this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2025
448 points (99.3% liked)

politics

24366 readers
3377 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Archive article: https://archive.ph/Wa1fg

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] peoplebeproblems@midwest.social 19 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Hot take, it wasn't set back at all.

Uranium enrichment is expensive and time consuming, but if North Korea can do it covertly Iran has a much more educated people and much more land to extract anything from. Plus Iran is probably much more cozy with Russia than Russia is with Nork.

If Iran hasn't produced a weapon yet, it's not because of these enrichment facilities, but a lack of material to produce enough high enrichment, OR they are trying to rely on methods for inducing fission that won't work for a bomb (inclusive OR). That's what kept Germany from advancing their program.

I have a feeling that the centrifuges are decoys anyway. It's a cheaper way to isolate enriched uranium, but easy targets. At one point Iran was trying laser separation to isolate the correct isotopes, but I doubt they had any success with that and they're undoubtedly putting resources into multiple methods now, UNLESS Putin has instructed them otherwise.

In reality? All Putin needs to do is provide enriched uranium or plutonium and Iran can make breeder reactors and it doesn't matter how many centrifuges get blown to bits.

[–] Vanilla_PuddinFudge@infosec.pub 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Iran doesn't actually have to have uranium for America to bomb them. In fact, if they didn't have uranimum, we'd be liberating them for the sake of Democracy or some shit. Israel told its wage slaves to bomb Iran, so its wage slaves are going to bomb Iran.

Remember last time?

"Oh, turns out... they didn't have weapons of mass destruction lmao. SILLY US! Oh well! Too late now!"

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago

This isn't the first time Iran's nuclear program has been targeted. It's been regularly attacked over the years. Getting weapons grade enrichment is really hard, it's years of lead time to get centrifuges up and running before you can even attempt enrichment. It's not unbelievable that they haven't gotten pure enough uranium for a nuke yet, it matches up with what we know about their program from what has been inspected.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

Iran also has money from selling oil to China.

but if North Korea can do it covertly Iran has a much more educated people and much more land to extract anything from

Iran is under a microscope though, and has severe problems with infiltration from outside intelligence agencies.

They do have more than 10x the land area and more than 3x the population though.