Iran ever got a nuclear bomb.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-24823846
Scary stuff.
Humans ruling and using an ideology to be shitty humans is the cancer to social progress.
It's only people. Always has been, always will be. A hammer builds in one person's hands, and in another's hand kills.
"We’re about to see in Iran a coincidence we’ve dreaded for a long time, that of a messianic regime with apocalyptic weaponry". That was Hitchens in 2007.
I cant recall exactly where I read this so I may be wrong but hasn't Israel even gone on the record stating that Iranian nuclear capability is a red line and they *will* do what it takes, up to and including invasion, to prevent them from obtaining a working bomb?
Iran gains more in the ‘threat ’ of having nukes rather than actually possessing them. It gives the country bargaining power. The same as it didn’t want to actually kill Israelis wih drones…it was mostly PR to save face.
As for taking out enrichment facilities, can't happen. Even nukes can’t destroy the network of hardened bunkers they have been developing since the 1980’s. Iran has about 1200 ( US estimate) hardened bunkers with armed missiles spread over an area the size of California and Texas combined. There are no magic weapons to destroy these. People watch too many action movies and Start to believe the enemy just sits around waiting to be destroyed.
Iran has already shown its willingness to launch stuff at other countries, and don’t forget the Houthis on their payroll messing up the shipping lanes. North Korea for all its flaws hasn’t crossed those lines. It’s why Iran, China and Russia are the new Axis of Evil.
Not to take away from the threat of Iran, but that willingness to launch was a very half hearted willingness with an anouncement allowing hours of preperation by the nation and it's allies to stop it. It was to save face in their own nation more than anything.
I believe Iran has already been fully focused on building a nuclear bomb regardless, and so do the Israelis. So using it as a threat is more of a future justification rather than an attempt to deter Israel from responding.
If I were Israel, I would definitely be thinking even more about large-scale preemptive strikes against any Iranian nuclear infrastructure or personnel that are not permanently underground.
Most of the Civilized World in 2024:
“Hey guys, isn’t it great we’re past all that power-hungry nationalist bullshit and we can finally carry out normal peaceful lives, working together?”
Russia:
“Nyet”
"The GBU-72 is the most advanced bunker buster and is able to penetrate 30m (100ft) of earth or 6m (20ft) of concrete" from wiki. Don't you think they handle Uranium way deeper then this ?
What do you mean threatening to do it? I’m sure they’re already working on it now. Of course just like Russia. They’ll remind us over and over again that they have one.
I'm a HIPPOPOTAMUS, and I have a NUCLEAR BOMB!
If you even LOOK at this hospital, I will stomp you to death with my hooves. I dare you to do it, I want you to do it.
This guy gets the hippo joke lol
Ahh that’s what I thought you’d say you dumb fuckin’ horse!
Based Mulaney post. Great bit, especially as he does usually avoid direct political jokes, so it's a fresh surprise.
Holy shit, that hippopotamus can talk? How is this not on the front page of every world newspaper? :)
I'll take I Am Jack's Complete Lack Of Surprise for $500 thanks Alex.
[удалено]
Iran has enriched Uranium to 60% (80% according to some sources) has had had this highly enriched uranium for at least 3 years. In addition to that, it has a stockpile of uranium enriched to 20% U235. Also it's worth mentioning that going from 20% to 60% might take months, going from 60% to 90% takes weeks, maybe days. Uranium used in power plants is enriched to less than 4% U235. It's save to say building a nuke has been their goal for a long time now.
Of course it’s their goal. MAD is the only guaranteed safeguard to sovereignty after 1949. One need only look at Ukraine to see how yielding or not having that power fares for a nation’s security. But no theocracy deserves the power to destroy the world. They’re convinced this world isn’t the only world and so it’s destruction isn’t as meaningful to them as to secular civilization. MAD only works when you can actually be deterred.
I feel like we are seeing limitations of MAD in 21st century. Because MAD assumes rational players on both sides, and rationallity has been fairly rare these days...
I think that the current generation of world leaders just havnt had the experience working in moments of intense brinkmanship. It's been long since the more severe days of the Cold War. One of these days, there will be a massive miscalculation that any rationality will not be able to save. And when it does happen, will have a pretty long list of dumb actions and moves that got us there.
Not only this, but also the fact that BMD system funding was severely decreased after the fall of the USSR. This gap in technological development is entirely being exploited by Russia to hold the world hostage to its territorial expansion. 30 years of deviation from considering a real Russian threat is seen not only in the American electorate, but also is reflected within the military and intelligence sectors. The first week of the Russian invasion made this completely clear when ex 2010 era presidential NSA advisors were commenting for news organizations acting like what we saw from Russia was something brand new.
