Public sentiment is largely negative and skeptical towards the Iran Nuclear Negotiations, with many expressing concern over Iran's nuclear ambitions and the effectiveness of the proposed diplomatic deal. There's a notable distrust in Iran's intentions, mixed with frustrations about the role of celebrity influence in political discourse, and skepticism regarding historical U.S. military interventions. While some advocate for peace and diplomacy, the overwhelming sentiment leans towards caution and skepticism over the implications of any agreements.

Iran

The United States

International Community

A few things:


1. In general, no country want other countries, even their ally's to have nuclear weapons (as an ally today may not always be an ally tomorrow, and a stable country today may not necessarily be a stable country tomorrow). They are absolutely devastating weapons and I think many leaders who have nuclear weapons would agree it would have been better if nuclear weapons were never invented. 


2. Iran is an enemy of many western countries. The current regime has not only openly called for the end of Israel, but has openly called for the end of America. You would not want your enemy to get their hands on extremely dangerous weapons. 


3. Some people say that countries only want nuclear weapons so they can threaten other countries with nuclear weapons. Meaning 'you don't use nuclear weapons on us, and we won't use them on you' as it would be mutually assured destruction (MAD). However this only works if the leadership is stable, not an islamic terrorist organisation. Islamic terrorist organisations adopt the doctrine of martyrdom, and believe they will go to heaven if they die for their cause, so MAD is not as much of a deterrence here. They are more likely to actually use a nuclear weapon, and if you don't understand why that would be terrible, then I can't help you. 


4. Lastly the Iranian regime is a part of an extremist Shia Islam. They believe that the prophet Mahdi will return when Israel is destroyed which is a big reason why they have been trying to destroy Israel pretty much since they took over Iran in 1979. 

Charlie4s

First, Iran is an antagonist not only to the United States, but also Israel, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and all of the other Sunni Islamic nations.  If Iran does get a nuclear weapon, let's say it IS for self defense, then Turkey, Egypt, SA, all of the rest will all also start an arms race to get their own nuclear weapons.  The middle east is not a stable region, there are coups, revolutions and crazy dictators that come and go.  Israel has a nuke and has a stable government, but everyone gets scared when a nuclear nation has a violent change of leadership - who is next? who will get control next? 

Once there is another nuclear nation, all of the non-nuclear nations will be begging the US to act as a nuclear deterrent and that will put the US deeper into the politics of the region than we already are. 

It's not entirely the first order effect of Iran having a nuclear weapon for defense that the US and rest of the world is worried about.  It's also the second and third order effects and the threat of a middle east with 5 nuclear countries and the chance that any of them lose control.

timotheo

The answer is pretty straightforward.

1.) the Islamic Republic of Iran is explicitly a genocidal theocratic state that is also the largest sponsor of extremist violent wahhabist terrorism in the world. They have stated goals of destroying Israel and wiping out the Jews, as well as wiping out all Zoroastrians, Christians, and polytheists in the world. They brutally oppress their own people in Iran, too. Women, queer people, non-muslims (especially Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians), and anyone who practices Islam "incorrectly" according to the Ayatollahs and their clerics. The punishments for these "crimes" are often public beatings and humiliation, or even execution. Iran has destroyed ancient heritage sites and important archeological sites, such as temples to Mesopotamian polytheist deities, and pre-Islamic Persian, Arab, Kurdish, Yezidi, Bedouin, and Druze cultural sites and artifacts. They give money and weapons to terrorist groups such as ISIS, Hamas, Fatah, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and the militant anti-Hindu groups in Pakistan, Kashmir, India, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh. And they rule Iranian citizens and residents (Persian and non-Persian, Muslim and non-muslim) with fear and murder, not rule of law or equal respect, dignity, and opportunity.

2.) Iran are a global threat militarily and diplomatically, who align themselves with China and Russia and North Korea in an attempt to take down the Western powers and NATO. If Iran got ahold of nuclear weapons capabilities, they would drastically shift the balance of power and control on the world stage in a way that would be much more dangerous for everyone, especially those who are aligned with the Western civilizations such as USA, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, the UK, EU countries, NATO members, the Nordic Council, and so on. Denying Iran nuclear weapons capabilities is a matter of strategic defense and the values of pluralistic liberal democracy, as opposed to autocracy and authoritarianism.

3.) nuclear proliferation in general is freaking scary and dangerous. The scientific community, humanitarian organizations, peace organizations, and the United Nations all acknowledge that the more nukes there are in the world total, and the more spread around they are, the more likely it is for a nuclear world war to start and the planet to become completely uninhabitable by over 90% of lifeforms for hundreds if not thousands of years, with potentially irreversible damage being done to the atmosphere, soil, water, and magnetosphere of Earth. In short, Mutually Assured Destruction, and the extinction of the human species.

[deleted]

&gt;I’m sure they’re smart enough to figure out if they launched a nuke af us or our allies it would quite literally end the world or at least guarantee their own extinction


You are talking about a group that is kinda known for suicide bombings. 


