Re:Trump says US has bombed Fordo nuclear plant in attack on...
by mgiampapa on Sunday June 22, 2025 @02:28AM
(#44344371)
Presumably if you allow monitors for non-weapons uses, the accounting of where the material goes is relatively straightforward. Therefore monitoring could not be allowed, ipso facto, they are doing it for weapons.
Re:Trump says US has bombed Fordo nuclear plant in attack on...
by rocqua on Sunday June 22, 2025 @03:40AM
(#44344796)
An other compatible explanation is that they wanted ambiguity about their weapon production.
Besides, wasn't this whole thing triggered by a UN report showing they had made a lot more 50% enriched stuff than expected? I.e. the monitoring "worked"
Re:Trump says US has bombed Fordo nuclear plant in attack on...
by hnaccount_rng on Sunday June 22, 2025 @04:40AM
(#44345145)
But ambiguity with respect to weapons production has to be taken as a confirmation of an intent to develop weapons of the opposite side. Which makes this equivalent to just having a nuke program. It doesn't even give you a bargaining chip because there is nothing you can do as a step back (since you didn't do anything in the first place)
[1]: https://apnews.com/article/iran-nuclear-un-inspectors-b82c92... [2]: https://news.un.org/en/story/2025/06/1164291