Israel attack on Iran

Surely facts are important to all, well not all, but should ,
facts = truth

Yes.

He has been planning massive attacks on Gaza for even longer, 1987.

GrannyGravy13

Claremont

None so close to the Middle East and potential big trouble as Cyprus. Enjoy your holiday, but I certainly will remain in Central and Western Europe for the foreseable.

As for Lakenheath, there may not be US nuclear weapons at the moment- but in the current situation, the UK could be put under huge pressure for doing so again. And we won't be asked for our opinion about this, I am sure.

'The UK is unique in that its nuclear program is completely intertwined with that of the US. The UK’s warhead designs are closely tied to their US counterparts and, the UK shares the Trident missiles from the US Navy pool. The UK’s nuclear deterrent relies so heavily on American nuclear infrastructure, that it cannot honestly be seen as “independent”, even though the UK can launch weapons independently.

This nuclear relationship with the US is governed by the US-UK Mutual Defence Agreement, which was, controversially, amended in September 2024 so it no longer requires renewal every 10 years. The Agreement enables the transfer of nuclear materials, research, training, and technology, between the two countries, contravening the UK’s legal obligation to disarm, and enabling the US to exercise significant leverage over the UK’s foreign and defence policy.

UK and US targeting plans have been integrated for decades, and throughout the Cold War included a mix of civilian and military targets, although the UK reportedly has an independent targeting doctrine centred around the so-called “Moscow criterion,” which calls for destroying the capital, along with other important cities in Russia – all of which are contrary to International Humanitarian law.

Since 1962 the UK has made its nuclear weapons available to NATO but operates them independently—only the UK Prime Minister can authorize the use of its nuclear weapons, even if used as part of a NATO response.

There are serious problems with the UK’s nuclear infrastructure and it is extremely costly. Each boat in the Vanguard fleet is way past its planned service life of 25 years. This has resulted in serious reliability problems and extensive delays for maintenance. Delays cause increased patrol lengths for the submarines, with serious negative impacts on crew members, and even more lengthy maintenance requirements needed on its return.

To replace the ageing Vanguard subs, the UK is building new Dreadnaught-class submarines and developing a new nuclear warhead. These are meant to come into service in the early 2030’s. Increasing budgets and deficient management have led to major budget over-runs of billions of pounds.

Another major problem is that the majority of Scottish people do not want nuclear weapons stored and deployed in their country. Should Scotland ever achieve independence, the costs and logistics involved with relocating somewhere else in the UK would be prohibitive.

On top of our UK nuclear weapons we now have changes in the status of US nuclear weapons here. US nuclear ballistic missile submar­ines, whilst not being based in the UK, have nevertheless resumed occasional visits to UK ports since 2015, when the USS Wyoming docked in Faslane in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and annexation of Crimea.

And although the US withdrew the last of its nuclear weapons from RAF Lakenheath prior to 2008, marking the first time since 1945 that there were no US nuclear weapons in the UK, we now know that they are coming back to the UK.

US documents talk of the construction of a “surety dormitory” at RAF Lakenheath. The term “surety” refers to the safety and security of nuclear weapons. The 495th Fighter Squadron of the 48th Fighter Wing at Lakenheath became the first squa­dron in Europe equipped with the new nuclear-capable F-35A Lightning II, certified to carry the new B61–12 nuclear gravity bomb. And recent satellite images indicate that 22 of the nuclear shelters, or vaults, at Lakenheath are being reactivated to receive these bombs. Announcements also tell us that the F-35A fighter jet maintenance and repair facilities at the base have now been completed. Recent announcements of full forward deployment means the nuclear bombs are now likely to have already been delivered.

So we know definitely that Lakenheath will be central to
NATO nuclear escalation.,

So I assume that you will not be visiting the U.K. anytime soon?

Well, it wouldn't be wise, certainly. It is worrying, but ramping up the fear is not really helpful, in my opinion.

Just returned and ACs, GCs, family and friends will be visiting us over the Summer.

Good.
I wonder whether to go to stay with ours.

Claremont

He has been planning massive attacks on Gaza for even longer, 1987.

He’s on a mission imo. And, given that he has been an unpopular leader of his country and knows he’s on borrowed time I’m terrified that he’s a loose cannon hell bent on revenge for things that have annoyed him for decades. I do no believe that most Israelis support this man.

Claremont

He has been planning massive attacks on Gaza for even longer, 1987.

How do you know this?

He was Israeli Ambassador to the UN at that time.