If their extremist religious ideas support the idea that if they die in a war (with israel) they are martyrs, then even if they are smart enough to realize it would be the end of the world. They would find that an acceptable offer since they get to go to heaven.

BackupChallenger

The world is inherently adversarial. Iran is among the worst of the bunch. They have a completely different value system (if you can even call it that) and a well-demonstrated willingness to impose it through violence, wherever they can.

For those who believe they simply want them for ‘self-defense’, take a look at Iran-sponsored terrorist attacks. Consider the endless militias they have funded with their oil money. Are these defensive? Do they only operate in Iran? 

Perhaps most importantly, who are Iran’s supporters? Russia, which is currently invading one its neighbors, China, which has *explicit* designs for their neighbors, North Korea, which has been habitually terrorizing its neighbors for decades… These are all global misfits. They are only aligned because what they want to inflict on the world is *not allowed*.

InsufferableMollusk

Iran officially plans to destroy israel by 2040. They even have a countdown clock 
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iran-al-quds-day-protest-clock-president-hassan-rouhani-a7806056.html


Whereas Israel just calls for regime change in Iran, Iran calls for complete destruction of Israel including its people.

wavefield

I've noticed r/politics has had a flood of angry outraged people insisting that letting Iran have nukes would actually help to keep world peace.  That its "only fair" they have them too since Israel has them.  The amount of posts, the absolute certainty of their convictions, and their angry outrage makes me think they are a bunch of bots trying to brainwash the younger generation.

The sad thing is, brainwashing seems to almost always work.

OP, be careful of propaganda.  It just takes one crazy dictator who has the power of nukes to kill almost everyone in the entire world.  I'm actually scared that putin, who's quite clearly a malignant narcissist that doesnt care about anyone else, may decide to take the world with him if he gets a terminal disease and is about to die.

It only takes one crazy dictator and the chances of there being a crazy dictator increases with every country that gets nuclear weapons.

Arming Iran is especially bad as they support suicide bombings and do not seem to care for life the way we do.  They've also threatened to attack so many different countries its literally crazy to to be living in one of the threatened countries and want to allow them to have nukes.

Hobobo2024

https://www.reddit.com/r/centrist/s/LzwYhOfDbN

plum-moonlight

"their government might not be the best"

Iran is not a country that the US simply has policy or ideological disagreement with.

This is a country that openly supports terrorism. Hamas is just a recent example. Their fundamentalist regime is opposed to Israel's existence and openly calls for its total destruction.

Think about what that means - it's basically saying you're my neighbor. I'm gonna kill you simply because you and I pray to in different gods.

The US has fundamental ideological differences with many countries - the Chinese communist party is an example. But the US has never advocated military actions against China or the toppling of its government; neither has China.

first off i’d say we need to just get rid of nukes all together, they pose too much of a threat to the world. even if no leader wants to launch their nukes first, there have been several moments in history when simulators accidentally turned on and nukes were also launched as a retaliatory measure, despite no one actually launching warheads in the first place. **the world almost ended because of a computer glitch**

If Iran gets nukes, it changes power dynamics in the world. Currently the countries with nuclear warheads and nuclear capabilities are:
- the U.S.
- the UK
- France
- Russia 
- China
- North Korea
- India
- Pakistan
- Israel (supposedly has warheads)

Other countries have had them in the past
- Ukraine (warheads were left in the Ukrainian SSR when the USSR collapsed. The warheads were given to the Russian Federation in a treaty.  
- Kazakhstan (same as Ukraine)
- South Africa (developed their own warheads)

There are also some countries in NATO and CSTO that share nukes with the U.S., UK or Russia.

If Iran develops warheads, it escalates the Middle Eastern cold war and conflicts. Currently, the U.S., UK, China and Russia have agreed not to create more warheads (though they could be in secret when you consider black budgets). 

India and Pakistan have not agreed to this and they basically do have them pointed at each other.

Iranian warheads would create an India-Pakistan situation between Iran and Israel. But caught in the middle would be the entire middle east. Iran also hates most of the world: Egypt, Saudi Arabia etc. their only allies in the region are autonomous rebel armies that they supply.

Iceberg-man-77

Iran is the greatest investor of state sponsored terrorism on the planet.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_state-sponsored_terrorism

Iran is also run by a theocracy who works with paramilitary groups with a culture of Martyrdom and a belief in the rapture and end of the world. 

It goes without saying that with this context, Iran is not the most ideal civilization to be allowed by the rest of humanity to produce nuclear weapons.

That said, the entire country isn't like that and I think if the Supreme Leader was changed to not be a theocracy then Iran would likely moderate and change for the better. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Leader_of_Iran

therosx

I'm against Iran having nukes as it would lead more ME countries to persue it, and I don't like having more nuclear armed countries in general. However, this can easily be done by reimplementing the Obama deal rather than starting a war with them (which I strongly oppose). I also believe Israel should denuke.

AntiWokeCommie

I think the idea is that people believe them to be an irrational actor, who may not mind setting off a nuke against a country because of religious beliefs or whatever and thus may not care about the "MA" part of "MAD."

