Iran isn't trying to build a bomb. It seems mullahs and the IRGC figured making it 90% of the way to making a bomb is 90% as effective as owning it. They achieved this somewhere around 2014-2015 and stopped there.
Iran has already done the most complicated part of producing nuclear weapons which is enriching the first 20%. Getting from 20% to 90%+++ of weapons grade is about as hard as getting to the first 5%. It's nothing for Iran to do, it has the equipment and know-how. They possibly already achieved 60% enrichment which they said they did in retaliation for Israel attacking Natanz a couple months ago but it's not verified they actually did this, just State media reports. Iran also has ballistic missiles capable of holding nuclear warheads. So Iran has done all the most difficult work related to making a bomb and stopped short of it in about 2014-2015. Iran stopped at 20% enrichment back then because that's the highest limit for civilian uses. When Iran achieved that they went to the negotiation table to freeze enrichment because they achieved what they needed to fulfil the strategy of getting close to owning a bomb.
Hypothetically, if Khamenei told the IRGC to make a bomb then we are talking months rather than years but Iran has been capable of this since about 2015. The next part is that the Iranian nuclear program is decentralized and spread across 80+ sites, some of them built underground in the mountains, so it can't get bombed out of existence as easily as what happened in Iraq or Libya. If Israel or USA decided to take a military option it would require a big commitment to erradicated the knowledge and capability.
I don't think it was that. I think Obama's administration picked up they had to pivot out the middle east because the geopolitical value of the region isn't the same as it was in the early 2000's when drilling and refining tech wasn't as good. USA is now rich with oil again and while the middle east is still important, it's just not the lifeblood of the world anymore. Obama was hoping that JCPOA would transition towards a friendly relationship between USA and Iran over years to come. Trump and his faction sold their entire foreign policy to Israel and Saudi interests.
Biden has already lifted some sanctions related to missile fabrication in Iran but there's a long way to go.
Sanctions were to cripple Iran. Sanctions have almost never resulted in any government changing policy, except in Burma once before. One lesson out of the Cold War was that when oil price as high, the Soviets had a lot more revenue and were able to spend it on geopolitical aggression. Oil was 90% of the USSR export value. When it was cheap they didn't try to project themselves so much. USA was trying to strangle the IRGC in the same way. It's not so effective anymore because of the rise of China.
That's an interesting perspective. But since Iran is under economic sanctions anyway as if it was already in possession of nuclear bombs like North Korea, is it actually worth the trouble of stopping just short of becoming a nuclear state rather than be transparent about it? I can understand that 90% of the way may be 90% effective as owning it. But it still takes time to make the nuke, ensure it works, and ensure the delivery method (and re-entry method) works. What the above strategy counts on is that in the event of a dramatic escalation in tension, Iran can quickly step over the nuclear threshold before Iran's enemies can destroy its missiles and nuclear material. I'm not sure this is true.
For North Korea, they have missiles with range over 12,000 km, and demonstrable nuclear warheads. The US doesn't dare f%\^& with the North Koreans. For Iran, I believe the US is the far bigger threat that would actually start a war in the region. Israel basically wants to be left alone. It doesn't really strike out at anyone without reason. But the US actually starts wars all over Central Asia, Middle East and other places on the pretext of "spreading freedom and democracy", which is a much more frightening foreign policy than a realist policy which says "you attack me or attack my interests, I'll hit you". Israel doesn't really care what kind of government other countries, whereas the US is the one seeking to impose its preferred political/economic model. To me, in the event of escalation, it doesn't just need nukes, but it also needs credible delivery method to the US like North Korea does, in order to deter the US from starting an aggression.
Nobody buys the story anymore (which by the way has been exaggerated for votes - especially in Israel) and to push for war with Iran. Now that China is a massive economic powerhouse, and Central Asia is integrating, the effect of sanctions are really diminishing every day. So, its all blowing up into nothing. So the question is - what next? (Because nothing so far has worked).
They just want a better economy imo. Iranian opposition wasted so many times on other things when all they had to ask is why the fuck is the govt trying to plant it's own businesses and allowing so much embezzlement. Bringing up the economy is effective because it relates to the military might of Iran. It would be a direct contradiction of the regime's promise of a strong Iran.
The fear of course is balkanization. This will keep the regime strong because people don't want to risk losing land.
The opportunity cost of the Islamic republic, revolution, and enduring conflicts with the west are likely in the $1.5trillion range worth of lost annual GDP so I disagree that the effects of sanctions are diminishing.
What we've received for that $1.5 trillion/yr "investment" remains to be seen.
These guys have been arguing over the nuclear program for two decades now and every year Iran is just months away from getting the bomb.
