Dramatic high-risk US Delta Force plan to snatch Iran’s nuclear stocks revealed
Chris Hughes Defence and Security Editor, 25 Mar 2026, https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/dramatic-high-risk-delta-force-36921080
American special forces could be used to smash Iran’s nuclear ambitions as war-chiefs weigh up high-risk mission amid fears of casualties and a repeat of 1980 ‘Op’ Eagle Claw’ disaster
American military chiefs are considering one of the biggest special forces raids ever-launched in a bid to cripple Iran’s nuclear programme.
The massive helicopter-borne insertion of thousands of assault troops supporting a large number of Delta Force specialists could take at least 24 hours to conduct.
It would try to seize 450kg of 60% enriched uranium believed still to be hidden deep beneath one of Tehran’s nuclear facilities and is an immensely high-risk operation.
Although below the ‘weapons grade’ 90% of enriched uranium needed to make a nuclear weapon some US intelligence experts fear Iran could use it in the future.
Two British military sources have told the Mirror the operation plan has been drawn up, although both said it has been assessed as “very high-risk, with high probability of casualties and low probability of absolute mission success since the exact location of the uranium is uncertain.”
After fighting their way into the complex, the elite Delta Force soldiers would secure the site for specialist engineers to drill and blast their way into the underground complex.
The immensely complex operation would involve scores of spy planes and fighter jets helping to secure the approach to the mission targets.
Ground troops would form a vast perimeter around the site to fight off attacks from the IRGC. Plans were drawn up by Joint Special Operations Command which has a poignant link to Iran as it was set up in 1980 following the disastrous Operation Eagle Claw whose aim was to rescue US hostages from Tehran.
Then eight US Navy Sea Stallion helicopters took off from the deck of an American aircraft carrier for a 600-mile trip to rendezvous in the Iranian desert with six C-130 transport aircrafts.
They were hit by a violent wind-driven sand storm common in the desert which damaged the aircrafts and President Carter abandoned the mission.
As the force prepared to depart, a RH-53D helicopter crashed into a C-130 plane carrying extra fuel for refueling, igniting a fire that killed five Airmen and three Marines.
America vowed it would never happen again and sought to bring its special forces and intelligence elites together for better mission planning and execution.
In 1980 JSOC was launched forming combined units from the Army Delta Force, Navy SEAL Team Six, and the Air Force’s 24th Special Tactics Squadron to ensure they could operate seamlessly together, a key failing during the Iran hostage crisis.
One source, from the intelligence community, told the Mirror: “The plan does exist but the risks of failure are very high and it may have been discounted as too difficult.
“However it is known that President Trump is extremely belligerent and not exactly risk-cognisant so there is always the possibility he could still give the go-ahead for it to happen.
“Certainly the US military has given the President options, along with their risk assessment and the uranium seizure is top of his list. Troops movements we are seeing towards the Gulf indicate something bigger than, or as well as, a Strait of Hormuz -specific operation.”
The operational planning includes crack paratroopers entering Iranian airspace in fast-moving Chinook troop carrier helicopters and uniquely-adapted special forces planes for an unusually large number of elite Delta Force special forces soldiers.
A second, military source, told the Mirror: “If it goes ahead this could be the biggest Special Forces operations ever launched, with diversions elsewhere in Iran and major air-raids to cast confusion into the ranks of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. It has been looked into for some time but it is exceptionally high risk.
“The final word will go to Commander-in-Chief Donald Trump with input from Pete Hegseth, his so-called Secretary of War, who has been extremely enthusiastic about this war. It is a major decision as a lot can go wrong in an operation of this size but US administration may see it as the only way to secure the enriched uranium. The question is whether Trump is prepared to give it the go-ahead.”
Earlier this month the Mirror revealed exclusively how US forces had sent a number of uniquely adapted MC-130J Commando II special forces planes from RAF Mildenhall in Suffolk to the Middle East, indicating a major covert operation was being planned.
The Lockheed Martin US Air Force Special Operations Command planes are for clandestine, low-visibility infiltration, exfiltration, and resupply of special operations forces.
They perform high-speed, low-level air refueling, cargo airdrops, and air to land missions in hostile or sensitive areas. It comes amid reports President Trump has now ordered thousands of elite US paratroopers to the Middle East, perhaps to invade Kharg Island, the oil-exporting hub on which the Iranian economy relies.
Based at Fort Bragg in North Carolina, the Immediate Response Force is a brigade of about 3,000 troops from the 82nd Airborne Division that can deploy anywhere in the world within 18 hours.
But at least 5,000 marines are also en route for the Gulf, supposedly also to support an operation to secure Kharg Island, despite Trump’s claims peace negotiations are underway.
These claims have been vehemently denied by Iran’s foreign ministry. The first of two marine expeditionary units is due to arrive in the Middle East on Friday, comprising the USS Tripoli, an amphibious assault ship carrying 2,200 troops, the USS New Orleans, an amphibious docking ship, F-35B Lightning II stealth fighters and MV-22B Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft.
Our sources told the Mirror the two operations against Kharg Island and the site of the hidden nuclear facility, which we have chosen not to identify, may yet happen simultaneously.
Third and final shipment of vitrified waste from the UK to Germany
As previously announced, the UK will be returning high level waste (HLW) in the form of vitrified residues to Germany.
