3 ms·
That argument only works when normal aboveground civilian infrastructure won't get bombed anyway on suspicion. Then both kinds require the same protection, and
by Terr_ 1y ago
That argument only works when normal aboveground civilian infrastructure won't get bombed anyway on suspicion.
Then both kinds require the same protection, and protection can't be used to distinguish between them.
"She's obviously a witch, because she's been living deep in the forest all suspicious-like ever since we burned down her cursed house."
- yyyk 1y agoIran did not expect to be bombed back at all, which is why their defenses were so shoddy around nearly everything. The _only_ thing having this level of protection is the enrichment facility.
- EnPissant 1y agoThere is no non-nuclear weapon purpose valuable enough to build such a facility. It's obviously for nuclear bombs.
- codedokode 1y agoSo every country which has facilities to enrich uranium, needs to be bombed, correct?
- EnPissant 1y agoThat's a separate question. I am just responding to the people saying we don't know they are enriching uranium for nuclear weapons. Of course they are.
- kelnos 1y ago60% enriched uranium is not quite considered weapons-grade, but also has no civilian applications. Hiding the facility is immaterial if the facility is doing stuff that isn't useful for non-weapon work.
- buzzerbetrayed 1y agoIf you honestly think Iran is enriching uranium for clean energy, I have a bridge to sell you.
- mensetmanusman 1y agoIt would have worked if Iran had stopped also paying people to shoot missiles so often and donating to kill Ukraine.