It was reported a week ago that the UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) released a report that argued that Iran may have been attempting to build nuclear weapons based on the fact that it had computer models of a nuclear warhead, in addition with other information. On the matter, the report itself states Iran conducted computer model studies and the like, but gives no conclusive damning evidence. 
This has led many to argue that Iran is in fact attempting to build a nuclear weapon. What many fail to realize is that not only does the UN report not state the Iran is attempting to build a nuclear weapon, but also the fact that the UN report may very well be biased due to the head of the IAEA's ties to the US and also that this report could be used as part of a media war for the US-NATO-Israeli alliance to wage war on Iran.
The UN may seem like a neutral organization, but in reality, it can be influenced by outside forces. An example of this is with the head of the IAEA. It was reported last month by The Guardian that a cable released by Wikileaks stated that the new head of the IAEA, Yukiya Amano, "was solidly in the U.S. court on every key strategic decision, from high-level personnel appointments to the handling of Iran's alleged nuclear weapons program."  In addition to this, when Amano had his first post-election meeting with the US, the Americans came away with the notion that the meeting "illustrate[d] the very high degree of convergence between his priorities and [America's] agenda at the IAEA" and that the coming transition period would "[provide] a further window for [the US] to shape Amano's thinking before his agenda collide[d] with the IAEA Secretariat bureaucracy." The fact that the US had plans to shape Amano's thinking should make one wonder how much influence the US had over him.
The US and Israel could be using this report to argue that their countries should go to war with Iran. However, the information could potentially be false as it was noted by Russia Today that the UN “has found no smoking gun, but has succeeded nonetheless in hyping up fears that Iran is continuing its research on nuclear weapons”  (emphasis added) and that the information could be false as
some, like former CIA officer Philip Giraldi, have grave doubts about the value of the IAEA report.
“I would be very skeptical about this report that is coming out from the International Atomic Energy Agency, because the IAEA doesn’t really have any intelligence capabilities of its own. It is relying on reports that are coming from other people. I would rather suspect these reports are coming from the US and Israel,” says Giraldi.
The precedent of US intelligence presenting false evidence to build a case for the war in Iraq raises alarm bells as to the accuracy of the atomic agency’s latest report on Iran.
“You may have a piece of evidence of some kind, but that piece of evidence is subject to your interpretation,” Giraldi says. “When they saw aerial photographs in Iraq showing certain things, they interpreted those photographs to mean something which was not correct.”  (emphasis added)
The possibility that the IAEA report could be using false information is quite possible as the US-NATO-Israeli alliance has been looking to invade Iran for quite some time and has been waging a media war in support of this objective. One major example being the myth that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stated that Iran wanted to wipe Israel off the map. This proved to be completely false as
The Iranian president was quoting an ancient statement by Iran's first Islamist leader, the late Ayatollah Khomeini that "this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time" just as the Shah's regime in Iran had vanished.
He was not making a military threat. He was calling for an end to the occupation of Jerusalem at some point in the future.  (emphasis added)
While this was proven to be false, war hawks in America and Israel still used as an argument of Iranian aggression. However, the current situation is quite dangerous as Israel may be making moves to bomb Iran, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arguing with his Cabinet for Israel to take such an action.  In addition to this, the British military is currently “stepping up their contingency planning for potential military action against Iran amid mounting concern about Tehran's nuclear enrichment programme”  as the British Ministry of Defense thinks that the US may go ahead and strike key Iranian facilities via missile strikes and that Britain will unconditionally support the US.
Despite their plans, however, the war mongerers may find it difficult to achieve their goals as Russia recently stated that it would “do everything possible to prevent a military strike on Iran and push forward political dialogue on Iran's nuclear issue.” 
The threat of a Western attack against Iran is extremely dangerous as it could potentially lead to a World War 3 scenario as “Were Iran to be the object of a ‘pre-emptive’ aerial attack by allied forces, the entire region, from the Eastern Mediterranean to China's Western frontier with Afghanistan and Pakistan, would flare up.”  We need to be knowledgeable of the fact that an attack on Iran would consist “not only in reclaiming Anglo-American control over Iran's oil and gas economy, including pipeline routes, [but would] also [challenge] the presence and influence of China and Russia in the region.” 
Russia has major interests in Iran as Russia has made a large amount of money off aiding Iran in building its nuclear facilities. In addition to this, Russia wants to back Iran as a counterweight to US influence in Central Asia. China also has an interest in Iran as China can get oil and natural gas from them. Both countries have been heavily involved in Iran economically and have a strategic interest in making sure that Iran is not attacked.
If the West attacks Iran, it could lead to World War III.