Sellafield Ltd, 24 March 2026,
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/third-and-final-shipment-of-vitrified-waste-from-the-uk-to-germany
Sellafield Ltd and Nuclear Transport Solutions (NTS) are making preparations for the third and final return of high level waste (HLW), in the form of vitrified residue, to Germany.
Seven flasks will be transported from Sellafield to the Brokdorf interim storage facility later in 2026.
This will be the final shipment from the UK to Germany. The first shipment of 6 flasks, to Biblis, was successfully completed in 2020 and the second shipment of 7 flasks to Isar was completed in 2025.
The waste results from the reprocessing and recycling of spent nuclear fuel at the Sellafield site in West Cumbria, which had previously been used to produce electricity by utilities in Germany.
Vitrified residue returns are a key component of the UK’s Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) strategy to repatriate high level waste from the UK, fulfil overseas contracts and deliver UK Government policy.
These returns involve Sellafield Ltd working in partnership with Nuclear Transport Solutions (NTS) to return the waste to German customers.
The shipments will be carried out in full compliance with all applicable national and international regulations, and subject to issue of all relevant permits and licenses.
Sellafield Ltd and NTS will provide further information on the shipments in due course.
Iranian man freed pending further inquiries after UK nuclear submarine base arrest
The man and a woman were arrested at HM Naval Base Clyde, known as Faslane, last week
Anthony France, 23rd March 2026
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/police-iranian-man-nuclear-sub-base-incident-b1276130.html
An Iranian man who was charged after allegedly trying to enter the naval base where Britain’s nuclear submarines are based has been released from custody pending further inquiries, the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service said.
Prosecutors said they have decided there should be no proceedings against a 31-year-old Romanian woman who was also arrested and charged by police following the alleged incident.
The man and woman were arrested on Thursday March 19 following the alleged incident at HM Naval Base Clyde, which is known as Faslane, and later charged, and had been expected to appear at Dumbarton Sheriff Court on Monday.
Faslane is home to the core of the UK’s submarine fleet and the Trident nuclear deterrent.
A Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service spokesperson said: “The Procurator Fiscal received a report concerning a 34-year-old man in connection with an alleged incident on March 19 2026.
A War Built on Lies, Sold by Lobbyists, with Innocent Children as its Price
23 March 2026 David Tyler, Australian Independent Media
On 27 February 2026, the night before the bombs fell, Oman’s foreign minister, Badr bin Hamad Al Busaidi, announced that a breakthrough had been reached. After months of back-channel diplomacy, Iran had agreed to never stockpile enriched uranium, to full IAEA verification, and to irreversibly downgrade its existing stock to the lowest possible level. Peace, he said, was “within reach”. Technical talks were scheduled to continue in Vienna the following week.
Fourteen hours later, at 7:00 AM Tehran time on 28 February, the first wave of missiles arrived. China had been working to improve Iran’s situational awareness. It did not matter. The attack came without warning. Reports from Arab media, undenied by Tehran, claimed that Esmail Qaani, commander of the IRGC’s Quds Force, had been arrested and executed as a Mossad agent.
Within twelve hours, the United States and Israel had conducted more than 900 strikes. Two hundred Israeli aircraft, the largest combat sortie in its history, dropped over 1,200 bombs on 500 sites across western and central Iran. US Tomahawk missiles, launched from destroyers in the Arabian Sea, hit leadership compounds, missile factories, naval installations, and the National Security Council offices where Ali Khamenei was meeting his senior advisers. They knew he was there. Netanyahu had personally briefed Trump on the location days earlier. Khamenei was above ground, in daylight, when the strike came. He was dead before midday.
Forty-eight hours later, US forces had flown more than 1,700 sorties and struck over 1,250 targets across 29 of Iran’s 31 provinces. The first six days of Operation Epic Fury cost the United States more than $11 billion.
In that same period, Amnesty International confirmed that a US Tomahawk missile struck a girls’ primary school in Minab. Debris bearing the inscription “Made in USA” and the name “Globe Motors, Ohio” was recovered at the site. At least 170 people were killed. Most were children aged seven to twelve.
Then Donald Trump, in the second year of his second term, appeared on Truth Social to claim the war was about freedom.
The Lobbyists and the Lie
The question corporate media has avoided is simple. Who wanted this war, and how did they get it?
The Washington Post reports that Trump acted after sustained lobbying from Israel and Saudi Arabia. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman urged him to strike. Netanyahu’s government pressed the case repeatedly. Their interests converged. Israel sought to restore deterrence and reshape a regional order drifting beyond its control. Saudi Arabia saw an opportunity to weaken a rival it had failed to contain by other means. Together, they found a willing president.
The deeper breach was internal. Pentagon briefers told congressional staff on 1 March that Iran was not preparing to attack US forces or bases unless Israel struck first. The intelligence did not support the war. It was set aside. This was not a failure of information. It was a decision to ignore it.
US intelligence had already assessed that Iran was not pursuing nuclear weapons and would not have the capacity to build one before the end of the decade, even if it chose to do so. The IAEA had affirmed it. At the same time, Badr Al Busaidi was moving between delegations, and Iran’s chief negotiator was describing the talks as the most substantive in years. A framework for Vienna was in place. Technical teams were on standby.
