Latest news with #tacticalnuclear
Daily Mail
6 hours ago
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Pentagon insider: Trump's only option to obliterate Iran's deadly labs
Only a tactical nuclear warhead would be certain to destroy Iran's key uranium enrichment base hidden inside a mountain, a military official has told the Daily Mail. It comes amid doubts that 30,000-pound 'bunker buster' bombs would be enough to destroy the secretive facility at Fordo, 60 miles south of Tehran. Tactical nukes are meant for battlefield use and do not carry the same devastating payloads as strategic nukes, which are used to topple cities. In this case, the warhead selected could be sized for the Fordo site, though no tactical nuclear weapon has ever been used in combat before. Israeli officials have urged American forces to deploy multiple GBU-57 bunker busters to cripple Fordo, a plant being used to enrich uranium hundreds of feet underground - the depth shields the lab from airstrikes. On Thursday, Trump gave Iran a two-week reprieve to negotiate a settlement that would see it give up on its quest to develop nuclear weapons. But as the crisis drags on, some military officials have expressed practical concerns that the bunker busters might not be enough. One official said, practically, a nuclear warhead would be the only way to be sure of success. 'The nuclear warhead has to happen, whether it's the first strike, second strike or 17th strike... given the location, from what I've read and for what I've seen, it's a difficult spot,' a military official told the Daily Mail. 'In order to be successful with the least amount of casualties, and to be able to get that target and do what we want to do, which is destroy them, it would have to involve a nuclear warhead.' 'Our bombers are the only ones that could get in there,' the official added. When reached for comment about the use of tactical nuclear weapons in the Middle East, the Pentagon passed along statements from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell. 'Over the weekend, I directed the deployment of additional capabilities to the United States Central Command Area of Responsibility,' Hegseth's Monday statement read. 'Protecting US forces is our top priority and these deployments are intended to enhance our defensive posture in the region.' Taking flight late at night, the US stealth planes along with massive refueling planes would take hours to reach Iran's nuclear sites, likely in the early hours between 2 and 4 am Ahead of them would likely fly stealth US fighter jets such as the F-35 to disable or absorb fire from any final defenses awaiting the bombers. Once the B-2s arrive, they'd drop their payloads from up to seven miles above their targets. The weapons they drop are generally guided by satellites to ensure direct hits. The B-2s can carry up to two bunker busters each or they can carry up to 16 B61 or B83 nuclear weapons. However, using bunker busters does not ensure success. The Pentagon's Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) reportedly found in a study of GBU-57s that a strike on Fordo likely would not be able to completely wipe out Iran's nuclear site. Instead, it would be disabled for years, according to the Guardian. 'It would not be a one and done,' former DTRA deputy director Randy Manner told the outlet. 'It might set the program back six months to a year. It sounds good for TV but it's not real.' Israeli officials, on the other hand, are confident that multiple strikes with GBU-57s would take out Fordo. However, US officials say the architecture of the Iranian lab makes it difficult to destroy - threatening to protract any potential conflict involving the US. They are also concerned about Iranian retaliation with drones. 'If they do strike US military bases, then there's going to be a lot more pressure to go in there, and that's also what I'm worried about,' the US official told the Daily Mail. With the recent use of drone warfare in Iran and Ukraine, drone strikes should be a top concern, the official shared. 'It doesn't have to be a missile, it could just be a drone carrying a bomb that could detonate part of the base,' the official continued. 'We're not thinking about this right now.'
Daily Mail
7 hours ago
- Politics
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Pentagon insider reveals Trump's only option to completely obliterate Iran's deadly labs
Only a tactical nuclear warhead would be certain to destroy Iran 's key uranium enrichment base hidden inside a mountain, a military official has told the Daily Mail. It comes amid doubts that 30,000-pound 'bunker buster' bombs would be enough to destroy the secretive facility at Fordo, 60 miles south of Tehran. Your browser does not support iframes. Your browser does not support iframes.
Reuters
16 hours ago
- Politics
- Reuters
Russia says any use of tactical nuclear weapons by US in Iran would be catastrophic, TASS reports
MOSCOW, June 20 (Reuters) - Potential use of tactical nuclear weapons by the United States in Iran would be a catastrophic development, Russian state news agency TASS quoted Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov as saying on Friday. Peskov was commenting on what he called speculative media reports about that possibility. His comments, as reported by TASS, did not mention any media by name. The Guardian newspaper reported that U.S. defence officials were briefed that using conventional bombs against Iran's underground uranium enrichment facility at Fordow would not be enough to destroy it completely, and that destroying it would require initial attacks with conventional bombs and then dropping a tactical nuclear weapon from a B-2 bomber. However, the British newspaper said President Donald Trump was not considering using a tactical nuclear weapon on Fordow and the possibility was not presented by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Dan Caine, in meetings in the White House Situation Room. Trump said on Thursday that any decision on potential U.S. involvement in the Israel-Iran conflict would be made within two weeks. Russia, which has close ties with Iran, has warned strongly against U.S. military intervention on the side of Israel.
