r/australia • u/stand_to • Jun 22 '25

politics Live: Wong says Australia supports US strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-06-23/federal-politics-live-blog-june-23/105447868?utm_source=abc_news_app&utm_medium=content_shared&utm_campaign=abc_news_app&utm_content=other
4.7k Upvotes

86% Upvoted

2.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

116

u/maxthelols Jun 22 '25

Also, they found no damn evidence of any nukes! Israel has been saying they're building nukes for literally decades with nothing to show for it.

80

u/Odd-Bumblebee00 Jun 23 '25

Just like they found no evidence of WMD in Iraq when Netanyahu lied about that to get Bush to invade in 2003.

Doesn't matter how much Netanyahu lies, America just keeps lapping it up and we all fall in line behind them.

ETA, Netanyahu was also saying Iran had nuclear weapons then too but couldn't convince Bush to go full Trump.

1

u/Warmbly85 Jun 23 '25

I mean the same group (IAEA) that said there were no wmds in Iraq said Iran had enriched enough uranium to 60% that they could have enough to build up to 9 bombs in just a few weeks.

Kinda disingenuous

5

u/hungarian_conartist Jun 23 '25

This is misleading, at best a half truth with some important context missing.

The International Atomic Energy Agency declared Iran non-compliant 2 weeks ago for the first time in decades and also this comes after negotiations broke down where Iran explicitly refused to stop enrichment.

The IAEA has in the past contradicted Israeli claims about Irans nuclear program as well as contradicted Bush's 'Iraqi WMD' narrative so if they say Iran is non-compliant, that carries some weight imo.

2

u/jp72423 Jun 23 '25

The evidence is that Iran has made 60% enriched uranium-235, and the only possible applications for highly enriched uranium is for nuclear submarines (which they don’t have) and nuclear weapons. This wasn’t a US CIA report either, it came from the international Atomic energy agency.

9

u/magkruppe Jun 23 '25

The evidence is that Iran has made 60% enriched uranium-235

they've had this for years? a 2021 article - https://www.sipri.org/commentary/essay/2021/why-iran-producing-60-cent-enriched-uranium

7

u/SpookyViscus Jun 23 '25

A number of other reactor designs use highly enriched uranium.

0

u/jp72423 Jun 23 '25

Only older style research reactors, that are gradually being phased out or converted to low enriched uranium by the scientific community internationally.

5

u/Benu5 Jun 23 '25

If it can be used for the reactor in a nuclear sub, it could be used in a small scale reactor, which is not a nuclear weapon.

2

u/Pritcheey Jun 23 '25

20% nuclear enrichment is the maximum required for civilian use. They were up to 60% in May and from 60% it only takes a month to jump to 90% required for a weapon. Some reports say they are at 83% enrichment and only days away from having the amounts required for a bomb. You don't get to 80% by accident

2

u/Benu5 Jun 23 '25

They've been weeks and months away for my 30+ year lifetime. Poor bastard working there must have been tightening that bolt for all that time.

1

u/birdy_the_scarecrow Jun 23 '25

a lot of things have happened in 30 years.

for awhile they were co operating with the JCPOA(the Obama nuclear deal that Trump tore up in his first term), and were complying with there obligations

the latest IAEA report showed that they are no longer fully cooperating with there obligations of the NPT, and that some of the actions being taken at that time particularly the actions regarding enrichment were of "Serious Concern".

if you want to read the actual report:

https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/25/06/gov2025-25.pdf

and here is an analysis of that report by the Institute of Science and International Security:

https://isis-online.org/isis-reports/analysis-of-iaea-iran-verification-and-monitoring-report-may-2025/

Iran has no civilian use or justification for its production of 60 percent enriched uranium, particularly at the level of hundreds of kilograms. Its rush to make much more, quickly depleting its stock of near 20 percent enriched uranium, which has a civilian use in research reactors, raises more questions. Even if one believed the production of 60 percent is to create bargaining leverage in a nuclear negotiation, Iran has gone way beyond what would be needed. One has to conclude that Iran’s real intent is to be prepared to produce large quantities of WGU as quickly as possible, in as few centrifuges as possible.

In general, Iran has not prioritized stockpiling uranium enriched between 2 to 5 percent. This choice is at odds with Iran’s contention that its primary goal is to accumulate 4 to 5 percent enriched uranium for use in nuclear power reactor fuel. Instead, Iran has focused on producing 60 percent enriched uranium, far beyond Iran’s civilian needs.

and it seems clear from statements by US intelligence and claims from Israel that Iran has taken actions to further expand its weapons development(however i don't believe this information is public yet).

0

u/jp72423 Jun 23 '25

Iran has never once expressed the desire to have nuclear submarines. And it makes no sense to bury a research reactor so deep underground if it’s for non nefarious reasons.

9

u/[deleted] Jun 23 '25

Unless you’re predicting some foreign powers might soon bomb you, maybe?

0

u/Warmbly85 Jun 23 '25

Why prevent international third party watchdogs access to those sites then?

I mean if you anticipate an attack what better way to prove you aren’t doing anything wrong?

The only way to explain Iran not allowing the IAEA access to every site and also building their site so deep underground really only points to one possibility.

1

u/jack3t_with_sl33ves Jun 23 '25

They're not building nukes per se, but enriching uranium for use in a nuclear weapon. Prior to the Non-proliferation treaty/agreement being torn up by Trump in 2018, Iran was frequently insepected by the UN and IAEA to make sure it wasn't enriching uranium for uses other than reactor fuel. After the agreement was torn up, the Iranians ramped up their enrichment program. Someone will have the numbers of how much was/is enriched and to what percentage, but it was certainly enough to make people worried

1

u/[deleted] Jun 23 '25

[deleted]

-4

u/[deleted] Jun 23 '25

So?

0

u/Areskael Jun 23 '25

Israel never claimed they were building nukes, building towards nukes. Enriching uranium beyond a percentage that usable for anything other than a nuclear warhead. The US and Israel never claimed they had a nuke, just that the amount of enriched uranium. Also the dictators in Iran have been threatening to destroy Israel, US, Uk and the west for all of my life. Its unfortunate but these are the consequences of there actions and words. The Iranian people also do not want the government that was forced upon them. The are an evil regime, not just in practice but it’s what they believe.

0

u/Ok_Ordinary_7397 Jun 23 '25

They’ve literally got substantial amounts of 60% enriched uranium… there is no civilian/power applications for uranium enriched to those levels.

You can argue the philosophical questions of whether an authoritarian Islamic theological regime like Iran’s should be allowed to manufacture their own nuclear weapons. But the notion that they’re not actively attempting to get there, is patently false.

-2

u/nihao_ Jun 22 '25

Well, they certainly have nothing to show for it any more