weapons and war « nuclear-news

‘We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran’: Trump

June 17, 2025, https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20250617-we-now-have-complete-and-total-control-of-the-skies-over-iran-trump/

US President Donald Trump claimed to have “complete and total control” of Iranian airspace Tuesday after five days of Israel’s bombing that targeted military and nuclear sites, Anadolu reports.

“We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran,” Trump said in a social media post. “Iran had good sky trackers and other defensive equipment, and plenty of it, but it doesn’t compare to American made, conceived, and manufactured ‘stuff.’ Nobody does it better than the good ol’ USA.”

The comments come one day after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth confirmed that the US deployed additional military assets to the Middle East, a move he and other senior Trump administration officials have maintained is “defensive” in nature amid speculation that American forces could join Israel’s military campaign.

A defense official told Anadolu on Monday that Hegseth directed the Nimitz Carrier Strike Group to the CENTCOM area of responsibility to sustain “our defensive posture and safeguard American personnel.”

Regional tensions have escalated since Friday when Israel launched airstrikes on multiple sites across Iran, including military and nuclear facilities, prompting Tehran to launch retaliatory strikes.

Israeli authorities said at least 24 people have been killed and hundreds injured since then in Iranian missile attacks. Iran said at least 224 people have been killed and more than 1,000 wounded in the Israeli assault.

June 20, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Iran, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Alternative Defence Review

CND 23rd May 2025, https://cnduk.org/ADR/

The UK’s 2025 Strategic Defence Review comes at a moment of intensifying global conflict, escalating climate crisis and soaring UK inequality. Yet, rather than rethinking the country’s militarised foreign policy in response to these pressures, the Government proposes to dramatically increase defence spending, a move that risks worsening each of these crises.

This Alternative Defence Review challenges the dominant war narrative—cultivated by political elites, the military-industrial complex, and the mainstream media—and offers a new vision for peace, justice, and security.

It was proposed by CND in response to the RMT union’s decision to ‘… campaign with other trade unions and peace organisations to convene a labour and peace movement summit to work out the basis of a new foreign policy with the promotion of peace and social justice at its heart’. The Alternative Defence Review is intended to be a contribution towards this.

It examines how militarisation has distorted national priorities, fuelled global instability, undermined international law, harmed the environment, and diverted investment from public services and social infrastructure. It shows that increased military expenditure will be economically inefficient, environmentally destructive, and socially regressive, offering limited job creation while stifling a more sustainable and just economy. The review calls for a shift toward a significantly demilitarised defence strategy rooted in human security and common security—prioritising diplomacy, global cooperation, conflict prevention, and investment in health, education, climate resilience, social care, and the creation of well-paid, secure, unionised and socially useful jobs. It advocates for a significant reduction in military spending, an immediate halt to arms exports to countries involved in active conflict or human rights abuses (including Israel and Gulf states), and a Just Transition for defence-dependent workers and communities. This report offers a credible, democratic alternative to militarism: a sustainable economy grounded in social justice, global solidarity, and the urgent need to build peace—not war—for the 21st century.

You can download the report here.
You can order a copy of the report here.

June 20, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | UK, weapons and war | Leave a comment

NewsReal: Israel Attacks Iran, Seeks Regime Change. Will Trump Take US Into War?

Sott.net, 16 Jun 2025

Israel’s brazen attack against Iran on June 13th could result in the culmination of the NeoCons’ plan for the ‘New American Century’: the toppling of the last regime resisting them in the Middle East. The US and Israel would thus fully control the world’s primary ‘energy spigot’ and cement their joint role as global hegemon(s) for decades to come.

Israel intends for this ‘short war’ to last a couple of weeks, after which Iran will be ruled by a new government with a new ideology, having submitted to US-raeli domination.

Wishful thinking?

Well, it depends on what capabilities Iran has to withstand Israel’s onslaught, whether its population is psychologically committed to resisting, and whether the US will have to directly intervene to fully realize Netanyahu’s dream of deposing the Ayatollah and defeating Iran’s military.

If the latter comes about, Trump will have shot MAGA – and his devoted followers, who are extremely hostile about the US engaging in another major Middle East war – through the heart. He isn’t so psychopathic and stupid, is he? https://www.sott.net/article/500130-NewsReal-Israel-Attacks-Iran-Seeks-Regime-Change-Will-Trump-Take-US-Into-War

June 20, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

WHAT I HAVE BEEN TOLD IS COMING IN IRAN

The initial battle plan for a new war

Seymour Hersh, Jun 20, 2025, Seymour Hersh Substack

This is a report on what is most likely to happen in Iran, as early as this weekend, according to Israeli insiders and American officials I’ve relied upon for decades. It will entail heavy American bombing. I have vetted this report with a longtime US official in Washington, who told me that all will be “under control” if Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei “departs.” Just how that might happen, short of his assassination, is not known. There has been a great deal of talk about American firepower and targets inside Iran, but little practical thinking, as far I can tell, about how to remove a revered religious leader with an enormous following.

I have reported from afar on the nuclear and foreign policy of Israel for decades. My 1991 book The Samson Option told the story of the making of the Israeli nuclear bomb and America’s willingness to keep the project secret. The most important unanswered question about the current situation will be the response of the world, including that of Vladimir Putin, the Russian president who has been an ally of Iran’s leaders.

The United States remains Israel’s most important ally, although many here and around the world abhor Israel’s continuing murderous war in Gaza. The Trump administration is in full support of Israel’s current plan to rid Iran of any trace of a nuclear weapons program while hoping the ayatollah-led government in Tehran will be overthrown………………………………. ………….(Subscribers only) https://seymourhersh.substack.com/p/what-i-have-been-told-is-coming-in?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1377040&post_id=166335210&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=ln98x&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

June 20, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Iran, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Jeffrey D. Sachs: Stop Netanyahu Before He Gets Us All Killed

We could soon see several nuclear powers pitted against each other and dragging the world closer to nuclear annihilation.

Jeffrey D. Sachs , Sybil Fares, Jun 16, 2025, Common Dreams, https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/netanyahu-war-on-iran

For nearly 30 years, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has driven the Middle East into war and destruction. The man is a powder keg of violence. Throughout all the wars that he has championed, Netanyahu has always dreamed of the big one: to defeat and overthrow the Iranian Government. His long-sought war, just launched, might just get us all killed in a nuclear Armageddon, unless Netanyahu is stopped.

Netanyahu’s fixation on war goes back to his extremist mentors, Ze’ev Jabotinsky, Yitzhak Shamir, and Menachem Begin. The older generation believed that Zionists should use whatever violence–wars, assassinations, terror–is needed to achieve their aims of eliminating any Palestinian claim to a homeland.