I don't.  Probably the more practical reason that there's opposition to them having a nuke is that they can project more power/bully more countries in their region.  Except for Israel, who has nukes.  It's why countries want them.

Educational_Impact93

Iran's government's goal is death to Israel and America, not rational self defense and self interest. They are a revolutionary theocracy. They are religious nuts for whom dying for the cause is martyrdom. This is all at the expense of their own people whose importance ranks far below their ideology. They sponsor terrorist organizations that advance these religious goals. They are antagonists to other countries including their Islamic neighbors as well.

If you don't understand why such a government having nukes is terrible I don't know what to say. Them "accidentally " having a loose nuke incident that ends up in the hands of jihadists would be an expected result.

[Podcast with Iran expert](https://youtu.be/c_WO0x4ERV0?si=INzC6x0HkXd7_f_6)

they will immediately use a nuclear bomb because of their religion and believe them starting a holy war will bring the return of al-Mahdi.

Holiday_Chapter_4251

You know how we can't do much to Russia for fear of them using nukes? That's why

Jimbo-Shrimp

I think it’s super interesting that I’m reading all these comments about how Iran is adversarial to Western countries, is a genocidal theocracy, and has a jihadist mindset so cannot have nuclear weapons. The US is adversarial to the entire world, including their neighbours, uses Christianity to overturn federal laws and justify their military actions on countries not strong enough to defend against them, and also, one very important point: the United States of America is the ONLY country in this entire world that has ACTUALLY dropped nuclear bombs on another country, after said country surrendered. I mean, if there is any country that should be disarmed and not allowed to have nuclear bombs is the US of fucking A.

EstablishmentMean497

Nah they are doing it for entirely scientific purposes bro

CrankyGrumpyWombat

Well it's not so bad, IMO. Now, to be clear, I do not want Iran to obtain a nuke just like I don't want North Korea to have one. But I try to look at the world as a realist. The Iranian regime is made up, in part, of conservative religious fanatics. Islamic fundamentaists. But, they have also shown themselves to be reasonable and interested in self-preservation. That being the preservation of the Islamic regime. I truly believe Iran's main interest in obtaining a nuclear weapon is purely for deterrence and preservation of their awful rule. I do not believe, like many neo-cons do, that Iran will use its nuclear weapon as soon as they obtain a functional nuclear warhead. Iran is a lot of bark and very little bite. They can chant "Death to America" until their heart's content so long as it stays only verbal which I believe, based on the history of the Islamic Republic, that it will.

CleverNombre

Iran essentially IS Hezbollah, and supporters, with both arms and finance, some of the worst terror groups in the Middle East. They have a stated goal of obliterating Israel and have attempted it, repeatedly. They were key players in every invasion against Israel to date.


As far as Israel is concerned, Iran having nukes is grounds to deploy their own in perceived self defence.


Add the general bullshit in the area, not great for regional stability.

Spida81

The nuclear bomb isn't even the issue. If it were, the warhawks would have gone after the real big players like Russia or China, or even North Korea when they started building up their nuclear powers. 

It's all about oil policies and profits for wars in foreign countries. We spent 20+ years in Afghanistan and Iraq "fighting the war on terror" after 9/11, but in reality the US military was building up pipelines for oil and gas industries. Soldiers died building and protecting these pipelines for corporation profits. 

On the homefront, we were supposed to believe it was to stop terrorism. We spent millions of dollars A DAY bombing and taking out entire poor and destitute cities, running out or killing people hungry and living in caves in the poorest parts of the world for territory instead of putting the money into our own US economy. 

The real reason they want to side with Israel for an Iran war is because it borders our oil pipelines already built in Iraq.

Financial-Special766

I have been listening to a great podcast called, Talk Iran. It has been very interesting to hear about the history and the timeline of how they became such an adversary of the US. I highly recommend a listen. 

CapitalInspection488

Before readint allat you will say it's islamic terrorist shit yeah whatever itan should have nukes

WorkerLeather2803

the US and Israeli governments and elites believe Israel must have “qualitative military edge” over all of the Middle eastern countries

if you google this you can see that US congress made this a law. by US law israel must have a huge advantage over the rest of the region 

——

[US support for Israel has been immoral since 1948](https://www.reddit.com/r/Global_News_Hub/comments/1ij11wd/comment/mbcyfk3/). Since 1967, the [US has helped the Israelis invade Palestinian territory](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_Israeli_settlements) with over 750,000 people in violation of international law. My fellow Americans have helped the Israelis kill 150,000 Arabs over this time and this has been evil on our part. The entire conflict's root cause has been deliberately misrepresented to the US public for more than 75 years.