Quote MayBee70 Sun 15-Jun-25 22:22:15
Claremont
He has been planning massive attacks on Gaza for even longer, 1987.
He’s on a mission imo. And, given that he has been an unpopular leader of his country and knows he’s on borrowed time I’m terrified that he’s a loose cannon hell bent on revenge for things that have annoyed him for decades. I do no believe that most Israelis support this man.

Unpopular leader ?

Netanyahu is the longest-serving prime minister in Israel's history, having served a total of over 17 years.

Watching the news I'm so angry with Netanyahu.

Nothing on the suffering of the Gaza people and its complications

Everything on the attacks on Iran. Even Trump is not joining in tho making sort of "Its OK" rather lukewarm to say the least.

I don't care how long he has served, he is a self serving man who has made matters worse.

The Guardian report at that Starmer is talking to other EU leaders to argue for a de-escalation of the war

interview here

www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=what+has+Starmer+said+on+Israel+attack+on+Iran&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:847299c9,vid:7SnHQmmpuyI,st:0

Good for Starmer.

Claremont

An honest question with someone with a lot of military information: 'would you go to Cyprus now'? It is VERY VERY close to an awful lot of trouble and potential major trouble.

Yes. It makes no difference.

Intercontinental ballistic missiles are just that.
Intercontinental.

Allira

GrannyGravy13

Claremont

None so close to the Middle East and potential big trouble as Cyprus. Enjoy your holiday, but I certainly will remain in Central and Western Europe for the foreseable.

As for Lakenheath, there may not be US nuclear weapons at the moment- but in the current situation, the UK could be put under huge pressure for doing so again. And we won't be asked for our opinion about this, I am sure.

'The UK is unique in that its nuclear program is completely intertwined with that of the US. The UK’s warhead designs are closely tied to their US counterparts and, the UK shares the Trident missiles from the US Navy pool. The UK’s nuclear deterrent relies so heavily on American nuclear infrastructure, that it cannot honestly be seen as “independent”, even though the UK can launch weapons independently.

This nuclear relationship with the US is governed by the US-UK Mutual Defence Agreement, which was, controversially, amended in September 2024 so it no longer requires renewal every 10 years. The Agreement enables the transfer of nuclear materials, research, training, and technology, between the two countries, contravening the UK’s legal obligation to disarm, and enabling the US to exercise significant leverage over the UK’s foreign and defence policy.

UK and US targeting plans have been integrated for decades, and throughout the Cold War included a mix of civilian and military targets, although the UK reportedly has an independent targeting doctrine centred around the so-called “Moscow criterion,” which calls for destroying the capital, along with other important cities in Russia – all of which are contrary to International Humanitarian law.

Since 1962 the UK has made its nuclear weapons available to NATO but operates them independently—only the UK Prime Minister can authorize the use of its nuclear weapons, even if used as part of a NATO response.

There are serious problems with the UK’s nuclear infrastructure and it is extremely costly. Each boat in the Vanguard fleet is way past its planned service life of 25 years. This has resulted in serious reliability problems and extensive delays for maintenance. Delays cause increased patrol lengths for the submarines, with serious negative impacts on crew members, and even more lengthy maintenance requirements needed on its return.

To replace the ageing Vanguard subs, the UK is building new Dreadnaught-class submarines and developing a new nuclear warhead. These are meant to come into service in the early 2030’s. Increasing budgets and deficient management have led to major budget over-runs of billions of pounds.

Another major problem is that the majority of Scottish people do not want nuclear weapons stored and deployed in their country. Should Scotland ever achieve independence, the costs and logistics involved with relocating somewhere else in the UK would be prohibitive.

On top of our UK nuclear weapons we now have changes in the status of US nuclear weapons here. US nuclear ballistic missile submar­ines, whilst not being based in the UK, have nevertheless resumed occasional visits to UK ports since 2015, when the USS Wyoming docked in Faslane in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and annexation of Crimea.

And although the US withdrew the last of its nuclear weapons from RAF Lakenheath prior to 2008, marking the first time since 1945 that there were no US nuclear weapons in the UK, we now know that they are coming back to the UK.

US documents talk of the construction of a “surety dormitory” at RAF Lakenheath. The term “surety” refers to the safety and security of nuclear weapons. The 495th Fighter Squadron of the 48th Fighter Wing at Lakenheath became the first squa­dron in Europe equipped with the new nuclear-capable F-35A Lightning II, certified to carry the new B61–12 nuclear gravity bomb. And recent satellite images indicate that 22 of the nuclear shelters, or vaults, at Lakenheath are being reactivated to receive these bombs. Announcements also tell us that the F-35A fighter jet maintenance and repair facilities at the base have now been completed. Recent announcements of full forward deployment means the nuclear bombs are now likely to have already been delivered.

