Hottest January on record shocks scientists

Last month was the hottest January on record, surprising scientists who
expected the cooling La Niña weather cycle in the tropical Pacific to slow
almost two years of record-high temperatures. The warming, despite the
emergence of La Niña in December, is set to fuel concerns that climate
change is accelerating at a time when countries such as the US, the
world’s largest historical polluter, pull back on commitments to reduce
emissions. Bill McGuire, emeritus professor of geophysical and climate
hazards at UCL, said the January data was “both astonishing and, frankly
terrifying”, adding: “On the basis of the Valencia floods and
apocalyptic Los Angeles wildfires, I don’t think there can be any doubt
that dangerous, all-pervasive, climate breakdown has arrived. Yet emissions
continue to rise.”
FT 6th Feb 2025,
https://www.ft.com/content/b5d18aa4-92b0-45a5-8c31-4ec2646ff700
If DOGE Goes Nuclear
The risk of messing with the wrong computer system,
The Atlantic By Ross Andersen, 6 Feb 25
You may have never heard of the National Nuclear Security Administration, but its work is crucial to your safety—and to that of every other human being on the planet. If Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) hasn’t yet come across the NNSA, it surely will before too long. What happens after that could be alarming.
As recently as yesterday morning, Musk made clear that DOGE will go line by line through the government’s books looking for fat targets for budget-cutting, including those that are classified—especially those that are classified. DOGE employees are bound to notice NNSA, a 1,800-person organization that sits inside the Department of Energy and burns through $20 billion every year, much of it on classified work. But as they set out to discover exactly how the money is spent, they should proceed with care. Musk’s incursions into other agencies have reportedly risked exposing sensitive information to unqualified personnel, and obstructing people’s access to lifesaving medicine. According to several nuclear-security experts and a former senior department official, taking this same approach at the NNSA could make nuclear material at home and abroad less safe.
The NNSA was created by Congress in 1999 in order to consolidate several Department of Energy functions under one bureaucratic roof: acquiring fissile material, manufacturing nuclear weapons, and preventing America’s nuclear technology from leaking. It has all manner of sensitive information on hand, including nuclear-weapon designs and the blueprints for reactors that power Navy ships and submarines. Even the Australian Navy, which has purchased some of these submarines, is not privy to their precise inner workings, James Acton, a co-director of the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, told me. more https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2025/02/elon-musk-doge-nuclear-weapons/681581/?fbclid=IwY2xjawISvTBleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHUrPZFLfiJr2WzSs_b18hBjw_kfvMiryvsRp7oWFDJKwab_ymjGYJOpnww_aem_tGIEBzt9c5Ia-phQtt1Nvw
Elon Musk Can Find His $2-Trillion Federal Spending Cut in Nuclear Weapons
DOGE’s Elon Musk should turn his $2-trillion hatchet to wasteful and perilous U.S. nuclear weapons modernization plans
Scientific American, By Dan Vergano edited by Jeanna Bryner, 5 Feb 25
Famously fortunate, Elon Musk now faces a rare opportunity—delivering on one of his signature overblown promises. From his newly created White House cost-cutting desk, all Musk must do is recommend ending one of the most misguided, wasteful and dangerous programs contemplated by the U.S. government, one that Scientific American has pushed for elimination.
Last November Musk set an ambitious target for his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), the meme-coin-joke name for his cost-cutting office, his reward for bankrolling Trump’s campaign. Under DOGE, Musk said he would trim $2 trillion from the federal budget. That’s a hefty sum even for the space mogul now regarded as the $400-billion-worth wealthiest man on Earth. (Musk subsequently downplayed $2 trillion as a “best-case outcome.”)
Luckily for him, there is one big, fat target with just that price tag, already sitting in Uncle Sam’s shopping cart, and it’s ripe for cutting: nuclear weapons. In 2010 Trump’s nemesis, then president Barack Obama, first proposed “modernizing” the U.S. triad of land-, sea- and air-based weapons over more than three decades. Almost unnoticed outside of national security circles, the initiative’s $1-trillion sticker price has nearly doubled and, as American University national security scholar Sharon Weiner wrote last year, “is likely to escalate even further by 2050—the supposed end date for modernization.”
Conveniently enough for Musk, his new boss, Trump, called in January for talks on reducing nuclear weapons with China and Russia, while speaking to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. “Tremendous amounts of money are being spent on nuclear, and the destructive capability is something that we don’t even want to talk about today, because you don’t want to hear it,” Trump said. “It’s too depressing.”……………………. more https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/elon-musk-can-find-his-usd2-trillion-federal-spending-cut-in-nuclear-weapons/
France’s top audit body questions feasibility of EDF’s nuclear plans

The report noted that the EPR2 program still lacks a final cost estimate and financing plan, while state-owned energy company EDF remains heavily indebted. The Cour des Comptes recommended withholding a final investment decision until financing is secured.