Inside the administration, advisers discussed the advantages of letting Israel strike first to create a cleaner pretext for US entry after Iranian retaliation. That is not strategy. It is sequencing. Diplomacy was not the alternative to war. It was its cover.
Behind the push stood the familiar architecture of American intervention. Senator Lindsey Graham. The Foundation for Defense of Democracies. The American Enterprise Institute. Donor networks that have spent decades advocating regime change in Iran. They did not invent the policy. They sustained it, funded it, and waited for a president prepared to act on it.
Trump supplied the rest. On different days he has offered regime change, nuclear prevention, Iranian freedom, mineral security, and the Venezuela model as justification. None align. That is because the rationale followed the decision, not the other way around.
Congress, meanwhile, has largely abdicated its role. War powers have withered into ritual complaint. Democratic leadership has offered little more than procedural discomfort. The constitutional check on executive war-making is now
political theatre, observed and ignored.
Illegal, Immoral and Known to Be Both
The legal position is clear. The UN Charter permits the use of force only with Security Council authorisation or in self-defence against an armed attack. Neither condition applied. Iran had not attacked the United States or Israel. The Security Council had authorised nothing. The strikes began during active negotiations.
Ben Saul, the UN special rapporteur on counterterrorism, called it what it is: a crime of aggression. Oona Hathaway described it as “blatantly illegal”. The European Council on Foreign Relations reported broad consensus among legal scholars that no valid justification exists. This was not a contested case. It was an unambiguous one.
Within the United States, dissent has come from the margins of power. Rashida Tlaib. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Bernie Sanders. They are not describing a grey area. They are describing what the law already recognises.
What the Bombs Actually Did……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
The Catastrophe in Progress
………………………….This is not a regional disruption. It is a global economic shock. Energy prices feed directly into inflation, into transport, into food. The cost of this war will not be confined to the battlefield. It will be paid at petrol stations, in grocery aisles, and in central bank decisions across the world.
………..Senator Thom Tillis has asked the only question that matters. What are we trying to accomplish?
There is no coherent answer because coherence was never the point. This is the Venezuela model applied to a country four times larger, with a military doctrine built to resist precisely this kind of intervention, and a political system shaped by decades of confrontation with the United States. The architects of this war designed Iraq. The pattern is familiar. The outcome will be too. https://theaimn.net/a-war-built-on-lies-sold-by-lobbyists-with-innocent-children-as-its-price/
A Sunken Nuclear Submarine Is Leaking Radiation Into the Ocean. How Worried Should We Be?
Repairs or just outright cleanup would be expensive, extremely difficult, slow, and, of course, quite dangerous.
By Luis Prada, March 25, 2026, https://www.vice.com/en/article/a-sunken-nuclear-submarine-is-leaking-radiation-into-the-ocean-how-worried-should-we-be/
According to new research published in PNAS, a Cold War-era nuclear submarine sitting at the bottom of the Norwegian Sea is still leaking radioactive material. It’s happening slowly, if unevenly, and it’s contained just enough to avoid becoming a full-scale environmental disaster… for now.
The K-278 Komsomolets sank in 1989 after an onboard fire, taking with it a nuclear reactor and two nuclear torpedoes. It now sits more than 1,600 meters below the surface, in a part of the ocean that is freezing and almost entirely out of reach.
A research team led by Justin Gwynn at Norway’s radiation safety authority analyzed years of data, including a 2019 survey using a remotely operated vehicle. The team found that the wreck is leaking radioactive isotopes, including cesium and strontium, through cracks in its deteriorating hull.
The leaks aren’t constant. They come in waves, with visible plumes drifting out from various spots, like the reactor compartment or a ventilation pipe. Radiation levels take a big jump closer to the submarine, with levels reaching hundreds of thousands of times above normal background radiation levels.
At Least the Nuclear Submarine’s Nuclear Torpedoes Are Still Intact
Terrifying, and here’s where it gets strange: measurements taken from just a few feet away dramatically drop off. Researchers believe this is caused by the ocean diluting the problem. That may be why the surrounding ecosystem isn’t showing any obvious signs of collapse, given all of the toxic radiation. There’s still plenty of marine life clinging to the wreck, including sponges, corals, and anemones. They have slightly elevated radiation levels but no visible signs of deformation or damage, though genetic damage wouldn’t be surprising.
Sediment samples collected nearby show minimal contamination. Things wouldn’t be looking so rosy if the nuclear torpedoes inside it weren’t intact, which they very much are and have been since the 1990s.
So far, there are no signs of imminent disaster. Everything is stable and holding steady… for now.
This won’t always be the case, and it is really more a matter not of if but of when. The reactor is still corroding, and the structure is still weakening. Repairs or just outright cleanup will be expensive, extremely difficult, slow, and, of course, quite dangerous. The risk is contained, but that doesn’t mean it’s going away anytime soon.
US moves to approve more than $16 billion in air defense sales to Middle East
The United States is moving to bolster air defenses across the Middle East, notifying Congress of more than $16.5 billion in potential weapons sales aimed primarily at countering missile and drone threats.
The packages include systems for the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Jordan, and range from advanced radar and air defense sensors to counter-drone technology and aircraft munitions, according to several statements released Thursday by the U.S. Department of State.
The notifications come as missile and drone attacks have intensified across the Middle East during the war with Iran, putting pressure on air defense systems used to protect U.S. forces and regional allies.
