3 ms·

We know that experts are fairly bad at predictions. Plus we have the latest report from the UN that Iran has been breaching their nuclear agreements. Iran mos

We know that experts are fairly bad at predictions. Plus we have the latest report from the UN that Iran has been breaching their nuclear agreements. Iran most likely won't be able to redevelop a nuclear program if the current one is destroyed (and Israel could easily destroy it again when/if they restart)

runarberg 1y ago
Iran’s behavior is exactly in line with my hypothesis. They a) were involved in regional conflicts against Israel (including having bombs dropped on them from Israel), and b) had their treaties broken by the USA. Dropping the treaties and invading Iran does seem to correlate with weapons buildup.
- mupuff1234 1y ago
  But the weapons have already been built, so at this point its either you act first or just hope. And hope isn't much of a strategy. Obviously there is a huge risk here that if Israel fails then Iran will without a doubt push for a bomb.
  - runarberg 1y ago
    You seem pretty sure about your beliefs about this, and I doubt there is anything I can say which will convince you otherwise. But when you put forth a testable hypotheses, and experts in the field seem to disagree with your conviction about the matter, perhaps it is time time maybe consider that maybe you are wrong and the experts are right. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/6/13/iran-to-double-down-on-nuclear-programme-after-israeli-strikes-analysts https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/6/13/iran-to-double-down...
    - mupuff1234 1y ago
      Because it seems fairly obvious to me that if the current nuclear program is taken out the chances that they'll be able to redevelop it in the near to medium term future are extremely low. How exactly will they be able to do so? They won't be able to protect the sites from further attacks, not to mention losing a significant chunk of the expertise in form of personal along with the materials required. It's not some Lego set, rebuilding such a project is insanely complex and time consuming, chances of success are very low (assuming Russia, North Korea, etc, don't decide to just hand some over) Plus, even if they did develop a new program by the time it's done anti missile tech will most likely reach a new phase.
- amendegree 1y ago
  Iran’s “treaty” was they get to build a giant stockpile of conventional weapons in exchange for not building a nuclear weapon… but they get to continue enriching uranium at levels that would make it very easy to quickly ramp up to nukes if they choose. And the treaty expires in 10 years (guess how long ago the treaty was signed). Not only did they immediately flout the rules and enrich uranium past the levels they were allowed to, the also in defiance of the treaty built secret nuclear reactors that weren’t monitored, and pursued building and stockpiling all the parts necessary to build a nuclear warhead. Throughout this entire conversation you’ve made many claims that aren’t true at all. You’ve shown extreme bigotry against Jews and Israel.
  - runarberg 1y ago
    Iran’s military spending has not significantly increased since 2015. Treaties also have a tendency to be extended or replaced by something similar. Your hypotheses that Iran’s buildup of conventional weapons would increase as a result of the nuclear agreement is wrong. Most experts agree that the Iran nuclear deal was a success until USA withdrew in 2018.
    - amendegree 1y ago
      Iran’s military spending hasn’t decreased significantly since 2015. Which you would expect if your “hypothesis” had any legs. It has in fact increased. Thus again disproving your spurious claims. Please point to these supposed experts, everything I saw from that time was that only those naive enough to believe a pack of lies claimed the nuclear deal would work, while everyone else was pointing out all the ways Iran was totally subverting it.
      - runarberg 1y ago
        2015: 10.38 Billion USD (inflation adjusted) 2023: 10.28 Billion USD (inflation adjusted) https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.CD?locations=IR https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.CD?location... Expert opinion: * https://carnegieendowment.org/emissary/2025/04/iran-nuclear-talks-five-lessons-jcpoa-negotiations?lang=en https://carnegieendowment.org/emissary/2025/04/iran-nuclear-... * https://nationalinterest.org/blog/energy-world/us-iran-nuclear-negotiations-are-a-test-for-global-energy-and-security https://nationalinterest.org/blog/energy-world/us-iran-nucle... Note that neither tout the success of 2015 directly (why would they, it failed after USA withdrew) but rather are proposing a new deal would build upon stuff that worked in 2015: > In 2015, the JCPOA’s durability stemmed in part from expert-level dialogue between scientists, including US Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz and Ali Akbar Salehi, then-head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran. Reestablishing that kind of technical cooperation is essential to crafting a framework that can both verify compliance and contain Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

runarberg 1y ago

Iran’s behavior is exactly in line with my hypothesis. They a) were involved in regional conflicts against Israel (including having bombs dropped on them from Israel), and b) had their treaties broken by the USA. Dropping the treaties and invading Iran does seem to correlate with weapons buildup.