US policy regarding Israel [led to the 9/11 attacks](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motives_for_the_September_11_attacks), the $ [8 trillion war on terror](https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/figures/2021/BudgetaryCosts) (the wealth equivalent of 20 million homes), [7,000 US soldier deaths](https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/human/military), 50,000 injured soldiers, 30,000 additional veteran suicides, and the [Iraq and Afghanistan wars.](https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v28/n06/john-mearsheimer/the-israel-lobby) And for decades, the US has [refused to put any pressure on Israel ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Israel#Nuclear_Non-Proliferation_Treaty_and_United_Nations)to have them join the NPT and disarm their hundreds of nukes, while [nearly all of the Middle East's 450 million people have sought this](https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2013-10/news/iaea-members-reject-israel-resolution).

Mundane_Molasses6850

Hitchens:  "The one thing we've -- since I was at school lying awake worrying what happens when apocalyptic weaponry is grabbed hold of, laid hold of, by messianic totalitarian forces. Well, we are about to find out. If we want to run that experiment, they're ready to do it for us."

[https://www.rferl.org/a/transcript\_conversation\_with\_christopher\_hitchens/2244720.html](https://www.rferl.org/a/transcript_conversation_with_christopher_hitchens/2244720.html)

jordipg

I’m Gen X first war I experienced was Vietnam War. Gulf War Afghanistan War that lasted 20 years. And every other conflict in between from 60’s to now 
We should have never helped Middle East with Russia. 
Russia would have learned that they could not defeat them before US got involved. 
We had a very precarious relationship with the Middle East at that time. 
But we did and then US end up fighting a country they were sent  to protect against Russia. 
Don’t make sense does it? 
Problem was they underestimated the Middle East They have no real civilization, they have been fighting each other since antiquity (biblical days) they live in the most harshest climate in the world They now how to survive and fight on that harsh terrain &amp; know there land. 
Any civilization is not going to win against that no matter how much military training they have 
Also is alot of psychological warfare that military men suffer from the environment but middle eastern people that’s all they know 
That war lasted 20 years. As long as Vietnam war. Which we also had no reason to get in the middle of that either. We lost that too. My uncle was Army Ranger and he came back really messed up and never recovered. Drank a lot. Still had nightmares and PTSD until he died from cancer which he got from the Agent Orange the US used to kill the foliage in Vietnam 
I’ve lived a long time, was a humanitarian of many continents and have seen suffering from war or an extremist that starved over 350,000 of his own people (Somalia) and had wars going a majority of my life. 

Regular-Song-6799

I think the crux of the issue is, would Iran be crazy enough to use nukes on Israel if it got them, knowing Israel has nukes too and would retaliate? Yes, several of its politicians have been fanatical and have threatened Israel with destruction, but what matters is whether the actual guys in charge would do it. It seems to me that Iran's actions in the past, while often despicable, have not been insane.

viperfish_01

The Abrahamic religions are violent in nature.  History shows a trail of war and aggression between Jews / Christians / Islam, all claiming God justifies their actions.  It is a mess.  There are more good people that live in Iran than bad.  Unfortunately, when bad people get power they can become dangerous and disruptive - Trump is a perfect example of this.  Unfortunately, many leaders in the middle-east also fall into this category.  Add Russia and North Korea to the mix and we've got a real problem on our hands.  I question the crazed bomb the hell out of Iran approach.  There was a real diplomatic process in place with every country in the UN Security council signed on until Trump pulled out of it.  Trump's posturing is nothing more than lies, his modus operandi, hiding his real intent of regime change and full imperialistic control of the Middle-East oil.  God forbid the US Petrodollar system is replaced with Chinese Yuan!  Instead of dealing with our deficit by building an appropriate tax base and managing spending we are running our deficits up to support billionaires and risk Gen Z's future.  If the dollar is no longer the major currency, countries will pull away from the US bond market which funds our deficit spending and our economy suffers greatly.  Demon Boy, I would highly suggest you and your Gen Z buds screw your heads on straight and vote intelligently in this next election if you want to continue to continue to experience a wealthy democracy.  MAGA is NOT the answer, but the problem.

kintotal

Nuclear weapon should have NEVER been invented. I don't get why folks are still fighting religious wars in 2025. Have you noticed that all four corners of the globe worksip a different God?

Junior_Occasion9776

Well Irans leaders have vowed to use those nukes to destroy Israel AND America. 


When somebody tells you who they are and what they want you should believe them. 

JaneDi

Because Israel seeks to avoid any regional power that could challenge its unchecked control and ongoing occupation.

LaDainianTomIinson

Not bad for the US or US interests. Not good for Israel or Saudi. Since these two sides provide parasitically major funding and networking to both sides of aisle of Congress and to Trump personally, we see what we see. The US groveling.

Idaho1964

If North Korea can manage to have nukes and not use them then I think Iran can as well. No body uses nukes. Let them eat cake

gravitywind1012

It’s propaganda. A lot of political narratives are simple propaganda to distract you from the true story. Follow the money. Follow the ego. 2 things that mankind will always use to dictate their interests and attention.

OddMeasurement7467

Its because Middle East is UNSTABLE. I also think majority of islamic people have a superiority complex. They want to be on top of everybody else. Not all of them are bad, but majority of them is.

