DEBUNKED.Sam Lowry said:Like I said, going on 4/4. It's just a matter of time before they resume enriching, assuming they even stopped.GrowlTowel said:Sam Lowry said:They were ready to agree to something like a 5% cap, maybe less. Now they're refusing to negotiate at all. I'll be surprised if they don't weaponize at this point.FLBear5630 said:That's because we will only work with them on civilian uses. They wanted weapons grade, that time has passed.Sam Lowry said:If Iran never trusted us to supply them with enriched uranium before, it seems unlikely that they're going to start now.Realitybites said:
We saw the stick, perhaps we are going to see the carrot.
" President Donald Trump is considering a $30 billion plan to help Iran develop a civilian nuclear program as an incentive to return to full-fledged talks over a nuclear deal, CNN reported on Thursday, citing sources.
Washington and its Middle East partners have been holding secret negotiations with Tehran, even as Iran and Israel exchanged strikes earlier this month, four sources familiar with the matter told the network.
The US reportedly has not dropped its key demand that Iran agree to zero enrichment of uranium, which has been a red line for Tehran. To sweeten the deal, however, Washington is said to have floated several incentives.
These include an estimated $20-30 billion investment project in Iran's nuclear program for civilian energy purposes though the money would not come directly from the US, but rather from its Arab partners, the report claims.
Israel sought to kill Iran's Khamenei defense chief
Other incentives reportedly under consideration include easing some sanctions and allowing Iran access to approximately $6 billion in frozen funds currently held in foreign bank accounts,"
If this is accurate, this will be the most brilliant exercise in US foreign policy since Reagan spanked Khadaffi for the Pan Am bombing without getting involved in a regime change war.
But Bibi, AIPAC, and the neocons are going to have steam coming out of their ears.
Seeing as you are batting about .133 these days, don't you think it is time to put the keyboard down and focus on something you are good at?
War with Iran?
134,897 Views |
2180 Replies |
Last: 4 mo ago by whiterock
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
Psalm 119:36
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
Psalm 119:36
whiterock said:you are imputing to others what you need them to be rather than what they are, have said, etc...muddybrazos said:No, not really. The majority of the MAGA base doesnt want any wars and Trump has been made aware of that so I think he is doing his best to avoid that situation. The war hawks like you and Mark Levin are pushing for all out ww3 so I hope your side ends up disappointed.Mothra said:But your ilk was predicting all of the above.muddybrazos said:I dont know about end of America or the WW3 stuff but I still believe that this whole Iran situation is far from over and Israel will not quit until they do regime change there. I hope the war stuff doesnt escalate and drag us into it, though.Mothra said:Kind of like the chicken little's doom and gloom predictions of the US being "at war," and this being the end of America as we know it, I don't believe this for a second.Realitybites said:
We saw the stick, perhaps we are going to see the carrot.
" President Donald Trump is considering a $30 billion plan to help Iran develop a civilian nuclear program as an incentive to return to full-fledged talks over a nuclear deal, CNN reported on Thursday, citing sources.
Washington and its Middle East partners have been holding secret negotiations with Tehran, even as Iran and Israel exchanged strikes earlier this month, four sources familiar with the matter told the network.
The US reportedly has not dropped its key demand that Iran agree to zero enrichment of uranium, which has been a red line for Tehran. To sweeten the deal, however, Washington is said to have floated several incentives.
These include an estimated $20-30 billion investment project in Iran's nuclear program for civilian energy purposes though the money would not come directly from the US, but rather from its Arab partners, the report claims.
Israel sought to kill Iran's Khamenei defense chief
Other incentives reportedly under consideration include easing some sanctions and allowing Iran access to approximately $6 billion in frozen funds currently held in foreign bank accounts,"
If this is accurate, this will be the most brilliant exercise in US foreign policy since Reagan spanked Khadaffi for the Pan Am bombing without getting involved in a regime change war.
But Bibi, AIPAC, and the neocons are going to have steam coming out of their ears.
You're kind of the boy who cried wolf.
No one here came remotely close to advocating an invasion of Iran. And one was never in the cards anyway. You are apparently not old enough to remember, the First Gulf War. It took us better part of FIVE MONTHS to get deployed to slice up Saddam's army in a few days. We requisitioned civilian sea lift. We requisitioned civilian airlift. Moved an entire Corps plus some (700k troops) into theater. We didn't lift a finger to do anything like that this time. Just moved some ships & aircraft around and staged some fuel & weapons to keep planes in the air to interdict Iranian incoming.
So the "war" everyone screamed about literally could not have happened. But they wanted to have one to ***** about so badly that they 100% conjured one up out of whole cloth.
That is not accurate. We could easily have ramped up, escalating were by week, for months. We could have said our goal was finding the enriched uranium and recovering it. Or that we needed nuclear specialists to actually investigate the sites we bombed, to know how damaged they were.
There was no way we were invading without troop movement, but anyone 25 years old remembers how easy it is for the federal government to convince themselves invasion is good.
historian said:
So in this new deal, we will likely give Iran access to billions we have frozen. When, 10 years from now, they are bombing Israel with the bombs they purchased out of those billions, will you add Trump to your little cartoon?
I'm not Ben Garrison. Maybe you should ask him.
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
Psalm 119:36
FLBear5630 said:When did the Generations flip from rooting for America and our Allies to rooting against?? My liberal daughter and fianc that live in Boston are over and they seem to want American to fail. A group on this Board, seem to want America's enemies to succeed, be it Russia, Palestinians, China, Iran, geez they even defended North Korea before. I don't get it...Sam Lowry said:I agree this is obvious fake news. When the IDF wants to use civilians for target practice, they clearly don't wait for anyone's orders.ShooterTX said:AF Post... really?muddybrazos said:— AF Post (@AFpost) June 27, 2025
The worlds most moral army is just indiscriminately murdering women and children.
Why not just retweet something from the National Inquirer?
The AF Post is famous for posting BS, lies and propaganda. It is totally unreliable.
Conservatives have lost just about all the major culture forming institutions in American life.
The Universities, Hollywood, the large corporate Media, etc
Not really surprising then that what you are seeing is taking place.
Lose the culture war/culture struggle and you will one day lose political power and just about everything else eventually.
Another good reason why real conservatives should focus less on foreign interventions and more on the serious battles of ideas/culture/purpose here at home.
If you like a militarily strong America abroad …you can NOT have that with a USA at home whose kids are taught to hate it and it's history.
Redbrickbear said:
Another good reason why real conservatives should focus less on foreign interventions and more on the serious battles of ideas/culture/purpose here at home.
Well said!
I did not speculate about what we could have done. I merely noted that we did not do ANYthing necessary to go to war. We did not preposition ANY soldiers, armored vehicles, supplies, support infrastructure. Nothing. Zip. Zilch. Nada. An invasion did not happen because one could not have happened. Nothing to invade with. Most of the talking heads screaming about us going to war full well knew that. They were just pandering to their base, and flexing their muscles to protect their positions.Porteroso said:whiterock said:you are imputing to others what you need them to be rather than what they are, have said, etc...muddybrazos said:No, not really. The majority of the MAGA base doesnt want any wars and Trump has been made aware of that so I think he is doing his best to avoid that situation. The war hawks like you and Mark Levin are pushing for all out ww3 so I hope your side ends up disappointed.Mothra said:But your ilk was predicting all of the above.muddybrazos said:I dont know about end of America or the WW3 stuff but I still believe that this whole Iran situation is far from over and Israel will not quit until they do regime change there. I hope the war stuff doesnt escalate and drag us into it, though.Mothra said:Kind of like the chicken little's doom and gloom predictions of the US being "at war," and this being the end of America as we know it, I don't believe this for a second.Realitybites said:
We saw the stick, perhaps we are going to see the carrot.