France’s Cour des Comptes has issued a warning about rising nuclear energy costs. It is urging state-owned utility EDF to reduce its financial risks in international projects.
Solar Power Portal, February 3, 2025 Emiliano Bellini, https://www.pv-magazine.com/2025/02/03/frances-top-audit-body-questions-feasibility-of-edfs-nuclear-plans/
France’s supreme audit institution, the Cour des Comptes, has released a report on the feasibility of the nuclear plans unveiled by the government in 2022, concluding that the industry is “far from being ready” for the challenge.
The Cour des Comptes said the plan to develop EPR2 nuclear reactors – pressurized water reactors designed by EDF and Framatome – remains unclear.
“The expected profitability of the EPR2 program remains, at this stage, unknown, especially as the financing conditions of this program have still not been determined,” the authors of the report said. “When these conditions will be clear, an additional year or more will be needed to obtain their approval by the European Commission. These delays and uncertainties, which also concern the number of power plants to be built, reduce the visibility that stakeholders in the sector need to engage in industrial projects of this magnitude and obtain financing.”
The report noted that the EPR2 program still lacks a final cost estimate and financing plan, while state-owned energy company EDF remains heavily indebted. The Cour des Comptes recommended withholding a final investment decision until financing is secured.
These precautions aim to prevent cost overruns similar to those seen in EDF’s Olkiluoto EPR project in Finland, the Hinkley Point plant in the United Kingdom, and the Flamanville 3 facility in France.
“EPR reactors operating in China and Finland have experienced multiple technical malfunctions in recent years, with significant financial impacts and damaging consequences for the credibility of the EPR2 program,” said Cour des Comptes. “EDF had to record in its 2023 financial report a depreciation of this asset which reduced its results by €11.5 billion ($11.77 million),” they added referring to the Hinkley Point C project, whose costs rose to GBP 33 billion ($40.6 billion), a 100% increase versus the initial estimated cost.
The court also said that a proposal to expand EDF’s Sizewell plant in the United Kingdom could be rejected if the French utility fails to reduce its financial exposure for Hinkley Point C. It warned that the industrial strategy implemented by EDF does not yet guarantee the accountability of stakeholders and noted that the incentives that are essential to the success of the EPR2 program.
“The EDF group’s strategy, which plans to continue promoting nuclear reactors internationally, should no longer make excessive equity commitments or take excessive risks in terms of profitability and operational coordination between the different projects,” the court said, noting that these financial risks may slow down the schedule of EPR2 program in France.
The report concluded that efforts to strengthen the nuclear industry remain inadequate, particularly in rebuilding skills and capacity.
Russian attacks near Ukrainian nuclear infrastructure heighten scrutiny of Kyiv’s preparedness

Daily Mail 4th Feb 2025
KYIV, Ukraine (AP) – Moscow´s renewed attacks on Ukraine´s electricity infrastructure this winter have heightened scrutiny over the Ukrainian Energy Ministry’s failure to protect the country´s most critical energy facilities near nuclear power sites.
Despite more than a year of warnings that the sites were vulnerable to potential Russian attacks, the Energy Ministry failed to act swiftly, current and former Ukrainian officials in Kyiv told The Associated Press.
Two years of punishing Russian strikes on its power grid have left Ukraine reliant on nuclear power for more than half of its electricity generation. Especially vulnerable are the unprotected nuclear switchyards located outside the perimeters of its three functioning nuclear plants, which are crucial to transmitting power from the reactors to the rest of the country.
“The switchyards that handle electrical routing from nuclear power plants are a vital component of Ukraine´s nuclear energy infrastructure – powering homes, schools, hospitals and other critical civilian infrastructure,” said Marcy R. Fowler, head of the office for research and analysis at Open Nuclear Network, a program of the U.S.-based NGO PAX sapiens that focuses on reducing nuclear risk.
“Given Ukraine´s heavy reliance on nuclear energy, military attacks on these switchyards would be devastating, severely impacting civilian life and undermining the resilience of the energy grid,” she said.
Only in the fall, after Ukrainian intelligence agencies warned of potential Russian strikes targeting the nuclear switchyards, was action taken to begin building protection – far too late in the event of an attack, analysts said…………………..
Even more worrying, nuclear switchyards also have a second critical function: delivering electricity to nuclear plants from the offsite grid that is essential to cooling their reactors and spent fuel. A disruption could potentially spell disaster, the U.N. nuclear agency has repeatedly warned since the Russian attacks began in August.