Daily Mail
16 hours ago
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Russia's nuke warning to Trump: Kremlin tells US a tactical nuclear weapon strike on Iran would be 'catastrophic' as it warns America and Israel not to kill Khamenei
Russia has today warned Donald Trump any use of tactical nuclear weapons in Iran would be 'catastrophic' as the US President says he will decide in the next two weeks whether to join in Israel 's war. Russian news service Tass is reporting the Kremlin has issued a fresh plea for Trump to avoid using bunker busting bombs on Iranian nuclear facilities amid fears it could spark wider conflict across the Middle East. Last night, Iran-backed militias threatened to join in the war with Israel if the Trump administration enters the Israel-Iran conflict.
Telegraph
09-06-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
These are Britain's options for tactical nuclear weapons. We must choose, and act
As the dust begins to settle on the Strategic Defence Review, Lord Robertson's interview with the Telegraph 's Roland Oliphant answered a number of important issues. However his lordship danced around the critical and pressing issue of re-introducing a tactical nuclear capability to our national deterrent. This is vital against the background of continuous nuclear threats against the UK and Europe from President Putin and the gangsters who advise him. The need to show military strength to Moscow could not be more pressing. The re-introduction of a tactical nuclear capability would impact Putin's decision-making far more than a few hundred tanks or half a dozen capital ships, but it is not quite so straight forward as strapping a nuclear bomb to a jet or on the end of a cruise missile. If the UK sticks with our closest ally, probably still the US, we will most likely purchase some F-35A runway stealth jets to go alongside our existing jumpjet F-35Bs. The Bs have the advantage of being able to operate from our carriers, but their vertical thrust equipment means that they lack range and cannot carry larger weapons in their internal bays. The F-35A is also the only 5th generation stealth jet that is certified to carry nuclear weapons – specifically the American B61-12 nuclear gravity bomb. This can be carried by German jets, will soon be certified on Italian ones, and would most likely be our tactical option also. But this may not be a credible enough option to effectively deter Putin. Though the F-35 is paraded as the stealthiest thing in the sky it is not actually invisible to radar and it might be shot down before it could get above its target to drop its B61-12s. This brings up the need to be able to knock out Russian air defences in order to make our tactical nukes (or other air power) effective. Air defence is nowadays hugely important and has been possibly the defining issue in the Ukraine war. In my day, you became an air defence officer – a 'cloud-puncher' – if no other path was open. Today the air defence officers are the first pick. Air defences, even modern and powerful Russian ones such as the S-400, can be suppressed: we have seen Israel do this against Iran's S-300s before bombing some of Iran's nuclear research establishments this and last year. Recent Ukrainian attacks, most especially the strike last week on the Russian military air base at Bryansk show that Russian AD is not as water-tight as the Kremlin would have us believe. Nonetheless it might be a big ask to get F-35s almost on top of their target in order to deliver a free-falling gravity bomb like the B61-12. The other option possibly available to the UK is to do what the French have done: rather than a free-falling nuke, France has the Air-Sol Moyenne Portée (ASMPA) supersonic cruise missile, which can be released from its carrying jet hundreds of miles from the target. The ASMPA is supersonic, making it harder to knock down than a normal subsonic cruise missile. Our missile making capability is joint with France and Europe anyway, so if we went down this route we could partner with the French, who already know what they're doing in this area. Our existing subsonic Storm Shadow cruise missile is actually French too – the warhead is the only British part. It has been put to good use against Russia in Ukrainian hands, though it appears to need help – either US defence-suppression technology or special forces operations against Russian defence radars – to be fully effective. It could be argued that it is now Monsieur Macron and France who are our closest allies, as President Trump seems to shun us 'pathetic' Europeans. This could be a viable way forward. Even I, a soldier, can recognise that reintroducing a tactical nuclear air delivered capability is not an insignificant task. It is complicated by our current lack of any AWACS radar planes and other specialist defence-suppression equipment. Nonetheless we have been in the nuclear deterrence game almost since the beginning and our Atomic Weapons Establishment can at least furnish us with the key: the actual warhead. We might alternatively make a beginning by developing a home-grown nuclear tip for our stock of US-made, submarine-launched Tomahawk cruise weapons: the Tomahawk was originally developed to deliver nukes, so we know it can do that job. One thing I am sure of is the need. As a former commander of the UK and Nato's chemical and nuclear defence forces, I know the overwhelming impact that tactical nuclear weapons can have on the battlefield, and the huge advantage they give to an aggressor against somebody who does not possess these weapons. We must be ready to deal with the Russian bear. Putin will not be deterred by 12 more submarines in the ocean in the next decade, and Dad's Army covering the White Cliffs perhaps sooner – useful and vital as these things will be. As Uncle Sam backs away from the fight, the prospect of the UK joining France in fielding a tactical capability which could cripple a Russian army in the field would likely get Putin talking peace quicker than most other threats. For 80 years there has been nuclear equilibrium in Europe, but this has become unbalanced. It is the major metric in Putin's decision making, psychologically if not physically. It isn't very important which tactical nuclear option we choose – F-35A, a French style standoff weapon, or Tomahawk. What is important is that we choose at least one and get it into service.