" President Donald Trump is considering a $30 billion plan to help Iran develop a civilian nuclear program as an incentive to return to full-fledged talks over a nuclear deal, CNN reported on Thursday, citing sources.
Washington and its Middle East partners have been holding secret negotiations with Tehran, even as Iran and Israel exchanged strikes earlier this month, four sources familiar with the matter told the network.
The US reportedly has not dropped its key demand that Iran agree to zero enrichment of uranium, which has been a red line for Tehran. To sweeten the deal, however, Washington is said to have floated several incentives.
These include an estimated $20-30 billion investment project in Iran's nuclear program for civilian energy purposes though the money would not come directly from the US, but rather from its Arab partners, the report claims.
Israel sought to kill Iran's Khamenei defense chief
Other incentives reportedly under consideration include easing some sanctions and allowing Iran access to approximately $6 billion in frozen funds currently held in foreign bank accounts,"
If this is accurate, this will be the most brilliant exercise in US foreign policy since Reagan spanked Khadaffi for the Pan Am bombing without getting involved in a regime change war.
But Bibi, AIPAC, and the neocons are going to have steam coming out of their ears.
You're kind of the boy who cried wolf.
No one here came remotely close to advocating an invasion of Iran. And one was never in the cards anyway. You are apparently not old enough to remember, the First Gulf War. It took us better part of FIVE MONTHS to get deployed to slice up Saddam's army in a few days. We requisitioned civilian sea lift. We requisitioned civilian airlift. Moved an entire Corps plus some (700k troops) into theater. We didn't lift a finger to do anything like that this time. Just moved some ships & aircraft around and staged some fuel & weapons to keep planes in the air to interdict Iranian incoming.
So the "war" everyone screamed about literally could not have happened. But they wanted to have one to ***** about so badly that they 100% conjured one up out of whole cloth.
That is not accurate. We could easily have ramped up, escalating were by week, for months. We could have said our goal was finding the enriched uranium and recovering it. Or that we needed nuclear specialists to actually investigate the sites we bombed, to know how damaged they were.
There was no way we were invading without troop movement, but anyone 25 years old remembers how easy it is for the federal government to convince themselves invasion is good.
You can't "sneak" 750k troops and all their weapons, armor, and supply chain to the far side of the world without someone spotting it. It took 5 months for us to do for 1GW, even with all the requisitions of civilian air/sea lift. Woulda taken years to try to do it the way you suggest (and still get spotted...you can't hide an armored division, much less a half dozen of them).
All we did was conduct flight & refueling operations to help protect Israeli airspace (and by extension Jordanian & Saudi & potentially Egyptian airspace). So did most of the militaries in the region, btw. Several Nato countries, too.... What we did was conduct a robust air defense mission, with allies and for allies, with a single air raid against a strategic target of immense national security significance. Israel did all the grunt work, taking out Iranian aircraft, air defense systems, command & control, etc..... They paved the street for us. (again, proving their worth as an asset).
sure, but it's not possible to be strong militarily around the world without bases around the world. To secure those bases requires relationships. Securing those relationships requires engagement in geopolitical affiars, to include helping allies with problems mostly involving allies. If we don't do that, why wouour allies help us?Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:When did the Generations flip from rooting for America and our Allies to rooting against?? My liberal daughter and fianc that live in Boston are over and they seem to want American to fail. A group on this Board, seem to want America's enemies to succeed, be it Russia, Palestinians, China, Iran, geez they even defended North Korea before. I don't get it...Sam Lowry said:I agree this is obvious fake news. When the IDF wants to use civilians for target practice, they clearly don't wait for anyone's orders.ShooterTX said:AF Post... really?muddybrazos said:— AF Post (@AFpost) June 27, 2025
The worlds most moral army is just indiscriminately murdering women and children.
Why not just retweet something from the National Inquirer?
The AF Post is famous for posting BS, lies and propaganda. It is totally unreliable.
Conservatives have lost just about all the major culture forming institutions in American life.
The Universities, Hollywood, the large corporate Media, etc
Not really surprising then that what you are seeing is taking place.
Lose the culture war/culture struggle and you will one day lose political power and just about everything else eventually.
Another good reason why real conservatives should focus less on foreign interventions and more on the serious battles of ideas/culture/purpose here at home.
If you like a militarily strong America abroad …you can NOT have that with a USA at home whose kids are taught to hate it and it's history.
more importantly, we can't quit doing that abroad just to focus on the war of ideas at home. We have to deal with both problems at once. (and we are making progress, in terms of both substantive policy achievements as well as changing minds on issues. Public polling shows us with plus/minus supermajority support on key agenda items - border, gender, foreign policy, etc....
If you like a militarily strong America abroad …you can NOT have that with a USA at home whose kids are taught to hate it and it's history.Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:When did the Generations flip from rooting for America and our Allies to rooting against?? My liberal daughter and fianc that live in Boston are over and they seem to want American to fail. A group on this Board, seem to want America's enemies to succeed, be it Russia, Palestinians, China, Iran, geez they even defended North Korea before. I don't get it...Sam Lowry said:I agree this is obvious fake news. When the IDF wants to use civilians for target practice, they clearly don't wait for anyone's orders.ShooterTX said:AF Post... really?muddybrazos said:— AF Post (@AFpost) June 27, 2025
The worlds most moral army is just indiscriminately murdering women and children.
Why not just retweet something from the National Inquirer?
The AF Post is famous for posting BS, lies and propaganda. It is totally unreliable.
Conservatives have lost just about all the major culture forming institutions in American life.
The Universities, Hollywood, the large corporate Media, etc
Not really surprising then that what you are seeing is taking place.
Lose the culture war/culture struggle and you will one day lose political power and just about everything else eventually.
Another good reason why real conservatives should focus less on foreign interventions and more on the serious battles of ideas/culture/purpose here at home.
If you like a militarily strong America abroad …you can NOT have that with a USA at home whose kids are taught to hate it and it's history.
You have that right. We want to keep trouble off our shores, to do that you put out OPs. Our bases do that. They allow us to have a presence and keep the battle away.
Are we including your predictions that we are now at war with Iran, akin to Iraq, and will be committing ground troops to the effort in your selective batting average?Sam Lowry said:Like I said, going on 4/4. It's just a matter of time before they resume enriching, assuming they even stopped.GrowlTowel said:Sam Lowry said:They were ready to agree to something like a 5% cap, maybe less. Now they're refusing to negotiate at all. I'll be surprised if they don't weaponize at this point.FLBear5630 said:That's because we will only work with them on civilian uses. They wanted weapons grade, that time has passed.Sam Lowry said:If Iran never trusted us to supply them with enriched uranium before, it seems unlikely that they're going to start now.Realitybites said:
We saw the stick, perhaps we are going to see the carrot.
" President Donald Trump is considering a $30 billion plan to help Iran develop a civilian nuclear program as an incentive to return to full-fledged talks over a nuclear deal, CNN reported on Thursday, citing sources.
Washington and its Middle East partners have been holding secret negotiations with Tehran, even as Iran and Israel exchanged strikes earlier this month, four sources familiar with the matter told the network.
The US reportedly has not dropped its key demand that Iran agree to zero enrichment of uranium, which has been a red line for Tehran. To sweeten the deal, however, Washington is said to have floated several incentives.
These include an estimated $20-30 billion investment project in Iran's nuclear program for civilian energy purposes though the money would not come directly from the US, but rather from its Arab partners, the report claims.
