Israel Strikes Iran: Explosions in Tehran, Sirens in Israel

[Landon Caeli]

I voted for W Bush twice, but I remember this moment.

View attachment 366727

I would advise my fellow Americans not to celebrate too early, as it is only day 4.

Which is better? To be an optimist or a pessimist? I suppose nobody knows.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

Which is better? To be an optimist or a pessimist? I suppose nobody knows.

When dealing with nuclear weapons, I prefer to be realistic and cautious rather than overly optimistic.

 

[wing2000]

Days after the US bombing of Iran, the administration finally plans to brief Congress on Thursday. Missing is the Director of National Intelligence - Tulsi Gabbord.

"...the White House is expected to send four of its top national security officials to brief lawmakers: Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, administration officials said.

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who testified in March that U.S. intelligence agencies assessed that Iran was not building a nuclear weapon, will be notably absent.

“Ratcliffe will represent the intelligence community,” the senior Trump administration official said of Gabbard’s absence, speaking on the condition on anonymity to discuss plans not yet made public. “The media is turning this into something it’s not.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2025/06/25/iran-intelligence-sharing-gabbard/

 

[Job 33:6]

If you actually read the report, they did that testing in 2003. The IAEA only just recently discovered that they did it.

https://www.reuters.com/world/china/iaea-report-says-iran-had-secret-activities-with-undeclared-nuclear-material-2025-05-31/

Iran's only movement towards building nuclear weapons recently (at least as far as we know - Israel claims otherwise, but they're hardly a reliable source on this issue, so I'm hesitant to take them at their word without third-party corroboration) was its ramping up of uranium enrichment to 60%. While I'm not an expert, it seems reasonable to conclude that the intent of this was more likely to be to signal that they were capable of building a nuclear weapon in order to warn off Israel and encourage the US to restart negotiations.

I think this approach may be on the naive side. 20 years really isn't a long time. It's not long enough for a change in intent from their former Amad secret nuclear weapons program.

IAEA urges Iran to explain uranium particles at undeclared sites

The nuclear watchdog says Iran has failed to answer questions about three undeclared locations.

www.bbc.com

They're building these bunkers deep within the earth. Hidden sites are discovered by inspectors rather than being openly shared.

60% of course has no civilian purpose. As though they would invest in tens of thousands of centrifuges, included more modernized and advanced centrifuges, merely for the sake of making it look "as if" Iran were developing a weapon, though it in reality allegedly never intended to.

The US is "the great Satan" to Iranian leadership. If you think they're merely trying to "strike a deal", I'd say you're being far too generous.

Alternatively, a nuclear weapon would be a massive deterrent against invading enemies. Which might sound like a fair situation, until we note that Iran, for decades, has been financing houthis, Hezbollah, and Hamas of the recent October massacre of innocent people in Israel. They've also been sending Russia drones for its invasion of Ukraine.

This is not a friendly nation merely looking to negotiate. They aren't liberal Europeans. They're exceptionally conservative and hardened clerics with a history of decades of wartime experience.

1. spends billions of dollars,

2. installs tens of thousands of centrifuges,

3. enriches uranium to 60% purity,

4. builds deep underground fortified facilities like Fordow and Natanz,

5. develops advanced centrifuge models (IR-6, IR-8),

6. stonewall IAEA inspections and conduct undeclared nuclear activities,

…only to maintain the illusion of weapons capability while having no intent to build one, strains credibility of a truly peaceful program.

60% enrichment is not economically or technically justifiable for any peaceful purpose. It's:

1. Far beyond reactor-grade (~3.67%).

2. Technically overkill for medical isotope production (often cited as a cover).

3. Expensive, provocative, and increases proliferation risk.

Advanced centrifuges are not needed for civilian programs. Iran’s newer models like IR-6 and IR-8 are vastly more efficient than the older IR-1s.

Civilian nuclear fuel needs don’t require high-output machines or redundancy across multiple underground halls.

Fordow’s very existence contradicts peaceful intent. It was secret until 2009. Built into a mountain, explicitly designed to withstand airstrikes. Not suitable for a civilian fuel cycle (too small in output, too fortified in design).

Iran’s long-term secrecy and deception track record:

Hidden sites like Lavizan-Shian, Parchin, Turquzabad, and undeclared nuclear materials detected by the IAEA.

The "nuclear archive" stolen by Israel in 2018 showed Iran preserved sensitive weaponization knowledge.

And remember, fordow wasn't even declared. Rather it was discovered (as recently as 2009).

Fordow Uranium Enrichment Plant - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It's hard to maintain a posture of deterrence if you're simultaneously trying to keep your own underground facilities a secret. And no, it is not necessary for civilian purposes to build a facility 300 feet underground, nor would the facility have been large enough for a civilian program.

And what did they proceed to do there? That's right, 60% enrichment.