DoDo says upthread that there is no "technical proof as of current that Iran does have a nuclear armament programme".

One of the most worryingly points against that is the recurring (and non-negotionable) urgency Iran puts on having gas (or isotope) centrifuges, those massive uranium enrichers. For the civilian use of nuclear energy, Iran needs centrifuges which can enrich uranium from its natural 0.7% to the necessarry 4 to 5% - after which nuclear fission is attainable.

Iran has and is building bigger gas centrifuges. There is but one goal for bigger gas centrifuges: higher uranium enrichment. There is but one goal known to man for uranium with higher enrichment than 4 - 5 percent: nuclear weapons. Do the math. Alarm bells should be ringing and they do ring in the IAEA.

And in that respect, I think there is a serious problem in Iran and Europe should not accept the way it gets treated. The Iranians even snuffed the perfectly acceptable offer of the Russians.

Having gas centrifuges for 4-5 % enrichment? Perfectly acceptable to me. Go ahead.
Gas centrifuges bigger than that? No, no, no.

In an aside: To other raised points that there would be perfect reasons for Iran to have nukes, as deterrents or such, that doesn't fly with me at all. We want to ban nuclear arms, not promote it.