Israel sought to kill Iran's Khamenei defense chief
Other incentives reportedly under consideration include easing some sanctions and allowing Iran access to approximately $6 billion in frozen funds currently held in foreign bank accounts,"
If this is accurate, this will be the most brilliant exercise in US foreign policy since Reagan spanked Khadaffi for the Pan Am bombing without getting involved in a regime change war.
But Bibi, AIPAC, and the neocons are going to have steam coming out of their ears.
Seeing as you are batting about .133 these days, don't you think it is time to put the keyboard down and focus on something you are good at?
LOL. You're like the Baghdad Bob of predictions - full of *****
Living rent free in Chicken Little's head...The_barBEARian said:I asked a boomer lady if she was proud to be White and she crashed out. pic.twitter.com/udTZnzVnvY
— Hermes (@chaotichermes) June 28, 2025
Mothra seemed to be enjoying the beach until this obnoxious content creator started asking too many questions.
For those familiar with Sam, he's always rooted against US interests. Ever since he's been on this board.FLBear5630 said:When did the Generations flip from rooting for America and our Allies to rooting against?? My liberal daughter and fianc that live in Boston are over and they seem to want American to fail. A group on this Board, seem to want America's enemies to succeed, be it Russia, Palestinians, China, Iran, geez they even defended North Korea before. I don't get it...Sam Lowry said:I agree this is obvious fake news. When the IDF wants to use civilians for target practice, they clearly don't wait for anyone's orders.ShooterTX said:AF Post... really?muddybrazos said:— AF Post (@AFpost) June 27, 2025
The worlds most moral army is just indiscriminately murdering women and children.
Why not just retweet something from the National Inquirer?
The AF Post is famous for posting BS, lies and propaganda. It is totally unreliable.
That idea is so foreign to me, I just don't get it. You take the good with the bad, there are always things that don't go your way, so you root against your Country and their allies? But than again, seeing Iraqi trucks loaded with Kuwait's medical equipment (MRIs, CAD scanners, etc...) and the oil fires they set sort of made an impression on just how bad these people can be.
UN nuclear watchdog chief says Iran could again begin enriching uranium in 'matter of months'
By Laura Sharman and Sophie Tanno, CNN
The head of the UN's nuclear watchdog says US strikes on Iran fell short of causing total damage to its nuclear program and that Tehran could restart enriching uranium "in a matter of months," contradicting President Donald Trump's claims the US set Tehran's ambitions back by decades.
Rafael Grossi's comments appear to support an early assessment from the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency, first reported by CNN, which suggests the United States' strikes on key Iranian nuclear sites last week did not destroy the core components of its nuclear program, and likely only set it back by months.
Grossi also told CBS News that the IAEA has resisted pressure to say whether Iran has nuclear weapons or was close to having weapons before the strikes.
"We didn't see a program that was aiming in that direction (of nuclear weapons), but at the same time, they were not answering very, very important questions that were pending."
Meanwhile, Tehran has made moves towards withdrawing from international oversight over its nuclear program.
Iran's parliament passed a bill halting cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog, while the Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, also said that the country could also rethink its membership of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which prohibits signatories from developing nuclear weapons.
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/06/29/world/iaea-iran-enriched-uranium-intl
By Laura Sharman and Sophie Tanno, CNN
The head of the UN's nuclear watchdog says US strikes on Iran fell short of causing total damage to its nuclear program and that Tehran could restart enriching uranium "in a matter of months," contradicting President Donald Trump's claims the US set Tehran's ambitions back by decades.
Rafael Grossi's comments appear to support an early assessment from the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency, first reported by CNN, which suggests the United States' strikes on key Iranian nuclear sites last week did not destroy the core components of its nuclear program, and likely only set it back by months.
Grossi also told CBS News that the IAEA has resisted pressure to say whether Iran has nuclear weapons or was close to having weapons before the strikes.
"We didn't see a program that was aiming in that direction (of nuclear weapons), but at the same time, they were not answering very, very important questions that were pending."
Meanwhile, Tehran has made moves towards withdrawing from international oversight over its nuclear program.
Iran's parliament passed a bill halting cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog, while the Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, also said that the country could also rethink its membership of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which prohibits signatories from developing nuclear weapons.
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/06/29/world/iaea-iran-enriched-uranium-intl
LOL "....didn't see a program that was aiming at nuclear weapons...." even though it was enriching to 60% level or higher in an underground bunker complex that international inspectors were not allowed to visit.Sam Lowry said:
UN nuclear watchdog chief says Iran could again begin enriching uranium in 'matter of months'
By Laura Sharman and Sophie Tanno, CNN
The head of the UN's nuclear watchdog says US strikes on Iran fell short of causing total damage to its nuclear program and that Tehran could restart enriching uranium "in a matter of months," contradicting President Donald Trump's claims the US set Tehran's ambitions back by decades.
Rafael Grossi's comments appear to support an early assessment from the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency, first reported by CNN, which suggests the United States' strikes on key Iranian nuclear sites last week did not destroy the core components of its nuclear program, and likely only set it back by months.
Grossi also told CBS News that the IAEA has resisted pressure to say whether Iran has nuclear weapons or was close to having weapons before the strikes.
"We didn't see a program that was aiming in that direction (of nuclear weapons), but at the same time, they were not answering very, very important questions that were pending."
Meanwhile, Tehran has made moves towards withdrawing from international oversight over its nuclear program.
Iran's parliament passed a bill halting cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog, while the Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, also said that the country could also rethink its membership of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which prohibits signatories from developing nuclear weapons.
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/06/29/world/iaea-iran-enriched-uranium-intl
Thank you for such a great example of studious obtusity.
As you know or should know, IAEA inspectors were allowed to visit the site until the recent attacks by the US and Israel. Until Trump scrapped the JCPOA, they were allowed to visit undeclared sites and conduct snap inspections as well. Iran was subject to the most comprehensive nuclear safeguards of any country in the world.whiterock said:LOL "....didn't see a program that was aiming at nuclear weapons...." even though it was enriching to 60% level or higher in an underground bunker complex that international inspectors were not allowed to visit.Sam Lowry said:
UN nuclear watchdog chief says Iran could again begin enriching uranium in 'matter of months'
By Laura Sharman and Sophie Tanno, CNN
The head of the UN's nuclear watchdog says US strikes on Iran fell short of causing total damage to its nuclear program and that Tehran could restart enriching uranium "in a matter of months," contradicting President Donald Trump's claims the US set Tehran's ambitions back by decades.
Rafael Grossi's comments appear to support an early assessment from the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency, first reported by CNN, which suggests the United States' strikes on key Iranian nuclear sites last week did not destroy the core components of its nuclear program, and likely only set it back by months.
Grossi also told CBS News that the IAEA has resisted pressure to say whether Iran has nuclear weapons or was close to having weapons before the strikes.
"We didn't see a program that was aiming in that direction (of nuclear weapons), but at the same time, they were not answering very, very important questions that were pending."
Meanwhile, Tehran has made moves towards withdrawing from international oversight over its nuclear program.
Iran's parliament passed a bill halting cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog, while the Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, also said that the country could also rethink its membership of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which prohibits signatories from developing nuclear weapons.
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/06/29/world/iaea-iran-enriched-uranium-intl
Thank you for such a great example of studious obtusity.