The founders of Netanyahu’s political movement, the Likud, called for exclusive Zionist control over all of what had been British Mandatory Palestine. At the start of the British Mandate in the early 1920s, the Muslim and Christian Arabs constituted roughly 87% of the population and owned ten times more land than the Jewish population. As of 1948, the Arabs still outnumbered the Jews roughly two to one. Nonetheless, the founding charter of Likud (1977) declared that “between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.” The now infamous chant, “from the River to the Sea,” which is characterized as anti-Semitic, turns out to be the anti-Palestinian rallying call of the Likud.

Israel’s war on Iran is the final move in a decades-old strategy. We are witnessing the culmination of decades of extremist Zionist manipulation of US foreign policy.

The challenge for Likud was how to pursue its maximalist aims despite their blatant illegality under international law and morality, both of which call for a two-state solution.

In 1996, Netanyahu and his American advisors devised a “Clean Break” strategy. They advocated that Israel would not withdraw from the Palestinian lands captured in the 1967 war in exchange for regional peace. Instead, Israel would reshape the Middle East to its liking. Crucially, the strategy envisioned the US as the main force to achieve these aims—waging wars in the region to dismantle governments opposed to Israel’s dominance over Palestine. The US was called upon to fight wars on Israel’s behalf.

The Clean Break strategy was effectively carried out by the US and Israel after 9/11. As NATO Supreme Commander General Wesley Clark revealed, soon after 9/11, the US planned to “attack and destroy the governments in seven countries in five years—starting with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.”

The first of the wars, in early 2003, was to topple the Iraqi government. Plans for further wars were delayed as the US became mired in Iraq. Still, the US supported Sudan’s split in 2005, Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in 2006, and Ethiopia’s incursion into Somalia that same year. In 2011, the Obama administration launched CIA operation Timber Sycamore against Syria and, with the UK and France, overthrew Libya’s government through a 2011 bombing campaign. Today, these countries lie in ruins, and many are now embroiled in civil wars.

Israel’s war on Iran is the final move in a decades-old strategy. We are witnessing the culmination of decades of extremist Zionist manipulation of US foreign policy.

The challenge for Likud was how to pursue its maximalist aims despite their blatant illegality under international law and morality, both of which call for a two-state solution.

Netanyahu was a cheerleader of these wars of choice–either in public or behind the scenes–together with his neocon allies in the U.S. Government including Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Victoria Nuland, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Richard Perle, Elliott Abrams, and others.

Testifying in the U.S. Congress in 2002, Netanyahu pitched for the disastrous war in Iraq, declaring “If you take out Saddam, Saddam’s regime, I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region.” He continued, “And I think that people sitting right next door in Iran, young people, and many others, will say the time of such regimes, of such despots is gone.” He also falsely told Congress, “There is no question whatsoever that Saddam is seeking, is working, is advancing towards to the development of nuclear weapons.”

The slogan to remake a “New Middle East” provides the slogan for these wars. Initially stated in 1996 through “Clean Break,” it was popularized by Secretary Condoleezza Rice in 2006. As Israel was brutally bombarding Lebanon, Rice stated:

“What we’re seeing here, in a sense, is the growing — the birth pangs of a new Middle East and whatever we do we have to be certain that we’re pushing forward to the new Middle East not going back to the old one.”

In September 2023, Netanyahu presented at UN General Assembly a map of the “New Middle East” completely erasing a Palestinian state. In September 2024, he elaborated on this plan by showing two maps: one part of the Middle East a “blessing,” and the other–including Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Iran–a curse, as he advocated regime change in the latter countries.

The premise of Israel’s attack on Iran is the claim that Iran is on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons. Such a claim is fatuous since Iran has repeatedly called for negotiations precisely to remove the nuclear option in return for an end to the decades of US sanctions.

Since 1992, Netanyahu and his supporters have claimed that Iran will become a nuclear power “in a few years.” In 1995, Israeli officials and their US backers declared a 5-year timeline. In 2003, Israel’s Director of Military Intelligence said that Iran will be a nuclear power “by the summer of 2004.” In 2005, the head of Mossad said that Iran could build the bomb in less than 3 years. In 2012, Netanyahu claimed at the United Nations that “it’s only a few months, possibly a few weeks before they get enough enriched uranium for the first bomb.” And on and on.

This 30-year-plus pattern of shifting deadlines has marked a deliberate strategy, not a failure in prophecy. The claims are propaganda; there is always an “existential threat.” More importantly, there is Netanyahu’s phony claim that negotiations with Iran are useless.

Iran has repeatedly said that it does not want a nuclear weapon and that it has long been prepared to negotiate. In October 2003, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei issued a fatwa forbidding the production and use of nuclear arms—a ruling later officially cited by Iran at an IAEA meeting in Vienna in August 2005 and referenced since as a religious and legal barrier to pursuing nuclear weapons.

Even for those skeptical of Iran’s intentions, Iran has consistently advocated for a negotiated agreement supported by independent international verification. In contrast, the Zionist lobby has opposed any such settlements, urging the US to maintain sanctions and reject deals that would allow strict IAEA monitoring in exchange for lifting sanctions.

In 2016, the Obama Administration, together with the UK, France, Germany, China, and Russia, reached the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran—a landmark agreement to strictly monitor Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief. Yet, under relentless pressure from Netanyahu and the Zionist lobby, President Trump withdrew from the deal in 2018. Predictably, when Iran responded by expanding its uranium enrichment, it was blamed for violating an agreement that the US itself had abandoned. The double-standard and propaganda is hard to miss.

On April 11, 2021, Israel’s Mossad attacked Iran’s nuclear facilities in Natanz. Following the attack, on April 16, Iran announced that it would increase its uranium enrichment further, as bargaining leverage, while repeatedly appealing for renewed negotiations on a deal like the JCPOA. The Biden Administration rejected all such negotiations.

At the start of his second term, Trump agreed to open a new negotiation with Iran. Iran pledged to renounce nuclear arms and to be subject to IAEA inspections but reserved the right to enrich uranium for civilian purposes. The Trump Administration appeared to agree to this point but then reversed itself. Since then, there have been five rounds of negotiations, with both sides reporting progress on each occasion.

The sixth round was ostensibly to take place on Sunday, June 15. Instead, Israel launched a preemptive war on Iran on June 12. Trump confirmed that the US knew of the attack in advance, even as the administration was speaking publicly of the upcoming negotiations.

Israel’s attack was made not only in the midst of negotiations that were making progress, but days before a scheduled UN Conference on Palestine that would have advanced the cause of the two-state solution. That conference has now been postponed.

Israel’s attack on Iran now threatens to escalate to a full-fledged war that draws in the US and Europe on the side of Israel and Russia and perhaps Pakistan on the side of Iran. We could soon see several nuclear powers pitted against each other and dragging the world closer to nuclear annihilation. The Doomsday Clock is at 89 seconds to midnight, the closest to nuclear Armageddon since the clock was launched in 1947.

