Washington Weighs High-Risk Operation

The administration of Donald Trump is reportedly considering deploying special forces into Iran to secure the country’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium (HEU), according to reports from US and Israeli officials.

Experts say Iran currently possesses about 440 kilograms of highly enriched uranium — enough material to produce at least 10 nuclear warheads if further refined to weapons-grade levels.

Get the latest headlines in your email

Preventing Tehran from developing a nuclear weapon has been one of the central objectives cited by the US president in the ongoing war.

US secretary of state Marco Rubio told Congress that the material would need to be physically removed to eliminate the threat.

“People are going to have to go and get it,” Rubio said, suggesting that some form of direct intervention may ultimately be required.

However, he did not provide details on how such an operation might be conducted.

Special Forces Operation Under Discussion

Reports indicate that officials in Washington and Israel have discussed the possibility of deploying special forces to seize or secure Iran’s uranium reserves.

The mission could potentially involve troops from either or both countries, though no final decision has been announced.

Military and nuclear experts say the operation would be extremely complex and dangerous.

Retrieving nuclear material inside a hostile country during an active conflict would pose major logistical and security challenges.

Facilities containing the uranium are heavily protected and, in some cases, built deep underground to withstand attacks.

Uranium Stored in Underground Facilities

According to Rafael Grossi, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), a significant portion of Iran’s stockpile is stored in underground tunnels.

Grossi said inspectors believe around 200 kilograms of highly enriched uranium are located at a nuclear complex near the city of Isfahan.

Additional material is believed to be held at another facility in Natanz, one of Iran’s most important nuclear sites.

Iran has recently constructed a new deeply fortified complex at Natanz known as Kuh-e Kolang Gaz La, which Western analysts often refer to as “Pickaxe Mountain”.

The site is built deep inside a mountain, making it far more difficult to reach through airstrikes or conventional military attacks.

High Risks and Strategic Challenges

Experts warn that any attempt to seize the uranium could carry significant risks.

Such an operation would likely require troops to enter heavily defended facilities while managing radioactive materials safely.

There is also the risk that Iran could attempt to move or hide the uranium if it believes foreign forces are preparing to capture it.

In addition, securing and transporting the material out of Iran would require careful handling to avoid environmental or nuclear safety hazards.

Analysts say the potential mission highlights how difficult it may be to fully eliminate Iran’s nuclear capabilities through military action alone.

Key Objective of the War

The fate of Iran’s enriched uranium has become one of the most critical strategic questions in the conflict.

US officials argue that leaving the material inside Iran could allow the country to rebuild its nuclear programme even if many of its facilities are destroyed.

For that reason, removing the stockpile entirely is being discussed as a possible final step to ensure Tehran cannot produce a nuclear weapon.

Whether such a high-risk operation will actually take place remains unclear.

But the discussions underline the growing urgency surrounding Iran’s nuclear programme as the war continues.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?

  Adapted by ASEAN Now · Source · 10.03 2026

View full article

Great idea couldn't possibly go wrong.

I should think the US public wouldn't be best pleased to see public beheadings in Tehran as a reprisal for the Ayatollah though.

1 hour ago, ASEAN NOW News said:

People are going to have to go and get it,” Rubio said, suggesting that some form of direct intervention may ultimately be required.

However, he did not provide details on how such an operation might be conducted.

I can't help but wonder whose side Rubio is on, gobbing off like that?

Mind you Whisky Pete would probably put the op order up on social media the day before it was launched!

"Desert 2" anyone?

Great idea, and Baron Trump can lead the special forces into combat, from the front of course, with assistance from Trump's other children. We know that Don Jr and Eric have had "combat" experience in Zimbabwe in 2011 when they "took out" a "terrorist" elephant - heroic bravery is certainly in the Trump genes.

To be fair it's got to be a hoax. I don't think even Trump & Co. are stupid enough to telegraph a special forces operation in advance..................on second thoughts um.

Trump is running out of scare tactics and no one is listening his idiocy except his goons like Hegseth and Lindsey.

Yup, tell the Iranians in advance to prepare a welcome committee. Why not hold a group chat on Signal? Bomb nearby schools to clear the path.

This gets more ridiculous by the day.

I am a Brit who would dearly like to see the end of the abhorrent regime in Iran. I doubt, however, that the IRGC and the Iran military can be bombed out of existence, and I cannot see a clear end to current hostilities.

30 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

I cannot see a clear end to current hostilities.

A clear end: the USA stops its attacks after declaring victory because it has realized its objectives. That the latter is BS plus that there were no clear objectives anyway doesn't matter, they can simply declare it. And looking at oil prices and stock market, it wouldn't surprise me if Trump does just that.

...Must Be Mixing Them Up With Another Nation That Has Substantial Nuclear Arm Stockpiles...(?)