The State Department said the secretary of state determined that an emergency justified the immediate sale, allowing the administration to bypass the typical congressional review process under the Arms Export Control Act.
Among the proposed sales is a long-range radar for the UAE that is designed to integrate with its Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system, or THAAD, for $4.5 billion.
The UAE package also includes a $2.1 billion fixed-site system designed to counter small drones, as well as $1.22 billion in air-to-air missiles and a $644 million set of F-16 munitions and upgrades to support its fighter aircraft.
Separately, Kuwait would receive $8 billion in lower tier air and missile defense radars designed to detect shorter-range threats, while Jordan’s $70.5 million package focuses on aircraft repair and parts to maintain its existing fleet.
Together, the sales point to a broader effort to build layered air defenses that are capable of detecting and intercepting threats at different ranges.
The demand comes as U.S. air defense systems are being used at a rate analysts worry exceeds the pace at which stockpiles can be replenished.
Ontario’s nuclear push risks another costly policy failure.
Nuclear power is neither nimble nor affordable and it’s about time the Ontario government stopped posturing otherwise.
Policy Options, Samuel Buckstein , March 20, 2026
Nuclear power is experiencing a resurgence worldwide and Ontario is no exception. The province has a long history with this awesome and terrifying energy technology, and it is once again turning to nuclear power in response to concerns over national sovereignty, economic growth, electrification and decarbonization.
Looking back over Ontario’s troubled history with nuclear energy, it is concerning to see the Ford government stumbling back to the bar for another round of nuclear cool-aid. Yet Ontario’s plan shows little evidence of having done its homework. Contrary to the government’s claims, it is fiscally irresponsible, incapable of delivering the energy the province needs in the time required, and compromises Ontario’s energy security.
When it should be investing in much cheaper and more easily deployed renewables, the province is recklessly doubling down on nuclear despite the evidence against it.
A legacy mired in debt
To understand Ontario’s nuclear trajectory, it is helpful to reflect on its origins. When civilian nuclear power was commercialized after the Second World War, its advocates promised it would be “too cheap to meter.” Buoyed by encouragement and financing from both provincial and federal governments, Ontario Hydro duly invested in a fleet of 20 CANDU reactors at three nuclear power stations over the course of 30 years.
By the turn of the millennium, Ontario Hydro’s nuclear obsession had saddled it with $38.1 billion in debt — $20.9 billion of it stranded (unsupported by assets). This burden was so immense that it toppled the once proud flagship Crown corporation. Ontarians continue to pay for this nuclear hangover today. As of March 2023, ratepayers were still on the hook for $13.8 billion.
Even as late as 1989, with Ontario Hydro already buckling under its crushing debt, the utility was forecasting the need for 10 to 15 new reactors by 2014. Reality proved otherwise, with peak electricity demand in 2014 lower than it had been 25 years earlier.
After a generation of staggering cost overruns and catastrophic international incidents at Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima, nuclear power fell out of favour in much of the developed world. Cheaper, more flexible and faster-to-deploy alternatives took its place, first gas and then renewables…………………………………
Lessons from the U.K. and Ukraine
However, Ontario should learn from the United Kingdom, not authoritarian China. The experience of Hinkley Point C, the first new nuclear power plant to be built in the U.K. in more than 20 years, should be a cautionary tale.
At least five years behind schedule and two times over budget, Hinkley Point C will likely be the most expensive nuclear power plant yet. The electricity generated by this colossal waste of rate-payer dollars will cost between two to four times more than renewable energy, which can be brought online in half the time. This is what the provincial government has in store for Ontario.
The scale of Ontario’s plan is immense. In addition to the CANDU refurbishments at Darlington and Bruce, Ontario has announced the refurbishment of Pickering B, one of the oldest and most urban nuclear power stations in the world.
Sovereignty concerns
Ontario has also contracted with GE Vernova Hitachi to build up to four small modular reactors (SMRs) at the Darlington site. It is unclear why the government has committed to building four SMRs before even the first is constructed. The greater concern with this arrangement is GE Vernova Hitachi is a U.S.-controlled company and the fuel supply chain is in the U.S. and France, not Canada…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
No price tag and no certainty it will pay
Despite these red flags, Ontario’s nuclear ambitions do not stop there. The government is also considering building two new large nuclear power stations at the Bruce site and at a new location near Port Hope. This despite the fact that, like the U.K., the domestic nuclear supply chain has all but vanished. This is precisely the kind of multi-billion-dollar, multi-decade infrastructure lock-in that bankrupted Ontario Hydro.
The government has been silent on how much this plan will cost. No one can predict whether demand will materialize to justify this massive supply expansion, or what electricity prices will be when these reactors finally come online. Committing to decades of investment in such an uncertain environment is sheer folly.
To top it all off, nuclear power is not even operationally flexible. Generation cannot be adjusted rapidly enough to follow demand, and the reactors can only be quickly turned off, but not back on again (it took Ontario more than a day to restore power after the 2003 Great Northeastern Blackout due to neutron poisoning in the reactors).