Over the past 30 years, Netanyahu and his US backers have destroyed or destabilized a 4,000-km swath of countries stretching across North Africa, the Horn of Africa, the Eastern Mediterranean, and Western Asia. Their aim has been to block a Palestinian State by overthrowing governments supporting the Palestinian cause. The world deserves better than this extremism. More than 170 countries in the UN have called for the two-state solution and regional stability. That makes more sense than Israel bringing the world to the brink of nuclear Armageddon in pursuit of its illegal and extremist aims.

June 19, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Israel, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Hidden History: How Israel Acquired Nukes

We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.”

Kit Klarenberg, Jun 14, 2025, https://www.kitklarenberg.com/p/hidden-history-how-israel-acquired

On June 13th, the Zionist entity carried out a wide-ranging, unprovoked, criminal military strike on Iran, purportedly to dent the Islamic Republic’s quest to develop nuclear weapons. Tehran has consistently repudiated any suggestion it harbours such ambitions. A November 2007 US National Intelligence Estimate concurred, expressing “high confidence that in fall 2003,” the country “halted” any and all research in the field. This assessment remained unchanged for several years subsequently, and was reportedly shared by Mossad.

By contrast, Benjamin Netanyahu has for decades declared almost annually Iran is mere years away from becoming a nuclear power, urging military action as a result. The longtime Israeli leader’s anxieties are sickly ironic, given Tel Aviv’s own nuclear weapons program is the worst kept ‘secret’ in international affairs. Over many years, multiple entity officials and prominent figures have effectively – or even directly – admitted this monstrous capacity. Moreover, Israel is avowedly committed to the ‘Samson Option’.

Under its horrifying auspices, if the entity feels sufficiently threatened, it reserves the right to carry out preemptive nuclear strikes not merely on regional adversaries, but its Western sponsors into the bargain. As Dutch-born Israeli military theorist Martin van Creveld boasted in September 2003:

“We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets…We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.”

Despite such flagrant disclosures, the Zionist entity rigidly sticks to a policy of “deliberate ambiguity”, refusing to formally confirm or deny it possesses nuclear weapons. When one of Netanyahu’s ministers openly advocated nuking Gaza in November 2023, they were reprimanded and suspended. Such punishment pales in comparison to the fate of Mordechai Vanunu, a former Israeli nuclear technician who revealed details of Tel Aviv’s nuclear weapons program to the British media in 1986.

Lured to Rome by Mossad, he was then rendered to the Zionist entity and convicted in a secret trial. Vanunu subsequently spent 18 years in prison, the majority of which in solitary confinement. Since release in 2004, he has been subject to a broad array of restrictions on his speech and movement, and repeatedly arrested and jailed for violating the stringent terms of his parole. All along, organisations including Amnesty International have condemned Tel Aviv’s brazen breaches of Vanunu’s basic human rights.

At the time of Vanunu’s heroic whistleblowing, Western governments and intelligence agencies had been aware of – and deeply concerned by – Israel’s development of nuclear weapons for almost three decades. How the Zionist entity acquired nukes is a little-known tale, of theft, deception, shadowy spy games, dangerous connivances, and more. Its full dimensions remain indeterminate today. However, given current events, it is vital what’s known about this sordid hidden history is told.

‘Face Value’

Israel’s nuclear weapons program was, from inception, “a secret within a secret”. In 1957, France inked a covert agreement with the Zionist entity, leading to the creation of the Dimona nuclear power facility. Paris was apparently unaware the complex would soon form the basis of a clandestine underground reprocessing facility, capable of producing weapons-grade plutonium. The US was seemingly ignorant of Dimona’s existence, let alone its utility for producing nukes, until December 1960.

That month, a classified CIA assessment outlined “implications of the acquisition by Israel of a nuclear weapons capability.” The document expressed little doubt that a “major purpose” of Dimona was “plutonium production for weapons,” and detailed multiple grave outcomes of Tel Aviv’s push for nukes. For one, exposure of the program would inevitably cause “consternation” in North Africa and West Asia, potentially prompting “threatened” Arab and Muslim states to turn to the Soviet Union for military assistance.

Furthermore, the CIA predicted Western interests in the region more widely could come under attack, and the Israeli initiative “might remove some of the inhibitions to development of nuclear weapons” elsewhere in the world. On January 19th 1961, the day before his inauguration, John F. Kennedy and his incoming administration visited the White House to meet with outgoing President Dwight D. Eisenhower. Israel’s nuclear program loomed large in discussions between the two statesmen.

On January 31st that year, Kennedy met with Eisenhower’s departing ambassador to Israel Ogden Reid, for a comprehensive briefing. Declassified records refer to the President’s “special interest” in Dimona. While a member of Congress during the 1950s, Kennedy had repeatedly taken a righteously robust stand against not only nuclear proliferation, but testing, believing the latter encouraged the former. He was implacably opposed to Tel Aviv securing nukes, and immediately upon taking office began intensely pressuring then-Israeli premier David Ben-Gurion to allow regular US inspections of Dimona.

Reid told Kennedy he believed Ben-Gurion’s “assurances” Dimona was a mere “research reactor”, intended to “serve the needs of industry, agriculture, health, and science”, could be taken at “face value”. The President strongly disagreed, and informed the Israeli Prime Minister in no uncertain terms regular inspections of Dimona were a core condition for harmonious US-Israeli relations. Tel Aviv finally folded in May 1961, and an American inspection team was dispatched to the site.

Their report concluded Dimona was strictly intended for nuclear power generation purposes, without military application. This false finding was achieved by French and Israeli technicians outright lying to US inspectors, while undertaking extensive efforts to camouflage and conceal areas of the plant dedicated to research and development of nukes. It was not until March 1967 that a State Department Intelligence and Research report uncovered this rank subterfuge, and that Tel Aviv had the ability to produce nuclear weapons at the complex.

‘Atrociously Incompetent’

In the intervening time, multiple US investigations of Dimona reached the same conclusion as the first. Yet, until his death in November 1963, Kennedy remained convinced the Zionist entity was determined to develop nuclear weapons, and may have already done so. Six months before his assassination, he wrote a private telegram to Ben-Gurion, warning of “the disturbing effects on world stability which would accompany the development of a nuclear weapons capability by Israel.” He also stressed the “urgency” of regular Dimona inspections.

Given the President’s visceral hostility to Israel’s nuke ambitions, it is hardly surprising theories have abounded for years Tel Aviv was one way or another involved in his murder. In 2004, Mordechai Vanunu explicitly levelled the charge, stating there were “near-certain indications” Kennedy was assassinated due to “pressure he exerted” on Ben-Gurion to “shed light on Dimona’s nuclear reactor.” No smoking gun evidence supporting this allegation has emerged since, although sensitive documents recently released upon Donald Trump’s order unambiguously point in this direction.