In my country, Philippines.
-We send caretakers/maids to the middle east only for them to go home overworked, battered, raped or abused. This is not isolated. Majority of oversees worker are being abused by their muslim employers. Hense you could see that THEY DO NOT STRAY FAR FROM VIOLENCE.

-We have many islamic terrorist groups here. "Maute" and "Abu-sayaf" which was funded by ISIS during the Siege of Marawi. The "MILF" or Moro Islamic Liberation Front occasionaly do some SUICIDE BOMBINGS, On churches or other crowded places. Beheading and Ambushing Journalist when they like it. Kidnapping foreign people to prove a point. Which proves that THEY DO EVERYTHING FOR THEIR RELIGION.

-They are very "FANATIC" AND "ZEALOT" about their religion that they forget the basic human decency to NOT MAKE YOUR WIFE A PUNCHING BAG.

In other words, if they continue to abuse on the micro-level whats stopping them from nuking every country they are pissed at? 

Fuck Israel and USA, what they are doing is wrong, but I dont want to see Iran or any other Islamic Country have a nuclear device on hand. You say North Korea has some, they are not RADICAL and stupid. If you want to die for your religion, then you are stupid.

CreamyPestoSandwich

They’d be a nuclear power that could oppose western greed in that region.


More importantly, they are a threat to Israel -who own our politicians.

12bEngie

Isreal claims that Iran has vowed to destroy them which justifies their actions. But in reality, I think  Israel doesnt want anyone being able to challenge them and Iran with a bomb makes Israel less in control. Isreal is believed to have up to 90 nukes of their own. So it's not like they couldn't defend themselves.

baby_budda

They're flagrantly breaching the terms of the agreement while still being parties to it.  How can they talk about fair negotiations when they don't even stick to what they've agreed?

Tetracropolis

Iran has no leg to demand anything. Its nuclear facilities are destroyed and under surveillance. Any attempt to build its nuclear capabilities, I believe, will be bombed again. Therefore, it is better for Iran to refrain from chaos.

Abdulkarim0

The whole situation feels like a bad rerun of the last decade. Iran says it is ready for fair talks if the West shows goodwill but at the same time the Europeans pull the snapback lever knowing full well that Tehran sees it as illegitimate. It is hard to call it diplomacy when both sides are already digging trenches. The US and Israel literally bombed Iranian facilities two months ago and now the E3 expects Iran to sit politely at a negotiation table. Of course Iran is going to call out the legal basis because that is the only card they have left besides escalation. What is striking is how little faith there is on either side that talks could actually solve anything. 

The snapback mechanism was always a blunt tool and using it now just looks like desperation to lock in sanctions before the October deadline. Ordinary people in Iran will pay the price in higher costs and more isolation while politicians in Europe and Washington pat themselves on the back for being tough.

UnlikelyOpposite7478

Every time, the western countries falling for the bullshit of a fanatic islamist mafia that holds the country of Iran hostage, posing as a "government" while spreading terrorism, death and decay internally and externally, not to mention being famous for their hostage diplomacy ever since they came to power with western help in 1979. 

When will it end? When will these spineless European countries stop appeasing these islamists?

DonnieB555

I agree with the author that purely from the standpoint of civilian nuclear, there’s little sense in Iran insisting on keeping enrichment capacity. The costs of their civilian nuclear program have been huge and the civilian benefit has been minimal.

But setting aside the civilian use, I don’t really understand the author’s argument on why Iran would agree to give up their latent nuclear deterrent. This paragraph in particular was hard for me to understand:

&gt; Israeli bombing of the sites that support weaponization has likely delayed Iran’s ability to produce nuclear warheads to be mated to missiles, although it is uncertain by how much. A few crude bombs could be built without further enrichment to 90 percent by using the less-effective 60 percent enriched material, if any of it survived the Israeli and American attacks. But Iran has had the capability to sprint to a few bombs, which could be employed in a one-time attack or as a terrorist weapon, for perhaps two decades. It hasn’t done so and likely will not now, especially since it is in the crosshairs of and virtually defenseless against Israeli and American air attacks and deeply infiltrated by Israel intelligence services. We believe Iran was hedging its nuclear bets all along to amass a sufficiently large stockpile of bomb-grade uranium for missile-deliverable nuclear warheads to serve as a deterrent against Israel. Such a nuclear deterrent has been set back by many years.

The author seems to be downplaying the value of Iran’s latent nuclear deterrent, but I’m confused by the assertion that the nuclear warhead deterrent has been set back by “many years” despite starting the paragraph by acknowledging that we don’t know how much the strikes have set them back in their ability to make warheads. 

The author also acknowledges elsewhere that Iran may have retained its stockpile of 60% enriched uranium. And — to his credit since so many authors don’t seem to understand this — he also discusses how the remaining steps to the bomb (enriching 60-&gt;90, uranium conversion, weaponization research) don’t require massive infrastructure like Fordow and Natanz, but can be done in small hidden facilities and workshops. 

So in what way have they been set back many years? Best I can tell, the author is taking it as a given that Iran won’t race for a bomb while it’s in a vulnerable state like it is now. I’m not sure why they are so confident in that. 