This conflicts with UN reportsSam Lowry said:As you know or should know, IAEA inspectors were allowed to visit the site until the recent attacks by the US and Israel. Until Trump scrapped the JCPOA, they were allowed to visit undeclared sites and conduct snap inspections as well. Iran was subject to the most comprehensive nuclear safeguards of any country in the world.whiterock said:LOL "....didn't see a program that was aiming at nuclear weapons...." even though it was enriching to 60% level or higher in an underground bunker complex that international inspectors were not allowed to visit.Sam Lowry said:
UN nuclear watchdog chief says Iran could again begin enriching uranium in 'matter of months'
By Laura Sharman and Sophie Tanno, CNN
The head of the UN's nuclear watchdog says US strikes on Iran fell short of causing total damage to its nuclear program and that Tehran could restart enriching uranium "in a matter of months," contradicting President Donald Trump's claims the US set Tehran's ambitions back by decades.
Rafael Grossi's comments appear to support an early assessment from the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency, first reported by CNN, which suggests the United States' strikes on key Iranian nuclear sites last week did not destroy the core components of its nuclear program, and likely only set it back by months.
Grossi also told CBS News that the IAEA has resisted pressure to say whether Iran has nuclear weapons or was close to having weapons before the strikes.
"We didn't see a program that was aiming in that direction (of nuclear weapons), but at the same time, they were not answering very, very important questions that were pending."
Meanwhile, Tehran has made moves towards withdrawing from international oversight over its nuclear program.
Iran's parliament passed a bill halting cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog, while the Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, also said that the country could also rethink its membership of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which prohibits signatories from developing nuclear weapons.
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/06/29/world/iaea-iran-enriched-uranium-intl
Thank you for such a great example of studious obtusity.
From UN reports:EatMoreSalmon said:This conflicts with UN reportsSam Lowry said:As you know or should know, IAEA inspectors were allowed to visit the site until the recent attacks by the US and Israel. Until Trump scrapped the JCPOA, they were allowed to visit undeclared sites and conduct snap inspections as well. Iran was subject to the most comprehensive nuclear safeguards of any country in the world.whiterock said:LOL "....didn't see a program that was aiming at nuclear weapons...." even though it was enriching to 60% level or higher in an underground bunker complex that international inspectors were not allowed to visit.Sam Lowry said:
UN nuclear watchdog chief says Iran could again begin enriching uranium in 'matter of months'
By Laura Sharman and Sophie Tanno, CNN
The head of the UN's nuclear watchdog says US strikes on Iran fell short of causing total damage to its nuclear program and that Tehran could restart enriching uranium "in a matter of months," contradicting President Donald Trump's claims the US set Tehran's ambitions back by decades.
Rafael Grossi's comments appear to support an early assessment from the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency, first reported by CNN, which suggests the United States' strikes on key Iranian nuclear sites last week did not destroy the core components of its nuclear program, and likely only set it back by months.
Grossi also told CBS News that the IAEA has resisted pressure to say whether Iran has nuclear weapons or was close to having weapons before the strikes.
"We didn't see a program that was aiming in that direction (of nuclear weapons), but at the same time, they were not answering very, very important questions that were pending."
Meanwhile, Tehran has made moves towards withdrawing from international oversight over its nuclear program.
Iran's parliament passed a bill halting cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog, while the Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, also said that the country could also rethink its membership of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which prohibits signatories from developing nuclear weapons.
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/06/29/world/iaea-iran-enriched-uranium-intl
Thank you for such a great example of studious obtusity.
Quote:
Monitoring Iran and promoting the peaceful use of nuclear energy--the IAEA's role explained
19 June 2025
As a non-nuclear armed signatory to the treaty, Iran is banned from acquiring nuclear weapons and is required to allow the IAEA to inspect and verify all nuclear materials and activities, including at short notice, if asked.
The agency regularly inspects Iran's nuclear facilities, including sites like Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan. The aim is to ensure that nuclear materials are only used for peaceful means and are not diverted for weapons use.
After the June 2025 Israeli strikes, the IAEA confirmed that Natanz had been impacted but reported no elevated radiation levels. However, it emphasised that any military attack on nuclear facilities is a violation of international law and poses serious risks to safety and the environment.
https://news.un.org/en/story/2025/06/1164611
Still waiting for the explanation of why one of the world's most oil rich nations would invest in nuclear energy ...
I largely agree, but disagree with your previous statement that ground invasion "could not have happened." It absolutely could have. We simply chose to stop after targeting their nuclear facilities, and accepted that they still have their enriched uranium.whiterock said:I did not speculate about what we could have done. I merely noted that we did not do ANYthing necessary to go to war. We did not preposition ANY soldiers, armored vehicles, supplies, support infrastructure. Nothing. Zip. Zilch. Nada. An invasion did not happen because one could not have happened. Nothing to invade with. Most of the talking heads screaming about us going to war full well knew that. They were just pandering to their base, and flexing their muscles to protect their positions.Porteroso said:whiterock said:you are imputing to others what you need them to be rather than what they are, have said, etc...muddybrazos said:No, not really. The majority of the MAGA base doesnt want any wars and Trump has been made aware of that so I think he is doing his best to avoid that situation. The war hawks like you and Mark Levin are pushing for all out ww3 so I hope your side ends up disappointed.Mothra said:But your ilk was predicting all of the above.muddybrazos said:I dont know about end of America or the WW3 stuff but I still believe that this whole Iran situation is far from over and Israel will not quit until they do regime change there. I hope the war stuff doesnt escalate and drag us into it, though.Mothra said:Kind of like the chicken little's doom and gloom predictions of the US being "at war," and this being the end of America as we know it, I don't believe this for a second.Realitybites said:
We saw the stick, perhaps we are going to see the carrot.
" President Donald Trump is considering a $30 billion plan to help Iran develop a civilian nuclear program as an incentive to return to full-fledged talks over a nuclear deal, CNN reported on Thursday, citing sources.
Washington and its Middle East partners have been holding secret negotiations with Tehran, even as Iran and Israel exchanged strikes earlier this month, four sources familiar with the matter told the network.
The US reportedly has not dropped its key demand that Iran agree to zero enrichment of uranium, which has been a red line for Tehran. To sweeten the deal, however, Washington is said to have floated several incentives.
These include an estimated $20-30 billion investment project in Iran's nuclear program for civilian energy purposes though the money would not come directly from the US, but rather from its Arab partners, the report claims.
Israel sought to kill Iran's Khamenei defense chief
Other incentives reportedly under consideration include easing some sanctions and allowing Iran access to approximately $6 billion in frozen funds currently held in foreign bank accounts,"
If this is accurate, this will be the most brilliant exercise in US foreign policy since Reagan spanked Khadaffi for the Pan Am bombing without getting involved in a regime change war.
But Bibi, AIPAC, and the neocons are going to have steam coming out of their ears.
You're kind of the boy who cried wolf.
No one here came remotely close to advocating an invasion of Iran. And one was never in the cards anyway. You are apparently not old enough to remember, the First Gulf War. It took us better part of FIVE MONTHS to get deployed to slice up Saddam's army in a few days. We requisitioned civilian sea lift. We requisitioned civilian airlift. Moved an entire Corps plus some (700k troops) into theater. We didn't lift a finger to do anything like that this time. Just moved some ships & aircraft around and staged some fuel & weapons to keep planes in the air to interdict Iranian incoming.
So the "war" everyone screamed about literally could not have happened. But they wanted to have one to ***** about so badly that they 100% conjured one up out of whole cloth.
That is not accurate. We could easily have ramped up, escalating were by week, for months. We could have said our goal was finding the enriched uranium and recovering it. Or that we needed nuclear specialists to actually investigate the sites we bombed, to know how damaged they were.