Renewable options
It does not have to be this way. Much has changed since the last wave of nuclear infatuation. Renewables are now the cheapest source of energy on a levelized basis. While renewables may be intermittent, they are reasonably predictable, and for the first time since the inception of the electricity industry, generation no longer needs to coincide perfectly with consumption. Rapidly falling battery costs have made energy storage a commercially viable reality…………………………………………………………. https://policyoptions.irpp.org/2026/03/ontario-nuclear-energy-costs-risks-renewables/
Fife Council approve Babcock plan for nuclear waste storage building
24th March, By Ally McRoberts, https://www.dunfermlinepress.com/news/25961651.fife-council-approve-babcock-plan-waste-storage-building/
A TEMPORARY storage facility will be built for waste that’s taken out of old nuclear submarines at Rosyth Dockyard.
Fife Council have given the green light to Babcock for a new warehouse between docks two and three for “decommissioning operations”.
The large industrial building – an ‘intermediate waste storage facility’ – will be 27 metres long and up to 20 metres in height with roller doors and security fencing.
Work is currently taking place at the dockyard to cut up and dismantle HMS Swiftsure, one of seven old nuclear subs that have been laid up in Rosyth for decades.
The demonstrator project is attempting a world first by removing the most radioactive parts left in the vessel, the reactor and steam generators.
The new building “will be utilised for cutting processes to aid submarine dismantling” and will go next to a larger steel shed that was approved in 2024 for the project.
A council report said: “The applicant has indicated that the waste to be temporarily stored would not be considered hazardous under the Town and Country Planning (Hazardous Substances) (Scotland) Regulations 2015 and that the site is currently subject to a permit issued by SEPA covering the related decommissioning activity.
“The site is also subject to regular inspections by the Office of Nuclear Regulation (ONR) and is one of their registered sites.
“Ultimately, the decommissioning activities are controlled by SEPA, the Health and Safety Executive and ONR and fall under their own consenting and control regimes, with mechanisms for changes to existing permits to be reviewed and approved by these bodies.”
There were no objections and the report said SEPA had confirmed that “no reprocessing of radioactive waste or materials takes place at Rosyth”.
The seven decommissioned nuclear subs at the yard are Swiftsure, Revenge, Renown, Repulse, Resolution, Dreadnought and Churchill.
Dismantling takes place in three stages with low level radioactive waste taken out first.
Next is the removal of the reactor pressure vessel, which is classed as intermediate level radioactive waste.
The final stage, once all radioactive material has gone, is [?] recycling.
So far the programme has invested more than £200 million in Rosyth Dockyard.
Switzerland Just Exposed Project Ranger’s Weakness
(Project Ranger, a 1,000-acre hypersonic manufacturing campus in Sandoval County, designed to support high-cadence production of hypersonic strike systems. )
Elaine Cimino, 23 Mar 26
Switzerland’s halt on weapons-related exports to the United States is not symbolic. It is a disruption—and it lands directly on projects like Project Ranger.
This facility is being built on the assumption that a complex, global weapons supply chain will function without interruption. That assumption is now broken.
Advanced weapons manufacturing depends on precision components, machine systems, and specialized inputs that cannot be swapped out overnight. When a country like Switzerland shuts off supply, timelines don’t “adjust”—they fail. Production stalls. Certification resets. Entire sequences of manufacturing have to be reworked.
That means one thing for Rio Rancho:
Project Ranger will not meet its LEDA job timelines as promised as long as the supply chain is disruptied.
LEDA agreements are performance-based. Jobs are supposed to materialize on a defined schedule. That schedule is now tied to a disrupted international supply chain. No amount of local approval, zoning, or political messaging can override that reality.
If the components aren’t there, the jobs aren’t there.
And when the jobs don’t show up on time, the public is left holding the bag.
Because the costs are already locked in.
Rio Rancho has approved development while operating with a water deficit. Return flow credits are not being met. Infrastructure is being expanded. Rates are rising. Nearly 40% of residents are low- or fixed-income—and they are being forced to subsidize a project whose economic return is now uncertain.
Water rates were locked designed for developers and project Ranger build out on the residents dollars.
At the same time, the broader economy is unstable. If the economy contracts—and all indicators say that risk is real—projects dependent on fragile, globalized supply chains are the first to break. Delays compound. Costs escalate. Public subsidies become sunk losses.
This is the predictable outcome of building a local economy around a volatile defense supply system.
And yet, construction continues. Question for how long—Until they stopped cold.
Steel is going up. Concrete is being poured. Commitments are being made in real time, while the underlying conditions that justified those commitments are collapsing. Now from the governor to the Castelion excuses to city dodging questions. Don’t count on the fascist tech bros to let their bomb factory to got to rust.
Switzerland didn’t just halt exports.
It exposed the truth: Project Ranger is not in control of its own timeline.And Rio Rancho is not in control of the consequences. The public pays
Nuclear plant told to improve after ‘near misses
Tom BurgessNorth East and Cumbria,
BBC 24th March 2026, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx24l9epwkdo
A nuclear power plant has been ordered to improve safety measures after an increase in “near misses”, the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) has said.
The decision was made after visits to the Hartlepool site, operated by EDF, identified areas where safety improvements were required after an increase in the number of reported “serious incidents”.
The ONR said the plant remained safe to continue to operate and the events were “not associated with radiological or nuclear risk”.
EDF said it had agreed an improvement plan with the regulator last year and was making progress.
ONR said moving the plant into “significantly-enhanced regulatory attention level” related to efforts it was making to bring about improvements in conventional health and safety and performance.
