Update
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

BREAKING: Exclusive: Early US intel assessment suggests strikes on Iran did not destroy nuclear sites, sources say

The US military strikes on three of Iran’s nuclear facilities last weekend did not destroy the core components of the country’s nuclear program and likely only set it back by months, according to an early US intelligence assessment that was described by three people briefed on it.

The assessment, which has not been previously reported, was produced by the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon’s intelligence arm. It is based on a battle damage assessment conducted by US Central Command in the aftermath of the US strikes, one of the sources said.

The analysis of the damage to the sites and the impact of the strikes on Iran’s nuclear ambitions is ongoing, and could change as more intelligence becomes available. But the early findings are at odds with President Donald Trump’s repeated claims that the strikes “completely and totally obliterated” Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth also said on Sunday that Iran’s nuclear ambitions “have been obliterated.”

Two of the people familiar with the assessment said Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium was not destroyed. One of the people said the centrifuges are largely “intact.”

“So the (DIA) assessment is that the US set them back maybe a few months, tops,” this person added.

The White House acknowledged the existence of the assessment but said they disagreed with it.

---

CNN

---

Will Il Duce have the guts to follow-up with the first strikes and make sure Iran doesn't have a capacity to retaliate with WMDs, like President George W. Bush did with Iraq?

Or is he going to kick the can down the road because he figures he might not even be around years from now?
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
MoveAlong · 70-79, M
I don't know how much enriched uranium the Iranians have but I doubt they keep it all in one basket. Even if the centrifuges were destroyed if they have stores of enriched uranium they can still produce a bomb.
helenS · 36-40, F
@MoveAlong From what I understood, Iran holds a stockpile of ~1/2 ton of uranium enriched to 60%. That's more than enough for a nuclear power plant, but 60% is not enough for a uranium fission bomb.
(Uranium is a poor material for fission bombs anyway. The Hiroshima bomb was made of Uranium, and its efficiency was on the order of 0.5%. The Nagasaki bomb was a plutonium bomb, it was much "better". Fission bombs are normally made of plutonium, not uranium.)
MoveAlong · 70-79, M
@helenS Thanks I was actually going to look that up. I know the Heroshima bomb was made from uranium enriched to 80%. I believe it took about 140lbs.

I read the book The Making of the Atomic Bomb by Richard Rhodes which won a Pulitzer for nonfiction. It left no stone unturned about the Manhattan Project. That was a long time ago though.

Edit: If we knew they were only enriching to 60% then it should have been evident that they were not close to making a bomb.
helenS · 36-40, F
@MoveAlong I always wanted to read that book, but I never did, for some reason.
I read the "Los Alamos Primer" though, which is a series of lectures by Oppi's postdoc, Robert Serber. It's written for people with a certain background in physics.
MoveAlong · 70-79, M
I have a strong interest in science but that may be over my head.
helenS · 36-40, F
@MoveAlong Try your luck:
https://www.amazon.com/Los-Alamos-Primer-Lectures-Introduction/dp/0520344170/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2QI5RC7KZPLCI&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.2JSbA2QvcL8Do-VW_BO_Y8Fgfs0S2NxWbHujcAQF67jGwwnLlUJKIDUOQZo5g6C46OD9wdNjR6jqEqNAZdapZYftD0rCaptwGKtp23LCamGDJVgE0__O_p50ijDLoD9ss5LcP8PgHPEGPEXq4O4wFnw6xRt4d8XRUIQi6z3Ei0gxmnv7D1yw2cB5WcibInqan8TTzmFewCOaLsBB_cQrvsaLYylES0WnxlRJtufWML4.1Q9GEQxmo3HzG-ww9-CaGn8ZVC6BtI7ogy4qtVRL5NI&dib_tag=se&keywords=los+alamos+primer&qid=1750798115&sprefix=los+alamos+primer%2Caps%2C207&sr=8-1

(Sorry I really have no idea why that URL is sooo huge...)
The (declassified) book has been harshly criticized because "It conveys a powerful message that bomb designing is fun. The primer succeeds all too well in recreating the Los Alamos mystique, the picture of this brilliant group of city slickers suddenly dumped into the remotest corner of the Wild West and having the best time of their lives building bombs. It helps to perpetuate the myth."
MoveAlong · 70-79, M
@helenS An Interesting story from TMOTAB (very abbreviated): The leading scientists were dispatched to the White House to meet with Roosevelt to ask for silver from the US reserves that would be needed for the project to succeed. Roosevelt asked: "How much silver do you need". The scientists replied: "All of it".

Nearly 15,000 tons was required of which all but about 100lb unaccounted for was eventually returned.

The book is full of stories like this.
helenS · 36-40, F
@MoveAlong I will definitely read it 👍🏽