I'm done with this and the rest of us ought to be too.  And just for context, I am generally opposed to any sort of wartime act -- unless it is to prevent an inevitable wartime act.

From the WSJ:

VIENNA—The United Nations atomic agency has found evidence at an underground bunker in Iran that could mean the country has moved closer to producing the uranium threshold needed to arm nuclear missiles, diplomats said Friday.

The International Atomic Energy Agency has found traces of uranium enriched up to 27% at the Fordo enrichment plant in central Iran, several diplomats told The Associated Press.

That's enough for me.

There is no reason to enrich uranium beyond ~5% if you are using it only for power production.  Power reactors are intentionally designed to not use highly-enriched fuel as a safety mechanism, as the minimum enrichment necessary to form a prompt critical mass (think "boom") is approximately 20%.

"Boom" is bad when it happens accidentally, by the way.

More to the point there is no reason in today's world for any nation that does not have dual-use intentions to run a uranium fuel cycle in the first place.  Starting with nothing (no infrastructure) there are far better and safer options, including the Thorium fuel cycle, which are extremely difficult (but not impossible) to pervert for weapons use.

The Journal goes on to say that you need 90% enrichment for weapons; this is not technically true, as it is possible to form a prompt critical mass beyond the 20% threshold or thereabouts.  It is, however, difficult and someone intending to build actual bombs would typically want that 90% enrichment.

But if you're enriching to 27%, you can easily enrich to 90%.  It's the same process; it just takes longer.  And there is no reason for peaceful, land-based power production, to use fuel enriched to that level.  It's dangerous, it has the potential to result in a positive-coefficient configuration (that is, reactivity goes up with increasing output which is inherently unstable) and there's no reason to do it if your intent does not include weapons production.

Iran claims the desire to fuel medical and research reactors (used to produce medical isotopes and similar); those are reasonable but again we get down to intent and transparency.  20% and 27% are quite a ways apart and the claim that this is an "accident" is damned unlikely.  It's far more likely that 27% was on its way to 90% when some ended up where it didn't belong and thus got "found."

This is an entirely separate issue as to whether Iran should be able to produce and have nuclear weapons.  The point here is not to moralize on that issue; it is that they have claimed they have no intention of producing them and their nuclear program is entirely peaceful.

They're lying.

Now what we, and others including Israel, intend to do about that is a separate question.  But we're no longer in the realm of trying to figure out if they have an "entirely peaceful" program.

That ship has sailed.