5 ms·

What's the reliability of this reporting? What we can tell though is that Iran is still firing missiles (including cluster munitions) at Israel's civilians and

by YZF 7mo ago

What's the reliability of this reporting? What we can tell though is that Iran is still firing missiles (including cluster munitions) at Israel's civilians and at gulf states. So the ground facts are that it can still do that. We also have to remember that Iran has a large number of different missile systems for different ranges. It's mostly not the same missiles they are firing at the nearby gulf states as they are firing into Israel. Some of the longer range missile systems they have need to be fired from western Iran to make it to Israel. There's a lot of other nuance, solid fuel vs. liquid fuel, mobile vs. fixed launchers etc.

rustyhancock 7mo ago
I don't think we'll see anything close to reliable reporting any time soon. The story of whether Iran had a nuclear program has been reported every which way but loose for the past 6 months. By the time Trump started pushing that they were close to a nuke again, those that claimed he was wrong 6 months ago and the nuclear program was intact. Had started claiming it was in fact destroyed. Gosh that sentence is hard enough to write, but the story is so contolvuted I don't think I can improve it.
- GolfPopper 7mo ago
  "Iran will have a nuclear weapon real soon!" is a claim that has been pushed, particularly by Benjamin Netanyahu for thirty years. https://www.news18.com/world/weeks-away-by-next-spring-video-shows-netanyahu-warning-of-irans-nuclear-threat-for-almost-30-years-ws-l-9392520.html https://www.news18.com/world/weeks-away-by-next-spring-video...
- CamperBob2 7mo ago
  That Iran had a nuclear program was not in dispute. It was regulated under international supervision based on the terms of Obama's agreement with Iran, which Trump promptly tore up because he has the mental capacity of a fourth-grader. That Iran was on the verge of building bombs was far from clear. Khameini had previously issued a fatwa against doing so, on the grounds that it would be haram, or un-Islamic. All signs suggest that the IRGC was operating in full compliance with that fatwa. I'm sure the remnants of his administration regret that now.
  - srean 6mo ago
    To that add what Joe Kent and Tulsi Gabbard said about Iranian nuclear bombs -- no indications that they have one or are building one.
    - YZF 6mo ago
      But everyone agrees that they have enriched >400kg of Uranium to a level that has no other purpose than nuclear weapons and that the remaining steps of enrichment are measured in days/weeks. So something doesn't add up in what your references are saying. What is your explanation of the discrepancy? https://www.sipri.org/commentary/essay/2021/why-iran-producing-60-cent-enriched-uranium https://www.sipri.org/commentary/essay/2021/why-iran-produci... https://armscontrolcenter.org/irans-stockpile-of-highly-enriched-uranium-worth-bargaining-for/ https://armscontrolcenter.org/irans-stockpile-of-highly-enri...
      - srean 6mo ago
        Oh shucks! military intelligence and 19 different intelligence gathering agencies are such nincompoops that they completely missed what an expert HN commenter of sparkling genius pointed out. I don't have the expertise to know what use its for, but I suspect the agencies assesment was informed bybthe knowledge of 60% enriched uranium. It's used for subs btw and maybe they felt they needed a nuclear one to secure Hormuz.
        YZF 6mo ago
        I get it. So according to you Iran is building nuclear subs. JFYI it takes 4-5Kg of material for a nuclear sub reactor. So according to you they're building 100 nuclear submarines. Got it genius. But hey, by the trust you put in Joe Kent and Tulsi Gabbard we already knew you were a genius. Didn't need the additional observation about Iran building 100 nuclear submarines to secure Hormuz.
        srean 6mo ago
        I have no F'ing clue what Iran wants to do. But I know that the intelligence agencies are well equipped and experienced to guess that, especially more than 'that guy on the internet '.
- NickC25 7mo ago
  >The story of whether Iran had a nuclear program has been reported every which way but loose for the past 6 months. 6 months? Try like 35+ years. Bibi has been pushing the "Iran is 2 weeks away from a nuke" narrative since the late 80s.
- defrost 7mo ago
  I do a mild bit of environmental geophysical radiometrics, that took me to Iran decades ago - it's not a new thing, they've been edging having nuclear deterrance for a good while. Trump ripped up the monitoring agreement - that was unquestionably stupid. He attacked Iran during talks to get that back on track .. that was unbelievably stupid (see: current world state). Had he agreed to have in country monitoring again and had the USofA simply waited it was probable the old hard line core would have withered in time. That's certainly not on the table now, the fanatics are dug in and feel fully justified. On both sides. Incapable of The Deal.

