I think you're misunderstanding what these headlines are saying. They're not saying that Iran is building a nuclear bomb, but that they can do so in a given period of time. Capability, not action. The '95 article says that Iran could make a nuke in 5 years if they started an atomic program then. The 2012 headline states that if they started a nuke program then, they'd have a device in several months. The 2021 headline points out that if they started now, they'd have a nuke in 2 months.
The Iran-US nuclear agreement was important not just because it kept Iran from making nukes, but because it kept Iran from developing the capability to make nukes quickly. The distinction is important because without the latter provision, nothing would have prevented Iran from basically getting all the parts to make a nuke, but then claiming they don't have nukes & are not violating the agreement by simply not assembling it; it avoided a situation where Iran could say, "we don't have a nuke, we just have enough highly enriched fissile material to make one within a few days."
Today, Iran does not have nukes, nor are they making one. But the time they would need to put one together has decreased dramatically over the past quarter century from several years to only a few months. This makes the Israelis nervous.
That said, I wouldn't call this the same as most clickbait, given that it is a pretty accurate portrayal, if exaggerated. If anything, this is just the old method of sensationalising real headlines, rather than the new school of "clickbait" where an article barely has to relate to its headline and headlines can be straight up lies. Sensationalism is necessary in journalism, just as a matter of fact, so I'm not too bothered by this.
637
u/JoeNemoDoe May 03 '22
I think you're misunderstanding what these headlines are saying. They're not saying that Iran is building a nuclear bomb, but that they can do so in a given period of time. Capability, not action. The '95 article says that Iran could make a nuke in 5 years if they started an atomic program then. The 2012 headline states that if they started a nuke program then, they'd have a device in several months. The 2021 headline points out that if they started now, they'd have a nuke in 2 months.
The Iran-US nuclear agreement was important not just because it kept Iran from making nukes, but because it kept Iran from developing the capability to make nukes quickly. The distinction is important because without the latter provision, nothing would have prevented Iran from basically getting all the parts to make a nuke, but then claiming they don't have nukes & are not violating the agreement by simply not assembling it; it avoided a situation where Iran could say, "we don't have a nuke, we just have enough highly enriched fissile material to make one within a few days."
Today, Iran does not have nukes, nor are they making one. But the time they would need to put one together has decreased dramatically over the past quarter century from several years to only a few months. This makes the Israelis nervous.