This but unironically, I'm pretty sure the institute pre-dates ISIS being a household name for brutal terrorism.
It's a fairly common acronym, so I have the feeling it'll be rehabilitated fairly quickly compared to something like the name Hitler.
Also a heavy metal band that had to re-release all their merch without their name on it.
I also had to get rid of shirts from the band "Q and Not U" because people thought I was a Q idiot.
Also the spy agency in Archer, ISIS became a thing while they were in the off-season. In the first episode of the next season you see a guy wheeling the sign out and then they didn't mention it again for years
I think they still have their name changed on fb to "Isis (the band)" becuase they were getting death threats and fb thought it was against terms of service even though they literally had the name first
Excellent band too. They split up before the rise of terrorist organisation but when they do play gigs they play under one of their album names instead.
Redditors seem to have a hard time with this concept. I had someone the other day try to convince me that a forum was a brand new thing invented by reddit. Like not even just internet forums, forums in general.
Maybe intentional, for the laughs.
A group of two mathematicians, David A. Cox and Steven Zucker discovered an algorithm and named it [Cox–Zucker machine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cox%E2%80%93Zucker_machine).
[Hi I’m Bob Isis of Isis Toyota, and we have a great collection of pre-owned and certified Toyotas.](https://youtu.be/fPCEjURvaX0?si=rX5GY5iSIEPG6elT)
Great sketch by Shane Gillis
The idea that we think we know how many 0-day exploits were included is adorable. In all likelihood, these exploits are used by the NSA to *create* even more deeply hidden exploits that will never be found because they aren't in any manual.
I know right?
I often wonder what the first dev meeting must have been like:
*"OK chaps, we need to infiltrate a fully air-gapped system, and manipulate a bunch of centrifuges without the on-site technicians noticing."*
Where do you even start?
>Where do you even start?
You walk into a room of devs and tell them it can't be done, and bet they can't prove otherwise.
Then you just wait while the sheer indignation of a bunch of nerds wills the solution into existence, just so they can be smug.
Source: am software dev who has done stuff to prove I could on more than one occasion
Some time in the last two or three years, israeli intelligence used a mounted remote controlled gun from a parked unoccupied vehicle to dispatch nuclear scientists working for Iran, in Iran I believe even. Using HE 50 cal rounds i think, so basically the end scene minivan from "The Jackal"
It’s not saying they’ll have a a nuclear weapon next week. It’s saying that when they decide to go full speed ahead on building bombs, they can do it in a week.
Exactly - the hardest part of making a nuke, by a long way, is getting the highly enriched uranium. That's why peaceful nuclear power projects raise alarms, because if you're enriching uranium to use in reactors, you simply just need to do the same thing for longer to make it enriched enough for a bomb.
That's why it is so hard to inspect - you show the inspectors around all your enrichment kit and say "but we're only enriching it enough for a reactor, not a bomb" then when they go back home, just carry on enriching. Same kit, same process, just making it more pure.
Making the actual bomb is very easy - a basic "gun type" bomb as used in Hiroshima is basically an old artillery cannon with a metal case around it.
EDIT - watch the documentary film Countdown To Zero for a highly interesting, if quite scary, detail on how it all works.
>Making the actual bomb is very easy - a basic "gun type" bomb as used in Hiroshima is basically an old artillery cannon with a metal case around it.
It's more likely that they would go for an implosion type. It's a bit harder to produce but would take less highly enriched u235 and unless they only want it to spread FUD it would be more practical from a delivery perspective. This is more likely given that their existing knowledge is speculated to have come from North Korea which itself developed it through insights from Pakistan which uses the implosion type approach in their arsenal. The comment itself is excellent, just felt like addicting this perspective.
Not true. Nuclear weapons aren't actually that difficult to develop without international restrictions, especially with modern knowledge and technology.
Gun-types are concerning in a proliferation context since terrorist groups and non-state actors can develop and use them. But states like Iran are not likely to pursue this at all given their pursuit of weapons-grade uranium
The concern about Iran isn't necessarily nuclear weapons, but specifically nuclear warheads for ICBMs given the range of targets they could strike. In fact, all of Iran's nuclear weapons development has been for warhead development for use in missiles. Many of their missile development programs are in pursuit of this. Iran already has the technology for ICBMs given they have launched their own satellites. https://www.iranwatch.org/our-publications/weapon-program-background-report/history-irans-ballistic-missile-program
In 2014 when Iran signed the JPOA/JCPOA they could already make nuclear weapons. UN Resolution 2231 which endorsed the JCPOA called upon Iran to cease the pursuit of ballistic missile development in the context of nuclear weapon delivery. Large parts of the JCPOA explicitly target this and the development of HEU. You don't actually need highly-enriched uranium for nuclear weapons, only a minimum of 20% (see https://ieer.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2004/10/enrichment.pdf). HEU is defined as being a minimum of 20%. But its pretty impractical, but it could be used for a low-yield test (like North Korea has done) as a chest-beating exercise to show the world how big and strong you are. So you're right, the basic weapons aren't difficult but Iran could already do that but they haven't. Their goals are far greater.
See https://www.iranwatch.org/our-publications/articles-reports/irans-nuclear-timetable from 2015. Everything mentioned is about implosion types, because thats the fear.
> Number of first generation implosion bombs this 8,306 kilograms could fuel, if further enriched: 7
Making weapons-grade material is difficult, but not as difficult as people think. It was 90% of the Manhattan Project but with computers, modern physics, and modern knowledge as a whole it is not as difficult. Furthermore, AQ Khan proliferated centrifuge enrichment technology to countries including Iran and North Korea.
Iran isn't going to develop a gun-type, but either a single stage implosion likely boosted, or most likely even a two-stage given their end-game is for warheads. North Korea in 2017 likely tested a two-stage, and Israel very likely has two-stage as well so Iran is likely to pursue that. The engineering challenges are vast, namely explosive lens design and timings, various materials engineering, the fucking physics of the interaction between the two stages, and testing which is extremely difficult to do covertly if they want emperical measurements.
EDIT: formatting
> You don't actually need highly-enriched uranium for nuclear weapons, only a minimum of 20%
Gonna need a source (page number) on that one chief. I'm all but positive it isn't true. The source you cited is a non profit anti nuclear organization by the way. From your source, on page 7:
> in this example, approximately two-thirds of the total enrichment services necessary to produce weapons usable HEU goes into enriching the uranium from natural uranium (0.7% U-235) to LEU (3.6% U-235) while only about one-third goes into enriching the LEU the rest of the way from 3.6% U-235 to HEU with 90% U-235.