Yes, the US and Israeli can inflict a lot of pain on Iran if they rush towards a bomb, but we can’t stop them. Airstrikes are very effective against massive facilities like Natanz and Fordow with thousands of centrifuges bolted to the ground, but much less effective when the target is 10,000 scientists spread out in small workshops and classrooms across the entire country. 

Maybe being in a vulnerable state like Iran is now, with your enemies bragging about how dominant their forces are, is exactly the time that you become willing to endure a few years of pain to get a nuclear weapon. 

________

The biggest hurdle I see in getting Iran to agree to zero enrichment is establishing the trust that would require. Such a deal would inevitably also require destroying or moving all of its highly enriched uranium to a third country, stopping production of new centrifuges and basically dismantling any remaining enrichment infrastructure. What happens if the very next day after they do that, Donald Trump (again) unilaterally rips up the nuclear deal and says “get punk’d idiots, sanctions are back on until you agree to more conditions.” Iran will have set itself back years from a nuclear deterrent in exchange for something the US and Israel can reverse at a moment’s notice. 

Between the US withdrawal and the Israeli surprise attack 2 days before negotiations were set to take place, Iran has little reason to trust the US and Israel would act in good faith. Retaining the capacity to enrich (capped to 3.67%) seems essential to any deal they might agree to, simply as a protection against another US withdrawal from the agreement. 

_____

Last thing I wanted to say about this article is that I don’t think they make any argument for why the US should insist on zero-enrichment. The author seems to acknowledge that Iran has been very hesitant to actually go nuclear and has mainly used the nuclear program as a latent deterrent, so what’s the harm in letting them keep enrichment up to 3.67%, assuming we have strict monitoring in place like the IAEA’s additional protocol? This is what Iran opened negotiations with back in April when speaking to the US envoy.

oskanta

ttown2011

I really can't see why Iran would. The US and Israel don't seem to want to invade, I can't imagine that making a deal with the US seems credible... So you need a regime backstop which is a nuke, just need to test one.

Neowarcloud

If they want to maintain any semblance of sovereignty, they absolutely should not agree to that lol

dpavlicko

From a realpolitik pov, I don't know why they would do that. Trump randomly thrashed the prior deal that they were in compliance with. Russia and China won't shield them if Trump decides to do a regime change....They could have sold them a nuclear warhead ages ago for permanent deterrence as well. The fact that Kim Dynasty sits so comfortably and Ukraine/Iraq was invaded on lies doesn't really leave a good reason for them to recommit.

fuggitdude22

It's bizarre watching the internet argue that Iran should have nukes

DrippingPickle

They can enrich the 5% or whatever needed for civilian programmes. Enriching to 60% was just reckless. I'm not saying I endorse the attacks on Iran, but they were playing with fire and they knew it.

polemism

Writing at the *Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists* website, Hoover Institution Research Fellow [Abbas Milani](https://www.hoover.org/profiles/abbas-milani) and Stanford emeritus professor of management science and engineering Siegfried S. Hecker argue that, “following the extensive Israeli bombing of Iran’s nuclear complex, supplemented by American attacks on the better-protected Iranian sites, the time has come for Iran’s leaders to reconsider their past intransigent, deceptive posture and instead pursue a nuclear power program that will benefit the Iranian people.” Milani, a leading authority on Iranian politics, and Hecker, a former director of Los Alamos National Laboratory, review key historical moments that led to the current standoff over Iran’s nuclear program. Turning to the role of US policy, the authors conclude, “It is now important for President Trump to get Israel to stop the bombing and follow through with Iran to consummate a deal that will benefit the people of Iran and take a big step toward peace in the region.”

HooverInstitution

There was a deal. Trump ended it. F off Maga loons.

Hertje73

There’s so much talk about the Iranian nuclear programme being delayed for x period of time. Guys. *Guys*. More time has elapsed since Trump backed out of the deal than it took to design and deploy two different nuclear weapon designs in WWII. If Iran genuinely wanted nukes as much as people claim, they’d have them. They already have the deployment mechanisms. 

It is absurdly clear they didn’t want to actually take that last step and create the bomb a couple months ago. That’s been the IC’s opinion for years, too. I’m old enough to remember the “Iraq has WMDs” talk in 2023; this is the exact same song and dance. The only real difference is the intended scale of involvement on the ground.

PausedForVolatility

Yes yes we are the most righteous people because we are in the Bible also yes we also have nuke because we are the chosen one - israel

If not for USA and aipac, Israel will be gone in no time. Also don't talk about Gaza, because there is no war in Gaza strip.

Every_West_3890

It’s too bad the citizens, the true Iranians, couldn’t use the Israeli strike to enact regime change. Hopefully in our lifetime there will be a free and prosperous Iran.

ChaLenCe

We're getting to the point where the international community has to ask whether the current Iranian regime should be allowed to have nuclear power in general.

Cultural-Flow7185

Religious fanatics and the IRGC are in control there will be no deal until they are gone.

