Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: There is no nuclear weapons program. [View all]sarisataka
(21,925 posts)25. The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists
How quickly could Iran build its first nuclear weapon? Look at China
How quickly could Iran make an atomic bomb once it has acquired enough weapons-grade uranium? Some nuclear experts argue it would take Iran anywhere between several months to up to a year. But Chinas experience shows that Tehran could build a bomb much fasterin as little as three to five weeks.[1]
***
Portions of Irans nuclear archive, which Israel seized in January 2018, clearly show Irans weaponization projects running in parallel with HEU projects under the Amad Plan, Irans code name for a crash nuclear weapons program that operated from 1999 to 2003. The Amad Plan aimed to produce five 10-kiloton nuclear weapons by early 2004, including four deliverable warheads for the Shahab-3 ballistic missile, and another one for testing underground.
***
Chinas insights. Given the similarities between Irans bomb and Chinas 596/548 atomic bomb designs, the technical bottlenecks and timelines of Chinas bomb development can shed light on Irans possible bomb development timelines.
The major hurdles China faced when making its first atomic bomb included the weapon design, neutron sources, the detonation wave focusing system, cold (or subcritical) tests, and uranium metal components production. All these are non-nuclear weapon components tasks that can be completed before HEU production, the most time-consuming step in the Chinese atomic bomb program. Once China produced HEU, it took abou three to five weeks from having sufficient UF6 gas to an assembled uranium bomb.
thttps://thebulletin.org/2025/01/how-quickly-could-iran-build-its-first-nuclear-weapon-look-at-china/
How quickly could Iran make an atomic bomb once it has acquired enough weapons-grade uranium? Some nuclear experts argue it would take Iran anywhere between several months to up to a year. But Chinas experience shows that Tehran could build a bomb much fasterin as little as three to five weeks.[1]
***
Portions of Irans nuclear archive, which Israel seized in January 2018, clearly show Irans weaponization projects running in parallel with HEU projects under the Amad Plan, Irans code name for a crash nuclear weapons program that operated from 1999 to 2003. The Amad Plan aimed to produce five 10-kiloton nuclear weapons by early 2004, including four deliverable warheads for the Shahab-3 ballistic missile, and another one for testing underground.
***
Chinas insights. Given the similarities between Irans bomb and Chinas 596/548 atomic bomb designs, the technical bottlenecks and timelines of Chinas bomb development can shed light on Irans possible bomb development timelines.
The major hurdles China faced when making its first atomic bomb included the weapon design, neutron sources, the detonation wave focusing system, cold (or subcritical) tests, and uranium metal components production. All these are non-nuclear weapon components tasks that can be completed before HEU production, the most time-consuming step in the Chinese atomic bomb program. Once China produced HEU, it took abou three to five weeks from having sufficient UF6 gas to an assembled uranium bomb.
Three to five weeks is fairly imminent, unless one believes Israel should wait until Tel Aviv is leveled.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
2 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
36 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

Just a cache of near-weapons grade enriched uranium expanded by 50% in the last 3 months--enough for 10 bombs
Ponietz
Jun 17
#3
The Point Is That It Is Not An "Imminent Threat" As Is Claimed That Was Necessarly Worthy Of This Strike
MayReasonRule
Jun 17
#5
Your idea of imminent and Israel's idea of imminent are far different,
MarineCombatEngineer
Jun 17
#9
This is sophistry at best, more likely just pure apologism for the Iranian regime.
tritsofme
Jun 17
#11
The Individual That Posted On Bluesky Does Not Have Any History Of Being An Aplogist For Iran As Far As I Know
MayReasonRule
Jun 17
#18
He's Not A Supporter Of Linsay Graham From What I've Seen... Quite The Opposite Emile
MayReasonRule
Jun 17
#20
No Doubt That Is Correct... The Reason Given For The Attack Is That There Is An "Imminent Threat"
MayReasonRule
Jun 17
#21
I'll Have To Read Through These This Evening...Thank You For Posting The Info Within The Thread!
MayReasonRule
Jun 17
#30
What is the greatest threat? The possibility that Iran might have a nuke program, or thousands of nukes that are ready
Doodley
Jun 17
#31