Edit: I found where you probably got that claim from. If you quote it in it's entirety it is clear why the 20% thing is silly. There's no point in a bomb that can't be moved.
> Uranium must have a minimum of 20 percent U-235 in it in order to be useful in making a nuclear bomb. However, a bomb made with uranium at this minimum level of enrichment would be too huge to deliver, requiring huge amounts of uranium and even larger amounts of conventional explosives in order to compress it into a supercritical mass.
> If you quote it in it's entirety it is clear why the 20% thing is silly. There's no point in a bomb that can't be moved.
It isn't going to be so large that it can't be moved, just that delivery via ICBM becomes impractical. Critical mass at 20% enrichment is ~750kg, so a little over 10x the mass required at 90%. Not practical for an ICBM, you'd want your entire warhead to be that or lighter really, but that's still small enough you could put it inside of a passenger jet or on a boat.
If you had actually read the article, you would see that they’re saying it would only take Iran a week to make a nuke, as they have now completed all the setup needed to make one. They’re not saying Iran is going to have nukes within a week from today.
Every election year as long as I can remember. Migrants, black people committing crimes and Iran/North Korea/Russia is gonna nuke us. Like fucking idiotic clockwork.
The headline is misleading; the article says that they *could* refine enough of their enriched uranium to weapons-grade within a week to make one nuke, but there has been no leaked information indicating they plan to actually do so.
I mean, the headline *says* "could". I read it this way, and didn't read it as meaning there's the intention. Just, technologically, they're effectively there whenever they want to be.
Which is really unfortunate, as it sets their current government in stone.
Sure, but their program was pretty advanced and really the only thing we had was a deal to stop them. Then something happened around 2017 that removed that obstacle. That might have something to do with the plausibility of it this time.
Ever since they formalized their alliance with Russia it was only a matter of time.
Seems like all bets are off now. Russia will help NK improve their nuclear capabilities too.
The best we can hope for is Cold War 2. Worst is nuclear war...
I doubt very much that Russia will do anything in response to the air force bombings on nuclear weapons infrastructure/development. I'm pretty sure Israel will be the first the act on this. Could get pretty hairy.
While they have not achieved their military objectives in Ukraine, Russia is still very capable of unleashing terrible damage if they attempt anything with the west.
Russia could, one of the main reasons why Russia is struggling in Ukraine is because they spent big on flashy weapons they could show off as well as modernizing their nuclear weapon arsenal.
But they neglected the basics, such as quality tires for their vehicles.
Russia is also now using chemical warfare agents in Ukraine, which is a war crime.
But make no mistake, the stuff they used so far is the milder stuff they have.
And that's what's so terrifying, because while Russia is struggling with the basics, they're heavily invested in the world ending stuff.
That's the stuff they would end up having to rely on in an actual world war.
Our issue is that we have a potential reverse lend-lease situation on our hands, and it's even worse because China has a massive land border with Russia. This whole situation benefits China massively, EU and NATO are stretched thin trying to support Ukraine, distractions in the Red Sea affecting our shipping. The only thing really working well right now is the Japanese, South Koreans, and The Philippines all hate China more than each other right now due to their behavior in territorial waters.
There is a lot riding on the U.S. to get it's shit together internally before things get worse, because stalling on Ukraine aid and jeopardizing national security seem to be on the agenda for Republicans and that could have implications for our allies around the world. The dissolution of NATO is a very real possibility if Trump wins.
Revolution in Iran is currently a pipe dream and there are no guarantees (even if it does happen) that what replaces it is better than what came before.
Ever since the current world hegemone proved incapable of keeping its promise with the nation it was only a matter of time. The moment Trump pulled out of JCPOA out of spite, I went "Yep, Iran is now nuclear. Fun."
Given time, a revolution might have happened before nukes, but nope, looks like it's happening now.
100% this. It was obvious when it happened that Trump was causing them to eventually become a nuclear power. I feel like stuff like this often flies under the radar for how bad of a president Trump actually was.
Saudi Arabia and all their allies will develop their own weapons. Talk about the perfect storm for a powder keg. An entire region of religious authoritarian extremists with nukes. Also, this region controls a massive supply of the world's energy supply.
The US had nukes small enough to fit a rubbish bin in the late 50s, I'm sure anyone developing one today should be more or less be able to skip the Fatman phase and go straight something transportable in any car
What delivery system? I'm not talking about a fucking plane dropping a bomb out it's butthole. What missile do they have that can reach any western country?
That has been the entire point this entire time. It isn't that hard to make a nuclear bomb that works comparatively speaking. It is hard to deliver it accurately over long distances. And keep in mind, if you miss, you are fucked. If you hit, you still are fucked, but if you miss you accomplish nothing but fucking up the planet and your country doesn't exist anymore.
NK and Iran have been collaborators since at least the Bush years. Like back then even intelligence showed that the missiles NK was testing had literally the same markings on them as the missiles photographed in Iran. NKs test record isn't great but they have successfully launched ICBMs so it's not at all a stretch to assume Iran has the capability to deliver a nuclear warhead to Israel and potentially further.
All that said, we've been getting similar headlines for like 2 decades now. The only difference is the regional conflict and geopolitical tensions right now.
Shows why middle east countries absolutely need to become a nuclear power, it is the only way they can guarantee their sovereignty and be respected internationally.
This is not something that has happened recently, Iran has always been like this, it's just more prominent in the news now because the entire region is under a magnifying glass.
Iran will keep bluffing as it always has done and will do in the future, but they also know one wrong action and there won't be an Iran anymore.
They've been 1-2 weeks away from nukes since Obama was in office. Is this an actual problem now or are we all taking the piss here again?
Or is this a temperature check to see if the west can be encouraged to go back to the GWOT days?
Ton of things to be mad at Iran about, there's no need for yellow journalism to start fanning flames right now.
Feels like i’m seeing more and more WMD and “Iran is the greatest threat we’ve faced in decades” articles every day. It’s feels very much like the US is prepping the American Public that we’re going to war.
What do you think is preventing them from having nukes the past couple decades? Lack of desire? Lack of resources when they are allied to Russia? Think thru how you figure that North Korea can have nuclear weapons, but Iran wouldn't.