by YZF 7mo ago

rustyhancock 7mo ago

I don't think we'll see anything close to reliable reporting any time soon. The story of whether Iran had a nuclear program has been reported every which way but loose for the past 6 months. By the time Trump started pushing that they were close to a nuke again, those that claimed he was wrong 6 months ago and the nuclear program was intact. Had started claiming it was in fact destroyed. Gosh that sentence is hard enough to write, but the story is so contolvuted I don't think I can improve it.

GolfPopper 7mo ago
"Iran will have a nuclear weapon real soon!" is a claim that has been pushed, particularly by Benjamin Netanyahu for thirty years. https://www.news18.com/world/weeks-away-by-next-spring-video-shows-netanyahu-warning-of-irans-nuclear-threat-for-almost-30-years-ws-l-9392520.html https://www.news18.com/world/weeks-away-by-next-spring-video...
CamperBob2 7mo ago
That Iran had a nuclear program was not in dispute. It was regulated under international supervision based on the terms of Obama's agreement with Iran, which Trump promptly tore up because he has the mental capacity of a fourth-grader. That Iran was on the verge of building bombs was far from clear. Khameini had previously issued a fatwa against doing so, on the grounds that it would be haram, or un-Islamic. All signs suggest that the IRGC was operating in full compliance with that fatwa. I'm sure the remnants of his administration regret that now.
- srean 6mo ago
  To that add what Joe Kent and Tulsi Gabbard said about Iranian nuclear bombs -- no indications that they have one or are building one.
  - YZF 6mo ago
    But everyone agrees that they have enriched >400kg of Uranium to a level that has no other purpose than nuclear weapons and that the remaining steps of enrichment are measured in days/weeks. So something doesn't add up in what your references are saying. What is your explanation of the discrepancy? https://www.sipri.org/commentary/essay/2021/why-iran-producing-60-cent-enriched-uranium https://www.sipri.org/commentary/essay/2021/why-iran-produci... https://armscontrolcenter.org/irans-stockpile-of-highly-enriched-uranium-worth-bargaining-for/ https://armscontrolcenter.org/irans-stockpile-of-highly-enri...
    - srean 6mo ago
      Oh shucks! military intelligence and 19 different intelligence gathering agencies are such nincompoops that they completely missed what an expert HN commenter of sparkling genius pointed out. I don't have the expertise to know what use its for, but I suspect the agencies assesment was informed bybthe knowledge of 60% enriched uranium. It's used for subs btw and maybe they felt they needed a nuclear one to secure Hormuz.
      - YZF 6mo ago
        I get it. So according to you Iran is building nuclear subs. JFYI it takes 4-5Kg of material for a nuclear sub reactor. So according to you they're building 100 nuclear submarines. Got it genius. But hey, by the trust you put in Joe Kent and Tulsi Gabbard we already knew you were a genius. Didn't need the additional observation about Iran building 100 nuclear submarines to secure Hormuz.
        srean 6mo ago
        I have no F'ing clue what Iran wants to do. But I know that the intelligence agencies are well equipped and experienced to guess that, especially more than 'that guy on the internet '.
NickC25 7mo ago
>The story of whether Iran had a nuclear program has been reported every which way but loose for the past 6 months. 6 months? Try like 35+ years. Bibi has been pushing the "Iran is 2 weeks away from a nuke" narrative since the late 80s.
defrost 7mo ago
I do a mild bit of environmental geophysical radiometrics, that took me to Iran decades ago - it's not a new thing, they've been edging having nuclear deterrance for a good while. Trump ripped up the monitoring agreement - that was unquestionably stupid. He attacked Iran during talks to get that back on track .. that was unbelievably stupid (see: current world state). Had he agreed to have in country monitoring again and had the USofA simply waited it was probable the old hard line core would have withered in time. That's certainly not on the table now, the fanatics are dug in and feel fully justified. On both sides. Incapable of The Deal.