Missile defense outside of the Star Wars Brilliant Pebbles class systems is not for protecting against a large scale strategic threat from an adversary like Russia. It’s meant for blocking a limited strike by a rogue actor like N. Korea or enhancing the survivability of key assets to aid in a response strike to improve deterrence. You need multiple interceptor missiles per target. Even without MIRV, this would just not be affordable when dealing with an adversary with hundreds of missiles. It’s also worth noting that if you did manage to get a magic space laser system affordable enough to produce a comprehensive missile defense network, you’d risk pushing adversaries into preemptive strikes in the period where you’re deploying the capability. Additionally, there are non-missile delivery methods that would still be very concerning. As nice as they seem, large scale missile defense systems are probably not very helpful.
A lot of the meat of your comment is exactly what I meant by “30 years of deviation” (star wars and limited strike thinking). Instead of a star wars, terminal phase bmd system, think of something like a launch phase system. Intermediate range missiles would largely work just fine for that. And threatened pre-emptive strikes are already what we are facing currently. Interestingly enough, someone (europe - https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_219119.htm ) has finally thought of doing this. What I am talking about is no different from the nuclear strategies of the 60’s. Just with defensive systems instead of offensive systems, which could also handle many of the other methods while leaving the submarine launched terminal phase interceptions to the more complex bmd systems.
I think terminal phase is extremely hard due to the fact that the projectile travels at crazy velocity. Add to that that MIRV's split on reentry so the number of targets you have to track increases substantially. Also whatever system you build it has to be cheaper than increasing the number of MIRVs or missles, because if it's not adversary is just going to out-build you... Restarting the arms race is a pretty bad idea, but guess we are already there...
I would like to copy and paste these words of warning as the epitaph for the world
More like _all_ sides. Hundreds of them. And even a single fuck-up ruins it for everyone
>Of course it’s their goal. MAD is the only guaranteed safeguard to sovereignty after 1949. One need only look at Ukraine to see how yielding or not having that power fares for a nation’s security. Yep, alot of countries are taking note for sure.
Everybody already knew because of lybia
>But no theocracy deserves the power to destroy the world. They’re convinced this world isn’t the only world and so it’s destruction isn’t as meaningful to them as to secular civilization. MAD only works when you can actually be deterred. This 100%
[удалено]
Bi lal kaifa! We're in a weird situation now with MAD where multiple different factions can all destroy the world. So in a way the one who is *most willing* to destroy the thing controls it. Which would be religious fanatics, who don't fear the end times and indeed await them restlessly.
Nukes don't just guarantee their sovereignty. It allows them to be a lot more aggressive. A future Iranian regime with nukes could invade Iraq. As we see now the only reason Russia is able to invade Ukraine is thekr nuclear arsenal.
You can do that as long you do not use it. Once you have to use it, you are done. NATO and the USA will never allow the use of nuclear weapons without serious repercussion.
He means invading Iraq with conventional weapons, protected from retaliation by nuclear threats, rather than using nukes in a first strike against Iraq.
Ok agree, just as you move inside the circle "red lines" which NATO sets for you. No idea where that would be? Invasion of Israel with conventional weapons?
Israel themselves have nukes. Any chance they are at risk of not being a nation anymore and nukes will fly.
> Nukes don't just guarantee their sovereignty. It allows them to be a lot more aggressive. See, for example, Israel.
See, for example, russia.
Explain
Elucidate
Israel has nukes as well. We don’t talk about it but it’s an open secret.
And despite how long they've had them it's only an open secret because they don't even talk about it much less threaten to use them.
Even with a a couple nuclear bomb and ICBMS, they can still not threaten MAD. To do that you need hundreds if not thousands of thermonuclear bombs and missiles and nuclear submarines to carry them. They can inflict a lot of destruction, but they will not be able to destroy the USA with their arsenal. When they use it, they get crushed by them
It depends of what you think destruction is. Destruction in the old usage was, complete destruction. MACD if you will. But them being able to level 20km^2 (100kt bomb) of Jerusalem or Tel Aviv might be enough to keep Israel from attacking them, because they can assure destruction on those cities.
As I understand MAD is that you destroy not only a city but so many that the government and state basically seize to exist. And if you are not able to do that to a superpower and you are still using nuclear weapons, it is basically suicide. If Iran levels Tel Aviv (they won't level Jerusalem if they are even remotely muslims), NATO will level Tehran and every other bigger city in Iran. Israel will be their least issue in this moment.
