I am not sure how its only a political decision when they don't have control of their own airspace. How exactly do they rebuild when as soon as they start they get bombed. I think its more accurate to say it WAS a political decision. They had the capability but did not pursue it due to the fallout of doing so. The question its do they still retain the capability and will they ever be allowed to reclaim that capability if they lost it.

> Enriched material was transported from these centers some time ago, as news outlets have already reported.

That's what Iran state media says. Has anyone else said this?

I would like to see the confirmation as well. At the same time, it does sound plausible. Why keep the highly enriched uranium at the centrifuge site after you're done doing all the centrifuging.

The challenge for Israel is there's always a small chance your intelligence has a blind spot or is wrong. You can't prove a negative.

This is why I think the most likely scenario is that Israel will commit to regime change. Israel can't trust the current regime to not race to a nuclear weapon at this stage, and Israel can never be over 99% certain that a clandestine effort isn't being done outside of the current understanding of intelligence. "Assume the worst" seems to be a doctrine they adhere to.

And honestly I'm ok with Israel attempting to force regime change. I think they'll fail but whatevs.

The problem is that the US government appear to support them in whatever craziness they aim for. That's the part that makes this a lot more problematic.

Regime change in Iran is not going to happen under duress, if anything, this will unite Iranians to defend their homes.

There was regime change against the Russian Tsar in response to his failures in WW1. The rally around the flag didn't count for anything. If the weakness and failures of Khamenei becomes a reality strong enough to pierce through the perceptions shaped by state run media then I am putting my money on regime change. Maybe not right now but soon.

Happened with Japan in WW2, too, although that was a surrender rather than bottom up. But still a form of regime change. There are many ways it could play out.

It's close to unknowable. The entire 500 kg stash of highly enriched uranium that we're fighting this war over has a volume of about 20 liters- not easy to track. Bombing the uranium doesn't unenriched it either unless you do something like drop an equal mass of depleted uranium and then hit it with enough explosives to thoroughly mix the two

Just curious where the enrichment fact you are claiming comes from. I see the NPT outlined 3% max while watchdogs detected over 80%. I didn’t think there were debates about them breaking the NPT

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-...

> If they really wanted to, they would already have it. Enriched material was transported from these centers some time ago.

…

> 60% enrichment is not considered weapons-grade enrichment.

So which is it?

1. They already have enriched uranium and can just make a bomb now

2. They don’t have weapons-grade enriched uranium (and now probably cannot enrich it)

3. (Speculation) They know how to enrich further, but deliberately didn't.

That's just (2).

Whether they had the theoretical ability to complete enrichment or not last week, does not matter, because they likely do not have it now.

There isn't anything special about Iran. It's anyone's political decision to use a nuke. So you make diplomatic decisions, war inclusive, to increase chances that you will not be nuked.

60% can be weaponized and it’s not a huge leap to go to 90%