🔭 Alex is Learning (To Think)

Israel & Iran (session 4)

Jul 16, 20259 min read

1. What was the Israeli calculus in launching Friday’s strikes against Iran?

  • They claimed that they had intel that Iran were very close to having enough fissile material for a bomb, right?
  • I saw a video of a defence analyst saying how the night of Israel’s strikes (Rising Lion) was essentially on a full moon, and how normally you’d very much avoid that as it makes your planes much more visible, and as such they must have really been in a rush, corroborating the “we’ve had intel that they’re very close to a nuke” story somewhat
  • I guess is the question “why strike Iran” or “why strike on that day”
  • There’s also the fact that the next round (6th round?) of negotiations between Iran & the US were about to begin, and how Israel killed the head Iranian negotiator (!). So clearly not wanting the negotiations to happen was part of the calculus
  • I think that covers the main points from me. Gotta stop reaching enough fissile material for a bomb, and stop the negotiations dead.
  • Also it’s relatively safe to attack now as their strokes in October destroyed a fair amount of Iran’s air defence systems

2. How effective has Israel been in dismantling Iran’s nuclear capabilities?

  • Idk if they mean in general, or just this time
  • Historically - Stuxnet was crazy, also they assassinated the Iranian Oppenheimer in the last 2-10 years
  • This time, they bombed at least 2 key enrichment sites, but don’t have the bunker busters to reach Fordow, which I think is the most significant site
  • They also killed a really shocking amount of top nuclear scientists this time, at least 3+, but I think maybe like 10+
  • They also killed key military personnel, potentially the second in command in the military, which is wild
  • Unsure how much damage has been done to the fuel enrichment sites that were hit

3. How forcefully has Tehran responded, and what has the impact been?

  • They’ve struck Israel (100%)
  • They’ve actually killed people in Israel, which I was surprised by
  • Turns out the Iron Dome is mostly (or exclusively?) for short-term missiles, whereas Iran is (naturally, as it’s so far away) not using short-term missiles
  • So Iran has been firing… intercontinental missiles (?) at Iran
  • And this is what David’s Sling and the Arrow systems are for (think I’ve got the names right)
  • Israel say they have a 90% rate of shooting down missiles via these systems? And also fighter jets can shoot them down.
  • I think I saw an Israeli official say that the Americans have probably saved hundreds (or thousands?) of lives, via shooting down these missiles
  • At least 10 Israelis have been killed (90%)

  • 50 Israelis have been killed - 30%

    • Note that it feels pretty ghoulish to be forecasting this as an amateur

4. What are the the environmental and health concerns from attacks on nuclear facilities?

  • I assume that it’s bad but it’s not that bad, because it’s not like they have bombs that you might actually hit…
  • My assumption is that the worst thing that happens if you bomb nuclear fission fuel is that it gets scattered. It’s not like it sets off a reaction (as you need 90% fissile fuel for a bomb)
  • But it’s still pretty damn bad to scatter nuclear fuel. It’s hard to know how much there is and how far it’d travel, what the health effects would be

5. How has the IAEA responded, and are there restrictions around striking nuclear facilities under international law?

  • Idk what the IAEA would be doing at this point
  • I know they handle inspections (article III of the NPT?) - the CSAs and APs
  • I’m pretty sure they’d be involved in negotiations. Like, 80%
  • I’m pretty damn sure there’d be international restrictions re: striking nuclear facilities. Like… 90%, because at the very least it’s very bad for the environment innit