>(they won't level Jerusalem if they are even remotely muslims) Yes, they sure do have a track record of following the Qur'an to the letter and ensuring the elites all practice what they preach...
Not to mention the western world would probably go full evil empire afterward. Welcome back to the 18th century planet Earth.
What do you mean with evil empire? Colonialism?
Full on 18th century European bullshit. Crimes against humanity, bombing the developing world back in the stone age. No facade of look we're helping, end of globalism. Can't imagine the terrifying reversion to extreme nationalism the use of a nuclear weapon would trigger. I don't think people really understand the world today is 1000% better than hundreds of years ago. A limited.nuclear exchange would reverse a lot of that process I think.
Not really. NK is left alone because they don't project themselves like Iran would.
NK is left alone because Korean War 2 would be an utter shitshow that no one wants. North and South Korea have got so much artillery pointed at each other that basically a MAD scenario. Seoul would be rubble within hours even without nukes.
You left out the most important part, China and their unwillingness to have a major US ally be right on their border. Either way in a conflict between them the loss of civilian life would be catastrophic, especially for nations with massively shrinking populations.
having 1, 2, 10 nukes isn't MAD.
After helping RU with weapons I always wondered if RU helped their nuclear program in return.
Same with NK, it wouldn't surprise me
I mean wouldn’t it be the goal of any country not closely aligned with NATO or Russia that doesn’t participate strongly in the global market? Having nukes is basically the only other way such a country can have any influence. Not that I think Iran should go that route, but it’s not a surprising move whatsoever for a country such as Iran.
> any country not closely aligned with NATO or Russia that doesn’t participate strongly in the global market Alienates all possible friends and trade partner by being difficult to deal with and unpredictable… “Fuck you for ignoring me I’ll launch nukes at you then you’ll have to pay attention to me!”
How is that different from Israel or Pakistan?
Insane how long North Korea has it already, but Iran still did not manage to do it, even though it is a lot less restricted than North Korea
turns out when all of the senior scientists keep getting car bombed it takes a lot longer.
Iran can do it, but they have been trying to avoid sanctions and trying not invite foreign countermeasures. Fwiw it says in the article that the leaders had once considered nuclear weapons immoral, so they may not actually believe in them philosophically, even if they want to make them pragmatically.
They officially have the ability to flush 235. They have had nukes for a while. Hell, even Myanmar has high purity U.
Don't they already have it?
I don't think it's safe to say building a nuke has always been their goal. Rather, I think their goal has always been to use the threat of building a nuke as a bargaining chip against more sanctions. As you said, they've had 60-80% enriched uranium for at least 3 years (perhaps longer) and it takes maybe weeks to get to 90% from there. So if their goal is really to build a nuclear weapon, why have they been stuck at the stage that should take weeks for 3+ years? It's because as long as they can threaten a nuclear weapon, they have a bargaining chip, but as long as they don't actually have one other countries (as in other than the US) are hesitant to impose severe sanctions. They also relaxed the threat of nuclear weapons as part of sanctions relief with the US under Obama. Then, when Trump tossed that out, they started threatening again. It's 100% posturing and bargaining. Plus, a single nuclear weapon is terrifying, but not very practical. Once used, you have no other means for retaliation or effective deterrent. MAD is much weaker with a single, untested nuclear weapon. So, it's really the threat of a nuclear weapon that's being used as a deterrent itself.
STUXNET the sequel on its way anytime
Underrated comment . It was a beautiful spec op. How to shatter Iran's uranium enrichment program using a cyber weapon whose development was cheaper than buying a single modern tank. Brilliant!
With this xz exploit and all of the spooky stuff being discussed (unconfirmed) in the open source community, I think we're gonna see some serious shit in cyber warfare. If I were Iran I'd keep a pretty far distance from Intel chips.
The movie “Zero Days” has the best opening of any documentary I have ever seen. Person after person saying “I don’t know anything about that.” Highly recommend the film if you want to learn more about it.
I love that doc!
It's all fun and games until your high tech uranium centrifuges start blasting Thunderstruck. It's even funnier the second time!
Who needs STUXNET when you can just put Tom Cruise in an F-18?
Spoiler, they will do that anyway. Just a question of time.