Dan Hasted, ONR’s director of regulation for operating facilities, said safety improvements were required but the decision to put the plant into the new category was not a punitive measure.
He said: “In the conventional health and safety area there has been an increase in the number of serious events or near misses that Hartlepool is legally required to report to the ONR.
“It’s important to note these have not been associated with radiological or nuclear risk.”
Hasted said it was important to look at the root causes to ensure they do not “transfer across to nuclear safety”.
Vital to Teesside
The Hartlepool site operates two gas-cooled reactors and has generated electricity for 43 years.
EDF said the regulator would be inspecting the site more regularly.
A spokesperson said the station was a vital part of the Teesside community.
They said: “Last year we agreed an improvement plan with the regulator.
“We have been making progress against that plan, but understand the ONR feels that some more focused attention is required to support that.
“We are committed to working with the regulator to ensure it is content that improvements required are being implemented.”
Sizewell C Inquiry
House of Commons 23rd March 2026,
https://committees.parliament.uk/work/9713/sizewell-c/
Sizewell C is a planned large-scale nuclear power station on the Suffolk coast. Funded by the government in partnership with the energy provider EDF, as well as private finance, the project is projected to cost £40.5bn to £47.7bn. When constructed, it will have a generating capacity of 3.2GW, meaning it will be able to generate around 7% of the UK’s current electricity demand.
The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) previously reported on the government’s deal with EDF to construct a nuclear power station at Hinkley Point, the site with Sizewell C will be based on. The PAC were concerned that that government’s negotiations were not championing the interests of consumers, who might be locked into an expensive deal for decades, and warned that the poorest would likely be the hardest hit. In its response, the Government accepted all of the PAC’s recommendations and stated the actions it planned to take in response.
The National Audit Office (NAO) will publish its report on Sizewell C in spring 2026. Following the NAO’s investigation, which is likely to examine the government’s current spend, as well as the potential risks to achieving value for taxpayer’s money, the PAC will hear from senior officials at the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero and Sizewell C on the reports key findings.
If you have evidence on these issues, please submit here by 23.59 on Monday 18 May 2026.
Please note that the Committee’s inquiry cannot assist with individual cases. If you need help with an individual problem you are having, you may wish to read the information on Parliament’s website about who you can contact with different issues.
Fears huge nuclear dump buried under concrete dome could be unleashed into the sea
Rory McKeown March 25, 2026,
https://metro.co.uk/2026/03/25/climate-change-unleash-huge-nuclear-dump-buried-concrete-dome-sea-27664599/
A Pacific Island is sitting atop a nuclear time bomb that could pollute the oceans for centuries.
Scientists have discovered that a concrete structure built to contain radioactive waste from Cold War-era testing is showing signs of deterioration.
The site, known as Runit Dome, sits on Runit Island in the Enewetak atoll in the Marshall Islands.
Although Runit itself is uninhabitable, the atoll is home to around 300.
The dome sits close to the ocean’s edge and rising sea levels and shifting groundwater bring seawater into close contact.
It dates back to a period of intensive nuclear testing. Between 1946 and 1958, the United States conducted 67 nuclear tests across Enewetak Atoll and Bikini Atoll, displacing more than 300 Marshallese people.
One test in particular, an 18-kiloton explosion known as “Cactus”, destroyed part of Runit Island and sent a mushroom cloud approximately six kilometres into the sky.
The Crater created by the Cactus explosion on May 5, 1958. It was later used as a burial pit to inter 84, 000 cubic meters of radioactive soil (Picture: US Defense Special Weapons Agency/Cover Media)
In the late 1970s, the 10 metre deep crater left by the blast was used to store more than 120,000 tonnes of radioactive soil and debris collected from across the atoll.
The site was then sealed with an 18-inch (46cm) concrete cap, forming what is now known as the Runit Dome.
More than five decades later, the structure is showing visible signs of ageing. Cracks have appeared across its surface, and groundwater is able to flow beneath it.
Researchers say this water moves in and out with the tides, potentially carrying radioactive material into the surrounding lagoon. Studies have also indicated that the dome is not watertight.
Ivana Nikolic-Hughes, of Columbia University and president of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, observed cracks during a visit in 2018 while measuring radiation levels.
‘These results provide further demonstration of the continuing impact of radioactive fallout on the Marshall Islands and will inform future work to understand how the presence of this isotope might affect current inhabitants and potential resettlement,’ she writes.
American officials have said the structure is not at immediate risk of collapse.
But experts have warned that some of the radioactive elements involved pose extremely long-term risks. Plutonium-239, used in nuclear weapons, remains hazardous for more than 24,000 years.
Arjun Makhijani, president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, said no concrete structure could be expected to last even a fraction of that time.
He noted that cracks have already appeared within decades, highlighting the challenge of containing radioactive material over such long timescales.
‘There are already cracks in it in less than 50 years,’ he told Australian broadcaster ABC.
Scientists say the dome illustrates a broader problem. Certain places we regard as being safe spaces to dump toxic waste, may become less so due to climate change. If sea levels rise and rain increases, water and food supplies change.