So we know definitely that Lakenheath will be central to
NATO nuclear escalation.,

So I assume that you will not be visiting the U.K. anytime soon?

Well, it wouldn't be wise, certainly. It is worrying, but ramping up the fear is not really helpful, in my opinion.

Much safer to stay in a safe neutral country in Europe but at the same time trying to whip up fear in the uk.
Wouldn’t you agree?

I think we should discuss the issues of a nuclear deterrent at the G7 meetings with European partners.

I don't want one at all, thats only my personal view, but feel that is the best way ahead. I've always been opposed from back in a long term CND membership.

I do no believe that most Israelis support this man.

Well, we don't know that, do we.

A Gransnetter who lives in Israel has received short shrift on threads on Gransnet so we don't have information from the ground now.

It doesn't make a jot of difference what Gransnetters may think.
This is just a talking shop.

Allira

^I do no believe that most Israelis support this man.^

Well, we don't know that, do we.

A Gransnetter who lives in Israel has received short shrift on threads on Gransnet so we don't have information from the ground now.

I found it difficult to respond to her Allira because iirc (sorry I cant recall her name) she didn't say much about Gaza in terms of concerns voiced on the thread, so although I felt very supportive of her situation, and clearly share her concern for the hostages, it was difficult to comment.

I didn't want to say anything that indicated any disapproval of course but there was not enough basis to form an opinion. That's just my take, of course.

I'm not sure she would have felt free to voice concerns if she had them?

Quote Wyllow3 Sun 15-Jun-25 23:32:52
Allira
I do no believe that most Israelis support this man.

Well, we don't know that, do we.

A Gransnetter who lives in Israel has received short shrift on threads on Gransnet so we don't have information from the ground now.
I found it difficult to respond to her Allira because iirc (sorry I cant recall her name) she didn't say much about Gaza in terms of concerns voiced on the thread, so although I felt very supportive of her situation, and clearly share her concern for the hostages, it was difficult to comment.

I didn't want to say anything that indicated any disapproval of course but there was not enough basis to form an opinion. That's just my take, of course.

You didn’t want to hear the Israeli position Wyllow , there are
many posts which quote ‘my Jewish friends in Israel ‘
no interest in exchanging opinions though,

petra

Allira

GrannyGravy13

Claremont

None so close to the Middle East and potential big trouble as Cyprus. Enjoy your holiday, but I certainly will remain in Central and Western Europe for the foreseable.

As for Lakenheath, there may not be US nuclear weapons at the moment- but in the current situation, the UK could be put under huge pressure for doing so again. And we won't be asked for our opinion about this, I am sure.

'The UK is unique in that its nuclear program is completely intertwined with that of the US. The UK’s warhead designs are closely tied to their US counterparts and, the UK shares the Trident missiles from the US Navy pool. The UK’s nuclear deterrent relies so heavily on American nuclear infrastructure, that it cannot honestly be seen as “independent”, even though the UK can launch weapons independently.

This nuclear relationship with the US is governed by the US-UK Mutual Defence Agreement, which was, controversially, amended in September 2024 so it no longer requires renewal every 10 years. The Agreement enables the transfer of nuclear materials, research, training, and technology, between the two countries, contravening the UK’s legal obligation to disarm, and enabling the US to exercise significant leverage over the UK’s foreign and defence policy.

UK and US targeting plans have been integrated for decades, and throughout the Cold War included a mix of civilian and military targets, although the UK reportedly has an independent targeting doctrine centred around the so-called “Moscow criterion,” which calls for destroying the capital, along with other important cities in Russia – all of which are contrary to International Humanitarian law.

Since 1962 the UK has made its nuclear weapons available to NATO but operates them independently—only the UK Prime Minister can authorize the use of its nuclear weapons, even if used as part of a NATO response.

There are serious problems with the UK’s nuclear infrastructure and it is extremely costly. Each boat in the Vanguard fleet is way past its planned service life of 25 years. This has resulted in serious reliability problems and extensive delays for maintenance. Delays cause increased patrol lengths for the submarines, with serious negative impacts on crew members, and even more lengthy maintenance requirements needed on its return.

