Iran

#6,077
#6,077
Did Tulsi gabbard say Iran wasn’t building a nuclear weapon. Was this proven wrong?

Yes, Tulsi Gabbard, as Director of National Intelligence, testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee on March 25, 2025, stating that the U.S. intelligence community assessed that "Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003." She also noted that Iran's enriched uranium stockpile was at unprecedented levels for a state without nuclear weapons, raising concerns about its potential capabilities.

However, in June 2025, Gabbard shifted her stance, stating on X that U.S. intelligence indicated Iran could produce a nuclear weapon "within weeks to months" if it decided to finalize assembly. This change followed President Donald Trump's public contradiction of her March testimony, where he claimed Iran was "very close" to having a nuclear weapon, dismissing her earlier assessment.

Was Gabbard's initial claim proven wrong?

There is no definitive evidence in the provided sources that conclusively proves Iran was actively building a nuclear weapon at the time of Gabbard's March 2025 testimony, contradicting her statement. A Reuters source with access to U.S. intelligence reports confirmed that the March assessment—stating Iran was not building a nuclear weapon—had not changed by June 2025. However, the same source noted it could take Iran up to three years to build a deliverable nuclear warhead, though some experts suggested a crude, untested device could be produced in a shorter time.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported in May 2025 that Iran had amassed enough uranium enriched to 60% (close to weapons-grade 90%) to potentially produce nine nuclear bombs, raising proliferation concerns. However, the IAEA could not confirm Iran’s program was exclusively peaceful due to non-compliance with investigations, but it did not conclude active weaponization.

Israeli claims, echoed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, asserted Iran was racing toward a nuclear weapon, justifying strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities in June 2025. These claims conflicted with U.S. intelligence assessments, and Iran consistently denied pursuing nuclear weapons, citing a peaceful program.

Analysis: Gabbard’s initial claim aligned with U.S. intelligence assessments at the time, which found no active Iranian nuclear weapons program. Her later statement in June 2025, aligning with Trump’s view, appears to reflect a shift in rhetoric rather than new evidence contradicting the earlier assessment. The increased uranium stockpile and public discussions in Iran about nuclear weapons raised concerns, but no source confirms Iran resumed weaponization. Critics, including some X posts, argue the narrative of an imminent Iranian nuclear threat may be exaggerated to justify military action, drawing parallels to the 2003 Iraq War.

In summary, Gabbard’s March 2025 claim that Iran was not building a nuclear weapon was consistent with U.S. intelligence at the time and has not been definitively proven wrong, though concerns about Iran’s capabilities persist due to its enriched uranium stockpile and lack of transparency with the IAEA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
#6,088
#6,088
MontyPython said:
Did Tulsi gabbard say Iran wasn’t building a nuclear weapon. Was this proven wrong?

Yes, Tulsi Gabbard, as Director of National Intelligence, testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee on March 25, 2025, stating that the U.S. intelligence community assessed that "Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003." She also noted that Iran's enriched uranium stockpile was at unprecedented levels for a state without nuclear weapons, raising concerns about its potential capabilities.

However, in June 2025, Gabbard shifted her stance, stating on X that U.S. intelligence indicated Iran could produce a nuclear weapon "within weeks to months" if it decided to finalize assembly. This change followed President Donald Trump's public contradiction of her March testimony, where he claimed Iran was "very close" to having a nuclear weapon, dismissing her earlier assessment.

Was Gabbard's initial claim proven wrong?

There is no definitive evidence in the provided sources that conclusively proves Iran was actively building a nuclear weapon at the time of Gabbard's March 2025 testimony, contradicting her statement. A Reuters source with access to U.S. intelligence reports confirmed that the March assessment—stating Iran was not building a nuclear weapon—had not changed by June 2025. However, the same source noted it could take Iran up to three years to build a deliverable nuclear warhead, though some experts suggested a crude, untested device could be produced in a shorter time.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported in May 2025 that Iran had amassed enough uranium enriched to 60% (close to weapons-grade 90%) to potentially produce nine nuclear bombs, raising proliferation concerns. However, the IAEA could not confirm Iran’s program was exclusively peaceful due to non-compliance with investigations, but it did not conclude active weaponization.

Israeli claims, echoed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, asserted Iran was racing toward a nuclear weapon, justifying strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities in June 2025. These claims conflicted with U.S. intelligence assessments, and Iran consistently denied pursuing nuclear weapons, citing a peaceful program.

Analysis: Gabbard’s initial claim aligned with U.S. intelligence assessments at the time, which found no active Iranian nuclear weapons program. Her later statement in June 2025, aligning with Trump’s view, appears to reflect a shift in rhetoric rather than new evidence contradicting the earlier assessment. The increased uranium stockpile and public discussions in Iran about nuclear weapons raised concerns, but no source confirms Iran resumed weaponization. Critics, including some X posts, argue the narrative of an imminent Iranian nuclear threat may be exaggerated to justify military action, drawing parallels to the 2003 Iraq War.

In summary, Gabbard’s March 2025 claim that Iran was not building a nuclear weapon was consistent with U.S. intelligence at the time and has not been definitively proven wrong, though concerns about Iran’s capabilities persist due to its enriched uranium stockpile and lack of transparency with the IAEA.
Click to expand...

Hoping John Cusack can confirm
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol since 77, hog88, MemphisVol77 and 4 others
#6,093
#6,093
NashVol11 said:
You continue to prove my point. This has been verified and you can't even say "that's sh***y behavior by the IDF," instead it's just pretending it didn't happen and claiming it's a lie. Israel lies at least as much as Hamas if not more so
Click to expand...
You continue to prove my point.
it’s the responsibility of Hamas to care for their own people. Hiding behind them isn’t caring for them. I expect the IDF to protect my family and prevent another 10/7 attack from ever happening again. The IDF doesn’t hide behind their women and children. They stand in front of them. If Hamas does not want its people killed they should defend them instead of using them as shields. If Hamas does not value their people then neither do I.

The difference between you and me is that I actually have family and friends in this mess and I’m condemning the people who are the cause of excessive civilian casualties. Hamas.

And you’re too smart to actually believe that Israel lies more than Hamas. You’re not an idiot.
 
#6,097
#6,097
volinbham said:
I don't trust them one bit but given how much of the top military leadership got taken out I could see that there might be some soul searching going on among the next in line.
Click to expand...
And the circle of trust is probably less than half of what it once was. My guess is Khomeini has already passed power to another.

There will be a significant lockdown once hostilities are over...... Followed by either a rebranding or forceful show of power for domestic consumption.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbh and Orangeslice13
#6,100
#6,100
KB5252 said:
And the circle of trust is probably less than half of what it once was. My guess is Khomeini has already passed power to another.

There will be a significant lockdown once hostilities are over...... Followed by either a rebranding or forceful show of power for domestic consumption.
Click to expand...
Maybe they can build another fake aircraft carrier to attack and not sink
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top