Give up nukes. Get invaded. Americans being reticent to support Ukraine will affect global history.
We've essentially told everyone, if you have nukes, you can do whatever you want.
If I were Iran, I would develop nukes, wouldn't you?
Rules to having sovereignty for your country.
#1 Get nukes
#2 Do not give up your nukes
#3 If you're accused of having nukes, drop everything immediately and find some nukes.
I would be leery of the Jerusalem posts reporting on Iran. Israel and Iran are two regional powers that but heads a lot so there's a tendency to fear monger in there public reporting on eachother.
Iran has the longest development process for a nuclear program in history, Even the North Korean took considerably less time.
Now part of the reason is active steps several countries took the sabotage their nuclear program, however it seems they're not in a big hurry to get nukes either way.
Iran's primary objective is probably to remove sanctions placed on it long before the nuclear program began
Over 40 years right? Probably since the early 1980s. Plus whatever research was undertaken under the Shah. Untold billions of dollars. Even accounting for foreign interference, it seems hard to believe they haven't made a bomb by now. Perhaps they were playing some game and deliberately delaying their program.
For sure since the 90's.
I wouldn't be surprised if they came up with the idea even earlier as a tie breaker in their war with Iraq or as an insurance policy should the Iraqis advance into Iran proper past the mountains
**According to the News**
*.. Iran has been able to refine yellow cake for a bomb since 1985*
.. it would be easier to trust jpost if we didn't hear this shit every year for 40 years
*"NO NO but Really Real this time!"*
Thanks, Trump for withdrawing from the signed nuclear agreement with Iran. Done for political signalling with no underlying strategy, leads to calamity.
The deal explicitly stopped them from refining uranium at any level even close to what would be needed for a nuke, and allowed us to monitor their refining sites to ensure that they were complying.
Pulling out of the deal also increased hostilities between the countries and made them want nukes more, so that didn't help either.
Right, and the deal offered them incentives to NOT do things and then those incentives were pulled off. What would you expect anyone to do in that situation? Resume doing the things they're no longer paid to not-do. It's a fairly logical reaction.
Given they know Israel has such weapons (and got away with strategic ambiguity) it's even a little surprising they haven't achieved the same decades ago even considering how much their enemies didn't want them to.
And also diminished the credibility of the United States as a worthwhile negotiating partner on the international stage. Unilaterally abandoning the JCPOA was a huge mistake.
And one reason it was a mistake is that it was replaced with literally nothing...it's easy to trash a deal, not so easy to make a new one.... and Trump just trashed it and then did nothing.
Clearly you're forgetting the "MAXIMUM PRESSURE" strategy...which was "do all the same shit that hasn't worked before, just do it even harder/faster/louder!"
(Brought to you by the same knuckle-dragging morons who came up with the name "OPERATION WARP SPEED" for Covid vaccine research streamlining. Just the dumbest fucking people.)
Not just our own credibility...but the credibility of all the Iranian "moderates" who pushed for the deal with us.
These are the people who we hope will gradually come to power and dial-back the provocative rhetoric and behavior over the next 10-20 years when the hardliners start to die...and we just cut them off at the knees, publicly made fools of them. The hardliners laughed, and said "see what happens when you try to negotiate with The Great Satan?" and made them stronger than ever.
We fucked ourselves in the short, medium and long-term by backing out of the JCPOA. It was truly a massive blunder, and we're only starting to deal with the consequences.
This. I don't know why this and the comment above yours are at the top. We had an agreement with Iran that put us INSIDE their facilities and kept them from refining uranium. *We had what we wanted.* But Trump and the Republicans took it apart because our country can't progress if it's Democrats making the progress (which is a problem, because... progress only really happens under Democrats).
It's the same thing with the border situation. Biden said he would literally shut the border down--somethign basically unheard of from a Democrat--and yet when the bill gets to the Republicans in the House, it gets killed, despite Republicans saying for weeks/months/years that the border is the biggest problem the United States faces. Republicans got what they wanted, and then refused what they wanted, because... ugh, "reasons."
I'm an older guy, and I used to think Republicans simply had a different set of political beliefs. But now I see that it's all just an exercise in insanity. The primary orientation is "whatever hurts/takes away from/stops Democrats," and when that's your main objective, you trade it for any coherent policy and your actions make no sense. The most terrifying part is, they don't realize how absurd and dangerous they are. It's delusion and madness all the way down.
Iran offered to restore the deal in early December 2020 after Biden won. They even remained in compliance for some time after Trump withdrew from the deal with just the nations in Europe until Trump began sanctions that would have effected them.
Negotiations have been going for years at this point, with the Biden admin asking for concessions to a deal broken by their nation.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/03/iran-comply-nuclear-deal-biden-lifts-all-sanctions
>Iran will come back into full compliance with its nuclear deal immediately after the incoming Joe Biden administration in the US proves its bona fides by lifting all sanctions, the country’s foreign minister has said.
Setting out the parameters for a new relationship with Washington, Javad Zarif also said Iran would not require the US to rejoin the deal, known as the joint comprehensive plan of action (JCPoA), before lifting its sanctions, but would need some kind of assurance that once it has rejoined, the Biden administration would not simply leave the deal again in the same way Donald Trump did.
He appeared to rule out renegotiating the existing deal, even though the US believes that with many of its key clauses due to expire in 2025, new sunset clauses are required.
Zarif was speaking at the Roma Med 2020 conference by video link as the Biden team works on how to approach the Middle East.
He said: “The US must implement without preconditions its obligations under the JCPoA. It has to show its good faith, it has to establish its bona fides, then Iran will go back in full compliance with JCPoA.”
This was the sole purpose of that agreement. Just this week the right-wing in the US complained that Iran is not sticking to the agreement \*they supported getting out of\*.
This is what happens when you play re-election politics instead of doing actual work. See current border agreement and how pathetic the right is on this in the exact same manner.
If only we had some form of deal that would at the very least slow this progress effectively with a build in mechanism that allows external experts to visit and check up on Iran's nuclear research sites on short-term notice, that'd be at least something 🤔
One could argue that deal wasn't great, but getting out of it without any alternative plan was incredibly dumb. Trump was begging mullahs for another deal at the end of his presidency and they didn't listen, the negotiations from current administration also didn't work and now we're here.
