The pretense that has already been debunked you mean. Iran was nowhere near having nuclear weapons.

The purpose of the war was keeping Netanyahu in power by having a constant war going on. And Trump went along because he was promised a quick win which he could have used to turn his midterms around.

▲

_DeadFred_ 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Why does HN flag valid replies like this dead?

tristanj 3 hours ago [dead] | root | parent | next [–]

> Iran was nowhere near having nuclear weapons. No, that's outdated. Iran had ~440kg of uranium enriched to 60%, enough for 9-10 nuclear weapons enriched to weapons grade. Given Iran's enormous centrifuge fleet, enrichment to enough material for a single weapons grade nuke would take 2-3 days. To enrich the entire amount would take 2-3 weeks.

This comes straight from the 2025 IAEA report.

https://armscontrolcenter.org/irans-stockpile-of-highly-enri...

▲

tristanj 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

It's automatic, the information trips the content filters.

▲

bigyabai a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Iran has had a stockpile of >100kg medium-enriched uranium for decades. The "enough for 9-10 nuclear weapons" scare line has been repeated since the 1990s, and it's not really any better of an argument today.

▲

tristanj a day ago | parent | next [-]

You're conflating the old 'Iran is N months from a bomb' predictions (which you have good reason to be skeptical of) with documented IAEA stockpiles. Iran had 440.9 kg of 60% highly-enriched U on June 13, 2025 per the final IAEA report, and that is new material, not decades-old, since Iran didn't produce any 60% until April 2021. Iran had no 60% material prior to 2021.

60% enriched material is very highly enriched, it's approximately ~98-99% of the way to weapons grade, in terms of total work required.

	▲	bigyabai a day ago \| parent [-]
		Medium-enriched is generally defined as anything in the 10-90% enrichment range. The IAEA is extremely clear that Iran possessed medium-enriched uranium as far back as 2010: https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/documents/gov2011-6... We all know how cascade enrichment works, having 20% or 60% enrichment is still not equivalent to having the bomb. It is directly commensurate to the "Iran is N weeks away from the bomb!" because people are just extrapolating enrichment time without any other metrics included.

▲

_DeadFred_ a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Knowing the numbers we are talking about isn't a scare line. Knowing the related facts should not be downvoted to [dead] on HN. Hiding facts feels manipulative/propaganda-y and not Hacker News worthy. A comment like yours seems the more appropriate response wouldn't you agree?

	▲	bigyabai a day ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> Knowing the numbers we are talking about Which numbers? "enough for 9-10 nuclear weapons" is a stupid figure, you could come up with similar scare quotes for raw uranium ore if you extrapolated the refinement process. It's a dishonest tactic that has been tossed around for decades without much meaning. The upstream claim that Iran would have ICBMs with nuclear warheads is just not true. Iran does not have any credible ICBM in their inventory, nor a known reentry vehicle, nor a strategy that would enable them to fight anyone besides regional powers like Israel. I did not flag their comments, but this kind of extraordinary "flood the zone" logic is consistent with what HN ends up flagging in the long run.
	▲	tristanj a day ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		[dead]

▲

tristanj 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> Iran was nowhere near having nuclear weapons.

No, that's outdated. Iran had ~440kg of uranium enriched to 60%, enough for 9-10 nuclear weapons enriched to weapons grade. Given Iran's enormous centrifuge fleet, enrichment to enough material for a single weapons grade nuke would take 2-3 days. To enrich the entire amount would take 2-3 weeks.

This comes straight from the 2025 IAEA report.

https://armscontrolcenter.org/irans-stockpile-of-highly-enri...

	▲	spiderfarmer a day ago \| parent [-]
		"Thus, a renewed offer to retrieve Iran’s 60% enriched uranium “under the supervision of the Agency [IAEA],” as stated by Foreign Minister Araghchi, and to down-blend it to lower enrichment, along with a return to IAEA verification and monitoring as well as constraints on Iran’s future enrichment levels, would be extremely valuable and well worth bargaining for. " Or, you could be very, very stupid and start bombing like maniacs. Without a plan, without allies and without justification. During ongoing negotiations as well, making you SO UNBELIEVABLY untrustworthy that NO-ONE will EVER trust this idiotic regime ever again. The stupidity is astounding.