There was no way we were invading without troop movement, but anyone 25 years old remembers how easy it is for the federal government to convince themselves invasion is good.
You can't "sneak" 750k troops and all their weapons, armor, and supply chain to the far side of the world without someone spotting it. It took 5 months for us to do for 1GW, even with all the requisitions of civilian air/sea lift. Woulda taken years to try to do it the way you suggest (and still get spotted...you can't hide an armored division, much less a half dozen of them).
All we did was conduct flight & refueling operations to help protect Israeli airspace (and by extension Jordanian & Saudi & potentially Egyptian airspace). So did most of the militaries in the region, btw. Several Nato countries, too.... What we did was conduct a robust air defense mission, with allies and for allies, with a single air raid against a strategic target of immense national security significance. Israel did all the grunt work, taking out Iranian aircraft, air defense systems, command & control, etc..... They paved the street for us. (again, proving their worth as an asset).
Harrison Bergeron said:
Still waiting for the explanation of why one of the world's most oil rich nations would invest in nuclear energy ...
I gave you one a valid reason a week ago.
For the same reason that they need to purify the uranium far beyond what is used for power generation: they want nukes to destroy Israel & start WWIII. They believe a global apocalypse will usher in the Mahdi and that will lead to a global caliphate with themselves in control. It's megalomania taken to the extreme and they believe it fanatically.
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
Psalm 119:36
Harrison Bergeron said:
Still waiting for the explanation of why one of the world's most oil rich nations would invest in nuclear energy ...
The sixth pillar of Islam is to be carbon neutral. It's really quite simple.
Porteroso said:I largely agree, but disagree with your previous statement that ground invasion "could not have happened." It absolutely could have. We simply chose to stop after targeting their nuclear facilities, and accepted that they still have their enriched uranium.whiterock said:I did not speculate about what we could have done. I merely noted that we did not do ANYthing necessary to go to war. We did not preposition ANY soldiers, armored vehicles, supplies, support infrastructure. Nothing. Zip. Zilch. Nada. An invasion did not happen because one could not have happened. Nothing to invade with. Most of the talking heads screaming about us going to war full well knew that. They were just pandering to their base, and flexing their muscles to protect their positions.Porteroso said:whiterock said:you are imputing to others what you need them to be rather than what they are, have said, etc...muddybrazos said:No, not really. The majority of the MAGA base doesnt want any wars and Trump has been made aware of that so I think he is doing his best to avoid that situation. The war hawks like you and Mark Levin are pushing for all out ww3 so I hope your side ends up disappointed.Mothra said:But your ilk was predicting all of the above.muddybrazos said:I dont know about end of America or the WW3 stuff but I still believe that this whole Iran situation is far from over and Israel will not quit until they do regime change there. I hope the war stuff doesnt escalate and drag us into it, though.Mothra said:Kind of like the chicken little's doom and gloom predictions of the US being "at war," and this being the end of America as we know it, I don't believe this for a second.Realitybites said:
We saw the stick, perhaps we are going to see the carrot.
" President Donald Trump is considering a $30 billion plan to help Iran develop a civilian nuclear program as an incentive to return to full-fledged talks over a nuclear deal, CNN reported on Thursday, citing sources.
Washington and its Middle East partners have been holding secret negotiations with Tehran, even as Iran and Israel exchanged strikes earlier this month, four sources familiar with the matter told the network.
The US reportedly has not dropped its key demand that Iran agree to zero enrichment of uranium, which has been a red line for Tehran. To sweeten the deal, however, Washington is said to have floated several incentives.
These include an estimated $20-30 billion investment project in Iran's nuclear program for civilian energy purposes though the money would not come directly from the US, but rather from its Arab partners, the report claims.
Israel sought to kill Iran's Khamenei defense chief
Other incentives reportedly under consideration include easing some sanctions and allowing Iran access to approximately $6 billion in frozen funds currently held in foreign bank accounts,"
If this is accurate, this will be the most brilliant exercise in US foreign policy since Reagan spanked Khadaffi for the Pan Am bombing without getting involved in a regime change war.
But Bibi, AIPAC, and the neocons are going to have steam coming out of their ears.
You're kind of the boy who cried wolf.
No one here came remotely close to advocating an invasion of Iran. And one was never in the cards anyway. You are apparently not old enough to remember, the First Gulf War. It took us better part of FIVE MONTHS to get deployed to slice up Saddam's army in a few days. We requisitioned civilian sea lift. We requisitioned civilian airlift. Moved an entire Corps plus some (700k troops) into theater. We didn't lift a finger to do anything like that this time. Just moved some ships & aircraft around and staged some fuel & weapons to keep planes in the air to interdict Iranian incoming.
So the "war" everyone screamed about literally could not have happened. But they wanted to have one to ***** about so badly that they 100% conjured one up out of whole cloth.
That is not accurate. We could easily have ramped up, escalating were by week, for months. We could have said our goal was finding the enriched uranium and recovering it. Or that we needed nuclear specialists to actually investigate the sites we bombed, to know how damaged they were.
There was no way we were invading without troop movement, but anyone 25 years old remembers how easy it is for the federal government to convince themselves invasion is good.
You can't "sneak" 750k troops and all their weapons, armor, and supply chain to the far side of the world without someone spotting it. It took 5 months for us to do for 1GW, even with all the requisitions of civilian air/sea lift. Woulda taken years to try to do it the way you suggest (and still get spotted...you can't hide an armored division, much less a half dozen of them).
All we did was conduct flight & refueling operations to help protect Israeli airspace (and by extension Jordanian & Saudi & potentially Egyptian airspace). So did most of the militaries in the region, btw. Several Nato countries, too.... What we did was conduct a robust air defense mission, with allies and for allies, with a single air raid against a strategic target of immense national security significance. Israel did all the grunt work, taking out Iranian aircraft, air defense systems, command & control, etc..... They paved the street for us. (again, proving their worth as an asset).
Quite honestly, we are being aimed in the direction of escalation by this "report" by the global organization. And Iran isn't helping matters publicly.
Sam Lowry said:From UN reports:EatMoreSalmon said:This conflicts with UN reportsSam Lowry said:As you know or should know, IAEA inspectors were allowed to visit the site until the recent attacks by the US and Israel. Until Trump scrapped the JCPOA, they were allowed to visit undeclared sites and conduct snap inspections as well. Iran was subject to the most comprehensive nuclear safeguards of any country in the world.whiterock said:LOL "....didn't see a program that was aiming at nuclear weapons...." even though it was enriching to 60% level or higher in an underground bunker complex that international inspectors were not allowed to visit.Sam Lowry said:
UN nuclear watchdog chief says Iran could again begin enriching uranium in 'matter of months'
By Laura Sharman and Sophie Tanno, CNN
The head of the UN's nuclear watchdog says US strikes on Iran fell short of causing total damage to its nuclear program and that Tehran could restart enriching uranium "in a matter of months," contradicting President Donald Trump's claims the US set Tehran's ambitions back by decades.
Rafael Grossi's comments appear to support an early assessment from the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency, first reported by CNN, which suggests the United States' strikes on key Iranian nuclear sites last week did not destroy the core components of its nuclear program, and likely only set it back by months.
Grossi also told CBS News that the IAEA has resisted pressure to say whether Iran has nuclear weapons or was close to having weapons before the strikes.
"We didn't see a program that was aiming in that direction (of nuclear weapons), but at the same time, they were not answering very, very important questions that were pending."
Meanwhile, Tehran has made moves towards withdrawing from international oversight over its nuclear program.