To replace the ageing Vanguard subs, the UK is building new Dreadnaught-class submarines and developing a new nuclear warhead. These are meant to come into service in the early 2030’s. Increasing budgets and deficient management have led to major budget over-runs of billions of pounds.

Another major problem is that the majority of Scottish people do not want nuclear weapons stored and deployed in their country. Should Scotland ever achieve independence, the costs and logistics involved with relocating somewhere else in the UK would be prohibitive.

On top of our UK nuclear weapons we now have changes in the status of US nuclear weapons here. US nuclear ballistic missile submar­ines, whilst not being based in the UK, have nevertheless resumed occasional visits to UK ports since 2015, when the USS Wyoming docked in Faslane in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and annexation of Crimea.

And although the US withdrew the last of its nuclear weapons from RAF Lakenheath prior to 2008, marking the first time since 1945 that there were no US nuclear weapons in the UK, we now know that they are coming back to the UK.

US documents talk of the construction of a “surety dormitory” at RAF Lakenheath. The term “surety” refers to the safety and security of nuclear weapons. The 495th Fighter Squadron of the 48th Fighter Wing at Lakenheath became the first squa­dron in Europe equipped with the new nuclear-capable F-35A Lightning II, certified to carry the new B61–12 nuclear gravity bomb. And recent satellite images indicate that 22 of the nuclear shelters, or vaults, at Lakenheath are being reactivated to receive these bombs. Announcements also tell us that the F-35A fighter jet maintenance and repair facilities at the base have now been completed. Recent announcements of full forward deployment means the nuclear bombs are now likely to have already been delivered.

So we know definitely that Lakenheath will be central to
NATO nuclear escalation.,

So I assume that you will not be visiting the U.K. anytime soon?

Well, it wouldn't be wise, certainly. It is worrying, but ramping up the fear is not really helpful, in my opinion.

Much safer to stay in a safe neutral country in Europe but at the same time trying to whip up fear in the uk.
Wouldn’t you agree?

Maybe, having children here, she has a right to be afraid for this country. I'm having to avoid the news as much as possible at the moment as I find it all frightening. Reminds me of how scared I was when, as a young mother, cruise missiles were based here, as I felt that a nuclear power could wipe out the uk as a show of strength and then go on to negotiate peace with everyone else.

Oh I was, Maybee
I recall so clearly one night, happy with my husband and young son aged 6, being scared of being wiped out by nuclear weapons. This would have been 1987 - the 1980's were a heightened nuclear scare time, and we immediately joined the local active CND in our new town in the Derbyshire countryside if Manchester were targeted. I never made it to Greenham but so admired the women there.

I also remember that, during the Falklands War, it said on the news that Exocet missiles had been deployed. At the very word, missiles when I went to bed I lay there shaking all over; the only time in my life that I ever did that. All I wanted back then was for my children to grow up in a peaceful world. I can’t believe what’s happening at this moment in time . I thought that, when I got old I wouldn’t have to fight any more and have to admit that I don’t think I’ve got any fight left in me. Which is why I’m avoiding the news as much as possible.

I think Claremont’s comprehensive summing up is largely accurate, although I don’t really see why the US would need a UK nuclear stockpile, advanced conventional weapons perhaps.

If nuclear war did break out in Europe, it’s hard to envisage battlefield scale nuclear weapons being used in such a highly populated area, the casualties would be millions very quickly on both sides.We know from previous nuclear releases from tests and Chernobyl how widespread and long lasting the consequences are, large areas are going to become uninhabitable, Armageddon is an understatement.

Deterrent only works if the enemy believe that you will use the weapons you have, if he thinks you will back down your credibility has gone. In the Cold War it was often said the the US was quite prepared to fight WW3 in Europe, we are not at that stage yet and we are certainly not going to trigger that over Ukraine.

Realistically the only likelyhood of a nuclear exchange is Israel/Iran and everything will be done to avoid that

I’m all for reasonable countries having nuclear weapons and becoming a nuclear State but those reasonable countries have to make damn sure that unreasonable countries don’t have them.
It’s what’s kept us out of a WW3 for a long time.
It’s no good railing about ‘the bomb’ as you can’t uninvent the wheel.Once a technology is out there it stays there.
What the US and the UK and other European countries have to do is to help Israel behind the scenes, which am sure they will be doing.None of them wants to see a pariah country like Iran getting it’s hands on full nuclear capabilities.