And while Ukraine’s nuclear plants have backup emergency power systems, these “are designed to provide temporary support,” Fowler said. “Without functioning switchyards, the backup systems alone would not be sufficient to sustain operations or prevent safety risks during an extended outage.”
Lawmakers cited failure to protect these sites in a resolution last month calling for the removal of Energy Minister Herman Haluschenko. The list of grievances, which also censured Haluschenko for alleged systematic corruption and inadequate oversight of the energy sector, must still be voted on by parliament.
Haluschenko maintained at a news conference Tuesday the allegations were “a manipulation” and that fortifications for the electrical grid were “done.” But he would not answer direct questions about whether Ukraine’s nuclear switchyards in particular were protected.
Russian attacks in November and December came dangerously close to the country´s nuclear power plants, causing five out of its nine operating reactors to reduce power generation. The attacks did not strike the nuclear switchyards about a kilometer (half-mile) away from reactor sites but came alarmingly close.
The task of building protections for energy transmission substations, both nuclear and non-nuclear, fell to state and private companies, with the Energy Ministry supervising.
Three layers of fortifications were ordered: sandbags followed by cement barricades capable of withstanding drone attacks and – the most costly and least complete – iron-and-steel-fortified structures.
Following a government decree in July 2023, many state energy companies began immediately contracting to build first- and second-layer fortifications for their most critical power facilities. In the spring of 2024, the government repeated the urgent call to get the work done.
But nuclear switchyards, under the responsibility of Ukraine’s state nuclear company Energoatom, did not issue contracts to build second-layer concrete fortifications until this fall. By then, state energy company Ukrenergo, which manages the high-voltage substations that transmit power from the nuclear reactors to the grid, had already completed 90% of its 43 sites.
The bidding process for two nuclear plants – in Khmelnytskyi and Mykolaiv – only started in early October, according to documents seen by the AP. The tender for the Rivne Nuclear Power Plant was even later, at the end of November.
Construction is not expected to be completed until 2026, the contract documents said.
Concerns over the delays were raised repeatedly in closed-door meetings and letters sent to energy officials over the last year, three current and former government officials told the AP, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss the foot-dragging by the Energy Ministry………………………………………………………………
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/article-14357703/Russian-attacks-near-Ukrainian-nuclear-infrastructure-heighten-scrutiny-Kyivs-preparedness.html
Trump, Who Tore Up Iran Nuclear Deal, Calls for Iran Nuclear Deal
The president has some grand, delusional ambitions for the Middle East
Rolling Stone, By Ryan Bort, February 5, 2025
“I want Iran to be a great and successful Country, but one that cannot have a Nuclear Weapon,” he wrote in a Truth Social post. “Reports that the United States, working in conjunction with Israel, is going to blow Iran into smithereens,’ ARE GREATLY EXAGGERATED. I would much prefer a Verified Nuclear Peace Agreement, which will let Iran peacefully grow and prosper. We should start working on it immediately, and have a big Middle East Celebration when it is signed and completed. God Bless the Middle East!”
The prospects for such a deal are slim given Trump’s zero-sum approach to foreign policy, not to mention how difficult it was to reach the initial agreement the president trashed in 2018. Trump signing a memorandum on Tuesday tightening sanctions against Iran didn’t seem to help. “The maximum pressure [policy] is a failed experience, and trying it again will lead to another failure,” Iran Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said in response according to the state-run Islamic Republic News Agency.
Trump’s recent Middle East wishcasting includes not only Iran capitulating to his demands, but the U.S. somehow taking ownership of the Gaza Strip, ridding it of Palestinians, and developing it into, as he put it Tuesday evening, the “Riviera of the Middle East.”
“The U.S. will take over the Gaza Strip,” Trump said during a press conference alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. “We’ll do a job with it, too. We’ll own it.”……… Subscribers only – more https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-iran-nuclear-deal-sanctions-1235257693/y
US failed to track weapons sent to Ukraine – Reuters

https://www.rt.com/news/612147-us-failed-track-ukraine-weapons/ 5 Feb 25
The chaos reached such proportions that the Pentagon struggled to define what “delivered” meant, the news agency has reported
US officials could not tell whether tens of billions of dollars of weapons sent to Ukraine were actually delivered due to tracking systems failures, Reuters reported on Monday, citing sources.
During the final year of former President Joe Biden’s administration, key weapons shipments to Ukraine faced prolonged delays due to concerns about depleting US stockpiles and debates over whether the arms would trigger an escalation with Russia.
According to a Reuters investigation, the Pentagon’s “chaotic weapons-tracking system in which even the definition of ‘delivered’ differed among US military branches,” was a significant contributor to the overall confusion.
The system failure “skewed” Pentagon data, making it almost impossible to accurately pinpoint weapons in the shipping process, Reuters said, citing reports by the Government Accountability Office (GAO).
