Weapons grade is our modern 10 warheads on one missile....
Highly enriched is more than capable of making a weapon.....its just a bigger weapon....I looked it up, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were 80% and with some 80kgs uranium
Moral of the story is don't think you need 90% to make a bomb, it's what you need to make a big bomb, much smaller.
Technically, a nuclear weapon can be made with as little as 20 per cent uranium-235 (known as “highly enriched uranium”), but the more the uranium is enriched, the smaller and lighter the weapon can be. Countries with nuclear weapons tend to use about 90 per cent enriched, “weapons-grade” uranium.
Little Boy was developed by Lieutenant Commander Francis Birch's group at the Los Alamos Laboratory. It was the successor to a plutonium-fueled gun-type fission design, Thin Man, which was abandoned in 1944 after technical difficulties were discovered. Little Boy used a charge of cordite to fire a hollow cylinder (the "bullet") of highly enriched uranium through an artillery gun barrel into a solid cylinder (the "target") of the same material. The design was highly inefficient: the weapon used on Hiroshima contained 64 kilograms (141 lb) of uranium, but less than a kilogram underwent nuclear fission. Unlike the implosion design developed for the Trinity test and the Fat Man bomb design that was used against Nagasaki, which required sophisticated coordination of shaped explosive charges, the simpler but inefficient gun-type design was considered almost certain to work, and was never tested prior to its use at Hiroshima.
Being closer to is not proof of intent. Personally there is much more evidence to distrust Trump and Netanyahu less than than the Iranians. I guess the West would not like Iran to have nuclear subs the equivalent of those of the US either:
* They have a high power density in a small volume and run either on low-enriched uranium (as do some French and Chinese submarines) or on highly enriched uranium (>20% U-235, current U.S. submarines use fuel enriched to at least 93%)[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_naval_reactors#Power_plants
Also:
In September 2017, Iran’s naval command said that the country’s nuclear agency was beginning to produce nuclear reactors for fueling and propulsion systems.16 However, many analysts assert that manufacturing a nuclear reactor for submarine use is beyond Iran’s current capabilities and is simply a response to increased U.S. sanctions after the U.S. withdrawal from the JPCOA.17
Am simply saying being closer to is not proof of intent. Personally there is much more reason to distrust Trump and Netanyahu more than than the Iranians. I guess the West would not like Iran to have nuclear subs the equivalent of those of the US either:
* They have a high power density in a small volume and run either on low-enriched uranium (as do some French and Chinese submarines) or on highly enriched uranium (>20% U-235, current U.S. submarines use fuel enriched to at least 93%)[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_naval_reactors#Power_plants
Also:
In September 2017, Iran’s naval command said that the country’s nuclear agency was beginning to produce nuclear reactors for fueling and propulsion systems.16 However, many analysts assert that manufacturing a nuclear reactor for submarine use is beyond Iran’s current capabilities and is simply a response to increased U.S. sanctions after the U.S. withdrawal from the JPCOA.17
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