In 1992, investigative journalist Samuel Katz posited veteran CIA counterintelligence chief James Jesus Angleton secretly directed clandestine Agency assistance to Israel’s nuclear weapons program for years. Fast forward to today, and the freshly-declassified JFK records amply expose how Angleton, one of the Agency’s founders, systematically abused his position to assist the Zionist entity throughout his lengthy tenure. Among the newly-declassified files is a June 1953 memo stating Angleton’s primary intelligence source was Israel.

Other declassified documents indicate Angleton was effectively running an agency within an agency in the CIA, with Tel Aviv the ultimate beneficiary. A June 1975 FBI report on “Israeli intelligence collection capabilities” in the US outlines Angleton’s “special relationship” with the entity in some detail, noting he routinely delivered “extremely sensitive information” in person to Israel’s Washington DC embassy. Simultaneously, the Bureau was into the 10th year of its probe into how 93 kilograms of highly-enriched uranium mysteriously vanished from Washington’s Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation.

Centre of the CIA-instigated FBI investigation was NUMEC president Zalman Shapiro, a hardcore Zionist with high-level government contacts and significant business interests in Israel. This included a contract to build nuclear-powered generators. Officially, the NUMEC scandal remains unsolved today, despite dedicated inquiries by the Atomic Energy Commission, Bureau, CIA, and other US government agencies lasting many years. A scathing 1978 review by Washington’s Comptroller General concluded investigating authorities deliberately sabotaged their probes into the uranium loss, for the Zionist entity’s benefit:

“The NUMEC incident and its associated 13-year investigation highlight this country’s current inability to effectively deal with possible diversions of nuclear material…The US needs to improve its efforts for effectively responding to and investigating incidents of missing or unaccounted for weapons-grade nuclear materials…We believe a timely, concerted effort on the part of these…agencies would have greatly aided and possibly solved the NUMEC diversion questions, if they desired.”

There was an obvious motivation for the CIA, FBI et al not “desiring” to solve the riddle of where NUMEC’s missing highly-enriched uranium ended up. As Kennedy assassination expert Jefferson Morley has told mainstream news networks, Israel’s man in Langley James Jesus Angleton placed the President’s alleged killer Lee Harvey Oswald under Agency surveillance in November 1959. This amounted to intensively “monitoring his politics, his personal life, his foreign travels, his contacts” until the day the President was killed. Morley explained the significance of this thus:

“Angleton had a 180-page file on Oswald on his desk a week before Kennedy went to Dallas in November 1963…So what this story raises is the question: was the CIA incredibly, atrociously incompetent when it comes to Lee Harvey Oswald, or was Angleton actually running an operation involving Oswald?”

June 19, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | weapons and war | Leave a comment

Israel publicly confirms its military involvement in Ukraine

Lucas Leiroz. June 13, 2025, Strategic Culture Foundation,

In the end, the Zionist entity and the Kiev regime are instruments of the same Western hegemony project

While global attention remains focused on the rising tensions between Israel and Iran, a significant development has been largely ignored by Western media in recent days: the revelation of Israel’s involvement in the arming campaign for Ukraine.

Despite publicly maintaining an appearance of military neutrality in the conflict between Moscow and Kiev, the State of Israel has quietly deepened its collaboration with Western military interests in Ukraine. Recent statements from Israeli diplomatic representatives make it clear that Tel Aviv not only politically supports Kiev but also directly participates in the military effort against Russia.

In an interview with Ukrainian media, the Israeli ambassador in Kiev confirmed that air defense systems originally supplied by the United States to Israel were transferred to Ukraine. According to him, the delivery was deliberately kept secret and away from international headlines, demonstrating Israel’s attempt to participate in the conflict without attracting negative consequences.

The omission of logistical details about the delivery reveals a clear attempt to preserve an appearance of neutrality before the public. It remains unclear whether the equipment was sent directly by Israel or through third parties, suggesting an internationally coordinated operation to avoid diplomatic friction with Moscow.

Until recently, Tel Aviv claimed a stance of non-involvement in the Ukraine conflict, citing concerns about potential Russian retaliation—particularly in Syria, where Russian forces maintain a strategic presence. However, this justification is becoming increasingly obsolete in light of Israel’s actual behavior…………………………………..

The recent neutralization of Shiite militias in Syria, which were aligned with Tehran, and the rapprochement between the new Syrian government and Israel have created a more favorable environment for Tel Aviv’s foreign military maneuvers. Feeling less vulnerable to indirect retaliation, Israel now appears more willing to expand its involvement in conflicts beyond the Middle East, such as the one in Ukraine……………………………………………..

Israel’s decision to more openly support the Kiev regime marks a significant shift in its foreign policy, abandoning previous caution in favor of a stance more aligned with the interests of the Collective West. However, this move may bring unforeseen consequences — not only at the regional level but also in the structure of its bilateral relationship with Moscow…………………………. https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/06/13/israel-publicly-confirms-its-military-involvement-in-ukraine/

June 19, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Israel, politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

US assisted Israeli war on Iran just another US regime change operation

16 June 2025 AIMN Editorial, By Walt Zlotow https://theaimn.net/us-assisted-israeli-war-on-iran-just-another-us-regime-change-operation/

In the 80 years since WWII, the US has engaged in roughly 80 regime change operations, an average of one per year. Some utilized outright war. Some used proxies. Some consisted of crippling economic sanctions designed to hurt the people so severely they would overthrow the targeted ruler.

Some succeeded immediately. Some took years to achieve regime change. Many failed.

The 1960 regime change operation in Cuba initially used sanctions. When that failed the US used Cuban dissident proxies in an invasion ending in catastrophe. Cuba brought in Russian missiles to prevent further regime change shenanigans. That nearly blew up the whole world simply to change out the Cuban communist regime in a tiny land 1/90th America’s size with a population just 3% of the American behemoth. After 65 years US embargo still makes life horrible for Cubans but does nothing to achieve regime change.

Then there is the current US regime change operation targeting Iran. The US has been itching to change out the Islamic theocracy ruling Iran since their 1979 revolution kicked out the US puppet we installed after our 1953 regime change operation deposed the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh.

But the current Iran regime change operation is truly unique. It’s being conducted by our best buddies in the Middle East, Israel, who launched a ferocious attack against Iran wholly supported, indeed cheered on by the US. Israel is ecstatic the US enabled their war since they’re even more committed to Iran regime change than America.

