• stardustwager@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      12 hours ago

      I don’t think Iran having highly enriched uranium is in question but there’s been no evidence put forward that it was in the process of being weaponized. Moreover who is to say that Iran can’t have nukes? The United States, China, Russia, all authoritarian regimes in possession of thousands of WMDs, what gives us the right to unilaterally stop others from possessing the same weapons?

      • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        12 hours ago

        I was responding specifically to your claim of there being no credible evidence of a bomb program. Whether they should have a bomb is another question entirely.

        But back to the main point. Enrichment to 83.7% IS absolute proof of a nuclear weapons program. That is what you’re missing. Reactor grade is 3-5%. There are no practical applications aside from bombs that require enrichment that high. There’s literally no other reason to do it.

        Nuclear enrichment is not something you just do for fun. It’s expensive and dangerous, both in terms of worker safety and geopolitics. And the cost to enrich to bomb grade is at least an order of magnitude more than what is required to enrich to reactor grade.