Iran's parliament passed a bill halting cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog, while the Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, also said that the country could also rethink its membership of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which prohibits signatories from developing nuclear weapons.
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/06/29/world/iaea-iran-enriched-uranium-intl
Thank you for such a great example of studious obtusity.Quote:
Monitoring Iran and promoting the peaceful use of nuclear energy--the IAEA's role explained
19 June 2025
As a non-nuclear armed signatory to the treaty, Iran is banned from acquiring nuclear weapons and is required to allow the IAEA to inspect and verify all nuclear materials and activities, including at short notice, if asked.
The agency regularly inspects Iran's nuclear facilities, including sites like Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan. The aim is to ensure that nuclear materials are only used for peaceful means and are not diverted for weapons use.
After the June 2025 Israeli strikes, the IAEA confirmed that Natanz had been impacted but reported no elevated radiation levels. However, it emphasised that any military attack on nuclear facilities is a violation of international law and poses serious risks to safety and the environment.
https://news.un.org/en/story2025/06/1164611
From UN reports already posted:
"Growing concerns
The draft for Thursday's resolution highlights serious and growing concerns since at least 2019 that Iran had failed to cooperate fully with the UN agency's inspectors."
Google is your friend.historian said:
For the same reason that they need to purify the uranium far beyond what is used for power generation: they want nukes to destroy Israel & start WWIII. They believe a global apocalypse will usher in the Mahdi and that will lead to a global caliphate with themselves in control. It's megalomania taken to the extreme and they believe it fanatically.
Yes, those would be the inspectors who regularly visit Iran's nuclear sites.EatMoreSalmon said:Sam Lowry said:From UN reports:EatMoreSalmon said:This conflicts with UN reportsSam Lowry said:As you know or should know, IAEA inspectors were allowed to visit the site until the recent attacks by the US and Israel. Until Trump scrapped the JCPOA, they were allowed to visit undeclared sites and conduct snap inspections as well. Iran was subject to the most comprehensive nuclear safeguards of any country in the world.whiterock said:LOL "....didn't see a program that was aiming at nuclear weapons...." even though it was enriching to 60% level or higher in an underground bunker complex that international inspectors were not allowed to visit.Sam Lowry said:
UN nuclear watchdog chief says Iran could again begin enriching uranium in 'matter of months'
By Laura Sharman and Sophie Tanno, CNN
The head of the UN's nuclear watchdog says US strikes on Iran fell short of causing total damage to its nuclear program and that Tehran could restart enriching uranium "in a matter of months," contradicting President Donald Trump's claims the US set Tehran's ambitions back by decades.
Rafael Grossi's comments appear to support an early assessment from the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency, first reported by CNN, which suggests the United States' strikes on key Iranian nuclear sites last week did not destroy the core components of its nuclear program, and likely only set it back by months.
Grossi also told CBS News that the IAEA has resisted pressure to say whether Iran has nuclear weapons or was close to having weapons before the strikes.
"We didn't see a program that was aiming in that direction (of nuclear weapons), but at the same time, they were not answering very, very important questions that were pending."
Meanwhile, Tehran has made moves towards withdrawing from international oversight over its nuclear program.
Iran's parliament passed a bill halting cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog, while the Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, also said that the country could also rethink its membership of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which prohibits signatories from developing nuclear weapons.
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/06/29/world/iaea-iran-enriched-uranium-intl
Thank you for such a great example of studious obtusity.Quote:
Monitoring Iran and promoting the peaceful use of nuclear energy--the IAEA's role explained
19 June 2025
As a non-nuclear armed signatory to the treaty, Iran is banned from acquiring nuclear weapons and is required to allow the IAEA to inspect and verify all nuclear materials and activities, including at short notice, if asked.
The agency regularly inspects Iran's nuclear facilities, including sites like Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan. The aim is to ensure that nuclear materials are only used for peaceful means and are not diverted for weapons use.
After the June 2025 Israeli strikes, the IAEA confirmed that Natanz had been impacted but reported no elevated radiation levels. However, it emphasised that any military attack on nuclear facilities is a violation of international law and poses serious risks to safety and the environment.
https://news.un.org/en/story2025/06/1164611
From UN reports already posted:
"Growing concerns
The draft for Thursday's resolution highlights serious and growing concerns since at least 2019 that Iran had failed to cooperate fully with the UN agency's inspectors."
And weren't cooperated with since 2019Sam Lowry said:Yes, those would be the inspectors who regularly visit Iran's nuclear sites.EatMoreSalmon said:Sam Lowry said:From UN reports:EatMoreSalmon said:This conflicts with UN reportsSam Lowry said:As you know or should know, IAEA inspectors were allowed to visit the site until the recent attacks by the US and Israel. Until Trump scrapped the JCPOA, they were allowed to visit undeclared sites and conduct snap inspections as well. Iran was subject to the most comprehensive nuclear safeguards of any country in the world.whiterock said:LOL "....didn't see a program that was aiming at nuclear weapons...." even though it was enriching to 60% level or higher in an underground bunker complex that international inspectors were not allowed to visit.Sam Lowry said:
UN nuclear watchdog chief says Iran could again begin enriching uranium in 'matter of months'
By Laura Sharman and Sophie Tanno, CNN
The head of the UN's nuclear watchdog says US strikes on Iran fell short of causing total damage to its nuclear program and that Tehran could restart enriching uranium "in a matter of months," contradicting President Donald Trump's claims the US set Tehran's ambitions back by decades.
Rafael Grossi's comments appear to support an early assessment from the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency, first reported by CNN, which suggests the United States' strikes on key Iranian nuclear sites last week did not destroy the core components of its nuclear program, and likely only set it back by months.
Grossi also told CBS News that the IAEA has resisted pressure to say whether Iran has nuclear weapons or was close to having weapons before the strikes.
"We didn't see a program that was aiming in that direction (of nuclear weapons), but at the same time, they were not answering very, very important questions that were pending."
Meanwhile, Tehran has made moves towards withdrawing from international oversight over its nuclear program.
Iran's parliament passed a bill halting cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog, while the Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, also said that the country could also rethink its membership of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which prohibits signatories from developing nuclear weapons.
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/06/29/world/iaea-iran-enriched-uranium-intl
Thank you for such a great example of studious obtusity.Quote:
Monitoring Iran and promoting the peaceful use of nuclear energy--the IAEA's role explained
19 June 2025
As a non-nuclear armed signatory to the treaty, Iran is banned from acquiring nuclear weapons and is required to allow the IAEA to inspect and verify all nuclear materials and activities, including at short notice, if asked.
The agency regularly inspects Iran's nuclear facilities, including sites like Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan. The aim is to ensure that nuclear materials are only used for peaceful means and are not diverted for weapons use.
After the June 2025 Israeli strikes, the IAEA confirmed that Natanz had been impacted but reported no elevated radiation levels. However, it emphasised that any military attack on nuclear facilities is a violation of international law and poses serious risks to safety and the environment.
https://news.un.org/en/story2025/06/1164611
From UN reports already posted:
"Growing concerns
The draft for Thursday's resolution highlights serious and growing concerns since at least 2019 that Iran had failed to cooperate fully with the UN agency's inspectors."
Not always. Having an education, being informed, & thinking for yourself ard far more valuable. Most important, though, is faith in Jesus Christ.