Investigations by the Pentagon’s Inspector General and the GAO also found that the administration lacked clarity on the number of weapons delivered and the extent of shipment delays, according to Reuters.
An unnamed US official told the agency that the Pentagon has since updated internal manuals to clarify the term “delivered.” However, it is not clear how broadly the reform is being implemented, the article said.
The report found that shipment delays have persisted even after Congress broke a months-long deadlock on $60 billion in supplemental aid for Ukraine caused by Republican opposition.
As a result, by November, the US had fulfilled only half of its total 2024 commitment from its stockpiles to Kiev. Only 30% of armored vehicles promised by Washington had arrived by early December, Reuters sources claimed.
One US official expressed frustration over the pace of deliveries, suggesting that delays prevented Ukraine from making any substantial progress on the battlefield.
The official echoed the sentiments of numerous Ukrainian officials who have often blamed inadequate Western assistance for Kiev’s failure to stem Russia’s advances in Donbass and elsewhere.
In January 2024, the US Department of Defense Office of Inspector General released a report revealing that the Pentagon was unable to fully track over $1 billion worth of weapons sent to Ukraine. At the time, it said the Pentagon failed to “fully comply” with tracking requirements, adding that it was not possible to complete an inventory of everything sent to Kiev.
Moscow has consistently condemned Western arms deliveries to Ukraine, saying they will only prolong the conflict.
Nuclear Dump “Reveal” of “Areas of Focus.” A Nuclear Dump Anywhere is a Nuclear Dump Everywhere – #GDFOFF.

On By mariannewildart,
https://mariannewildart.wordpress.com/2025/02/04/nuclear-dump-reveal-of-areas-of-focus-a-nuclear-dump-anywhere-is-a-nuclear-dump-everywhere-gdfoff/
Nuclear Waste Services have “revealed” their “Areas of Focus” for Mid-Copeland and South Copeland along with Lincolnshire.
This is not so much of a reveal as now being more upfront with the maps which were previously obtuse so as not to scare the horses grazing happily on premium hay courtesy of the “bribes”.
Nuclear Free Local Authorities have produced a press release below which assumes that “Drigg has been spared” for now at least. This is unfortunately exactly what Nuclear Waste Services want folk to think. The reality is that Drigg is being eyed up for for so called “Near Surface Disposal” 10s of metres below ground for Intermediate Level Wastes, these are the wastes that were refused at the NIREX inquiry for a dump 1000 metres below ground, however, the inquiry found the wastes would percolate to the surface faster than the nuclear industry had forcast. At 10s of metres below ground the rate of percolation would be even faster!
Mark Kirkbride (the coal mine boss) has produced costings for the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management/Nuclear Decommissioning Authority for the “co-disposal” of Intermediate and High Level nuclear wastes. This would involve a dump for Intermediate Level Wastes underground with the above ground sprawl and drift tunnels also being used to access a sub-sea Geological Disposal Facility.
“Exploratory” boreholes have already been drilled for “Near Surface Disposal” of Intermediate Level Wastes at Drigg. The “tandem” plan to “co-locate” a Near Surface Disposal Facility for Intermediate Level Nuclear Wastes which would be fully delivered in 10 years ie within the lifetimes of many of the people within the so called Community Partnerships now. The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority have stated in their 2020 position paper on Near Surface Disposal that “The assessment of disposal costs has been made on the assumption that a nearer- surface disposal facility ..would be co-located with a GDF.” Lakes Against Nuclear Dump say that “Drigg would be the politically expedient choice for co-location given that the community has already been in receipt of decades worth of funding for the ongoing blight caused by hosting the Low Level Waste Repository.”
At a GDF drop in event at Drigg we were told that “the Near Surface Disposal Plan for Intermediate Level Wastes has nothing to do with a GDF.” Mmmm Rather like the hot plutonium now nonchalantly earmarked for a GDF? Boy does this industry love mission creep. Our report on the shifting sands of nuclear waste dumping is here outlining the Drigg plan
Here are the newly released “Areas of Focus” with Drigg being “spared” – yeah right we believe you. No area is safe – the only sane response is to oppose a geological disposal facility aka deep hot nuclear dump anywhere – all would be impacted.
The following press release is from Nuclear Free Local Authorities who have given a good summary of Nuclear Waste Services “Areas of Focus,” the veil is slipping. The “Areas of Focus” are for the surface nuclear sprawl which would blight towns and villages on the Lake District coast but not within the National Park. For this intergenerational toxic blight there is proposed a single “Test of Public Support” for a limited area and excluding the wider region for what would be the biggest and most dangerous infrastructure project in the UK. Nuclear Waste Services want to give the impression that “Drigg has been spared” – but we say buyer beware – Drigg may be the gateway to GDF via so called Near Surface Disposal of the high end of Intermediate Level Wastes 10s of meters below ground. The only sane response is to oppose this plan.