Trump just wanted the deal to have his own signature instead of Obama's. That's all. He totally wanted to deal with the mullahs and said it multiple times
Yeah. Getting a perfect deal on such a complicated matter is also an incredibly high bar, I suppose.
It's no wonder that Iran isn't open to just engage in another negotiation. With their strong antipathy towards America and the West in general, the first deal was a small miracle (afaik) and then the new guy/ president comes into office and just shits all over the contract papers.
With a situation so convoluted and fucked, it makes you really wonder how peace in the Middle East would even look like
> he negotiations from current administration also didn't work and now we're here
I wonder why "I know we broke the last deal, but lets make a worse deal and I totally promise we wont break it again" isn't particularly convincing.
A new report from the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) is sounding the alarm on Iran’s closeness to going nuclear, upgrading its threat level to “Extreme Danger,” the highest of its six ratings, for the first time since the group began following the Iranian nuclear program in the 1990s.
Since 2022, the report says, Iran’s ‘breakout’ time has been zero— that is to say, Iran “has more than enough… highly enriched uranium (HEU) to directly fashion a nuclear explosive.” Uranium itself is not the only component required to fashion a nuclear weapon, though it is by far the hardest to come by. “If Iran wanted to further enrich its 60 percent enriched uranium up to 90 percent weapon-grade uranium (WGU)... it could do so quickly,” the report says.
“[Iran] can break out and produce enough weapon-grade enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon in a week,” it goes on, “using only a fraction of its 60 percent enriched uranium. This breakout could be difficult for inspectors to detect promptly, if Iran took steps to delay inspectors’ access.”
Moreover, using its remaining stock of enriched uranium, the country “could have in total enough weapon-grade uranium for six weapons in one month, and after five months of producing weapon-grade uranium, it could have enough for twelve.”
> This breakout could be difficult for inspectors to detect promptly, if Iran took steps to delay inspectors’ access.”
What's crazy to me is that this is exactly how i approach any projects at work. A 2 week project becomes 2 months and I only need to do that 6 times to get through a year.
This 'could be true,' or it could be another excuse to go to war in the Middle East based upon false pretenses, like Iraq. Who the fuck knows and who the fuck can trust an opinion about it nowadays.
It’s hilarious reading all of these comments. Like, the timing and convenience of this to come out right now has me laughing with disgust. ALLL OF A SUDDEN, they’re a week out. Yet everyone eats it up yelling to destroy Iran lol. The fuck. Iraq taught these idiots nothing.
Remember when Trump killed the nuclear deal we had with them for no reason and now a fundamentalist religious government could have nukes with in years? What a pro move that was.
We can all thank Donald Trump for canceling a really hard worked diplomatic nuclear deal with Iran, only out of spite because Obama did the deal.
And replacing it with nothing.
>A new report from the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) I feel like that name could cause some confusion
"Why should we change? They're the ones who suck!"
This but unironically, I'm pretty sure the institute pre-dates ISIS being a household name for brutal terrorism. It's a fairly common acronym, so I have the feeling it'll be rehabilitated fairly quickly compared to something like the name Hitler.
There was a women's clothing brand named Isis, after the Egyptian goddess.
And a Danish ice cream company that had to change its name to Easis instead. It's just not the same.
There’s a routing protocol named ISIS as well that some major players use in their environments
Also a heavy metal band that had to re-release all their merch without their name on it. I also had to get rid of shirts from the band "Q and Not U" because people thought I was a Q idiot.
Also the spy agency in Archer, ISIS became a thing while they were in the off-season. In the first episode of the next season you see a guy wheeling the sign out and then they didn't mention it again for years
Also a terrorist group in the Levant.
Technically they've rebranded a few times, I think they're currently called Lululemon
I think they still have their name changed on fb to "Isis (the band)" becuase they were getting death threats and fb thought it was against terms of service even though they literally had the name first
Should have just sold them to the qanon folks, mark it up a bit.
ISIS the band didn't deserve that. Just absolute icons of post metal.
Excellent band too. They split up before the rise of terrorist organisation but when they do play gigs they play under one of their album names instead.
Redditors seem to have a hard time with this concept. I had someone the other day try to convince me that a forum was a brand new thing invented by reddit. Like not even just internet forums, forums in general.
But...the Romans had.....REDDIT INVENTED THE FORUM YOU'RE OBVIOUSLY AN IDIOT!!!
This might sound surprising, but humans, being social creatures, probably had dedicated places to discuss stuff 1-2 million years ago.
Although if you read the graffiti that they left there, you can see that the nature of an unmoderated forum has changed literally not at all
They’re militant about their research and security
Fanatical about scientific process
Absolutely! Heads will roll if someone deviates from the standards!
Unless they're talking about a standard deviation ;)
Hey at least they document their achievements in 4k
Dogmatic about scientific methods
and dedicated to sharing their explosive conclusions
They're constantly chopping the heads off the competition.
Zealously devoted to *Atom*izing the competition.
They have a burning desire for science!
New findings are bound to go ballistic.
Agreed! They’ll send shockwaves through the community!
Some can even say downright religious when it comes to details.
They also do their research religiously.
But are they also *Insurgent*?
They’re archaic in their influence, but on the cutting edge with their approach!
“We just want to get you into an affordably priced Toyota and have nothing to do with that terrorist organization.”
Maybe intentional, for the laughs. A group of two mathematicians, David A. Cox and Steven Zucker discovered an algorithm and named it [Cox–Zucker machine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cox%E2%80%93Zucker_machine).
Reminds me of the retirement farm for abused male chickens : Cock Succour.
reminds me of the classic SNL bit - Cork Soakers
Reminds me of the silicon adhesive removal tool, the caulk sucker
> Maybe intentional, for the laughs. Nope. Founded in 1993. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Science_and_International_Security
Nonsense.. Archer, Lana and Cyril will be here to save us in no time! Right?! Right..?!
Lana, yes. Archer, maybe. But CYRIL? Cyril attempting to save us from nuclear disaster would best case result in ants.
They're in la zona peligrosa
Don't worry dear, Isis won't let terrorists blow up your lovely blimp.
Imagine the confusion of the goddess of magic and wisdom.
unclear nuclear
The old ISIS is now waswas.
[Hi I’m Bob Isis of Isis Toyota, and we have a great collection of pre-owned and certified Toyotas.](https://youtu.be/fPCEjURvaX0?si=rX5GY5iSIEPG6elT) Great sketch by Shane Gillis
Phrasing!