Just seen on the news that that if the situation continues and escalates between Israel and Iran then Turkey, Cyprus, Greece and other countries in the area will be put on the UK Government’s list advising people not to travel there.

In these circumstances I would adhere to their policy and not go.

petra

Allira

GrannyGravy13

Claremont

None so close to the Middle East and potential big trouble as Cyprus. Enjoy your holiday, but I certainly will remain in Central and Western Europe for the foreseable.

As for Lakenheath, there may not be US nuclear weapons at the moment- but in the current situation, the UK could be put under huge pressure for doing so again. And we won't be asked for our opinion about this, I am sure.

'The UK is unique in that its nuclear program is completely intertwined with that of the US. The UK’s warhead designs are closely tied to their US counterparts and, the UK shares the Trident missiles from the US Navy pool. The UK’s nuclear deterrent relies so heavily on American nuclear infrastructure, that it cannot honestly be seen as “independent”, even though the UK can launch weapons independently.

This nuclear relationship with the US is governed by the US-UK Mutual Defence Agreement, which was, controversially, amended in September 2024 so it no longer requires renewal every 10 years. The Agreement enables the transfer of nuclear materials, research, training, and technology, between the two countries, contravening the UK’s legal obligation to disarm, and enabling the US to exercise significant leverage over the UK’s foreign and defence policy.

UK and US targeting plans have been integrated for decades, and throughout the Cold War included a mix of civilian and military targets, although the UK reportedly has an independent targeting doctrine centred around the so-called “Moscow criterion,” which calls for destroying the capital, along with other important cities in Russia – all of which are contrary to International Humanitarian law.

Since 1962 the UK has made its nuclear weapons available to NATO but operates them independently—only the UK Prime Minister can authorize the use of its nuclear weapons, even if used as part of a NATO response.

There are serious problems with the UK’s nuclear infrastructure and it is extremely costly. Each boat in the Vanguard fleet is way past its planned service life of 25 years. This has resulted in serious reliability problems and extensive delays for maintenance. Delays cause increased patrol lengths for the submarines, with serious negative impacts on crew members, and even more lengthy maintenance requirements needed on its return.

To replace the ageing Vanguard subs, the UK is building new Dreadnaught-class submarines and developing a new nuclear warhead. These are meant to come into service in the early 2030’s. Increasing budgets and deficient management have led to major budget over-runs of billions of pounds.

Another major problem is that the majority of Scottish people do not want nuclear weapons stored and deployed in their country. Should Scotland ever achieve independence, the costs and logistics involved with relocating somewhere else in the UK would be prohibitive.

On top of our UK nuclear weapons we now have changes in the status of US nuclear weapons here. US nuclear ballistic missile submar­ines, whilst not being based in the UK, have nevertheless resumed occasional visits to UK ports since 2015, when the USS Wyoming docked in Faslane in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and annexation of Crimea.

And although the US withdrew the last of its nuclear weapons from RAF Lakenheath prior to 2008, marking the first time since 1945 that there were no US nuclear weapons in the UK, we now know that they are coming back to the UK.

US documents talk of the construction of a “surety dormitory” at RAF Lakenheath. The term “surety” refers to the safety and security of nuclear weapons. The 495th Fighter Squadron of the 48th Fighter Wing at Lakenheath became the first squa­dron in Europe equipped with the new nuclear-capable F-35A Lightning II, certified to carry the new B61–12 nuclear gravity bomb. And recent satellite images indicate that 22 of the nuclear shelters, or vaults, at Lakenheath are being reactivated to receive these bombs. Announcements also tell us that the F-35A fighter jet maintenance and repair facilities at the base have now been completed. Recent announcements of full forward deployment means the nuclear bombs are now likely to have already been delivered.

So we know definitely that Lakenheath will be central to
NATO nuclear escalation.,

So I assume that you will not be visiting the U.K. anytime soon?

Well, it wouldn't be wise, certainly. It is worrying, but ramping up the fear is not really helpful, in my opinion.

Much safer to stay in a safe neutral country in Europe but at the same time trying to whip up fear in the uk.
Wouldn’t you agree?

No, I would not. In case of al nuclear attack, this just would just not work. And being separated from your children, granchildren and other very close family and friends, not knowing (phones and internet, flights, trains, not working) - would just be the worst possible scenario for us.

Allira

Claremont

He has been planning massive attacks on Gaza for even longer, 1987.

How do you know this?

He was Israeli Ambassador to the UN at that time.

I posted a video some time ago, of him saying exactly that at the time. Clear as a bell (hell).