Continue readingHinkley Point plays down reports of suspected ‘spy’ at nuclear power plant
A spokesperson for Hinkley Point C has played down press reports about a
man suspected of being a spy at the nuclear power plant. A 67-year-old
Italian national who worked at Hinkley Point C from 2020 to 2023 was
questioned by counter-terrorism police after he flew into Heathrow airport
on April 12th, 2023.
It was reported that several documents were found in
his possession and were seized by the authorities. Counter terrorism police
retained the man’s hard drives for national security reasons. He was not
charged with any offence.
A spokesperson for EDF’s Hinkley Point C adds:
“Hinkley Point C takes information security very seriously and there are
rigorous measures in place to protect sensitive data.” “This individual
did not have access to sensitive nuclear information. The information he
removed was outdated.” The spokesperson adds that the man’s contract
with his employer, a supplier to EDF’s Hinkley Point C, has since ended.
Burnham-on-Sea.com 4th Feb 2025, https://www.burnham-on-sea.com/news/hinkley-point-plays-down-press-reports-of-suspected-spy-operating-at-nuclear-power-plant/
Fury over switch of possible nuclear waste dump site to village land near Louth

A previous survey revealed that 85 per cent of local residents were against the dump, which would store nuclear waste beneath up to 1,000 metres of solid rock until its radioactivity naturally decayed.
By Richard Silverwood, 3rd Feb 2025,
The bombshell news that a nuclear waste dump could now be built on greenfield land close to Louth has been greeted with dismay by campaigners and the town’s MP.
East Lincolnshire has long been identified as one of three potential locations for the dump, known as a GDF (geological disposal site).
And the government agency, Nuclear Waste Services (NWS), charged with finding a suitable area, has focused its attention on the former gas terminal site, operated by Conoco, within the coastal village of Theddlethorpe.
But now NWS has announced that it is looking inland and “beyond Theddlethorpe”. Instead, it is “prioritising” largely agricultural land to the north of the A157 road, between the villages of Gayton le Marsh and Great Carlton and south-west of Gayton Wind Farm.
A network of underground vaults and tunnels would transfer shipments of waste to a sealed storage area under the seabed which would extend 22 kilometres from the coast.
NWS insists nothing has been decided and has promised to keep all residents informed. A series of webinars and public drop-in events is already under way and will continue throughout February.
However, opponents of the dump, led by Conservative MP Victoria Atkins, are furious and are calling for a public vote on the entire scheme.
Ms Atkins said: “I have opposed the threat of a nuclear waste dump on the Lincolnshire coast since the proposal came to light several years ago.
“In that time, residents have had to live with the uncertainty, worry and financial costs of having this monstrous carbuncle threatened in their area.
“People have been left in limbo and have had their house prices severely impacted by these proposals.
“This latest news will be very distressing for the residents in and around the area. Rest assured, I will be meeting NWS in the coming week to continue to put pressure on them to move their focus away from Lincolnshire entirely………………………
The campaign group, Guardians Of The East Coast, has also lambasted the latest proposal, claiming the switch has been made because the Theddlethorpe site would not be large enough.
Chairman Mike Crookes said the fresh site would span 900 acres of agricultural land, including at least one farm. He called on Lincolnshire County Council to withdraw their apparent engagement with the dump scheme process.
“The council has expressed its outrage at agricultural land being taken for solar farms and pylons by National Grid,” Mr Crookes said.
“But it seems perfectly happy with a square mile of agricultural land being used to bury high-level nuclear waste, including weapons-grade plutonium.
“When the project was first announced, the council said it was policy to make use of ‘brownfield’ sites such as the gas terminal.
“But if it has a policy of opposing the industrial use of agricultural land, why is it apparently facilitating this project?”
Another group firmly against the nuclear waste dump is the Nuclear Free Local Authorities (NFLA), whose secretary Richard Outram described the fresh site as “worse than the original”.
“The news will have come as a tremendous shock to the residents of Gayton le Marsh and Great Carlton, where the threat of a dump suddenly appears writ large.
“Those residents are already up in arms and, doubtless in the coming days, new protest groups will be formed to represent the people affected.
“It is important to emphasise that the decision on the final site for a GDF is still a long way off. There is still time to organise and fight back.”
Coun Travis Hesketh, who represents the ward of Withern and Theddlethorpe on East Lindsey District Council, said residents were demanding a public vote – and this year, not in 2027 as previously promised.
A previous survey revealed that 85 per cent of local residents were against the dump, which would store nuclear waste beneath up to 1,000 metres of solid rock until its radioactivity naturally decayed.