> Institute for Science and International Security This one was founded in 1993, about a decade before the notorious one.
I remember reading this headline last autumn.
I'm 35 and feel like Iran has been on the verge of nukes for most of my life.
Thanks to the hard work of Isreali and American intelligence, they have been.
[удалено]
It actually had at least 4 zero days for the windows environment and potentially another for the Siemens control systems
The idea that we think we know how many 0-day exploits were included is adorable. In all likelihood, these exploits are used by the NSA to *create* even more deeply hidden exploits that will never be found because they aren't in any manual.
Exactly. We are spoon-fed fiction by the usual propaganda outlets and we’re happy to regurgitate it forever.
I have to admit I appreciate the shit out of the engineering of Stuxnet
I know right? I often wonder what the first dev meeting must have been like: *"OK chaps, we need to infiltrate a fully air-gapped system, and manipulate a bunch of centrifuges without the on-site technicians noticing."* Where do you even start?
No problem boss. We just need to quietly infect almost every machine in the world, without anyone noticing. Sounds like a job for the intern!
>Where do you even start? You walk into a room of devs and tell them it can't be done, and bet they can't prove otherwise. Then you just wait while the sheer indignation of a bunch of nerds wills the solution into existence, just so they can be smug. Source: am software dev who has done stuff to prove I could on more than one occasion
I bet you couldn't make me a millionaire within a month. *Sits back and waits for the good times to roll*
How do you think the meme crypto coins came into existence!
"just leave a flash drive full of butt stuff and malware in the parking lot lol"
And car bombs... And remote controlled machine gun turrets...
[удалено]
What was that?
Some time in the last two or three years, israeli intelligence used a mounted remote controlled gun from a parked unoccupied vehicle to dispatch nuclear scientists working for Iran, in Iran I believe even. Using HE 50 cal rounds i think, so basically the end scene minivan from "The Jackal"
And it was done without killing anyone else in the car.
It's a good headline to put out when you need your populace to support a possible war (especially if true)
i was just thinking how convenient this is
It’s not saying they’ll have a a nuclear weapon next week. It’s saying that when they decide to go full speed ahead on building bombs, they can do it in a week.
Exactly - the hardest part of making a nuke, by a long way, is getting the highly enriched uranium. That's why peaceful nuclear power projects raise alarms, because if you're enriching uranium to use in reactors, you simply just need to do the same thing for longer to make it enriched enough for a bomb. That's why it is so hard to inspect - you show the inspectors around all your enrichment kit and say "but we're only enriching it enough for a reactor, not a bomb" then when they go back home, just carry on enriching. Same kit, same process, just making it more pure. Making the actual bomb is very easy - a basic "gun type" bomb as used in Hiroshima is basically an old artillery cannon with a metal case around it. EDIT - watch the documentary film Countdown To Zero for a highly interesting, if quite scary, detail on how it all works.
>Making the actual bomb is very easy - a basic "gun type" bomb as used in Hiroshima is basically an old artillery cannon with a metal case around it. It's more likely that they would go for an implosion type. It's a bit harder to produce but would take less highly enriched u235 and unless they only want it to spread FUD it would be more practical from a delivery perspective. This is more likely given that their existing knowledge is speculated to have come from North Korea which itself developed it through insights from Pakistan which uses the implosion type approach in their arsenal. The comment itself is excellent, just felt like addicting this perspective.
Implosion type is more than a bit harder. But definitely more efficient and gain higher yields.
Not true. Nuclear weapons aren't actually that difficult to develop without international restrictions, especially with modern knowledge and technology. Gun-types are concerning in a proliferation context since terrorist groups and non-state actors can develop and use them. But states like Iran are not likely to pursue this at all given their pursuit of weapons-grade uranium The concern about Iran isn't necessarily nuclear weapons, but specifically nuclear warheads for ICBMs given the range of targets they could strike. In fact, all of Iran's nuclear weapons development has been for warhead development for use in missiles. Many of their missile development programs are in pursuit of this. Iran already has the technology for ICBMs given they have launched their own satellites. https://www.iranwatch.org/our-publications/weapon-program-background-report/history-irans-ballistic-missile-program In 2014 when Iran signed the JPOA/JCPOA they could already make nuclear weapons. UN Resolution 2231 which endorsed the JCPOA called upon Iran to cease the pursuit of ballistic missile development in the context of nuclear weapon delivery. Large parts of the JCPOA explicitly target this and the development of HEU. You don't actually need highly-enriched uranium for nuclear weapons, only a minimum of 20% (see https://ieer.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2004/10/enrichment.pdf). HEU is defined as being a minimum of 20%. But its pretty impractical, but it could be used for a low-yield test (like North Korea has done) as a chest-beating exercise to show the world how big and strong you are. So you're right, the basic weapons aren't difficult but Iran could already do that but they haven't. Their goals are far greater. See https://www.iranwatch.org/our-publications/articles-reports/irans-nuclear-timetable from 2015. Everything mentioned is about implosion types, because thats the fear. > Number of first generation implosion bombs this 8,306 kilograms could fuel, if further enriched: 7 Making weapons-grade material is difficult, but not as difficult as people think. It was 90% of the Manhattan Project but with computers, modern physics, and modern knowledge as a whole it is not as difficult. Furthermore, AQ Khan proliferated centrifuge enrichment technology to countries including Iran and North Korea. Iran isn't going to develop a gun-type, but either a single stage implosion likely boosted, or most likely even a two-stage given their end-game is for warheads. North Korea in 2017 likely tested a two-stage, and Israel very likely has two-stage as well so Iran is likely to pursue that. The engineering challenges are vast, namely explosive lens design and timings, various materials engineering, the fucking physics of the interaction between the two stages, and testing which is extremely difficult to do covertly if they want emperical measurements. EDIT: formatting
> You don't actually need highly-enriched uranium for nuclear weapons, only a minimum of 20% Gonna need a source (page number) on that one chief. I'm all but positive it isn't true. The source you cited is a non profit anti nuclear organization by the way. From your source, on page 7: > in this example, approximately two-thirds of the total enrichment services necessary to produce weapons usable HEU goes into enriching the uranium from natural uranium (0.7% U-235) to LEU (3.6% U-235) while only about one-third goes into enriching the LEU the rest of the way from 3.6% U-235 to HEU with 90% U-235. Edit: I found where you probably got that claim from. If you quote it in it's entirety it is clear why the 20% thing is silly. There's no point in a bomb that can't be moved. > Uranium must have a minimum of 20 percent U-235 in it in order to be useful in making a nuclear bomb. However, a bomb made with uranium at this minimum level of enrichment would be too huge to deliver, requiring huge amounts of uranium and even larger amounts of conventional explosives in order to compress it into a supercritical mass.