In possibly the most despicable, duplicitous act of diplomatic treachery in US history, the US lulled Iran from being on alert for attack by scheduling a sixth negotiating session on Iran’s nuclear program while knowing the bombs were about to fall. An Israeli official admitted to the Jerusalem Post; “The round of US-Iranian nuclear negotiations scheduled for Sunday was part of a coordinated US-Israeli deception aimed at lowering Iran’s guard ahead of Friday’s attack.”

Besides keeping Iran’s defenses from preparing for attack, the deception was designed to keep military, political and nuclear scientists from moving to safety. Some were killed in their imagined safe homes.

Israel claims their attacks were defensive to keep Iran from building a nuclear bomb. Poppycock. That argument was simply a MacGuffin, a Hitchcock style directorial plot device to keep the narrative moving. And that narrative is regime change of the theocracy ruling Iran and inflicting massive devastation so Iran will no longer be a hegemonic rival to Israel for Middle East supremacy.

The US is delighted that it may finally achieve its first Iran regime change since deposing Moseddgegh 72 years ago. And it will do so without dropping a single bomb or losing a single soldier or civilian. Firing the bombs and burying their dead will fall to its proxy Israel which, in their lust to topple Iran, is only too happy to fill that proxy role.

On December 6-7, 1941, two Japanese diplomats were still negotiating with US officials in DC when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. The US charged Japan with dastardly deception to enable their attack. But history later attributed the two events as unrelated due to the slow, poor communication methods of 84 years ago. Not so with America’s grotesque use of diplomacy to achieve, as Sen. Lindsay Graham gloated “Game on” for regime change in Iran.

Next time the US wants to negotiate a sensitive issue of war and peace, the opposition will not say; ‘Remember Pearl Harbor.’ They’ll proclaim; ‘Remember Iran.’

June 19, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Iran, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

How Iran Turned Israel’s Iron Dome Against Itself Using Clever Jamming

Sputnik International, Ekaterina Blinova 16.06.2025

New evidence suggests that Iran successfully compromised Israel’s vaunted air defense systems during recent attacks — forcing Tel Aviv to fire on its own positions. How?

Iran overwhelmed Israeli defenses by breaching the data transmission and correction system early in flight, explains military expert and historian of the Air Defense Forces Yuri Knutov.

Based on the footage that was released, it seems that the Iranians were able to breach the data transmission and correction signal system at the early stage when the missiles were flying, using an inertial guidance system. As a result, the system misdirected the missiles, not toward their intended target, but toward Israel’s own surface-to-air missile batteries, leading to a strike on them.”

The attack included:

100+ Shahed drones (swarming tactics)

Decoy ballistic missiles (old models to waste interceptors)

Fattah hypersonic missiles (unstoppable by Israeli Arrow/PAC-3)

As a result, the Iron Dome’s interception rate dropped drastically to just 10-15%.

“The use of jamming against surface-to-air missiles and missile defense systems is actually a fairly old tactic. During the Vietnam War, the Americans used jamming to mislead missiles by range, angle, and many other active interference methods. Special transmitters were deployed to create the illusion of aircraft presence on the radar screens of Vietnamese missile guidance stations,” Knutov says.

………………………..Masterful deception

Iran’s hypersonic Fattah missiles and Haj Qassems guided ballistics hit critical Israeli targets, including the Defense Ministry HQ and a major airbase housing F-35 and F-16 fighters. Despite Israel’s marketing of its advanced defense systems, the Arrow and Patriot systems failed to stop them.

Iran also deployed decoys so effectively that Israeli strikes repeatedly hit fake targets. The Iron Dome, which covers only 144 sq km and is good for single rockets, but seemingly couldn’t handle mass attacks or the hypersonic gap — Fattah missiles reach Israel in 7 minutes, while the Iron Dome needs 11 minutes to reload.

Iran has learned from past Israeli strikes and improved tactics, establishing backup command centers and more efficient maneuvering to increase its chances of success. https://sputnikglobe.com/20250616/how-iran-turned-israels-iron-dome-against-itself-using-clever-jamming-1122265685.html

June 19, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Iran, Israel, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Trump Threatens to Bomb Iran to Smithereens for “Playing By the Rules”

there is no provision in international law or under the UN Charter that allows one country to attack another country based on its own subjective perception of what ‘may or may not’ constitute a threat.

Did we mention that the Trump campaign was given over $100 million by wealthy Zionist donors whose driving ambition is to topple the government in Tehran and absorb territorial Iran into Greater Israel?

Mike Whitney • June 9, 2025, https://www.unz.com/mwhitney/trump-threatens-to-bomb-iran-to-smithereens-for-playing-by-the-rules/

President Donald Trump is threatening to launch air strikes on Iran for activities that are approved under the terms of Iran’s treaty obligations. This is not a matter on which there should be any debate. The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) explicitly grants all parties, including Iran, the “inalienable right” to develop, research, produce, and use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. This “inalienable right” includes the enriching of uranium.

Trump either doesn’t understand what a “treaty” is or thinks its terms should not apply to Iran. For the sake of clarity, a treaty is a formal, legally binding agreement between sovereign states that is governed by international law. It establishes mutual obligations, rights, or rules on matters such as trade, security, nuclear non-proliferation, or environmental protection. A treaty is not optional and cannot be repealed by executive fiat. States that ratify treaties are legally obligated to comply with their terms in good faith. Political leaders, as representatives of the state, are expected to uphold these obligations.

This is all very straightforward which is why we find so it hard to understand why Trump is threatening a country that is clearly “in compliance” with its obligations under the NPT. Here’s what Trump said on Friday on Air Force One:

“They won’t be enriching. If they enrich, then we’re going to have to do it the other way… (air strikes) And I don’t really want to do it the other way but we’re going to have no choice. There’s not going to be enrichment.”

Trump has no legal authority to determine whether Iran can enrich uranium or not. It’s simply not his decision to make. Even Grok — with its obvious pro-Israel bias — understands this. Check it out:

Donald Trump, whether as a private citizen or as U.S. president, has no legal authority under international law to demand that Iran stop enriching uranium. Iran, as a sovereign state and signatory to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), has the right under Article IV to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, including uranium enrichment, provided it complies with its safeguards obligations under Article III and its Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement (CSA) with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). No individual state, including the United States, has the unilateral legal authority under international law to prohibit Iran from exercising this right. Any demand from Trump would be a political or diplomatic action, not a legally binding directive, unless backed by a UN Security Council resolution, which would require agreement from other permanent members (e.g., Russia, China). Grok

Trita Parsi explains how Trump has adopted John Bolton’s Iran policy.[0n original]

Also, there is no provision in international law or under the UN Charter that allows one country to attack another country based on its own subjective perception of what ‘may or may not’ constitute a threat. That’s insanity, and it flies in the face of the UN’s efforts to ensure peace and security through collective action and multilateralism. Besides, there is no credible legal case against Iran, because Iran is not violating the rules. What the MSM stubbornly refuses to tell the public is that Iran has no nuclear weapons and no nuclear weapons program. And—according to the IAEA—Iran has been “in compliance” since 2003 and has never diverted nuclear material to a weapons program. In other words, there’s no legal case against Iran at all. Zilch.

