Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by hypeatei 2 hours ago
I never swapped claims. We're talking about nuclear weapons and why the US started a war with Iran this year due to this supposed "crisis" (in your words) but there's no evidence that a threat is imminent. The NIEs were just one data point against your claim; the burden is still on you to show who else agrees with the assesment that this is a crisis.

> IAEA concluded in May 2025 that Iran ran an "undeclared structured nuclear program" until the early 2000s

"nuclear program" is not the same as a weapons program and the IAEA sounding alarm bells over policy violations is not a conclusion that Iran is/was on a nuclear warpath.

1 comments

Name the civilian use for Iran's 440 kg of 60% enriched uranium. There isn't one. No power reactor uses it (those run on 3-5%), no research reactor needs it (~20% max), and it sits 98-99% of the way enriched weapons-grade. Iran has enough fissile material for multiple bombs with under two weeks of further enrichment. There is no civilian use for this material. Iran enriched this material, under a mountain, in violation of IAEA requirements, at a site it hid from IAEA investigators until it got caught lying, while stonewalling compliance investigators for years.

Even your own source, the 2025 Annual Threat Assessment report, states: "Iran's enriched uranium stockpile is at its highest levels and is unprecedented for a state without nuclear weapons."

What's your justification for Iran producing this material, if not for a nuclear weapons program?

Did that 2025 assessment conclude that Iran was building toward a nuclear weapon, or didn't it?