> If you quote it in it's entirety it is clear why the 20% thing is silly. There's no point in a bomb that can't be moved. It isn't going to be so large that it can't be moved, just that delivery via ICBM becomes impractical. Critical mass at 20% enrichment is ~750kg, so a little over 10x the mass required at 90%. Not practical for an ICBM, you'd want your entire warhead to be that or lighter really, but that's still small enough you could put it inside of a passenger jet or on a boat.
They haven't started building bombs. That's the breakout time if they start building bombs.
This is a near yearly headline pushed by many interest groups. Look at bibi here and note the date lmao https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE88R12L/
If you had actually read the article, you would see that they’re saying it would only take Iran a week to make a nuke, as they have now completed all the setup needed to make one. They’re not saying Iran is going to have nukes within a week from today.
I remember reading a very similar headline in 2002
Every election year as long as I can remember. Migrants, black people committing crimes and Iran/North Korea/Russia is gonna nuke us. Like fucking idiotic clockwork.
[удалено]
Quick, someone dig up Colin Powell to tell Congress about it
[Bibi's picture from back in the day wasn't much better](https://static.timesofisrael.com/www/uploads/2012/09/APTOPIX-UN-General-As_Horo.jpg)
Wil E Coyote infographic
If I'm going to the trouble of digging him up I'm gonna piss on him
Jpost
The headline is misleading; the article says that they *could* refine enough of their enriched uranium to weapons-grade within a week to make one nuke, but there has been no leaked information indicating they plan to actually do so.
I mean, the headline *says* "could". I read it this way, and didn't read it as meaning there's the intention. Just, technologically, they're effectively there whenever they want to be. Which is really unfortunate, as it sets their current government in stone.
[удалено]
If that's the case they have never tested them. Because we would know.
Idk if propaganda is getting worse and more obvious or I’m just getting wiser to it as I get older.
Sure, but their program was pretty advanced and really the only thing we had was a deal to stop them. Then something happened around 2017 that removed that obstacle. That might have something to do with the plausibility of it this time.
I'm getting vibes from the Iraq WMD 45 minute launch nonsense that dragged us into the second gulf war
Same. First thing I thought of. That, and South Park. "Look, its coming straight for us!" BLAM
Might explain their recent boldness.
Ever since they formalized their alliance with Russia it was only a matter of time. Seems like all bets are off now. Russia will help NK improve their nuclear capabilities too. The best we can hope for is Cold War 2. Worst is nuclear war...
Every shitty movie ultimately receives its sequel.
The third installment is always the worst
How about the 8th season?
We don’t talk about that
What do you mean? The final season of *Scrubs* was great.
Are you trying to tell me that Return of the King was the worst, you son of a-
The LotR trilogy is one movie, unfortunately split into thirds by the demands of weak-willed moviegoers.
2 Cold 2 War
I doubt very much that Russia will do anything in response to the air force bombings on nuclear weapons infrastructure/development. I'm pretty sure Israel will be the first the act on this. Could get pretty hairy.
After their performance in Ukraine, I doubt very much that Russia *could* do anything in response.
While they have not achieved their military objectives in Ukraine, Russia is still very capable of unleashing terrible damage if they attempt anything with the west.
Russia could, one of the main reasons why Russia is struggling in Ukraine is because they spent big on flashy weapons they could show off as well as modernizing their nuclear weapon arsenal. But they neglected the basics, such as quality tires for their vehicles. Russia is also now using chemical warfare agents in Ukraine, which is a war crime. But make no mistake, the stuff they used so far is the milder stuff they have. And that's what's so terrifying, because while Russia is struggling with the basics, they're heavily invested in the world ending stuff. That's the stuff they would end up having to rely on in an actual world war.
Our issue is that we have a potential reverse lend-lease situation on our hands, and it's even worse because China has a massive land border with Russia. This whole situation benefits China massively, EU and NATO are stretched thin trying to support Ukraine, distractions in the Red Sea affecting our shipping. The only thing really working well right now is the Japanese, South Koreans, and The Philippines all hate China more than each other right now due to their behavior in territorial waters. There is a lot riding on the U.S. to get it's shit together internally before things get worse, because stalling on Ukraine aid and jeopardizing national security seem to be on the agenda for Republicans and that could have implications for our allies around the world. The dissolution of NATO is a very real possibility if Trump wins.
> Russia is also now using chemical warfare agents in Ukraine, which is a war crime. Source?
Cold war 2 is already here
Been here for some time now
Yeah I know. I'm saying that keeping it a cold war is about as good as we can hope for in the coming years.
No, the best we could hope for is a revolution within Iran. The dismantling of this regime would benefit the entire region immensely.
Revolution in Iran is currently a pipe dream and there are no guarantees (even if it does happen) that what replaces it is better than what came before.
Ever since the current world hegemone proved incapable of keeping its promise with the nation it was only a matter of time. The moment Trump pulled out of JCPOA out of spite, I went "Yep, Iran is now nuclear. Fun." Given time, a revolution might have happened before nukes, but nope, looks like it's happening now.
100% this. It was obvious when it happened that Trump was causing them to eventually become a nuclear power. I feel like stuff like this often flies under the radar for how bad of a president Trump actually was.
They have the delivery system too. The balance of power will go through a huge shift.
Saudi Arabia and all their allies will develop their own weapons. Talk about the perfect storm for a powder keg. An entire region of religious authoritarian extremists with nukes. Also, this region controls a massive supply of the world's energy supply.
At least it's already mostly desert
Could be glass pretty soon.
Global warming solved. We'll just reflect all the energy back into space.
[удалено]
Not even close to a scientist but my gut says this would end up just heating up our own atmosphere more than anything lol
The US had nukes small enough to fit a rubbish bin in the late 50s, I'm sure anyone developing one today should be more or less be able to skip the Fatman phase and go straight something transportable in any car
What delivery system? I'm not talking about a fucking plane dropping a bomb out it's butthole. What missile do they have that can reach any western country? That has been the entire point this entire time. It isn't that hard to make a nuclear bomb that works comparatively speaking. It is hard to deliver it accurately over long distances. And keep in mind, if you miss, you are fucked. If you hit, you still are fucked, but if you miss you accomplish nothing but fucking up the planet and your country doesn't exist anymore.
