• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

UN Nuclear Watchdog Chief: ‘Night and Day’ Difference Between Iran’s Nuclear Capabilities Before and After US Strikes

trixare4kids said:
The links from the two experts mentioned above are embedded in the above article that will lead the reader to their professional assessments but go ahead and shoot the messenger if you must.

Nobody cares.
Click to expand...
god damn right no one cares for your right-wing links.
 
Absentglare said:
We spent a few hundred million dollars to destroy some centrifuges.
Click to expand...
Direct Military Costs
  • B-2 Spirit Stealth Bombers: 7 were deployed, roughly $150,000 per flight hour.
  • Massive Ordnance Penetrators (MOPs): 14 of these 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs were used. Each costs an estimated $3.5 million.
  • Tomahawk Missiles: 30 were launched from submarines, at about $1.9 million each, totaling $57 million.
  • Total Aircraft Involved: Over 125 U.S. aircraft participated, including F-22s, F-35s, and support planes.
While the Pentagon hasn’t released an official total, estimates suggest the mission alone could exceed $1 billion in operational costs.
 
No such things as "UN nuclear watchdog" , it's just a criminal pseudo-institution subservient to (certain) nuclear powers
 
imo,
- it is still too soon to know for sure the amount of damage done to Iran's nuclear program.
- President Trump might have overstated that the sites were "obliterated"
- Defense Intelligence Agency leaked report and the OP's linked article does not agree with the extent of damage done.
 
trixare4kids said:
No.

And because of the division in this country, I prefer the opinions of the two cited in the O/P.
Click to expand...

Well, according to the article, the evaluations were done using satellite imaging of the location, not boots on the ground. There is only so much one can see using such imagery.

Having some experience with such imagery while serving in the Army, it can be very helpful in many circumstances but may not be as informative as boots on the ground. Having said that, I also understand the issue with radiation that would inhibit an actual walk-through. But remote operated devices might do it.

Still, I can accept the reports at face value, although the Iranians are claiming the damage was not as effective as reported and I'd prefer to remove all doubts.
 
Taylor said:
Ha! It wasn't "obliterated", it was only "significantly set back!" Nobody gets anything past you!
Click to expand...
that seems to be the crux of the debate. Permanently obliterated or significantly set back. both work .
Iran has too many other pressing problems because of the 12 day war to try and reconstitute, or it can throw money into the ground and we'll whack it again.. Israel has said anything it finds in terms of nuke development gets whacked
 

Remember when righties threw a fit over a half-million-dollar missile used to shoot down the Chinese spy balloon?

Now our military-industrial complex just blew a ton more, and the righties are fine with this.
 
So much hope that the US military failed in its mission to destroy Irans capability to nuke an Israel and God knows who else. Fingers crossed. What a joy to read.
 
trixare4kids said:
No.

And because of the division in this country, I prefer the opinions of the two cited in the O/P.
Click to expand...
The Free Beacon came under criticism for its reporting on Fusion GPS. Three days before it was revealed that it was the Free Beacon that had funded the work by Fusion GPS, the Free Beacon wrote that the firm's work "was funded by an unknown GOP client while the primary was still going on."<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Free_Beacon#cite_note-:0-16"><span>[</span>16<span>]</span></a> The Free Beacon has published pieces that have sought to portray the work by Fusion GPS as unreliable "without noting that it considered Fusion GPS reliable enough to pay for its services.

The Washington Free Beacon - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org
 
costs of not doing it? Iran retains development of a nuclear weapon. Spend the $billion
 
They still have highly enriched uranium and suitable facilities to refine it into weapons grade in short order.

They were tipped off.
 
trixare4kids said:
No.

And because of the division in this country, I prefer the opinions of the two cited in the O/P.
Click to expand...
You’re telling on yourself that you are choosing to believe what you want to believe in denying the Pentagon’s assessment.
 
Boots said:
So much hope that the US military failed in its mission to destroy Irans capability to nuke an Israel and God knows who else. Fingers crossed. What a joy to read.
Click to expand...
I wish Trump knew what he was doing and didn’t throw away Irans nuclear agreement for no reason.

I wish you had rooted for the success of the US back then, when it didn’t cost us hundreds of millions of dollars only to be mildly effectual.
 

I'm sure what you are advocating is coming in the days ahead.
 
Anybody remember "It's only a flesh wound". From Mony Python? Sounds a lot like Iran.
 
trixare4kids said:
"it is clear that there is one Iran—before June 13, nuclear Iran—and one now," describing the difference as "night and day."
Click to expand...
A bold, entirely vague claim followed by another entirely vague claim.

"I think the nuclear program, the Iranian nuclear program, has been set back significantly," he said on Fox News. However, Grossi added that he could not say for sure that the program had been set back years. "I don't know what is your metric," he said.

Dude is claiming on one hand that the “Iranian nuclear program has been set back significantly, significantly” by the air strikes, and other acknowledging that he really doesn’t know the extent of the damage done which, of course, he doesn’t.

As IAEA doesn’t have access to the sites hit during the strikes, the organization doesn’t have any more information on the extent of the damage than the U.S. Intel community.

I support preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons, including by acting preemptively with limited/targeted military strikes, but I’m not accepting Grossi’s claims as gospel.
 
RetiredAtLast said:
"The Pentagon's assessment" is a very preliminary review of aerial photos only, marked "Low Confidence."
Click to expand...
Which is normal in the earliest stages of fact/intelligence gathering.

Nobody outside of Iran has (at least not that’s being shared publicly) more knowledge.
 
phoenix2020 said:
The irony here is that Trix is openly declaring that she is going to trust the United Nations over the Trump Administration.
Click to expand...

Well Trump himself said Iran's program was set back by decades, so it must be true. The Administration? Pfff, deep state.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.