mupuff1234 1y ago
But the weapons have already been built, so at this point its either you act first or just hope. And hope isn't much of a strategy. Obviously there is a huge risk here that if Israel fails then Iran will without a doubt push for a bomb.
- runarberg 1y ago
  You seem pretty sure about your beliefs about this, and I doubt there is anything I can say which will convince you otherwise. But when you put forth a testable hypotheses, and experts in the field seem to disagree with your conviction about the matter, perhaps it is time time maybe consider that maybe you are wrong and the experts are right. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/6/13/iran-to-double-down-on-nuclear-programme-after-israeli-strikes-analysts https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/6/13/iran-to-double-down...
  - mupuff1234 1y ago
    Because it seems fairly obvious to me that if the current nuclear program is taken out the chances that they'll be able to redevelop it in the near to medium term future are extremely low. How exactly will they be able to do so? They won't be able to protect the sites from further attacks, not to mention losing a significant chunk of the expertise in form of personal along with the materials required. It's not some Lego set, rebuilding such a project is insanely complex and time consuming, chances of success are very low (assuming Russia, North Korea, etc, don't decide to just hand some over) Plus, even if they did develop a new program by the time it's done anti missile tech will most likely reach a new phase.
amendegree 1y ago
Iran’s “treaty” was they get to build a giant stockpile of conventional weapons in exchange for not building a nuclear weapon… but they get to continue enriching uranium at levels that would make it very easy to quickly ramp up to nukes if they choose. And the treaty expires in 10 years (guess how long ago the treaty was signed). Not only did they immediately flout the rules and enrich uranium past the levels they were allowed to, the also in defiance of the treaty built secret nuclear reactors that weren’t monitored, and pursued building and stockpiling all the parts necessary to build a nuclear warhead. Throughout this entire conversation you’ve made many claims that aren’t true at all. You’ve shown extreme bigotry against Jews and Israel.
- runarberg 1y ago
  Iran’s military spending has not significantly increased since 2015. Treaties also have a tendency to be extended or replaced by something similar. Your hypotheses that Iran’s buildup of conventional weapons would increase as a result of the nuclear agreement is wrong. Most experts agree that the Iran nuclear deal was a success until USA withdrew in 2018.
  - amendegree 1y ago
    Iran’s military spending hasn’t decreased significantly since 2015. Which you would expect if your “hypothesis” had any legs. It has in fact increased. Thus again disproving your spurious claims. Please point to these supposed experts, everything I saw from that time was that only those naive enough to believe a pack of lies claimed the nuclear deal would work, while everyone else was pointing out all the ways Iran was totally subverting it.
    - runarberg 1y ago
      2015: 10.38 Billion USD (inflation adjusted) 2023: 10.28 Billion USD (inflation adjusted) https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.CD?locations=IR https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.CD?location... Expert opinion: * https://carnegieendowment.org/emissary/2025/04/iran-nuclear-talks-five-lessons-jcpoa-negotiations?lang=en https://carnegieendowment.org/emissary/2025/04/iran-nuclear-... * https://nationalinterest.org/blog/energy-world/us-iran-nuclear-negotiations-are-a-test-for-global-energy-and-security https://nationalinterest.org/blog/energy-world/us-iran-nucle... Note that neither tout the success of 2015 directly (why would they, it failed after USA withdrew) but rather are proposing a new deal would build upon stuff that worked in 2015: > In 2015, the JCPOA’s durability stemmed in part from expert-level dialogue between scientists, including US Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz and Ali Akbar Salehi, then-head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran. Reestablishing that kind of technical cooperation is essential to crafting a framework that can both verify compliance and contain Iran’s nuclear ambitions.