Trump’s battle plan for Iran
Bruce Gagnon, Mar 26, 2026, https://brucegagnon177089.substack.com/p/trumps-battle-plan-for-iran?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=3720343&post_id=192096004&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=ln98x&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
Europe key to US ops in Iran
Another very interesting piece from the WSJ. These details have been available through OSINT sources but it’s a good roundup showing how key Europe is to US operations against Iran:
- The central command center for US operations against Iran is within Ramstein Air Base in Germany (unsurprising)
- US drone operations are conducted from there as well
- Ramstein is increasingly being used as a hub by the Americans. Military transport aircraft, in particular, land there and took off for the Middle East, including several Boeing C-17 Globemaster III (77.5 tons of load) and Lockheed C-130 aircraft (20 tons).
- American media reported that F-16 fighter jets had been transferred from US Spangdahlem AFB, Germany to the Middle East. According to the trade magazine Air and Space Forces, they are to be used in Iran to combat air defenses. BBC reported that the base is now operating “around the clock.”
- American aircraft stationed in Spain have been relocated to France and Germany after the Spanish government denied the use of the Morón and Rota air bases for attacks on Iran
- Bomber aircraft sorties out of bases in the UK like RAF Fairford
- Refueling operations are based out of Aviano Air Base in Italy and Tubé Air Base in France
- Lajes Air Base in the Azores (Portugal) is serving as a major logistical hub, with dozens of aircraft stationed there at various times during the conflict
- RC-135 Rivet Joint spy planes are operating out of Souda Bay in Crete
- Unspecified “logistics and intelligence assets” are being hosted by Romania
- The piece paints an amusing picture of European attitudes towards this. Keir Starmer’s justification for overcoming his reticence to allow the US to base out of British facilities in the initial wave of strikes is that bomber operations are now “defensive” in nature.
- Merz has said publicly that this “isn’t [Germany’s] war,” but he has no choice but to allow US operations out of German air bases due to pre-existing legal agreements.
- Meloni has spun Italian involvement as minor because only refueling missions are flown out of Aviano. Similarly, French defense minister Vautrin said, “a refueling aircraft is a gas station, not a fighter jet.”
- These technicalities may work on the European public, but it’s difficult to imagine they’ll work on the Iranians.
Let’s focus not on what Trump says, but on what he does.
These are the U.S. military units recently deployed to the Middle East against Iran.
- 160th SOAR (Night Hunters): An elite helicopter unit that secretly inserts and extracts special forces, often at night, using skilled pilots and modified aircraft.
- 75th Airborne Brigade: A light infantry force for rapid raids, airfield seizures, and close-quarters combat missions against high-value targets.
- Delta Force (1st SFOD-D): A top-tier counterterrorism and hostage rescue unit focused on high-risk, precision missions targeting high-value individuals.
- 1st Special Forces Group (1st SFG): Operates primarily in the Asia-Pacific; trains allied forces, conducts unconventional warfare, and supports insurgencies or partner militaries.
- 5th Special Forces Group (5th SFG): Focused on the Middle East; It specializes in counterterrorism, unconventional warfare, and advising local forces.
- US Navy SEALs: Special operations focused on the sea—raids, reconnaissance, direct action, and covert missions from the sea, air, or land.
- But for what mission?
- Islands within or near the Strait of Hormuz—Small but strategically important islands used by Iran to control shipping lanes. US special forces could quickly seize them to reopen the strait.
- An island outside—Iran’s main oil export terminal. Seizing or destroying it would cripple Iranian oil revenues.
- Iranian nuclear facilities or other high-value sites—Potential raids to destroy stockpiles of enriched uranium or related infrastructure.
The war against Iran: Lessons still unlearned
By William Briggs | 26 March 2026, https://independentaustralia.net/life/life-display/the-war-against-iran-lessons-still-unlearned,20853
The dreams of the U.S. President, that it would all be over in days – that the Iranian people would rise against their tyrannical regime – is now a nightmare that Trump has visited upon the world.
The global economy is on the brink of disaster as oil dries up. America and Israel have further isolated themselves from world public opinion and, apart from an ever- shrinking clique of semi-vassal states like Australia, Trump appears to be alone and increasingly dangerous.
The war offers a great many lessons, but while life and history can be great teachers, there seem to be precious few pupils ready to learn those lessons. This applies equally to apologists for U.S. power, to governments of all stripes and to many of those who inhabit the Left and lay claim to Marxist credentials.
The war was never about “liberating” the Iranian people from the right-wing theocracy. It was about securing a compliant regime that would ensure the flow of oil and to make sure that the USA, as a fading imperial power, maintained global hegemony — both politically and economically.
The slogan that accompanied the wars of aggression against Iraq, that tore Libya apart and which laid waste to so much of the Middle East was simply, No Blood for Oil! The years have slipped by, and yet the same foul motivation for despoiling the globe and destroying a people remains.
Our mainstream media know this to be true, even as the “story” turns its focus to the retaliation by Iran and to the oil pressure that the blocking of the Straits of Hormuz entails. The same media focuses on potential oil shortages, and rightly so, but seems less keen to link that invasion to the fact that people are paying stupid prices for petrol and diesel.
Fewer voices can be heard that would remind the people of how the war started and who is responsible. That has become largely the responsibility of the Left — the Marxists, the campaigners against war and imperialism.
This is as it should be, but something is very wrong. Marxism is quite clear that economics is the defining factor and that politics works with and responds to economic demands. The war, then, can only be understood from an economic perspective. But is it being understood in this way? Sadly, no.