However, NWS is hoping to win people over and has set up a community partnership group to fully explain the scheme.
Hidden history of RAF airfield may be lost in latest nuke dump plan
The latest announcement by Nuclear Waste Services making the site of RAF
Millom part of the Area of Focus in South Copeland may lead to the airfield
and its rich wartime history being lost to a nuclear waste dump.
NFLA 4th Feb 2025, https://www.nuclearpolicy.info/news/hidden-history-of-raf-airfield-may-be-lost-in-latest-nuke-dump-plan/
The national missile defense fantasy—again

Bulletin, By Joe Cirincione | February 4, 2025
National missile defense advocates live in a world of magic and make-believe. Fantasy replaces science, assertions replace facts, and cartoon weapons replace real capabilities.
This enduring fantasy, however, has real-world consequences.
President Donald Trump’s pledge last week to build “a next-generation missile defense shield” that would “defeat any foreign aerial attack on the Homeland [with] space-based interceptors” has provoked a predictable reaction. Russia blasted Trump’s plan, detailed in his new executive order, “The Iron Dome for America.”
But no magic shield is going to protect the United States against nuclear attack.
An idea that never dies. Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova said on Friday of Trump’s plan that “it directly envisages a significant strengthening of the American nuclear arsenal and means for conducting combat operations in space, including the development and deployment of space-based interception systems.”
“We consider this as another confirmation of the US focus on turning space into an arena of armed confrontation… and the deployment of weapons there,” Zakharova added.
The Russian reaction could scuttle Trump’s stated desire to negotiate limits on nuclear weapons. If so, it would repeat the role strategic defenses have played in the Cold War’s nuclear arms race. Efforts to build national defenses always trigger efforts to overcome them with more missiles and other counter-measures—the well-known security dilemma.
Despite all the formidable technical and geopolitical evidence against such schemes, however, “faith in national missile defense never dies,” Washington Post columnist Max Boot observes.
It is no coincidence that Trump’s new order is lifted almost entirely from the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 wish list. In the 1980s, the group championed President Ronald Reagan’s original dream to “put in space a shield that missiles could not penetrate—a shield that could protect us from nuclear missiles just as a roof protects a family from rain,” as he told a 1986 high school graduating class.
“Like Israel’s highly effective system of the same name, President Trump’s Iron Dome will provide an impenetrable defense for the American people that will bring peace through strength,” Heritage Foundation fellow Victoria Coates said. It “will fulfill President Reagan’s vision for the Strategic Defense Initiative laid out some four decades ago,” she added.
Doomed to fail. Trump’s executive order is a jumble of false claims and imaginary solutions. It begins by declaring that the risk of a missile attack “remains the most catastrophic threat facing the United States.” That would surprise most experts on existential risks. The climate crisis, the threat of new pandemics, artificial intelligence, and crippling cyber attacks are all at least as likely catastrophic events as nuclear weapons delivered by other means. But threat inflation has always been a key part of efforts to justify urgent action and massive investment.
Trump claims that “over the past 40 years, rather than lessening, the threat from next-generation strategic weapons has become more intense and complex.” Despite being utter nonsense, this claim has gone largely unchallenged.
While it is true that new technologies have increased the lethality of missiles, the missile threat to the United States has decreased dramatically. Arms control treaties and the collapse of the Soviet Union slashed the number of nuclear weapons and nuclear-armed missiles threatening the United States.
In 1985, the Soviet Union deployed 2,345 land-based and submarine-based missiles carrying over 9,300 nuclear warheads. That was the threat Reagan hoped to render “impotent and obsolete” with his missile shield.
Thanks to negotiated agreements, today’s Russia fields only 521 missiles, carrying 2,236 warheads. China’s land-based nuclear-armed missiles capable of reaching the United States have increased from around 20 in 1985 to some 135 today (carrying 238 warheads) and perhaps 72 single-warhead submarine-based missiles. In sum, the United States today faces roughly one-fifth the number of enemy missiles compared to 40 years ago and one-quarter of the nuclear warheads (728 vs. 2,365 missiles and 2,546 vs. 9,320 warheads). That is still a very dangerous threat but by no means a greater one.
Where arms control succeeded, missile defense technology failed.
None of the scores of systems developed by Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) and its successor organizations have ever come close to providing the imaginary shield that Reagan promised. National missile defenses did not work then. They do not work now. They will likely never work………………………………………
As it became clear that the space-based laser weapons Edward Teller told Reagan he could build were a fantasy, Reagan and subsequent presidents scaled down the program to try to get some kind of workable defense. But after spending over $415 billion over decades, all the United States has to show for the effort is 44 ground-based interceptors in Alaska and California that can hit a cooperative target in carefully scripted demonstrations—about half of the time. Congress currently allocates $30 billion a year on missile defense and defeat programs, most run by the SDI successor, the Missile Defense Agency.
