LibreTechni.ca
  • Communities
  • Create Post
  • Create Community
  • heart
    Support Lemmy
  • search
    Search
  • Login
  • Sign Up
supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz to Geopolitics@sopuli.xyz · 9 days ago

No Evidence Iran Is Building Nuclear Bomb, Says UN Atomic Energy Chief

novaramedia.com

external-link
message-square
48
fedilink
272
external-link

No Evidence Iran Is Building Nuclear Bomb, Says UN Atomic Energy Chief

novaramedia.com

supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz to Geopolitics@sopuli.xyz · 9 days ago
message-square
48
fedilink
There is no evidence that Iran is building a nuclear bomb, the head of the UN’s atomic energy agency has said, despite claims by Israel and the US that the country poses an imminent nuclear threat.
alert-triangle
You must log in or register to comment.
  • ComradeSharkfucker@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    9 days ago

    They should really consider it at this point

    • Know_not_Scotty_does@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      9 days ago

      That’s the lesson I think a lot of countries have beeen learning. Don’t fuck with someone who can make thir own portable star.

  • ZombieCyborgFromOuterSpace@piefed.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    Of course not. Iran was playing by the rules because they were trying to avoid exactly what happened in the last few days.

    EDIT: To add to this, the conflict is mostly due to Iran not wanting to share its oil resources. Just like Venezuela. Just like Lybia. Just like any other country who doesn’t want to have its energy resources exploited by U.S. interests.

    • F_State@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      9 days ago

      To be more specific, they refuse to accept US currency for oil purchases.

  • mortemtyrannis@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    9 days ago

    Well yeah no shit.

    You think the USA would start a war with a country that has nukes?

    • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 🇮 @pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      9 days ago

      Absolutely. Look who the fuck is in charge.

  • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    The Iraqi WMDs, all over again.

  • reksas@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    Iran has oil, there is the reason for the war for you. Anything else is just excuses that may or may not be based on also real things, but which wouldnt get reacted at if iran didnt have oil.

  • MinnesotaGoddam@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    9 days ago

    Refining nuclear materials is really not that complicated. I mean it’s just, well, refining, while being safe about radiation. The only reason iran doesn’t have nuclear weapons is because they don’t want to. Which means they decided to abide by the nonproliferation treaties they signed. And since the US didn’t, we now get to see how everyone else who signed one behaves. Yaaaaay.

    • Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      9 days ago

      If they don’t want, or treat with wanting, why are they refining all that fissile material then?

      They do want the bomb

      Edit: you just have no answer except downvotes because you know I’m right, and it makes you angry.

      • IronBird@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        9 days ago

        2 weeks away from nuclear weapons since the 70’s

        • Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 days ago

          I didn’t say that though.

      • Tja@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        9 days ago

        For fuel for electricity generation, as explicitly allowed in the treaties.

        • Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 days ago

          Then why go over a couple of percent of refinement? There is no other reason than to make weapon grade uranium. At 60 percent they are not “2 weeks from a bomb” but they are fucking far from 3-4% that is used for civil energy generation.

          • Tja@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            9 days ago

            Did they go to 60%? Verified by the UN? I wasn’t aware of that…

            • Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 days ago

              Well you are now, and even 20% means they want to at least pretend to work towards an atomic bomb.

              • Tja@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                9 days ago

                You surely have a link to the un report…

                • Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 days ago

                  Nice sealioning. Show me they stayed under 4% smarty.

      • davepleasebehave@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 days ago

        Thanks Benjamin.

      • liuther9@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 days ago

        Does it fuck you in the ass?

        • Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 days ago

          What is this 6 yo rhetoric lol, go back to kindergarten.

          • liuther9@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 days ago

            It sure does but I don’t judge you

            • Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              9 days ago

              Are you okay?

      • MinnesotaGoddam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 days ago

        do they have any reactors?

  • super_user_do@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    9 days ago

    No fucking way man fr?

  • AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    9 days ago

    Are you saying that their bombs aren’t made of atoms? Huh? Huh?

  • neukenindekeuken@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    9 days ago

    When has that ever stopped the US?

  • jaykrown@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    9 days ago

    Enriching large amounts of uranium above 20% isn’t a good idea.

    • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyzOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      9 days ago

      No, the whole point of bombing Iran was to make the point that it is and trying diplomacy with the US as an alternative is suicidal.

      • jaykrown@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 days ago

        I tend to trust the IAEA, not the Iranian government, how about you?

        • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyzOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          9 days ago

          Ok, trust them then fool

          Speaking in remarks reported on Tuesday evening, Grossi said Iran possesses a large stockpile of enriched uranium that has reached levels close to weapons-grade. However, he stressed that the agency has not found proof that Iran is developing a nuclear weapon.

          https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20260304-iaea-says-no-evidence-iran-is-building-a-nuclear-bomb/

          In response to the attacks, Iran excluded UN inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) from those and other sensitive sites, with the result that the watchdog lost track of what became of the 440kg HEU stockpile, and of what was being done in the deep tunnels in Isfahan and Natanz.

          In its latest report, the IAEA conceded it could not verify whether Iran had suspended all enrichment-related activities, or the size of its uranium stockpile at the affected nuclear facilities.

          Despite that uncertainty, the IAEA director general, Rafael Grossi, said on Monday that “we don’t see a structured programme to manufacture nuclear weapons”.

          https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/04/us-israel-strikes-iran-nuclear-program-could-backfire

          • jaykrown@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 days ago

            Thanks for proving my point. From the article you linked:

            Most worryingly for the international community, Iran had by last summer produced a stockpile of just over 440kg of highly enriched uranium (HEU), of 60% purity. In terms of technical difficulty, once at 60%, it is a relatively easy step to reach 90% – weapons-grade uranium that can be used to make a compact warhead.

            You don’t need HEU for civilian nuclear power operations.

            • dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              9 days ago

              You ignored the main part though

              Despite that uncertainty, the IAEA director general, Rafael Grossi, said on Monday that “we don’t see a structured programme to manufacture nuclear weapons”.

              • jaykrown@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 days ago

                You don’t need “a structured programme to manufacture nuclear weapons” for it to be clear that’s what the intention is. At that point it’s already too late.

                Again: You don’t need highly enriched uranium (HEU) for civilian nuclear power operations.

            • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyzOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              9 days ago

              Did you ignore the part of there being no evidence Iran was developing a nuclear bomb?

              • jaykrown@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 days ago

                a stockpile of just over 440kg of highly enriched uranium (HEU), of 60% purity

                a stockpile of just over 440kg of highly enriched uranium (HEU), of 60% purity

              • jaykrown@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 days ago

                Here let me make it a bit easier to read:

                a stockpile of just over 440kg of highly enriched uranium (HEU), of 60% purity

            • mrdown@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 days ago

              Since it is so easy why didn’t they do it?

              • jaykrown@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 days ago

                Because they got bombed?

                • mrdown@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  8 days ago

                  They was at 60% for 4 years . If they want it they would have already done it

            • WraithGear@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 days ago

              did…did you read it though?

  • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    9 days ago

    Why build when you can buy?

    • halfapage@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      9 days ago

      deleted by creator

      • 6stringringer@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 days ago

        New world troubles.

  • sleepmode@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    deleted by creator

  • GameOverFlow@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 days ago

    At what point the reason for this war where nuclear weapons? Did trump even say this?

    • Tja@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      9 days ago

      Yes, they gave 8 excuses in the first 24h, one of them was “they are 2 weeks away from a nuke”, which has been the talking point since the 70s.

Geopolitics@sopuli.xyz

geopol@sopuli.xyz

Subscribe from Remote Instance

Create a post
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !geopol@sopuli.xyz

Welcome

Visit us on Matrix at #geopol:matrix.org

Visibility: Public
globe

This community can be federated to other instances and be posted/commented in by their users.

  • 98 users / day
  • 419 users / week
  • 786 users / month
  • 912 users / 6 months
  • 1 local subscriber
  • 525 subscribers
  • 247 Posts
  • 132 Comments
  • Modlog
  • mods:
  • lisko@sopuli.xyz
  • BE: 0.19.5
  • Modlog
  • Instances
  • Docs
  • Code
  • join-lemmy.org