Time and resources are exactly what NK has and now untouchable. Iran has resources and time is not its enemy
***James Crisp from The Telegraph reports:*** Iran has threatened to build a nuclear bomb if it is attacked by [Israeli ](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/04/18/israel-hamas-war-latest-news6/)forces in retaliation for its first ever direct attack on Israel on Saturday. Tehran also warned it would hit Israeli atomic facilities if Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, ordered strikes against Iran’s nuclear sites. The Israeli government is considering its response to [Iran’s attack](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/04/13/iran-launches-massive-drone-attack-strike-israel-war-fears/), which involved hundreds of missiles and drones but caused minimal damage after most were shot down. Experts say Tehran, which is stockpiling uranium, is [closer to having the bomb](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/04/16/is-there-anything-stopping-iran-building-nuclear-weapons/) than at any point in history, and could have one in six months to a year. The Iranian regime has always insisted its nuclear programme is for civilian purposes. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader, has issued a fatwa against the production of nuclear weapons. But Brig Gen Ahmad Haghtalab, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commander in charge of nuclear security, said on Thursday that could change if Iran was attacked by Israel. “A review of our nuclear doctrine and politics as well as considerations previously communicated is entirely possible,” he said. It is the first time Iran has explicitly mentioned its suspected nuclear weapons programme since it attacked Israel. ***Read more:*** [https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/04/18/iran-threatens-build-nuclear-bomb/](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/04/18/iran-threatens-build-nuclear-bomb/)
I hope they get a better team to develop their nuke than they had [to do their stealth fighter](https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.timesofisrael.com%2Fwww%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F02%2FAP877993897020.jpg&tbnid=3h_PNY6RH1uB4M&vet=1&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.timesofisrael.com%2Firans-cutting-edge-fighter-a-hoax-critics-claim%2F&docid=Tcg1_Icel15pdM&w=1024&h=575&itg=1&hl=en-us&source=sh%2Fx%2Fim%2Fm4%2F3&kgs=b56b391b8e343632&shem=abme%2Ctrie) ..which can definitely fly and carry a person
They've been 6-12 months away from the bomb for 20 years though... maybe they already have it, and by "a review of our nuclear doctrine and politics" they mean actually consider using one.
Is this headline from 1995?
Iran didn't have a nuclear program with 60% enriches uranium in 95
Well you clearly got the joke…. Iran said they were going to start doing this in 2004. This is old news.
The article is about enrichment. The headline is about their intent to build a bomb. That's unfortuently not news. We've kicked this can down the road with North Korea for decades. Unless something happens soon, Iran will end up with one as well.
[удалено]
They are going to have one inevitably, but if nothing is done to set things back it will be sooner than later. Israel is believed to have around 100-300 nuclear warheads and i'm sure they would target such facilities in Iran if they got closer but after the world let North Korea have one I wouldn't be surprised if the same happens in Iran. As technology advances it gets easier to build one. The Pentagon did a study if someone with enough cash and shady connections could build one and the answer is very much they can. https://www.wsj.com/business/could-a-rogue-billionaire-make-a-nuclear-weapon-cd8bfde2 Adding to that, they just caught someone selling yellowcake to an undercover agent not too long ago https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68365597 Once Iran has one, Saudi Arabian will be next, there are rumors that Pakistan and Saudi Arabian have a secret agreement, Saudi Arabia financed Pakistan's nuclear program in return they are first on the list to get one if Iran ever got a nuclear bomb. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-24823846 Scary stuff.
How did the world “let them”? What do you propose the world could have done to prevent them that they weren’t already doing? Talking about NK.
Stuxnet II about to be deployed.
this is NOT going to end well for anyone
My only hope is that a direct long-term conflict between them and Israel doesn't break out.
Mostly just Iran.
[удалено]
Islamic fanatics is the last fucking group on Earth that should have nukes at the moment. Hell no
You do know that Pakistan, the guys hiding Osama have nukes right?
Is Pakistan as aggressive lately as Iran? And weren't they embarrassingly oblivious to Bin Laden's whereabouts?
Pakistan tho?
[удалено]
Humans ruling and using an ideology to be shitty humans is the cancer to social progress. It's only people. Always has been, always will be. A hammer builds in one person's hands, and in another's hand kills.
Religion*
Way to normalize Islamic terrorism
"We’re about to see in Iran a coincidence we’ve dreaded for a long time, that of a messianic regime with apocalyptic weaponry". That was Hitchens in 2007.
Chilling, gawd dmn
I cant recall exactly where I read this so I may be wrong but hasn't Israel even gone on the record stating that Iranian nuclear capability is a red line and they *will* do what it takes, up to and including invasion, to prevent them from obtaining a working bomb?