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
Psalm 119:36
Who apparently are saying that Iran isn't cooperating.Sam Lowry said:Yes, those would be the inspectors who regularly visit Iran's nuclear sites.EatMoreSalmon said:Sam Lowry said:From UN reports:EatMoreSalmon said:This conflicts with UN reportsSam Lowry said:As you know or should know, IAEA inspectors were allowed to visit the site until the recent attacks by the US and Israel. Until Trump scrapped the JCPOA, they were allowed to visit undeclared sites and conduct snap inspections as well. Iran was subject to the most comprehensive nuclear safeguards of any country in the world.whiterock said:LOL "....didn't see a program that was aiming at nuclear weapons...." even though it was enriching to 60% level or higher in an underground bunker complex that international inspectors were not allowed to visit.Sam Lowry said:
UN nuclear watchdog chief says Iran could again begin enriching uranium in 'matter of months'
By Laura Sharman and Sophie Tanno, CNN
The head of the UN's nuclear watchdog says US strikes on Iran fell short of causing total damage to its nuclear program and that Tehran could restart enriching uranium "in a matter of months," contradicting President Donald Trump's claims the US set Tehran's ambitions back by decades.
Rafael Grossi's comments appear to support an early assessment from the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency, first reported by CNN, which suggests the United States' strikes on key Iranian nuclear sites last week did not destroy the core components of its nuclear program, and likely only set it back by months.
Grossi also told CBS News that the IAEA has resisted pressure to say whether Iran has nuclear weapons or was close to having weapons before the strikes.
"We didn't see a program that was aiming in that direction (of nuclear weapons), but at the same time, they were not answering very, very important questions that were pending."
Meanwhile, Tehran has made moves towards withdrawing from international oversight over its nuclear program.
Iran's parliament passed a bill halting cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog, while the Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, also said that the country could also rethink its membership of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which prohibits signatories from developing nuclear weapons.
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/06/29/world/iaea-iran-enriched-uranium-intl
Thank you for such a great example of studious obtusity.Quote:
Monitoring Iran and promoting the peaceful use of nuclear energy--the IAEA's role explained
19 June 2025
As a non-nuclear armed signatory to the treaty, Iran is banned from acquiring nuclear weapons and is required to allow the IAEA to inspect and verify all nuclear materials and activities, including at short notice, if asked.
The agency regularly inspects Iran's nuclear facilities, including sites like Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan. The aim is to ensure that nuclear materials are only used for peaceful means and are not diverted for weapons use.
After the June 2025 Israeli strikes, the IAEA confirmed that Natanz had been impacted but reported no elevated radiation levels. However, it emphasised that any military attack on nuclear facilities is a violation of international law and poses serious risks to safety and the environment.
https://news.un.org/en/story2025/06/1164611
From UN reports already posted:
"Growing concerns
The draft for Thursday's resolution highlights serious and growing concerns since at least 2019 that Iran had failed to cooperate fully with the UN agency's inspectors."
So, what's your point?
What they mean is that Iran basically reverted to the level of cooperation it was providing before the JCPOA, and that happened more than a year after Trump withdrew from the treaty. You can't expect unlimited cooperation when you refuse to honor the agreement.EatMoreSalmon said:And weren't cooperated with since 2019Sam Lowry said:Yes, those would be the inspectors who regularly visit Iran's nuclear sites.EatMoreSalmon said:Sam Lowry said:From UN reports:EatMoreSalmon said:This conflicts with UN reportsSam Lowry said:As you know or should know, IAEA inspectors were allowed to visit the site until the recent attacks by the US and Israel. Until Trump scrapped the JCPOA, they were allowed to visit undeclared sites and conduct snap inspections as well. Iran was subject to the most comprehensive nuclear safeguards of any country in the world.whiterock said:LOL "....didn't see a program that was aiming at nuclear weapons...." even though it was enriching to 60% level or higher in an underground bunker complex that international inspectors were not allowed to visit.Sam Lowry said:
UN nuclear watchdog chief says Iran could again begin enriching uranium in 'matter of months'
By Laura Sharman and Sophie Tanno, CNN
The head of the UN's nuclear watchdog says US strikes on Iran fell short of causing total damage to its nuclear program and that Tehran could restart enriching uranium "in a matter of months," contradicting President Donald Trump's claims the US set Tehran's ambitions back by decades.
Rafael Grossi's comments appear to support an early assessment from the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency, first reported by CNN, which suggests the United States' strikes on key Iranian nuclear sites last week did not destroy the core components of its nuclear program, and likely only set it back by months.
Grossi also told CBS News that the IAEA has resisted pressure to say whether Iran has nuclear weapons or was close to having weapons before the strikes.
"We didn't see a program that was aiming in that direction (of nuclear weapons), but at the same time, they were not answering very, very important questions that were pending."
Meanwhile, Tehran has made moves towards withdrawing from international oversight over its nuclear program.
Iran's parliament passed a bill halting cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog, while the Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, also said that the country could also rethink its membership of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which prohibits signatories from developing nuclear weapons.
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/06/29/world/iaea-iran-enriched-uranium-intl
Thank you for such a great example of studious obtusity.Quote:
Monitoring Iran and promoting the peaceful use of nuclear energy--the IAEA's role explained
19 June 2025
As a non-nuclear armed signatory to the treaty, Iran is banned from acquiring nuclear weapons and is required to allow the IAEA to inspect and verify all nuclear materials and activities, including at short notice, if asked.
The agency regularly inspects Iran's nuclear facilities, including sites like Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan. The aim is to ensure that nuclear materials are only used for peaceful means and are not diverted for weapons use.
After the June 2025 Israeli strikes, the IAEA confirmed that Natanz had been impacted but reported no elevated radiation levels. However, it emphasised that any military attack on nuclear facilities is a violation of international law and poses serious risks to safety and the environment.
https://news.un.org/en/story2025/06/1164611
From UN reports already posted:
"Growing concerns
The draft for Thursday's resolution highlights serious and growing concerns since at least 2019 that Iran had failed to cooperate fully with the UN agency's inspectors."
Please don't confuse Sam with facts.EatMoreSalmon said:And weren't cooperated with since 2019Sam Lowry said:Yes, those would be the inspectors who regularly visit Iran's nuclear sites.EatMoreSalmon said:Sam Lowry said:From UN reports:EatMoreSalmon said:This conflicts with UN reportsSam Lowry said:As you know or should know, IAEA inspectors were allowed to visit the site until the recent attacks by the US and Israel. Until Trump scrapped the JCPOA, they were allowed to visit undeclared sites and conduct snap inspections as well. Iran was subject to the most comprehensive nuclear safeguards of any country in the world.whiterock said:LOL "....didn't see a program that was aiming at nuclear weapons...." even though it was enriching to 60% level or higher in an underground bunker complex that international inspectors were not allowed to visit.Sam Lowry said:
UN nuclear watchdog chief says Iran could again begin enriching uranium in 'matter of months'
By Laura Sharman and Sophie Tanno, CNN
The head of the UN's nuclear watchdog says US strikes on Iran fell short of causing total damage to its nuclear program and that Tehran could restart enriching uranium "in a matter of months," contradicting President Donald Trump's claims the US set Tehran's ambitions back by decades.
Rafael Grossi's comments appear to support an early assessment from the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency, first reported by CNN, which suggests the United States' strikes on key Iranian nuclear sites last week did not destroy the core components of its nuclear program, and likely only set it back by months.
Grossi also told CBS News that the IAEA has resisted pressure to say whether Iran has nuclear weapons or was close to having weapons before the strikes.
"We didn't see a program that was aiming in that direction (of nuclear weapons), but at the same time, they were not answering very, very important questions that were pending."
Meanwhile, Tehran has made moves towards withdrawing from international oversight over its nuclear program.
Iran's parliament passed a bill halting cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog, while the Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, also said that the country could also rethink its membership of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which prohibits signatories from developing nuclear weapons.