Some see it as a political gamble by a beleaguered and dangerously unhinged U.S. President. Some portray it as a means, by Israel, of destroying any potential risk to its domination of the region. Some come a step closer by recognising the strategic desire to weaken China, as it is a principal customer for Iranian oil.
Any and all of these considerations are enough to allow blame to be sheeted home to the USA and Israel, but there is a deeper, more worrying aspect to this. The United States has been and remains the single biggest military force and greatest economic power that the world has seen. It is, as the Marxist Left will say, an imperialist power. It is also a declining power.
For decades, its main preoccupation has been how to hold back the rising tide of its one great rival. China’s rise, accompanied by a global capitalist economy that has run out of ideas and resilience, ensures that wars are either finishing, beginning, or in the planning stage. A failing economic structure is driving the world to the point of no return. The war against Iran is one battle in this endless spiral into decay. The USA, as the central power in the capitalist global economy, is more than willing to destroy entire nations in its quest to keep the sinking ship afloat.
No crime is too much. The U.S. bombing the girls’ school in Iran, the Israeli destruction of oil facilities on the edge of Tehran that have led to acid rain and an unimaginable civilian health disaster, sicken all reasonable people. But those who plan such actions are not among the reasonable.
These acts need to be condemned. Governments need to show at least a modicum of decency. Our Prime Minister needs to stop slinking in the shadows and act. He needs to denounce such actions. He needs to find the courage to say “No!” and to work to secure the natural resources needed to keep Australia functioning. This is unlikely. Our political structures are such that we remain totally subservient to the demands and interests of the USA..
Those whose anger compels them to take to the streets deserve better than the Babel that has become the protest movement. The most recent action in Melbourne, which was dominated by ever more shrill denunciations of Israel, while mention of the USA and its causal responsibility for the war was at best an afterthought. Protest has merit, it is necessary and has purpose. It also needs focus, if it is to have either merit or purpose.
Protest is also about winning the hearts and minds of people. Sound and fury might be a therapy for some, but numbers count and numbers must grow, people must be educated, encouraged to talk to others, to build a movement that can go beyond noise.
Part of that building process must include the raising of collective consciousness. It must be able to show and convince people that this or that crime of the USA, of Israel, of imperialism, is not isolated, or in any way an aberrant thing, but is a symptom of a deeper, structural crisis. It is not enough for the ideologues to make demands that cannot be achieved. The protest movement, the anti-war movement, should aim at providing a vehicle, a voice for those who want something better than news screens full of war stories and a Federal Government pathetically marching to the fifes and drums of a fading U.S. empire.
European Union leaders have been prepared to stand back a little; to say that the war is not their war. It is hard to imagine an Australian government being daring enough to question anything that comes from Washington. As the sun sinks on U.S. hegemony, Australia seems ready to go down with the American ship.
Nuclear to take up to quarter of British defence budget
26 Mar 2026
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/nuclear-to-take-up-to-quarter-of-british-defence-budget/
The UK nuclear enterprise is expected to absorb between 20 and 25 percent of the Ministry of Defence budget in the coming years, as spending rises across a growing portfolio of submarine, warhead, infrastructure and fuel programmes.
Giving evidence to the Public Accounts Committee, Permanent Secretary Jeremy Pocklington said defence nuclear spending totalled about £10.9 billion in 2024-25, equivalent to 18% of the department’s budget, and is expected to rise to around 20% in the current financial year.
He told MPs that the share would continue to grow, saying the Defence Nuclear Enterprise was on course to account for “between about 20% and 25% of the MOD’s overall budget.” That growth, he said, reflects both inflation and a broader expansion in the nuclear portfolio.
Pocklington said the increase was not being driven primarily by the core Dreadnought submarine build, which he said remains within the range previously set out to Parliament. “For Dreadnought, we are still within the range that the Department stated to Parliament,” he said, referring to the longstanding £31 billion programme cost plus £10 billion contingency.
Instead, he pointed to other pressures within the wider enterprise, including “scope changes related to AUKUS” and the re-establishment of a defence nuclear fuel capability, which he said had not featured in earlier forecasts in the same way.
He described the Defence Nuclear Enterprise as a large and increasingly complex portfolio, covering not only Dreadnought and Astute, but also warhead work, infrastructure at Barrow, naval bases at Clyde and Devonport, and fuel production. “There are nine programmes with a whole-life cost of over £10 billion in the Defence Nuclear Enterprise,” he said
Pressed repeatedly for a 10-year forecast, a more specific Dreadnought in-service date, and an update on how much of the £10 billion contingency has been drawn down, Pocklington declined to provide further detail, saying much of that would have to wait for the delayed Defence Investment Plan.
On timing, he said there had been no change to the government’s position that the first Dreadnought boat would enter service in the “early 2030s,” but did not narrow that window further.
Committee chair Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown argued that the exact date mattered, given the pressure on the existing deterrent fleet and the implications for long submarine patrols and support arrangements if replacement boats arrive later in the decade.
1 This Month
of the week – Shut Down Drone Warfare!
Tell the Ukrainian Government to Drop Prosecution of Peace Activist Yurii Sheliazhenko
Petition to revoke the licensing of the Near Surface Nuclear Disposal Facility (NSDF) at Chalk River. https://www.ourcommons.ca/petitions/en/Petition/Details?Petition=e-7247
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- April 2026 (68)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
-
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
nuclear-news 