So, what is the point of Trump’s fulminations? Why is he threatening a peaceful country that is clearly “playing by the rules”?

Could that be a factor? Could that explain why Trump convened 5 separate meetings with Iranian negotiators without once mentioning the issue of “nuclear enrichment”, but then—Surprise, Surprise—did a swift 180 after which he made “zero enrichment” the foundational demand for which he has declared unflinching support?

How do you explain that sudden about-face? Is Trump pursuing an Israeli agenda or putting “America First”?

And why would Trump stake-out such a flimsy, untenable position when he knows that enrichment is the one provision in the NPT on which Iran will never budge?

The obvious answer is that Trump doesn’t want an agreement; he does not want to resolve the issue peacefully. That’s why he focused on the one issue on which there is no flexibility, figuring (quite rightly) that enrichment can be used as a pretext for war. And that’s the goal, war with Iran.

(Readers who have been following developments with Iran closely may recall that Trump’s original demand was that “Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon”. (Iran has agreed to that demand.) But now, he has sneakily changed the wording to “no enrichment” as if the two things are the same. Naturally, the pro-Israel media has not drawn attention to the president’s sleight-of-hand fearing that it would reveal the deceptive game he is playing. But, the fact remains, Trump used the negotiations to look like he genuinely wanted peace, and then quickly moved the goalposts as the “talks” progressed. Bottom line: A peaceful settlement was never Trump’s objective.

This is from an article at The Times of Israel (June 8, 2025)

This is how desperate the Trump team (and their Israeli allies) are to cast suspicion on Iran’s perfectly legal activities. They’ve actually dug up the details of research that was conducted in 2003. (a period during which Iran has admitted to “aspects of a nuclear weapons program.”) Notice that the IAEA report does not suggest that anything illegal is going on today, or that there is any indication that Iran has an active nuclear weapons program, or even that they are diverting nuclear material to some other location. No. What they’re referring to happened more than two decades ago. It’s a joke.

And the same rule applies to the uranium that has been enriched to 60% which the Iranians have admitted to many times in the past. They’re not hiding anything; they’re looking for sanction’s relief, that’s all. Turns out, they don’t like economic strangulation. Are you surprised?

By the way, under the terms of the NPT, Iran is allowed to enrich uranium to 60% as the treaty does not explicitly set a maximum enrichment level for non-nuclear-weapon states. This is a fact, but it is a fact that is omitted in 100% of the MSM coverage of the issue. Why would that be?:-

Iran Needs Nuclear Energy

Many people believe that a country with vast oil resources like Iran has no need for nuclear energy, but that’s simply not true. Much of Iran’s electricity generation takes place at the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant, Iran’s primary nuclear power facility, that uses low-enriched uranium to generate significant electrical power and reduce reliance on fossil fuels.

Iran also uses nuclear technology to produce radioisotopes for medical diagnostics and treatment,… widely used in cancer diagnosis and imaging. Iran claims its nuclear program supports healthcare by providing isotopes for over 1 million patients annually.

Iran also uses nuclear energy in industrial applications, agriculture, water resource management, scientific research, cancer treatment, technology and radioisotope production. The fact is, no country would join the NPT if they were denied the “peaceful use” of nuclear power. Why would they?

Finally….

Americans should realize that nothing one reads about Iran in the western media can be trusted; it is all poisoned with the same, vile anti-Iran hatred and bias. Since the 1979 Revolution to today, US policy towards Iran has been an unbroken chain of relentless hectoring, belligerence and demonization. Washington has never treated Iran with the respect it deserves nor will it in the future. That’s because—on a fundamental level—the entire US political class despises Iran for asserting sovereign control over their-own vast resources and for failing to kowtow to their mucky-muck overlords in Washington. That’s the real issue; Iran has refused to cave in to Uncle Sam’s diktats which is why it must be punished with economic strangulation, “maximum pressure” and, inevitably, war. That is how America treats the peasants in the provinces, with an iron fist.

Iran’s foreign minister Abbas Araghchi summed up Iran’s approach at a recent ceremony for the late Ayatollah Khomeini. He said:

“The main foundation of Iran’s foreign policy is based on the principle of renouncing foreign domination. Trump’s ban on enrichment is itself domination, and this is unacceptable to the Iranian people.”

To its credit, Iran has never ‘given an inch’ to Washington’s endless badgering and saber-rattling. They have stuck by their principles and defended their right as a free country to choose their own development model, their own political system and their own collective future without bullying or coercion.

Iran should be applauded for shrugging off Washington’s threats and intimidation, and for its unflinching commitment to the principle of sovereign independence. They have preserved their dignity through 45 years of nonstop hostility and antagonism.

Bravo, Iran.

June 18, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Iran, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Trump Praises ‘Excellent’ Israeli Strikes on Iran.

A source said Washington provided Tel Aviv with “exquisite” intel for the assault

by Kyle Anzalone | Jun 13, 2025, https://news.antiwar.com/2025/06/13/trump-praises-excellent-israeli-strikes-on-iran/

President Donald Trump endorsed the massive Israeli strike on Iran early on Friday morning, calling the attack “excellent.” A source explained that the US provided Israel with intelligence for the operation.

Speaking with ABC News on the phone following the Israeli strikes across the Islamic Republic, Trump said, “I think it’s been excellent.” He continued, “We gave them a chance and they didn’t take it. They got hit hard, very hard. They got hit about as hard as you’re going to get hit. And there’s more to come. A lot more.”

Trump refused to provide details about the US role in the attack, saying, “I don’t want to comment on that.”

However, elements of Washington’s support for Tel Aviv are becoming public. Israeli officials told the Jerusalem Post and Axios that the White House helped to create the illusion that the US was still seeking a diplomatic settlement with Iran.

Just hours before the attack, President Trump declared that he was committed to a “Diplomatic Resolution to the Iran Nuclear Issue!” But it appears he had already greenlit the Jewish state’s attack on the Islamic Republic.

A source provided further details of the US support, telling ABC News that Washington provided Tel Aviv with “exquisite” intelligence. Additionally, the source said the US will help Israel defend against any Iranian response.

The Iranian Foreign Ministry said in a statement that it holds the US responsible for the attack. “The Zionist regime’s aggressive actions against Iran cannot have been carried out without the coordination and authorization of the United States. Accordingly, the United States government, as the main supporter of this regime, will also be responsible for the dangerous effects and consequences of the Zionist regime’s adventure,” the ministry said.

