93scaro t1_j9o5fpu wrote
Realistically speaking, how much longer will it take until they have nuclear weapons ready? Anyone who has some expertise in the subject?
Grunchlk t1_j9o8bxd wrote
Iran has had the capability to build a bomb for at least 20 years. If they were trying to build one, they'd already have an arsenal full of them.
- Iran has mastered the fuel cycle. They have advanced centrifuges and thus enriching uranium to weapons grade is trivial for them. The bigger question is why haven't they?
- Iran has missiles capable of carrying a miniaturized nuclear warhead, yet they have only conventional warheads in their arsenal.
- Iran is believed to have conducted a number of implosion tests pre-2003. This would indicate they have enough knowledge for a trigger device.
Iran is using the threat of building a bomb as a tool for negotiations. Note how when the JCPOA was in effect Iran didn't enrich above 19.75%. Then once the US abandoned the agreement and forced the EU into non-compliance Iran cranked the purity up to 60+%. Now we're at 84%. Why would Iran keep increasing the purity while simultaneously letting everyone know? Because it's about securing a new deal.
However, it's also a warning that if anyone attacks Iran, they will purse a bomb and have one in less than 6 months.
3dio t1_j9oag6a wrote
6 months is plenty time to circumvent. I doubt this is anywhere related to being true.
There is no new deal for them on the horizon. In fact this proves the claim that the jcpoa was a scam to begin with and signed in bad faith.
Grunchlk t1_j9oscwk wrote
You don't believe Iran has mastered the fuel cycle? That's demonstrably true and universally accepted. The UN, IAEA, US, EU, etc, all agree that Iran has. The fact that they can trivially produce 84% HEU is also proof.
You don't believe Iran has missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads? I'll defer to Uzi Rabin, the father of Israel's missile program, who says they do and also says their missiles are quite more advanced that people believe.
You don't believe Iran has conducted implosion tests? This is one of the major sticking points of the JCPOA, the US and UN want access to Parchin because they have evidence that Iran did exactly that.
If you believe all these things are lies then you believe that Iran isn't capable of building a bomb, and thus any talk of such is propaganda.
3dio t1_j9ospvo wrote
>If you believe all these things are lies then you believe that Iran isn't capable of building a bomb, and thus any talk of such is propaganda.
Iran can have a bomb within a week. The question is how many of them can they make and maintain in the long term
Grunchlk t1_j9ousn1 wrote
I don't disagree that Iran could make one quickly (miniaturization would take a bit longer though.) I do disagree that they're already making one because they've had this capacity for 20 years now. 2002 is when they performed the implosion tests:
As of now Iran benefits more from threatening to cross the line that it does if it actually crosses it. Iran is hoping to leverage the threat to get a better deal. Maybe that won't work because of their support of Russia in the Ukraine War. However, that's what they're likely doing. If they cross the line then they likely get attacked by Israel, KSA and the US as well as max sanctions, embargoes, blockades, etc.
I highly expect Iran to state they'll be converting the TRR back to using HEU (as per its original design) instead of LEU. Then they'll have a legitimate reason for needing large quantities of weapons grade uranium. This puts them as close to that line as possible without crossing it.
If Israel, the US and KSA attack then Iran will make a bomb immediately and detonate one in the desert signalling the attacks are an existential threat which they'll respond to with maximum force.
The benefit of the JCPOA wasn't that it prevented Iran from having the know-how to make a bomb, it was that it ensured all the monitored uranium wasn't diverted and that it was converted to fuel rods (or at least stored in UN monitored containers/locations.) It also gave the IAEA broader ability to monitor for a parallel program.
3dio t1_j9pvess wrote
Here's to hoping no more wars and that the situation can somehow defuse itself
pp_in_a_pitcher t1_j9p9zve wrote
They probably already have a few nukes I would assume
ty_kanye_vcool t1_j9p8q5j wrote
If Iran is pursuing a bomb the attacks aren’t going to stop. They will do what they have to to stop it from being a reality.
cobrakai11 t1_j9or739 wrote
They could have a nuclear bomb 5 years ago if they wanted to. Enrichment is not some sort of video game loading screen, where they inch closer and closer to 90%. They have all the capabilities of enriching at 90% and building a bomb if they wanted.
If Iran wanted to build a nuclear weapon they could kick out the IAEA and build one tomorrow, like North Korea did. Or they could do what Israel India and Pakistan did when they wanted nukes, and simply never signed the NPT.
People seem to forget that Iran willingly signed the NPT allowing inspections in the first place. There was no need for them to do that, as it is not illegal for a country to build nuclear bombs. That's why Israel Pakistan and India have them. It is only illegal if you agree not to build them by signing the NPT.
The idea that Iran signed the NPT 20 years ago and has allowed endless sanctions to build the slowest nuclear bomb in the history of nuclear arms is ridiculous. Less technologically advanced countries were building nuclear bombs 50,60, 70 years ago.
Like most headlines on the subject this one is worded to make you think that Iran was caught doing something and confessed. There was nothing to catch them and nothing to confess to; they broadcasted the move and have been for several months now. The IAEA is actively monitoring their program, it wasn't an accusation it was a statement of fact.
pp_in_a_pitcher t1_j9panim wrote
I feel like majority of countries have the expertise to build the bombs , it’s gotten easier with time and could make them in 5-10 years given time but most don’t do as the holy 8 don’t want other nations to hurt their hegemony
EllieLuvsLollipops t1_j9r3wga wrote
Building a bomb is easy. It's a relatively simple design. It's the refinement that's hard, and that is only cause it costs money. After that it's time. Or more money to reduce that time. But yeah. It's not exactly hard
psyics t1_j9o6vcs wrote
It’s a political decision not a technical challenge that is the reason they do not have a functional weapon. If they decided today to manufacture one, it would take approximately 5 days for them to accumulate the required mass of HEU needed for a weapon and approximately 3 to 6 months for them to fashion the core into a deliverable weapon. Than probably another 6 months to miniaturize it into a warhead that could be usable on a ballistic missile for delivery
It should be noted that even though the article is saying they reached 84% purity it’s being slightly manipulative as Iran did not accumulate 84% enriched uranium which would be the real issue if they did. They have still not gone above 60% accumulated
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments