Israelische Streiks haben das iranische Atomprogramm oder seine nuklearen Ambitionen nicht ausgeschieden

Snippet from this article:
“In just a few days of war, Israel has killed more than a dozen of Iran’s top nuclear scientists, taken out much of its top military hierarchy and attacked key parts of its nuclear programme.
It has been a powerful display of Israeli military and intelligence dominance, but has not critically damaged Iran’s widely dispersed and heavily protected nuclear programme, Israeli military commanders and international nuclear proliferation experts agree.

And far from curbing nuclear proliferation, Israel’s gamble on force could drive Iran to speed up its efforts to get a bomb if the current conflict ends without full destruction of the programme or a deal with iron-clad controls and broad inspection powers.
Israel’s initial attacks had delayed by a few months Iran’s ability to “break out”, or make a functioning nuclear weapon, an Israeli military official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

But US intelligence officials believe Tehran was up to three years away from being able to deliver a weapon and not actively pursuing a bomb, CNN reported on Tuesday – which would make that delay relatively inconsequential.
The Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, claimed he launched the attacks because Iran was on the threshold of having a nuclear bomb. But even if that is true, strikes so far will not have bought much more time, and Israel may not be able to do more lasting damage without US help.

So in general I agree that this was probably not a wise move on Israel’s part. However I don’t think the idea that this is speeding up Iran’s nuclear ambitions really means much. They were fully committed already. The regime had too many concerns about threats both foreign and domestic and have long made it clear that they viewed it as an existential need.

That said I still tend to think that a MAD situation would probably have been preferable to this hot war that most likely leads to exactly the same place. Israel can achieve complete air superiority, but they can’t invade effectively. They can’t force regime change (and it likely wouldn’t stick if they did). So I see this as a costly way to accomplish nothing.

Has there ever been a case where a country’s nuclear program was destroyed, and then they went on to make nuclear weapons anyway?

I can think of two examples where nuclear programs were destroyed and then never restarted.

So what wins; real life examples, or fantasy speculation? 

I know which side the Guardian is on.