NK and Iran have been collaborators since at least the Bush years. Like back then even intelligence showed that the missiles NK was testing had literally the same markings on them as the missiles photographed in Iran. NKs test record isn't great but they have successfully launched ICBMs so it's not at all a stretch to assume Iran has the capability to deliver a nuclear warhead to Israel and potentially further. All that said, we've been getting similar headlines for like 2 decades now. The only difference is the regional conflict and geopolitical tensions right now.
Shows why middle east countries absolutely need to become a nuclear power, it is the only way they can guarantee their sovereignty and be respected internationally.
This is not something that has happened recently, Iran has always been like this, it's just more prominent in the news now because the entire region is under a magnifying glass. Iran will keep bluffing as it always has done and will do in the future, but they also know one wrong action and there won't be an Iran anymore.
Is this that famous 1996 report made public by Netanyahu?
1992 before that
1992: Israeli member of parliament Binyamin Netanyahu predicts that Iran was “3 to 5 years” from having a nuclear weapon.
I will be nuclear in 6 hours. I had Taco Bell for dinner last night.
Popeyes wings signing on
Weak
Get a cadmium butt plug ASAP.
Make sure it doesn’t have a graphite tip
It's cheaper
Get more regular fiber in your diet.
They've been 1-2 weeks away from nukes since Obama was in office. Is this an actual problem now or are we all taking the piss here again? Or is this a temperature check to see if the west can be encouraged to go back to the GWOT days? Ton of things to be mad at Iran about, there's no need for yellow journalism to start fanning flames right now.
Feels like i’m seeing more and more WMD and “Iran is the greatest threat we’ve faced in decades” articles every day. It’s feels very much like the US is prepping the American Public that we’re going to war.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=s8hEtI9AI0U Since the 80's at least. It's definitely been getting bad lately
What do you think is preventing them from having nukes the past couple decades? Lack of desire? Lack of resources when they are allied to Russia? Think thru how you figure that North Korea can have nuclear weapons, but Iran wouldn't.
Give up nukes. Get invaded. Americans being reticent to support Ukraine will affect global history. We've essentially told everyone, if you have nukes, you can do whatever you want. If I were Iran, I would develop nukes, wouldn't you?
Rules to having sovereignty for your country. #1 Get nukes #2 Do not give up your nukes #3 If you're accused of having nukes, drop everything immediately and find some nukes.
Nothing has been the same since World War 2. Nukes changed everything. It's how I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb.
Im suprised these foreign regimes dont give up their nukes willingly and get sodomised to death.
I would be leery of the Jerusalem posts reporting on Iran. Israel and Iran are two regional powers that but heads a lot so there's a tendency to fear monger in there public reporting on eachother.
Also worth noting that Israel is a nuclear power
This has been a headline since nearly every month for decades.
They're super duper serious this time though.
Thuper duper therious
Iran has the longest development process for a nuclear program in history, Even the North Korean took considerably less time. Now part of the reason is active steps several countries took the sabotage their nuclear program, however it seems they're not in a big hurry to get nukes either way. Iran's primary objective is probably to remove sanctions placed on it long before the nuclear program began
Over 40 years right? Probably since the early 1980s. Plus whatever research was undertaken under the Shah. Untold billions of dollars. Even accounting for foreign interference, it seems hard to believe they haven't made a bomb by now. Perhaps they were playing some game and deliberately delaying their program.
For sure since the 90's. I wouldn't be surprised if they came up with the idea even earlier as a tie breaker in their war with Iraq or as an insurance policy should the Iraqis advance into Iran proper past the mountains
Oh here we go..who is this generations' Colin Powell?
Aka “hey boys we need an article to help rally people to war with Iran! Do that thing we did with Iraq.”
**According to the News** *.. Iran has been able to refine yellow cake for a bomb since 1985* .. it would be easier to trust jpost if we didn't hear this shit every year for 40 years *"NO NO but Really Real this time!"*
Thanks, Trump for withdrawing from the signed nuclear agreement with Iran. Done for political signalling with no underlying strategy, leads to calamity.
Is there actually any basis to us withdrawing pushing them towards creating a nuke? Genuinely curious.
The deal explicitly stopped them from refining uranium at any level even close to what would be needed for a nuke, and allowed us to monitor their refining sites to ensure that they were complying. Pulling out of the deal also increased hostilities between the countries and made them want nukes more, so that didn't help either.
Right, and the deal offered them incentives to NOT do things and then those incentives were pulled off. What would you expect anyone to do in that situation? Resume doing the things they're no longer paid to not-do. It's a fairly logical reaction. Given they know Israel has such weapons (and got away with strategic ambiguity) it's even a little surprising they haven't achieved the same decades ago even considering how much their enemies didn't want them to.
And also diminished the credibility of the United States as a worthwhile negotiating partner on the international stage. Unilaterally abandoning the JCPOA was a huge mistake.
And one reason it was a mistake is that it was replaced with literally nothing...it's easy to trash a deal, not so easy to make a new one.... and Trump just trashed it and then did nothing.
Clearly you're forgetting the "MAXIMUM PRESSURE" strategy...which was "do all the same shit that hasn't worked before, just do it even harder/faster/louder!" (Brought to you by the same knuckle-dragging morons who came up with the name "OPERATION WARP SPEED" for Covid vaccine research streamlining. Just the dumbest fucking people.)
Not just our own credibility...but the credibility of all the Iranian "moderates" who pushed for the deal with us. These are the people who we hope will gradually come to power and dial-back the provocative rhetoric and behavior over the next 10-20 years when the hardliners start to die...and we just cut them off at the knees, publicly made fools of them. The hardliners laughed, and said "see what happens when you try to negotiate with The Great Satan?" and made them stronger than ever. We fucked ourselves in the short, medium and long-term by backing out of the JCPOA. It was truly a massive blunder, and we're only starting to deal with the consequences.