Not an iron dome; more like an iron colander. The major technical problems that remain unresolved—and eventually forced the cancellation of all SDI’s ambitious plans—are the same obstacles that have ruled out an effective ballistic missile defense for more than 60 years:
- the ability of the enemy to overwhelm a system with offensive missiles;
- the questionable survivability of space-based weapons;
- the inability to discriminate among real warheads and hundreds or thousands of decoys;
- the problem of designing battle management, command, control, and communications that could function in a nuclear war; and,
- the low confidence in the ability of the system to work perfectly the first—and, perhaps, only—time it is ever used.
……………………………………………………………………“There is zero possibility of a comprehensive missile defense of the United States in the foreseeable future,” James N. Miller, who served as undersecretary of defense in the Obama administration, told Max Boot. “We are not going to escape mutual assured destruction vis-à-vis Russia or China.”
As shown repeatedly over the past 60 years, the only way to eliminate the threat of nuclear-armed missiles is to negotiate their elimination. Pretending that there is a magic shield that can be willed into existence will only make the problem of national missile defense worse. https://thebulletin.org/2025/02/the-national-missile-defense-fantasy-again/
Google deletes policy against using AI for weapons or surveillance

The pledge had been in place since 2018.
Mashable By Amanda Yeo on February 5, 2025
Google has quietly deleted its pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance, a promise that had been in place since 2018.
First spotted by Bloomberg, Google has updated its AI Principles to remove an entire section on artificial intelligence applications it pledged not to pursue. Significantly, Google’s policy had previously stated that it would not design nor deploy AI technology for use in weapons, or in surveillance technology which violates “internationally accepted norms.”
Now it seems that such use cases might not be entirely off the table.
“There’s a global competition taking place for AI leadership within an increasingly complex geopolitical landscape,” read Google’s blog post on Tuesday. “We believe democracies should lead in AI development, guided by core values like freedom, equality, and respect for human rights. And we believe that companies, governments, and organizations sharing these values should work together to create AI that protects people, promotes global growth, and supports national security.”
While Google’s post did concern its AI Principles update, it did not explicitly mention the deletion of its prohibition on AI weapons or surveillance. ……………………..
Google first published its AI Principles in 2018, following significant employee protests against its work with the U.S. Department of Defense. (The company had already infamously removed “don’t be evil” from its Code of Conduct that same year.) Project Maven aimed to use AI to improve weapon targeting systems, interpreting video information to increase military drones’ accuracy.
In an open letter that April, thousands of employees expressed a belief that “Google should not be in the business of war,” and requested that the company “draft, publicize and enforce a clear policy stating that neither Google nor its contractors will ever build warfare technology.”
The company’s AI Principles were the result, with Google ultimately not renewing its contract with the Pentagon in 2019. However, it looks as though the tech giant’s attitude toward AI weapons technology may now be changing.
Google’s new attitude toward AI weapons could be an effort to keep up with competitors. Last January, OpenAI amended its own policy to remove a ban on “activity that has high risk of physical harm,” including “weapons development” and “military and warfare.” In a statement to Mashable at the time, an OpenAI spokesperson clarified that this change was to provide clarity concerning “national security use cases.”
“It was not clear whether these beneficial use cases would have been allowed under ‘military’ in our previous policies,” said the spokesperson……………
Now Google’s revised policy has consolidated this list to just three principles, merely stating that its approach to AI is grounded in “bold innovation,” “responsible development and deployment,” and “collaborative process, together.” The company does specify that this includes adhering to “widely accepted principles of international law and human rights.” Still, any mention of weapons or surveillance is now conspicuously absent. https://mashable.com/article/google-ai-weapons-surveillance-policy
Local opinion: Raytheon pushes The Doomsday Clock closer to midnight

because of their work on both the LRSO and Tomahawk cruise missiles, Raytheon is now seen as the leading contender to produce even more nuclear weapons in the form of new sea-launched nuclear cruise missiles. This further escalation would represent a huge setback to hard-won nuclear arms control progress, when nuclear-armed Tomahawks were removed from submarines over 30 years ago.
Jack Cohen-Joppa Special to the Arizona Daily Star, Jan 31, 2025, 31, 2025, https://tucson.com/opinion/column/local-opinion-raytheon-pushes-the-doomsday-clock-closer-to-midnight/article_46da901c-df20-11ef-8e77-235556fbeeb6.html
In Tom Lehrer’s classic Cold War ditty, “So Long Mom,” a nuclear bomber pilot sings, “I’ll look for you when the war is over, an hour and a half from now.”
It’s darkly funny, because even though we don’t talk much about it, we all know it’s true. Planned or imagined, nuclear war scenarios rarely last longer.