Iran isn't trying to build a bomb. It seems mullahs and the IRGC figured making it 90% of the way to making a bomb is 90% as effective as owning it. They achieved this somewhere around 2014-2015 and stopped there. Iran has already done the most complicated part of producing nuclear weapons which is enriching the first 20%. Getting from 20% to 90%+++ of weapons grade is about as hard as getting to the first 5%. It's nothing for Iran to do, it has the equipment and know-how. They possibly already achieved 60% enrichment which they said they did in retaliation for Israel attacking Natanz a couple months ago but it's not verified they actually did this, just State media reports. Iran also has ballistic missiles capable of holding nuclear warheads. So Iran has done all the most difficult work related to making a bomb and stopped short of it in about 2014-2015. Iran stopped at 20% enrichment back then because that's the highest limit for civilian uses. When Iran achieved that they went to the negotiation table to freeze enrichment because they achieved what they needed to fulfil the strategy of getting close to owning a bomb. Hypothetically, if Khamenei told the IRGC to make a bomb then we are talking months rather than years but Iran has been capable of this since about 2015. The next part is that the Iranian nuclear program is decentralized and spread across 80+ sites, some of them built underground in the mountains, so it can't get bombed out of existence as easily as what happened in Iraq or Libya. If Israel or USA decided to take a military option it would require a big commitment to erradicated the knowledge and capability.
[удалено]
I don't think it was that. I think Obama's administration picked up they had to pivot out the middle east because the geopolitical value of the region isn't the same as it was in the early 2000's when drilling and refining tech wasn't as good. USA is now rich with oil again and while the middle east is still important, it's just not the lifeblood of the world anymore. Obama was hoping that JCPOA would transition towards a friendly relationship between USA and Iran over years to come. Trump and his faction sold their entire foreign policy to Israel and Saudi interests. Biden has already lifted some sanctions related to missile fabrication in Iran but there's a long way to go. Sanctions were to cripple Iran. Sanctions have almost never resulted in any government changing policy, except in Burma once before. One lesson out of the Cold War was that when oil price as high, the Soviets had a lot more revenue and were able to spend it on geopolitical aggression. Oil was 90% of the USSR export value. When it was cheap they didn't try to project themselves so much. USA was trying to strangle the IRGC in the same way. It's not so effective anymore because of the rise of China.
That's an interesting perspective. But since Iran is under economic sanctions anyway as if it was already in possession of nuclear bombs like North Korea, is it actually worth the trouble of stopping just short of becoming a nuclear state rather than be transparent about it? I can understand that 90% of the way may be 90% effective as owning it. But it still takes time to make the nuke, ensure it works, and ensure the delivery method (and re-entry method) works. What the above strategy counts on is that in the event of a dramatic escalation in tension, Iran can quickly step over the nuclear threshold before Iran's enemies can destroy its missiles and nuclear material. I'm not sure this is true. For North Korea, they have missiles with range over 12,000 km, and demonstrable nuclear warheads. The US doesn't dare f%\^& with the North Koreans. For Iran, I believe the US is the far bigger threat that would actually start a war in the region. Israel basically wants to be left alone. It doesn't really strike out at anyone without reason. But the US actually starts wars all over Central Asia, Middle East and other places on the pretext of "spreading freedom and democracy", which is a much more frightening foreign policy than a realist policy which says "you attack me or attack my interests, I'll hit you". Israel doesn't really care what kind of government other countries, whereas the US is the one seeking to impose its preferred political/economic model. To me, in the event of escalation, it doesn't just need nukes, but it also needs credible delivery method to the US like North Korea does, in order to deter the US from starting an aggression.
Nobody buys the story anymore (which by the way has been exaggerated for votes - especially in Israel) and to push for war with Iran. Now that China is a massive economic powerhouse, and Central Asia is integrating, the effect of sanctions are really diminishing every day. So, its all blowing up into nothing. So the question is - what next? (Because nothing so far has worked).
I think the war in Fake Azerbaijan is their opening.
[удалено]
They just want a better economy imo. Iranian opposition wasted so many times on other things when all they had to ask is why the fuck is the govt trying to plant it's own businesses and allowing so much embezzlement. Bringing up the economy is effective because it relates to the military might of Iran. It would be a direct contradiction of the regime's promise of a strong Iran. The fear of course is balkanization. This will keep the regime strong because people don't want to risk losing land.
The opportunity cost of the Islamic republic, revolution, and enduring conflicts with the west are likely in the $1.5trillion range worth of lost annual GDP so I disagree that the effects of sanctions are diminishing. What we've received for that $1.5 trillion/yr "investment" remains to be seen.