Since starting the assault early Friday morning, Israeli forces have delivered multiple rounds of strikes targeting Iranian military sites, nuclear facilities, and residential buildings. Top Iranian nuclear scientists and generals have been confirmed killed.

Tel Aviv said the operation, dubbed “Nation of Lions,” will last several days.

Israel is seeking more support from the US. The Jerusalem Post reports that Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz will hold a call with Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth later on Friday to lobby Washington for more military assistance. Additionally, Trump is expected to speak with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by phone.

Kyle Anzalone is the opinion editor of Antiwar.com and news editor of the Libertarian Institute. He hosts The Kyle Anzalone Show and is co-host of Conflicts of Interest with Connor Freeman.

June 18, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Israel, politics international, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Why the AUKUS ‘dream’ was never realistic and is likely to die

it has always been clear that Washington will sell us its submarines only if it is absolutely certain Australia would commit them to fight if the US goes to war with China.

The Albanese government has never acknowledged it is willing to make that commitment.

it has always been clear that Washington will sell us its submarines only if it is absolutely certain Australia would commit them to fight if the US goes to war with China.

The Albanese government has never acknowledged it is willing to make that commitment.

Hugh White, Jun 16, 2025, https://www.thenewdaily.com.au/opinion/2025/06/16/aukus-submarines-review-australia

The first clear sign the Trump administration was taking a long hard look at AUKUS came two weeks ago, when US Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth gave his first major speech on US strategic policy in Asia at the annual Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore.

In a long presentation that catalogued a host of initiatives with America’s Asian allies, AUKUS was not mentioned once.

This was noteworthy, because under the Biden administration, AUKUS was the poster-child for US military engagement in the region, name-checked at every opportunity. Now we understand why.

The Pentagon’s review of AUKUS, announced last week, marks the first time any of the three partners – the US, Britain and Australia – has tested the AUKUS dream against hard military and strategic realities. It is unlikely to survive.

AUKUS was always a long shot, right from the start. That was clear from the moment, back in September 2021, that then prime minister, Scott Morrison, sprung the dream of an Australian nuclear-powered submarine force on an astonished public. For that dream to be realised, a lot of things would have to go right, and most of them were much more likely to go wrong.

But the flaw that looks set to kill the AUKUS dream is one that was not part of the original plan. The way Morrison and his then defence minister, Peter Dutton, originally conceived it, there would be no need for Australia to acquire US-built Virginia-Class subs in the 2030s before taking delivery of Australian-built subs to replace the Collins-class boats. They were confident that subs built in Australia, almost certainly to a British design, could be delivered fast enough to enter service as the old Collins subs were being retired, ensuring no gap in our capability.

It became clear this was not going to work out only after Labor took office in 2022, as the new government tried to turn Morrison’s vague idea into a viable project. It soon found there was simply no way to bring new Australian-built nuclear subs into service until long after the Collins boats had to be retired.

To save the AUKUS dream, it was necessary to fill the gap between the retirement of the Collins and the delivery of the first of what we now know as the UK-designed, Australian-built SSN-AUKUS class of submarine. That was when the idea of Australia getting ex-US Navy Virginia class boats first surfaced.

It was a desperate measure that vastly increased the already formidable risks of the whole AUKUS idea. One reason is that it meant the Royal Australian Navy had the almost impossible task of managing and operating not one but two very different kinds of nuclear submarine, powered by two very different nuclear power plants.

For a navy that has struggled to keep the much simpler Collins subs at sea, the task of operating just one class of nuclear-powered subs was truly formidable. To expect it to effectively operate two quite different classes of nuclear submarine simultaneously was frankly absurd.

But there is another reason why the decision to buy Virginia subs to cover the capability gap undermined the viability of the whole AUKUS plan.

Very simply, the US has no submarines to spare. The facilities and workforce that build and maintain its submarines have never recovered from the savage cuts imposed in the 1990s after the end of the Cold War. No serious steps were taken to rebuild it even after it became clear China had become a formidable new maritime rival.

The result is that America’s two submarine construction yards have for many years been delivering barely half as many Virginia-class subs as the Pentagon now says America needs – about 1.2 a year instead of two a year.

This problem was acknowledged when the AUKUS partners announced the detailed plan in 2023. It was optimistically claimed that everything necessary would be done to increase production to the level of 2.3 subs a year required to meet US needs and provide extra boats for Australia.

So far, there is no sign of that happening. Elbridge Colby, the senior US official conducting the Pentagon’s AUKUS review, will almost certainly puncture the irresponsible optimism around this crucial issue and make it clear that unless there is a miracle in US submarine production, America will not sell any Virginia-class subs to Australia.

But that’s not all. Even if that miracle is achieved, US leaders and officials still have to ask whether it makes sense for America to pass the extra submarines to Australia rather than bring them into service with the US Navy.

Any subs sold to Australia weaken America at a time when it is already struggling to match China’s fast-growing navy. So it has always been clear that Washington will sell us its submarines only if it is absolutely certain Australia would commit them to fight if the US goes to war with China.

The Albanese government has never acknowledged it is willing to make that commitment. The Biden administration, desperate for its own reasons to keep the AUKUS dream alive, did not press Canberra on this very sensitive point.

The Trump administration will be much tougher. Colby’s review will also certainly conclude that America should not sell Virginia-class subs to Australia, unless Canberra offers much clearer and more public guarantees that Australia will go to war with China if the US ever does.

For Canberra, this could well be a deal-breaker, making the end of the AUKUS dream. It certainly should be.

Hugh White’s new Quarterly Essay, Hard New World: Our Post-American Future, is published this month.

Hugh White, Emeritus Professor of Strategic Studies at the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, Australian National University

June 18, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | AUSTRALIA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Israel claims it damaged Iran’s Natanz nuclear facility “significantly.” But questions remain

By François Diaz-Maurin Bulletin, June 13, 2025

Early Friday, Israel conducted air strikes on the Natanz nuclear facility, Iran’s main enrichment site. The strikes were part of a larger operation by the Israeli military that targeted nuclear sites, long-range missile facilities, military leaders, and nuclear scientists across Iran.

It was not clear how much damage the Natanz nuclear site—which hosts both a commercial fuel enrichment plant for use in things such as powering civilian nuclear reactors, and the more technologically advanced and opaque so-called pilot fuel enrichment plant (PFEP)—had sustained from the strike. Israel’s military published its own assessment of the attack, claiming that they have damaged the underground area of the site. This area reportedly contains a multi-story enrichment hall with centrifuges, electrical rooms, and additional supporting infrastructure, which can be used to enrich uranium to military-grade levels. During a briefing, Israel Defense Forces (IDF) spokesperson Efi Defrin said the Natanz nuclear site was “significantly damaged.

“It’s difficult to assess the consequences of the strikes on the nuclear program itself and the facilities, as we are still waiting for independent analyses of the satellite imagery,” Héloïse Fayet, a research fellow at the French Institute of International Relations and an expert of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, told the Bulletin.