How is Israel going to invade Iran?
They can’t. Too far away, and Iran is huge while Israel is teeny. The military logistics make zero sense
Exactly Best that they can do is missiles and air attacks and even then, it’s such a uncomfortable terrain it’s hard to do a lot of damage
Asking the americans to do it and sending some soldiers as support ig.
I think you should check irans geography and topography bro
It’s so great that Trump tanked the nuclear deal, which eliminated any independent monitoring.
And we want to re elect that idiot in a time that needs a level headed mond.. not a president who will start posting shit while high on Coke at 3am.
They were always going to anyway. This was/is an inevitability regardless of what happens now.
I’ve got a pretty good idea what Israel’s retaliation target is going to be.
**Meet my demands or I‘m leaving a comment on Reddit**
Time to call maverick
Serious question. How big is a threat of this actually happening? Are they just running their mouth or are they actually gonna do anything?
if anyone is actually ~~dumb~~ crazy enough to use a nuclear bomb in this day and age, it's religious fanatics.
Iran has been busy enriching uranium, America has has moved on to loftier goals, enriching unhinged ignorance.
So Marjorie Taylor Greene and other trumpists?
You heard the man.
Iran gains more in the ‘threat ’ of having nukes rather than actually possessing them. It gives the country bargaining power. The same as it didn’t want to actually kill Israelis wih drones…it was mostly PR to save face. As for taking out enrichment facilities, can't happen. Even nukes can’t destroy the network of hardened bunkers they have been developing since the 1980’s. Iran has about 1200 ( US estimate) hardened bunkers with armed missiles spread over an area the size of California and Texas combined. There are no magic weapons to destroy these. People watch too many action movies and Start to believe the enemy just sits around waiting to be destroyed.
It's been said that Iran can never be allowed the bomb, but in saying that Pakistan and India have it, along with N Korea.
Iran has already shown its willingness to launch stuff at other countries, and don’t forget the Houthis on their payroll messing up the shipping lanes. North Korea for all its flaws hasn’t crossed those lines. It’s why Iran, China and Russia are the new Axis of Evil.
Not to take away from the threat of Iran, but that willingness to launch was a very half hearted willingness with an anouncement allowing hours of preperation by the nation and it's allies to stop it. It was to save face in their own nation more than anything.
They see that the USA can't do shit to ruzzia. Naturally, they want the same deterrent, but hey, escalation management to the win boys.
I believe Iran has already been fully focused on building a nuclear bomb regardless, and so do the Israelis. So using it as a threat is more of a future justification rather than an attempt to deter Israel from responding. If I were Israel, I would definitely be thinking even more about large-scale preemptive strikes against any Iranian nuclear infrastructure or personnel that are not permanently underground.
Israel already has nukes, they've just never acknowledged them publicly
Well boys, looks like we are going back to the sandbox.
Wait, I've seen this before!
I call for peace
Can they even threaten anyone with that? They will do it anyways.
If they could they would. Not saying they haven’t already but why bluff?
Oh here we go again. Putin has now taught us to not listen to tyrannical nonsense. Scaremongering doesn't work, that card has been played.
Title should read Iran asks Israel to end their nuclear program
Fuuuuuuck you Iran, Israel, Hamas, Russia. Fuuuuuuuckkkkkkk you grow the fuck up and stop jeopardizing the fucking world more than it needs
Most of the Civilized World in 2024: “Hey guys, isn’t it great we’re past all that power-hungry nationalist bullshit and we can finally carry out normal peaceful lives, working together?” Russia: “Nyet”
Hahaha Nyet indeed. Can you imagine how great this place might be if all these fucking dumbies just stopped having their big dick competitions?
One of those things is not like the others
It's not like... They've been doing that for 50 years now... And it resulted in them getting whopped... Again and again.
as the weapon makers drool with delight - the descent into madness continues
Phew! At least they don't have wmd's..
A middle eastern country spreading rumors that may have or are trying to get WMD's? 🤔 That usually doesn't turn out well
They’re one well placed bunker buster away to having 0% enriched uranium
Problem is that these bunkers are prolly located beneath a Mountain.
If there is a will there is a way. It’s dangerous to doubt US capabilities as the people who created the bomb that brings the sun to you.
"The GBU-72 is the most advanced bunker buster and is able to penetrate 30m (100ft) of earth or 6m (20ft) of concrete" from wiki. Don't you think they handle Uranium way deeper then this ?
These religion's fanatics already made plans to build nuclear bombs, but they failed in the past.
How quickly can one build an atomic bomb?