So it is agreed. The Iran Regime and Military are to big and strong to Stop entirely.

The cost of lives, military equipment, time and money is to much of a burden for even the US and Isreal.

So do Nothing, Talking for 40 years has done Nothing.

Maybe weaken key areas of the Iran Governance and Military, along with strategic equipment and supplies. Financially restrict them so they have to use money to rebuild and not for fighting.

Maybe delay, set Iran back 10 years and say jobs good enough. AI, robotics, will possibly give parts of the World an advantage and capability not easily matched.

Iran steps out of line again. World says enough and sets them back another 10 years.

We can all agree we would like to see positive change in Iran, a country who focuses more on living in Harmony than the current state of life. A prosperous country that is free of embargos and restrictions. A country that opens to Tourism and people visit, learn, and experience Iran. Hopefully learn Iran's positive contributions to the World.

Where is Trump going to get Special Forces operatives from?

Aren't they all propping up bars in Pattaya? 🥷

Meanwhile, in Greenland:

5 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

Trump is running out of scare tactics and no one is listening his idiocy except his goons like Hegseth and Lindsey.

I wish. But plenty on these forums seem to crave his lies and stupidity.

From a legal standpoint, the idea of deploying U.S. Special Forces into Iran to seize nuclear material raises serious questions under both international and U.S. law.

Any such operation conducted without UN Security Council authorization or Iran’s consent would almost certainly violate the UN Charter’s prohibition on the use of force, unless Washington could credibly claim an imminent threat justifying self‑defense. Even then, the threshold for “imminence” is extremely high.

Under U.S. domestic law, the President would also face constraints. A covert military seizure inside a sovereign state would likely exceed existing Authorizations for Use of Military Force, meaning Trump would be acting in a legal grey zone unless Congress explicitly approved such an operation.

What’s striking is the selective application of this doctrine. If the legal rationale is preventing nuclear proliferation, why is Iran the only target being discussed?

North Korea already possesses nuclear weapons, and Pakistan maintains a rapidly expanding arsenal yet neither is being considered for a U.S. special forces “secure the stockpile” mission.

The inconsistency suggests this is less about universal non‑proliferation norms and more about geopolitical convenience.

Ultimately, if Washington asserts a right to unilaterally “secure” nuclear material in Iran, it must explain why that same logic does not apply to other nuclear‑armed or near‑nuclear states.

Without that clarity, the legal justification looks selective at best, and unlawful at worst.

2 minutes ago, Jim Waldron said:

From a legal standpoint, the idea of deploying U.S. Special Forces into Iran to seize nuclear material raises serious questions under both international and U.S. law.

Any such operation conducted without UN Security Council authorization or Iran’s consent would almost certainly violate the UN Charter’s prohibition on the use of force, unless Washington could credibly claim an imminent threat justifying self‑defense. Even then, the threshold for “imminence” is extremely high.

Under U.S. domestic law, the President would also face constraints. A covert military seizure inside a sovereign state would likely exceed existing Authorizations for Use of Military Force, meaning Trump would be acting in a legal grey zone unless Congress explicitly approved such an operation.

What’s striking is the selective application of this doctrine. If the legal rationale is preventing nuclear proliferation, why is Iran the only target being discussed?

North Korea already possesses nuclear weapons, and Pakistan maintains a rapidly expanding arsenal yet neither is being considered for a U.S. special forces “secure the stockpile” mission.

The inconsistency suggests this is less about universal non‑proliferation norms and more about geopolitical convenience.

Ultimately, if Washington asserts a right to unilaterally “secure” nuclear material in Iran, it must explain why that same logic does not apply to other nuclear‑armed or near‑nuclear states.

Without that clarity, the legal justification looks selective at best, and unlawful at worst.

All of which is applicable to the ongoing illegal Israeli/US war on Iran.

Articles 2(4) and 51 of the UN Charter.

International correspondents are pointing out that the new leader hasn't been seen (or heard from) in public, despite now being ultimately 'in charge' for 3-4 days.

8 hours ago, JimHuaHin said:

Great idea, and Baron Trump can lead the special forces into combat, from the front of course, with assistance from Trump's other children. We know that Don Jr and Eric have had "combat" experience in Zimbabwe in 2011 when they "took out" a "terrorist" elephant - heroic bravery is certainly in the Trump genes.

Don't forget we have this hero who will lead the breach!

https://x.com/SenMullin/status/1914335595167445471

1 hour ago, BusyB said:

I wish. But plenty on these forums seem to crave his lies and stupidity.

If he is still the real estate guy, no one bother. As the President of the most powerful country in the world, he should carry himself in a more respectful and dignified manner and consistent lying and frivolous statements are not what we should expect and accept. .