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/06/29/world/iaea-iran-enriched-uranium-intl
Thank you for such a great example of studious obtusity.Quote:
Monitoring Iran and promoting the peaceful use of nuclear energy--the IAEA's role explained
19 June 2025
As a non-nuclear armed signatory to the treaty, Iran is banned from acquiring nuclear weapons and is required to allow the IAEA to inspect and verify all nuclear materials and activities, including at short notice, if asked.
The agency regularly inspects Iran's nuclear facilities, including sites like Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan. The aim is to ensure that nuclear materials are only used for peaceful means and are not diverted for weapons use.
After the June 2025 Israeli strikes, the IAEA confirmed that Natanz had been impacted but reported no elevated radiation levels. However, it emphasised that any military attack on nuclear facilities is a violation of international law and poses serious risks to safety and the environment.
https://news.un.org/en/story2025/06/1164611
From UN reports already posted:
"Growing concerns
The draft for Thursday's resolution highlights serious and growing concerns since at least 2019 that Iran had failed to cooperate fully with the UN agency's inspectors."
This is straight up spin.Sam Lowry said:What they mean is that Iran basically reverted to the level of cooperation it was providing before the JCPOA, and that happened more than a year after Trump withdrew from the treaty. You can't expect unlimited cooperation when you refuse to honor the agreement.EatMoreSalmon said:And weren't cooperated with since 2019Sam Lowry said:Yes, those would be the inspectors who regularly visit Iran's nuclear sites.EatMoreSalmon said:Sam Lowry said:From UN reports:EatMoreSalmon said:This conflicts with UN reportsSam Lowry said:As you know or should know, IAEA inspectors were allowed to visit the site until the recent attacks by the US and Israel. Until Trump scrapped the JCPOA, they were allowed to visit undeclared sites and conduct snap inspections as well. Iran was subject to the most comprehensive nuclear safeguards of any country in the world.whiterock said:LOL "....didn't see a program that was aiming at nuclear weapons...." even though it was enriching to 60% level or higher in an underground bunker complex that international inspectors were not allowed to visit.Sam Lowry said:
UN nuclear watchdog chief says Iran could again begin enriching uranium in 'matter of months'
By Laura Sharman and Sophie Tanno, CNN
The head of the UN's nuclear watchdog says US strikes on Iran fell short of causing total damage to its nuclear program and that Tehran could restart enriching uranium "in a matter of months," contradicting President Donald Trump's claims the US set Tehran's ambitions back by decades.
Rafael Grossi's comments appear to support an early assessment from the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency, first reported by CNN, which suggests the United States' strikes on key Iranian nuclear sites last week did not destroy the core components of its nuclear program, and likely only set it back by months.
Grossi also told CBS News that the IAEA has resisted pressure to say whether Iran has nuclear weapons or was close to having weapons before the strikes.
"We didn't see a program that was aiming in that direction (of nuclear weapons), but at the same time, they were not answering very, very important questions that were pending."
Meanwhile, Tehran has made moves towards withdrawing from international oversight over its nuclear program.
Iran's parliament passed a bill halting cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog, while the Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, also said that the country could also rethink its membership of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which prohibits signatories from developing nuclear weapons.
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/06/29/world/iaea-iran-enriched-uranium-intl
Thank you for such a great example of studious obtusity.Quote:
Monitoring Iran and promoting the peaceful use of nuclear energy--the IAEA's role explained
19 June 2025
As a non-nuclear armed signatory to the treaty, Iran is banned from acquiring nuclear weapons and is required to allow the IAEA to inspect and verify all nuclear materials and activities, including at short notice, if asked.
The agency regularly inspects Iran's nuclear facilities, including sites like Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan. The aim is to ensure that nuclear materials are only used for peaceful means and are not diverted for weapons use.
After the June 2025 Israeli strikes, the IAEA confirmed that Natanz had been impacted but reported no elevated radiation levels. However, it emphasised that any military attack on nuclear facilities is a violation of international law and poses serious risks to safety and the environment.
https://news.un.org/en/story2025/06/1164611
From UN reports already posted:
"Growing concerns
The draft for Thursday's resolution highlights serious and growing concerns since at least 2019 that Iran had failed to cooperate fully with the UN agency's inspectors."
Not at all. The US unilaterally ditched the JCPOA in May 2018. Iran continued for more than a year to act as if it was still in effect. Since then they have still provided access, but not the full access that was agreed under the now defunct treaty. These are facts.EatMoreSalmon said:This is straight up spin.Sam Lowry said:What they mean is that Iran basically reverted to the level of cooperation it was providing before the JCPOA, and that happened more than a year after Trump withdrew from the treaty. You can't expect unlimited cooperation when you refuse to honor the agreement.EatMoreSalmon said:And weren't cooperated with since 2019Sam Lowry said:Yes, those would be the inspectors who regularly visit Iran's nuclear sites.EatMoreSalmon said:Sam Lowry said:From UN reports:EatMoreSalmon said:This conflicts with UN reportsSam Lowry said:As you know or should know, IAEA inspectors were allowed to visit the site until the recent attacks by the US and Israel. Until Trump scrapped the JCPOA, they were allowed to visit undeclared sites and conduct snap inspections as well. Iran was subject to the most comprehensive nuclear safeguards of any country in the world.whiterock said:LOL "....didn't see a program that was aiming at nuclear weapons...." even though it was enriching to 60% level or higher in an underground bunker complex that international inspectors were not allowed to visit.Sam Lowry said:
UN nuclear watchdog chief says Iran could again begin enriching uranium in 'matter of months'
By Laura Sharman and Sophie Tanno, CNN
The head of the UN's nuclear watchdog says US strikes on Iran fell short of causing total damage to its nuclear program and that Tehran could restart enriching uranium "in a matter of months," contradicting President Donald Trump's claims the US set Tehran's ambitions back by decades.
Rafael Grossi's comments appear to support an early assessment from the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency, first reported by CNN, which suggests the United States' strikes on key Iranian nuclear sites last week did not destroy the core components of its nuclear program, and likely only set it back by months.
Grossi also told CBS News that the IAEA has resisted pressure to say whether Iran has nuclear weapons or was close to having weapons before the strikes.
"We didn't see a program that was aiming in that direction (of nuclear weapons), but at the same time, they were not answering very, very important questions that were pending."
Meanwhile, Tehran has made moves towards withdrawing from international oversight over its nuclear program.
Iran's parliament passed a bill halting cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog, while the Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, also said that the country could also rethink its membership of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which prohibits signatories from developing nuclear weapons.
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/06/29/world/iaea-iran-enriched-uranium-intl
Thank you for such a great example of studious obtusity.Quote:
Monitoring Iran and promoting the peaceful use of nuclear energy--the IAEA's role explained
19 June 2025
As a non-nuclear armed signatory to the treaty, Iran is banned from acquiring nuclear weapons and is required to allow the IAEA to inspect and verify all nuclear materials and activities, including at short notice, if asked.
The agency regularly inspects Iran's nuclear facilities, including sites like Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan. The aim is to ensure that nuclear materials are only used for peaceful means and are not diverted for weapons use.
After the June 2025 Israeli strikes, the IAEA confirmed that Natanz had been impacted but reported no elevated radiation levels. However, it emphasised that any military attack on nuclear facilities is a violation of international law and poses serious risks to safety and the environment.
https://news.un.org/en/story2025/06/1164611
From UN reports already posted:
"Growing concerns
The draft for Thursday's resolution highlights serious and growing concerns since at least 2019 that Iran had failed to cooperate fully with the UN agency's inspectors."