Both the House of Commons and House of Lords are currently in a February recess period. The House of Commons is scheduled to return from recess on 23 February 2026. There is no official business scheduled for today.
Some military commentators say that an attack on Iran could happen as early as tomorrow.
Other political commentators say that US/Israel is not likely to launch an attack until after Trump’s State of the Union speech in Congress on Tuesday 24 February.
See the programme (broadcast 14 hours ago) in the comment below.
The guest says (scroll forward to 14 minutes) that it was ‘alluded’ to him, in a conversation with a high level UK military source (allegedly a Major-General), that the initial strike on Iran will include a nuclear weapon, backed-up by a threat that unless Iran capitulates – ‘there is more coming’.
Surely, that would be insane!
Surely, this cannot be correct? i.e. because of the potential regional consequences, unless of course the objective is the destruction of Iran and of neighbouring states in the region?
Qui Bono?
I asked AI what the environmental consequences would be.
AI (20.02.2026) – ‘A nuclear strike by the US or Israel on Iran would cause catastrophic, long-term environmental devastation, releasing lethal radiation and hazardous fallout across the region.
Radioactive particles could travel hundreds of miles, impacting neighboring nations while causing immediate, severe air and water contamination in Iran.
Such actions would severely damage ecological resources and produce toxic debris.
Key environmental consequences include:
Radioactive Fallout: Lethal radioactive material would be released, with the most severe fallout occurring near the explosion, though it could travel hundreds of miles depending on wind patterns.
Contamination of Resources: Bombing nuclear sites or facilities risks releasing radioactive fission products (caesium, strontium, iodine) into the atmosphere and water systems.
Chemical Hazards: Damage to nuclear facilities could release uranium hexafluoride, which forms strong acids upon contact with atmospheric moisture, posing severe localized environmental risks.
Massive Hazardous Debris: Conventional bombing of industrial and military sites, as seen in recent non-nuclear strikes, generates immense amounts of hazardous debris, leading to long-term clean-up challenges and ecological damage.
Regional Impact: While initial impacts are local, the long-term contamination of air and water sources would affect neighboring countries in the Middle East.’
Comments added:
‘Decisions that affect hundreds of millions of lives need to be made within six minutes, based on partial information, in the knowledge that once launched, nothing is capable of halting the destruction.
Based on dozens of new interviews with military and civilian experts who have built the weapons, been privy to the response plans, and taken responsibility for crucial decisions, this is the only account of what a nuclear exchange would look like.
‘This terrifying book is a must-read for every world leader’ Mother Jones
‘These are scenes straight out of Dr Strangelove’ Telegraph
‘At once methodical and vivid’ The Economist’ (Amazon).
Has Trump read and understood this book?Nuclear War: The bestselling non-fiction thriller, shortlisted for the Baillie Gifford Prize 2024Nuclear War: The bestselling non-fiction thriller, shortlisted for the Baillie Gifford Prize 2024LikeReply87 impressions
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-iCpXrdJ7g
Professor Sachs concludes that there is a high risk of a nuclear conflagration is US/israel attack Iran. Scroll forward to 16:45 minutes – ‘anything could happen. We shouldn’t play with global nuclear suicide. …’
Prof. Jeffrey Sachs : The Strategic Risks of Fighting IranProf. Jeffrey Sachs : The Strategic Risks of Fighting IranLike
See also – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCDuxei5dj8
Scott Ritter: Hormuz Blocked! Iran’s Missile Fire Can Leave the US Navy DEFENSELESSLike
1Reply59 impressionsSee also – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSvsMr-wnq0
I recommend watch the entire programme.
At the end of the programme, what occurred to me is that if Trump wants to keep things ‘simple’ and achieve a ‘quick in and out operation’, that logically, use of a nuclear weapon during the 1st strike cannot be ruled out as being a ‘real’ option, and therefore – possibility.
Alastair Crooke states – ‘This is a bigger war and it is a war of the power of Israel to determine, set and dominate the future of West Asia, and the power of Russia and China to oppose by whatever way is possible.’
He observes that military commentators have opined that US war ships will run out of air defence missiles within 12 days.
‘Once they have fired their air defence missiles I am told by the experts, that they cannot reload at sea and will have to go to a port to re-load their vertical take-off systems. Where are they going to go? If Hormuz is closed they cannot go to Bahrain. … Diego Garcia is 3/4 days steaming … ‘
NB – UK has refused permission for US to use Diego Garcia.
The USS Ford has mechnical problems – ‘the sewage is not working properly.’Alastair Crooke: Trump’s Final Gamble: Iran Dares to Strike BackLikeReply40 impressions
See also – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmCk7WnAQc8
‘[Diego Garcia is within range of Iranian missiles and drones]. If we can’t use Diego Garcia [i.e. becuase UK has refused permission to use the base] that is going to be a huge military problem for us. I don’t think people are quite thinking this out … If UK extends this [refusal] to RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus then we have a serious situation.’ (parphrased) – scroll forward to 11 minutes.…moreREGIME CHANGE BASICALLY IMPOSSIBLE in IRAN /Patrick Henningsen** NEW MERCH ** Jackets & Sweatshirts, Thermo Mugs!! Daniel Davis Deep Dive Merch: Etsy store https://www.etsy.com/shop/DanielDavisDeepDive?ref=seller-platform-mcnavLikeReply28 impressions
See also – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLFq45I4cm0
White House has been briefed that 10,000 American casualties are possible, which is more than the US casualties in Afghanistan and Iraq.Larry C. Johnson & Col. Larry Wilkerson: Iran Warns U.S. in Urgent Letter to UN Vowing to WIPE OUTLikeReply16 impressions
AI (today) – ‘Recent reports from early 2026 indicate that the White House has been briefed on military options regarding Iran, with some estimates suggesting high potential casualties. While the specific figure of “10,000 American casualties” has not been confirmed as an official U.S. government projection in public briefings, it aligns with a pattern of warnings and rhetorical escalations:
Iranian Warnings: Iranian officials, including members of the Majlis National Security Committee, have explicitly warned the U.S. that any strike would lead to “thousands of American casualties.” Specifically, lawmaker Mahmoud Nabavian claimed Tehran warned that a strike would cost the U.S. 3,000 to 4,000 lives. Another official stated that even “five thousand graves” would not be enough to hold the American dead.
Casualty Comparisons: For context, the U.S. suffered 2,459 military deaths in the War in Afghanistan (2001–2021) and approximately 4,500 deaths in the Iraq War.’LikeReply3 impressions
See also – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QseGXTqYDc
‘An existential war’: Prof. Mohammad Marandi on the coming US-Israeli assault on IranProfessor Mohammad Marandi of the University of Tehran joins The Grayzone’s Max Blumenthal to discuss the looming US-Israeli regime change war on Iran and how his country will respond, both militarily and politically. Marandi forecasts economically…LikeReply1 impression
AI – (21.02.2026) – ‘Analysts suggest the USS Gerald R. Ford strike group could reach operational waters—which may include the Red Sea, Arabian Sea, or eastern Mediterranean—within the next 4 to 7 days, depending on its transit speed and whether it proceeds through the Suez Canal.’LikeReply2 impressions