Fed the above into ChatGPT and said “gimme predictions” because I’m feeling lazy

  1. Full-moon timing: The “Rising Lion” Israeli strike occurred on a night when lunar illumination was ≥ 75%
    • 80% → don’t think the youtube video guy would’ve bullshitted me. But it’ll be interesting to check for myself
    • ✅
      • ” a waning-gibbous stage only two days past full, so almost all of its disc is still sunlit—roughly 95 % of the surface is illuminated. Published almanacs give values in the low- to high-90s, e.g. 97.7 % and 95 % at standard reference times, with minor shifts (≈92 %) depending on your time-zone”
  2. Negotiator casualty: The chief Iranian nuclear negotiator slated for upcoming U.S.–Iran talks was killed in that strike.
    • 80% → don’t think I’m misremembering this!
    • ❌ !! Apparently not, at least according to Perplexity
  3. Talks imminence: A sixth round of U.S.–Iran nuclear negotiations was publicly scheduled to begin within seven days of the strike.
    • 60%
    • ✅
  4. Scientist deaths: At least three named Iranian nuclear scientists were confirmed killed in connection with the strike.
    • 80%
    • ✅
  5. Senior officer killed: An individual officially described as Iran’s second-in-command was killed in the same action.
    • 70% - don’t think I’m misremembering this!
    • ✅
  6. ICBM use: Iran’s direct retaliation included at least one missile with a range ≥ 5 500 km.
    • So I don’t really know much about missile types, like, I know they’ve had to use long range ones, but idk if its ICBMs or something a bit more medium-range…
    • I guess they’d want ICBMs for general defence, like to be able to hit America if needed?
    • I’m gonna say 40%
    • ❌ → as expected, they’ve used medium-range ones instead
      • Oh shit, Iran doesn’t have ICBMs! I had no model re: how rare they are. I don’t know much about military expenses too
      • “Iran fires MRBMs because that is what it actually possesses and what the mission requires. True ICBMs would be an unnecessary, ultra-expensive escalation that adds military risk without improving the ability to hit Israel”
      • “Iran hasn’t fired intercontinental-range missiles at Israel mainly because it doesn’t have any operational ICBMs. The longest-range missiles Iran has actually fielded top out around 2 000 km—already enough to hit Israel—so anything in the ICBM class (≥ 5 500 km) would be over-engineered, costlier, and far more escalatory.”
  7. Iron Dome range: Iron Dome is marketed solely for intercepting threats with ranges ≤ 250 km, not medium- or long-range missiles.
    • 70% - a youtuber told me this, doubt they were wrong…
    • ✅ - but so conservative that it’s kinda wrong/missed the point ❌
      • By saying “≤ 250 km” you implicitly include 200-km class missiles—those are firmly in the David’s Sling layer, not Iron Dome. So the core idea (“it’s for short-range, not medium/long-range”) is right, but the numeric cap is wrong, not conservative.
  8. Interception claim: Israeli officials publicly cited an interception rate of ≥ 80 % against the Iranian salvo.
    • Another direct report from a youtube video
    • 80%
    • ✅
      • Overall interception rate since the start of the conflict: approximately 90% for Iranian ballistic missiles.
      • Recent 24-hour interception rate: about 65% due to faster, more advanced Iranian missiles
  9. Fatalities count: The confirmed Israeli death toll from Iran’s missile response currently stands at ten or more.
    • 90%
    • ✅
  10. There isn’t significant danger of a nuclear explosion/chain reaction from striking an enrichment facility
    • 70%
    • ✅
      • “Low-enriched or even 60 % uranium can’t detonate. Criticality (an uncontrolled nuclear chain reaction) needs 90 %+ enrichment in a precise geometry—and isn’t present in UF₆ feedstock. So there’s no chance of a nuclear explosion, and only a slim chance of a local criticality accident.”
  11. The main risk of striking an enrichment facility is spreading fissile fuel
    • 60%
    • ✅ I’ll give myself this - it’s the hexaflouride spreading
      • “Enrichment plants store and pipe tons of uranium hexafluoride (UF₆). If a bomb cracks those cylinders, the gas meets air-moisture in seconds and turns into hydrogen fluoride (HF) and uranyl-fluoride dust”
      • Immediate hazards nearby (e.g. burns, inhalation) and down-the-wind contaminatino
  12. The Israelis killed 10+ Iranian nuclear scientists on the day of Rising Lion
    • 70%
      • ❌
      • 6! I could have sworn I saw a video where they said 15+

  13. 50 Israelis have been killed

    1. 30%
    • ❌
      • In summary, the total number of Israeli civilian deaths since Operation Rising Lion began is approximately 24, with hundreds more injured due to Iranian missile and drone attacks during this period

  14. 50 Iranian civilians have been killed

    • 80%
    • ✅

  15. 100 Iranian civilians have been killed

    • 40%
      • ✅
      • The Iranian health ministry and the Human Rights Activists in Iran nonprofit group reported more than 200 Iranian civilians killed in the Israeli strikes, with the Iranian health authorities specifically reporting 224 killed, the majority being civilians.
      • The US-based organization HRANA reported a total of 408 killed in Iran, including 199 civilians, 92 military members, and 117 unidentified dead
  16. It’s illegal to strike nuclear enrichment facilities according to international law
    • 80%
      • I actually don’t know what would cover this, like, it’s not in any of the NPT treaties that I know (although there are some that I don’t know - 7, 8 and 9, and 10 is the highest I’m aware of)
      • ❌
      • Outside that narrow category, an enrichment complex is treated like any other installation: it is immune from attack unless it constitutes a military objective. If it is contributing to a weapons programme, belligerents may lawfully target it provided they meet the usual law-of-armed-conflict tests of military necessity, distinction, and proportionality. 
  17. The IAEA were key partners in the JCPOA negotiation - 90% - if not them then who - ❌ oh shit! - Result: False — the IAEA was crucial for verification but not a negotiating party to the JCPOA. Negotiations were conducted by Iran and the P5 + 1 (US, UK, France, Germany, Russia, China, plus the EU); the Agency’s role began when it was asked to verify and monitor Iran’s nuclear-related commitments after the deal was struck

Graph View

Backlinks