MeatPiston

This is genuinely a really good question and there are some interesting answers to it.

1: Israel doesn't trust the process. See, Israel has long believed that Iran uses negotiations as a stalling tactic; time spent talking at the peace table means more time spent advancing nuclear capabilities. Every delay, every loophole, every ambiguity could potentially mean Iran is one step closer to a bomb. Even if a talk turns into a deal, Iran's compliance isn't guaranteed. It's not even necessarily that Israel doesn't have faith in negotiating, it's that they don't have faith the deal reached will be strong enough or enforced enough to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power.

2: Israel's credibility could be at stake. They've drawn very clear lines in the sand with Iran's nuclear capabilities, and if they reach certain thresholds, Israel won't hesitate to respond with military force to maintain international and domestic credibility. In their strategic culture, and in the Middle East especially, credibility is everything; if they say they'll act, and don't, Iran is simply emboldened to push the envelope even further.

3: This could just be a case of preemptive strike, which is on par for Israel strategically speaking. They have a long history of doing so, just look at Operation Opera in Iraq (1981) or Operation Orchard in Syria (2007). In both cases, Israel bombed nuclear reactors in enemy states without international approval for the sake of keeping nukes out of hostile hands, trading short term diplomatic backlash for long term national security.

4: Israel might not trust the United States' intelligence. We might be allies, but we can also interpret the reports differently. If Israeli intelligence believes Iran is closer to a bomb than the US does, they'll hit them regardless.

5: It could be their way of forcing our (as in the US, I forget not everyone reading this is from here, as a typical 'murican would) hand. They're essentially saying, "if you won't stop them, we will, and you'll have to deal with the consequences." If they strike, Washington either has to back Israel or risk alienating a key ally in the Middle East, which would damage our position and interests in the region.

6: This could all be a ploy for domestic political pressure. Don't forget, the Middle East has politics that are just as complex as those in the United States, particularly in Iran and Israel. Netanyahu could be making a long term play with military action to shift the national conversation, bolster support, and show decisive, united leadership against a universally hated enemy. There are plenty of good examples of this all over the world, with tough military tactics being used as a sort of propaganda to rally the people of that country. 

Sorry that this is so long 💀😭 but I hope this answers your question!!

Nobody respects Trump's propensity for "deals" in the international community

macdaddee

Good question. I’d understood this to have been the decisive factor - article published just hours before Israel’s strike on Iran:

“The global nuclear watchdog's board of governors has formally declared Iran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations for the first time in 20 years. […] It follows a report from the IAEA last week which criticised Iran's "general lack of co-operation" and said it had enough uranium enriched to 60% purity, near weapons grade, to potentially make nine nuclear bombs.”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce3v6w2qr12o.amp

Elbow2020

I can't imagine any sane country waiting on the Trump administration to cement a meaningful deal.

KronusIV

The UN inspectors report came out publicly backing what Israel/US intelligence personnel already knew. With the expansion of their program they knew any negotiations where just lip service. They had been planning this for months.

Gtstricky

The likeliest answer is as stupid as it sounds.

Trump told Netanyahu not to do anything for 60 days.  Trump played hardball for the “deal” he wanted.  Day 61 came around and Netanyahu did whatever the fuck he wanted.


Politics and happenstance aside.  What people have to realize is Netanyahu’s legacy is set.  The ball is rolling, when Hamas attacked on October 7th he said, fuck it.  I perceive threats, I’m done being threatened, and is attempting to clean house.

First it was Hamas.  Then it was the round ups in the West Bank.  Then it was brutalizing Hezbollah.  Now it’s taking the fight to Iran directly.

He’s an unleashed dog; and we can argue reasons or whatever bullshit.  But at this stage that is what he is doing.  Clearing the threats, knocking them down a peg.

jredful

Trump. 

Realistically 

What negotiation?   What deal?

CleaveIwishnot

LoL you think the US runs the show??? Especially with Trump at the helm?

Birkeland1992

US talks gave Iran a false sense of security so Israel could strike 


https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/in-twist-u-s-diplomacy-served-as-cover-for-israeli-surprise-attack-c79b2206?st=riaAjY

Monte_Cristos_Count

Clearly Israel didn’t think a deal was going to happen and Iran had just blown past its nuclear proliferation limits for the first time in 20 years, according to the UN watchdog monitoring Iran’s nuclear program.

Cornwallis400

The negotiations were pretty much a sham. Israel has wanted to attack Iran for at least a couple of decades, but the US always made them back down. 

However, for a number of reasons, Iran’s influence and military capacity is weaker now than it has been for many years, and US has a president who actively approved of the Israeli plans.

Azdak66

1. Israel believes Trump is a chump.

Like every other country.

Jensen1994

Internal politics. Concerned about what nonsense trump might actually agree to given that he's a .... special negotiator

ParsleySlow

It's an aggressive rogue state that is currently emboldened by the lack of repercussions to its aggression. Let's remember that it's also bombing lebanon Syria gaza Iraq.