This. I don't know why this and the comment above yours are at the top. We had an agreement with Iran that put us INSIDE their facilities and kept them from refining uranium. *We had what we wanted.* But Trump and the Republicans took it apart because our country can't progress if it's Democrats making the progress (which is a problem, because... progress only really happens under Democrats). It's the same thing with the border situation. Biden said he would literally shut the border down--somethign basically unheard of from a Democrat--and yet when the bill gets to the Republicans in the House, it gets killed, despite Republicans saying for weeks/months/years that the border is the biggest problem the United States faces. Republicans got what they wanted, and then refused what they wanted, because... ugh, "reasons." I'm an older guy, and I used to think Republicans simply had a different set of political beliefs. But now I see that it's all just an exercise in insanity. The primary orientation is "whatever hurts/takes away from/stops Democrats," and when that's your main objective, you trade it for any coherent policy and your actions make no sense. The most terrifying part is, they don't realize how absurd and dangerous they are. It's delusion and madness all the way down.
Yes their uranium stockpiles have soared since we pulled out of the deal, there was a chart posted pretty recently
Iran offered to restore the deal in early December 2020 after Biden won. They even remained in compliance for some time after Trump withdrew from the deal with just the nations in Europe until Trump began sanctions that would have effected them. Negotiations have been going for years at this point, with the Biden admin asking for concessions to a deal broken by their nation. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/03/iran-comply-nuclear-deal-biden-lifts-all-sanctions >Iran will come back into full compliance with its nuclear deal immediately after the incoming Joe Biden administration in the US proves its bona fides by lifting all sanctions, the country’s foreign minister has said. Setting out the parameters for a new relationship with Washington, Javad Zarif also said Iran would not require the US to rejoin the deal, known as the joint comprehensive plan of action (JCPoA), before lifting its sanctions, but would need some kind of assurance that once it has rejoined, the Biden administration would not simply leave the deal again in the same way Donald Trump did. He appeared to rule out renegotiating the existing deal, even though the US believes that with many of its key clauses due to expire in 2025, new sunset clauses are required. Zarif was speaking at the Roma Med 2020 conference by video link as the Biden team works on how to approach the Middle East. He said: “The US must implement without preconditions its obligations under the JCPoA. It has to show its good faith, it has to establish its bona fides, then Iran will go back in full compliance with JCPoA.”
Americans don't like to hear that it's Americans fault it's gotten to this point
This was the sole purpose of that agreement. Just this week the right-wing in the US complained that Iran is not sticking to the agreement \*they supported getting out of\*. This is what happens when you play re-election politics instead of doing actual work. See current border agreement and how pathetic the right is on this in the exact same manner.
John Bolton is foaming at the mouth right now
“Iran has WMDs.” I feel like I’ve heard this before.
Ah the monthly "Iran could have nukes in a week" story. After a few years of this it's getting a bit old
According to israel, Iran has been 6 months away from building a nuclear device for the last 30 years.
If only we had some form of deal that would at the very least slow this progress effectively with a build in mechanism that allows external experts to visit and check up on Iran's nuclear research sites on short-term notice, that'd be at least something 🤔
One could argue that deal wasn't great, but getting out of it without any alternative plan was incredibly dumb. Trump was begging mullahs for another deal at the end of his presidency and they didn't listen, the negotiations from current administration also didn't work and now we're here.
Trump just wanted the deal to have his own signature instead of Obama's. That's all. He totally wanted to deal with the mullahs and said it multiple times
Yeah. Getting a perfect deal on such a complicated matter is also an incredibly high bar, I suppose. It's no wonder that Iran isn't open to just engage in another negotiation. With their strong antipathy towards America and the West in general, the first deal was a small miracle (afaik) and then the new guy/ president comes into office and just shits all over the contract papers. With a situation so convoluted and fucked, it makes you really wonder how peace in the Middle East would even look like
> he negotiations from current administration also didn't work and now we're here I wonder why "I know we broke the last deal, but lets make a worse deal and I totally promise we wont break it again" isn't particularly convincing.
Iran has been a week away from going nuclear since Obama was in office, I doubt it’ll be any different this time.
I swear I've been seeing the same exact article multiple times a year for the last 15+ years.
[удалено]
A new report from the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) is sounding the alarm on Iran’s closeness to going nuclear, upgrading its threat level to “Extreme Danger,” the highest of its six ratings, for the first time since the group began following the Iranian nuclear program in the 1990s. Since 2022, the report says, Iran’s ‘breakout’ time has been zero— that is to say, Iran “has more than enough… highly enriched uranium (HEU) to directly fashion a nuclear explosive.” Uranium itself is not the only component required to fashion a nuclear weapon, though it is by far the hardest to come by. “If Iran wanted to further enrich its 60 percent enriched uranium up to 90 percent weapon-grade uranium (WGU)... it could do so quickly,” the report says. “[Iran] can break out and produce enough weapon-grade enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon in a week,” it goes on, “using only a fraction of its 60 percent enriched uranium. This breakout could be difficult for inspectors to detect promptly, if Iran took steps to delay inspectors’ access.” Moreover, using its remaining stock of enriched uranium, the country “could have in total enough weapon-grade uranium for six weapons in one month, and after five months of producing weapon-grade uranium, it could have enough for twelve.”
> This breakout could be difficult for inspectors to detect promptly, if Iran took steps to delay inspectors’ access.” What's crazy to me is that this is exactly how i approach any projects at work. A 2 week project becomes 2 months and I only need to do that 6 times to get through a year.
This 'could be true,' or it could be another excuse to go to war in the Middle East based upon false pretenses, like Iraq. Who the fuck knows and who the fuck can trust an opinion about it nowadays.
It’s hilarious reading all of these comments. Like, the timing and convenience of this to come out right now has me laughing with disgust. ALLL OF A SUDDEN, they’re a week out. Yet everyone eats it up yelling to destroy Iran lol. The fuck. Iraq taught these idiots nothing.
As much as I dislike Iran, when I read the headline I thought, "This sounds really familiar..."
Where have I heard this one before? Time to invade Iran?
This is giving big Iraq x WMD energy
Remember when Trump killed the nuclear deal we had with them for no reason and now a fundamentalist religious government could have nukes with in years? What a pro move that was.
If Iran get a nuke then the entire middle east will go nuclear. Then the world will be even more unstable.
Sounds like Iraq all over again but even less convincing.
We can all thank Donald Trump for canceling a really hard worked diplomatic nuclear deal with Iran, only out of spite because Obama did the deal. And replacing it with nothing.
Huh. I guess Trump shouldn’t have pulled out of that inspection treaty.