Unverified footage shared on social media from near the Natanz facility seemed to show repeated explosions at four locations. This seems to be consistent with the description of the facility, believed to consist of three underground buildings and six above-ground buildings.

As the operation was reportedly still ongoing, many questions about the attack remain unanswered. Here are some of the unknowns about the attack.

When will the attack be over? During a live briefing on Friday morning, Defrin said that “more than 100 targets have been struck across Iran.” And in his address, Netanyahu said that the operation “will continue for as many days as it takes to remove that threat.”

Defrin added that pilots were “still striking military targets and targets from the nuclear program across different areas in Iran,” which the Israeli military said involved about 200 fighter jets.

It is not clear how long the attack will last.

What are the other nuclear facilities targeted? On early Friday, the IAEA confirmed with Iranian authorities that the Fordow fuel enrichment plant, located near Qom in central Iran, had not been targeted during Israel’s attack. But new reports later suggested that Israel was actively attacking the plant, with residents reportedly having heard large explosions coming from the plant’s underground complex and smoke seen rising from several locations in the vicinity of the site.

The IAEA also said the Isfahan nuclear complex had not been targeted, contradicting reports of explosions near the site. The Isfahan Nuclear Technology Center, located 340 kilometers south of Tehran, hosts nuclear research reactors, a uranium conversion plant, and a fuel production plant, among other facilities. On Friday evening, the IDF confirmed that it also targeted the Isfahan complex, but offered no evidence.

Was the United States involved in the attack? According to The Washington Post, Trump officials have said that there was no US military support in the attack. But it is still unknown whether the United States provided indirect intelligence or logistical support for the attack.

Some news reports claim Israeli officials as saying that the United States may be opposing the attack only publicly, adding that the Trump administration did not express opposition in private. “We had a clear US green light,” one official reportedly told Axios.

Was the attack necessary? Israel’s military called its operation “preemptive” due to the imminent nuclear threat from Iran. During his address moments after launching the attack, Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the operation was necessary because “Iran has produced enough highly enriched uranium for nine atom bombs,” adding that “Iran could produce a nuclear weapon in a very short time.” For its part, Israel’s military said “[Iran’s] program has accelerated significantly in recent months, bringing the regime significantly closer to obtaining a nuclear weapon.”

Reports that Israel was preparing to conduct such attacks have been made for over a year, and right-wing columnists have, for years, openly called on Israel to do so.

But several agencies and analysts dispute the claim that the threat of an Iranian nuclear bomb was imminent. A May 22 report to the House Foreign Affairs Committee concluded that “the US intelligence community continues to assess that Iran is not currently undertaking nuclear weapons-related activities,” although adding that “Iran could enrich enough uranium for more than a dozen nuclear weapons within weeks if it chose to do so.”……………………………………………………….

Did the attack successfully roll back Iran’s nuclear program? Despite several Iranian nuclear facilities reported as being targeted by heavy military strikes, it is difficult at this stage to assess how successful Israel’s operation has been, especially as it was still ongoing as of Friday evening.

But Jon Wolfsthal, a nuclear expert and director of global risk at the Federation of American Scientists, is skeptical that the attack may have significantly altered Iran’s nuclear program. “Iran has likely been planning for this day for months or years. We have to assume they have stored a lot of capabilities to rebuild and even to build a weapon in short order.”

According to Wolfsthal, Israel’s attack may be counterproductive.

“You cannot bomb away a nuclear program.” https://thebulletin.org/2025/06/israel-claims-it-damaged-irans-natanz-nuclear-facility-significantly-but-questions-remain/

June 18, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Iran, Israel, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Was Iran months away from producing a nuclear bomb?

The Israeli military said it had accumulated intelligence showing that
“concrete progress” had been made “in the Iranian regime’s efforts to
produce weapons components adapted for a nuclear bomb”, including a uranium
metal core and a neutron source initiator for triggering the nuclear
explosion. Kelsey Davenport, director for non-proliferation policy at the
US-based Arms Control Association, said Israel’s prime minister “did not
present any clear or compelling evidence that Iran was on the brink of
weaponizing”. “Iran has been at a near-zero breakout for months,” she told
the BBC, referring to the time it would take Iran to acquire enough fissile
material for one bomb if it chose to do so.

“Similarly, the assessment that
Iran could develop a crude nuclear weapon within a few months is not new.”
She said some of Iran’s nuclear activities would be applicable to
developing a bomb, but US intelligence agencies had assessed that Iran was
not engaged in key weaponization work.

BBC 14th June 2025, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn840275p5yo

June 18, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Iran, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Sources: US Will Enter Israel’s War With Iran

By Dave DeCamp / Antiwar.com, June 16, 2025, https://scheerpost.com/2025/06/16/sources-us-will-enter-israels-war-with-iran/

Sources familiar with the matter have told Antiwar.com Editorial Director Scott Horton that the Trump administration is poised to enter Israel’s aggressive war against Iran directly. US airstrikes on Iran could begin as soon as Monday.

Please contact the White House by sending an email or calling the comment line starting at 10 am EST on Monday  (202‑456‑1111). Tell them that you do not want the US to enter this disastrous war, which could lead to heavy American casualties at US bases across the Middle East.

The US has supported the war by reportedly providing Israel with intelligence and helping intercept Iranian missiles and drones, but so far, there have been no direct US attacks on Iran. Iranian officials have warned that Tehran would hit US bases in the region in response to any US strikes.

Axios reported on Saturday that Israel is urging the US to join the war since Israel lacks the bunker-busting bombs necessary to do serious damage to Iran’s Fordow plant, which is buried deep underground. An Israeli official told Axios that President Trump had previously suggested the US could strike Fordow.

Trump himself said on Sunday that it was “possible” that the US would get directly involved in the war, which Israel launched early Friday morning with airstrikes across Iran.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu started the war under the pretext of preventing Iran from building a nuclear weapon. But it was the consensus of the US intelligence community that there was no evidence Iran was working toward a nuclear weapon, and Tehran made clear they were ready to make a deal with the US that would significantly lower uranium enrichment levels and increase oversight of its nuclear program in exchange for US sanctions relief.

Ali Larijani, an aide to Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has previously said that the one thing that would make Tehran reconsider its prohibition on the development of nuclear weapons would be a US or Israeli attack.

“We are not moving towards (nuclear) weapons, but if you do something wrong in the Iranian nuclear issue, you will force Iran to move towards that because it has to defend itself,” Larijani said on April 1.

“Iran does not want to do this, but … (it) will have no choice,” he added. “If at some point you (the US) move towards bombing by yourself or through Israel, you will force Iran to make a different decision.”

June 17, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Israel, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries Next Entries »