Early-Carrot-8070

Because Netanyahu wants to stay out of jail any way he can.

ProPwno

they don’t respect trump because he’s a little bitch

ghost_of_apaol

Another option being that Netanyahu can only stay in power as long they're actively militarily engaged so he just keeps pushing the envelope as hard as he can.

He's a wanted war criminal for the Genocide he and his regime are committing and the fighting basically gives him the ability to stave off his inevitable visit to the ICC.

M0reMotivati0n

Considering it’s Iran, why would anybody trust anything regarding them? Least trustworthy country next to North Korea, China, and Russia.

Plus, the current Israeli government is kind of on a spree of being like, “fuck it, might as well”.

Dramatic-Blueberry98

The US only thought it was negotiating. Sending a tweet doesn’t constitute a negotiation.

GuitarPlayingGuy71

Trump has shown consistently that deals mean nothing to him. Iran can't trust the U.S., and Israel knows it, so they just use hard power to cripple Iran's nuclear program. Trump would have been unsuccessful in reaching a deal anyway since he's the one who pulled out of a deal made during Obama's presidency.

As an American who still remembers Trump throwing the previous nuclear deal Obama made that had the works largest economies including China behind it, I have no faith that Trump is working on a deal either in good faith, or even competently

MajorPlanet

attraction hurry squash silky tender enjoy whistle knee rhythm zephyr

 *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev/home)*

Scrum_Bag

In Case you haven't noticed yet, nobody gives a fuck about the current US government because they're not fit for the job and your president is mentally ill in a very dysfunctional way. Nobody wants to negotiate with these kind of people and the common consensus is that Trump will break contracts whenever he wants anyway so they are essentially worthless.

TheGreatButz

alienalf1

johnf420bro

Because they received intelligence that Iran was days away from enriching weapons grade uranium (for making nukes). And once that has been achieved they can move it all over in country, making locating and destroying it almost impossible. They know it can only be made in a few locations, so attacking them now is much, much easier.

Plus they must know the talks aren’t going anywhere. Despite what Trump says, him and his buddies are not master negotiators. And Isreal has seen how Trump treats Ukraine.

coachhunter2

We already had a deal with Iran years ago, then Donald Trump destroyed the deal.   there's no reason to think Donald Trump will ever negotiate a better deal even if you tried.

WorldTallestEngineer

They don’t want a deal. They don’t want peace. War is profit and power. 

Also Netanyahu’s court case isn’t going well.

EPCOpress

-Israel doesn't care- is the correct answer. They want WAR iran since what, 30 years already? It's not about nukes, they want to dominate the region and iran is the really last standing country opposing them left.

Zlatan-Agrees

1. Nobody outside of Trump's sycophantic echochamber actually thinks he is good at making deals. He's definitely not going to get anything done.



2. (This one is more important, in my opinion) global pressure is building against the genocide in Gaza. Israel may be forced to pull out of Gaza soon, and even if their not, there's not much left for them to do there anyway. So they need another enemy. 



Fascism is an unstable system that can not survive long in peace times. It needs an enemy to unite its people against. Netanyahu is worried that he's going to lose his current "enemy" due to global pressure forcing a withdrawal from Gaza, so he's making a new one.

larrry02

Because they know better than anyone that you cant trust the terrorist state of Iran.

SarcastikBastard

Because they are an independent nation and made a judgement call.

URignorance-astounds

Netanyahu wants war. He's been beating the drum forever and now under Trump he's gotten the green light.

kembik

Israel doesn't want a deal. They know that they can do anything they want; Trump won't do anything to them because of the strong, unquestioning support evangelicals give to Israel.

Professional-Pay1198

Because if there is no forever war Netanyahu will go to prison and lose power.

I wish it weren't so dumb

GiantSquirrelPanic

Follow up question didn’t we already have a nuclear deal with Iran? What happened to that?

Apprehensive_Dog1526

Because the current US administration tore up an old deal the last time they were in office.

So, now we’re here…

TheHarlemHellfighter

Well, if all of a sudden a deal is made and they stop attacking that might be something to note huh. Let's see.

InflationOk3410

To humiliate Trump. He’s a useful moron, Bibi, Putin etc. do not like or respect him.

sonofchocula

Netanyahu is fighting to remain in power to avoid jail. His coalition was hanging on by a thread, supported by only war mongering zionists who want only to kill as many of their enemies as possible....including their women, children, animals and olive trees....real old testament stuff. Trump and most of the US Congress fear for their political lives over the power Israel exerts politically. The MAGA Christian crowd supports Israel over the "Philistines" yet seem totally unaware of just how much venom and hatred those same Zionists feel for Christians. They despise Christ. They are truly a base people supported in the US by idiots.

FlaminFlabbarghast

Discussions between European diplomats and Iran focus on averting renewed sanctions concerning its nuclear program, emphasizing diplomatic solutions.

Iran Nuclear Negotiations

Why This Matters

Public Sentiment Summary

Highlighted Comments

Parties Involved

What the people want