After Iraq, you’d think it would have been obvious that if you can make a nuke you should absolutely do it as soon as possible.
Talk about a historic fumble
It’s almost like they weren’t…
Iran had a civilian nuclear program that could have been weaponized. This was dating back to the Shah’s era in the late 70s
The revolutionary government simply chose not to do so.
I have it on good authority that they were weeks away from it.
This is all BS, there are no weapons of mass destruction.
Welp, you heard it here first, everyone: some rando on the Internet says without evidence that the chief of the IAEA is wrong, so there’s no 60% uranium (different from “weapons of mass destruction” on which the IAEA agrees with you, in case you didn’t read the article or even the headline).
Didn’t Trump “claim” he destroyed all the material LAST YEAR???
As noted in the article, yes:
Iran’s nuclear programme is one reason Israel and the U.S. have given for their current attacks on Iran, arguing that it was getting too close to being able to produce a bomb, despite Trump saying in June that U.S. strikes had obliterated the programme. The IAEA has said it has no credible indication of a coordinated nuclear weapons programme.
And we don’t have any credible evidence that Trump is on the same planet we are on.
Some kind of alternate reality.
Great. Way to put a target on a world heritage site.