But how much time have we got before then? How near is that threat of omnicide today?
The Doomsday Clock is a visual metaphor created by the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists back in 1947 to illustrate how close we are to global calamity from nuclear weapons and other looming threats to civilization as we know it. Originally set at seven minutes to midnight, in 2023 it advanced to 90 seconds to midnight, largely due to nuclear threats from war in Ukraine.
And Raytheon keeps pushing us closer.
In April 2020, Raytheon, with more than 12,000 local employees and the bulk of its research, development and production based here in Tucson, was awarded a sole-source contract to produce about 1,000 new nuclear-armed, air-launched cruise missiles. Known by the anodyne acronym LRSO (Long Range Stand Off), the missile is arguably both redundant and destabilizing in a time of disappearing nuclear diplomacy.
Not only that, but because of their work on both the LRSO and Tomahawk cruise missiles, Raytheon is now seen as the leading contender to produce even more nuclear weapons in the form of new sea-launched nuclear cruise missiles. This further escalation would represent a huge setback to hard-won nuclear arms control progress, when nuclear-armed Tomahawks were removed from submarines over 30 years ago.
Why aren’t we talking about it in Tucson? Senators Mark Kelly and Ruben Gallego and Rep. Juan Ciscomani all vote for U.S. nuclear domination. Only Rep. Raul Grijalva has spoken out for the 2017 Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, now adopted by more than half the nations of the world. Despite near-universal condemnation of nuclear weapons by leaders of the world’s religions, we could use more local political and religious leaders speaking out against this blasphemous enterprise in our backyard.
It’s not as if it’s a military secret. The industry press has recently carried reports of LRSO flight tests, budget allocations, production schedules and more. Yet local media have not kept up.
Raytheon also has nothing to say. Usually, Southern Arizona’s largest employer and exporter is mighty proud of the panoply of products in their military portfolio. Their website is filled with fulsome boasts and lurid photos of deadly hardware. But the baddest boy of the bunch is missing in action. The nuclear-armed LRSO only pops up in a handful of financial reports. Raytheon’s original press release heralding the multibillion-dollar contract was posted on its website and quoted by the Tucson media in April 2020. But now it’s gone, simply deleted from its media archive.
Perhaps management has realized that there is nothing to be gained by crowing about their only product that, if used as intended, would be the instrument of multiple war crimes and crimes against humanity (incomprehensible death and devastation, disproportionate civilian casualties, lasting contamination of land and water, etc.). Raytheon’s “products” are certainly nothing I’m proud of as a Tucsonan.
This is the same Raytheon/RTX that last November was fined nearly $1 billion for defrauding the government (i.e., the taxpayer) and paying multiple bribes to promote business with the government of Qatar.
Experts debate whether the LRSO is intended for a nuclear surprise attack, or just another layer of “deterrence.” But if it isn’t meant to be used first, that just makes it fit into plans for a full-scale nuclear war. All ninety minutes of it.
Shouldn’t we all pay more attention, and demand that our elected leaders resist this insanity?
Trump Asks Congress To Approve $1 Billion Arms Transfer to Israel

The deal will be funded by US military aid and includes 1,000-pound bombs and armored bulldozers
by Dave DeCamp February 3, 2025 , https://news.antiwar.com/2025/02/03/trump-asks-congress-to-approve-1-billion-arms-transfer-to-israel/
The Trump administration has asked congressional leaders to approve a new $1 billion weapons transfer to Israel that will be funded by US military aid, The Wall Street Journal reported on Monday.
The deal includes 4,700 1,000-pound bombs worth more than $700 million and $300 million worth of armored bulldozers, which the Israeli military uses to demolish homes and infrastructure in Gaza and the West Bank.
The request for the new arms transfer comes as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is in Washington and set to meet with President Trump at the White House on Tuesday. He’s expected to push for US support for Israel to restart its genocidal war in Gaza instead of fully implementing the ceasefire deal.
The Journal report said Netanyahu is also expecting Trump to push ahead with a massive $8 billion deal that President Biden notified congressional leaders about in early January. The report said some Democrats in Congress put a hold on the massive sale and that the Trump administration is now pushing congressional leaders to unblock it.
The $8 billion deal includes munitions for fighter jets and attack helicopters as well as artillery shells. The Trump administration also recently released a hold on a shipment of 2,000-pound bombs for Israel.
Israeli officials suggested that the increased military aid was part of a deal to get Netanyahu to agree to the Gaza ceasefire deal. Trump’s envoy for the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, has said he’s pushing for the full implementation of the agreement, but the ceasefire is very fragile as Netanyahu doesn’t want to implement the second phase.
-
Archives
- February 2026 (127)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS

