this post was submitted on 07 May 2026
209 points (99.5% liked)

News

37571 readers
2173 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A group of Democrats in the United States Congress have called on the State Department to break the US government’s longstanding silence on Israel’s nuclear capabilities.

In a letter sent to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the Democrats pointed to the US-Israel war on Iran as the reason more clarity is urgently needed.

While Israel is believed to have possessed nuclear weapons since the 1960s, it maintains “a policy of nuclear opacity, never officially confirming the existence of its nuclear weapons program and arsenal”, according to the Washington, DC-based Nuclear Threat Initiative.

all 8 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 38 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Isreal started "smuggling" uranium out of the USA in the 60s with several US agencies knowing the uranium went missing and where it went. The USA is well aware of the existence of isreals nuclear weapons.

[–] BigDiction@lemmy.world 15 points 6 days ago

Israel also partnered with France on development, and then with South Africa to obtain more Uranium in exchange for sharing technology with SA.

Perhaps an oversimplification, but SA is only country to disarm themselves of nukes because the apartheid government was so racist they would rather disarm then allow nuclear weapons to be controlled by a black people as apartheid ended.

Anyway, always weird to me that Israel gets an open pass to ignore the nuclear non proliferation treaty since LBJ was president. I think Kennedy was the last administration to push back on Israel significantly in this area.

[–] AmazingSUPERG@thelemmy.club 24 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Is it to see how many nukes they have and then give them more?

[–] limonfiesta@lemmy.world 20 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

The United States officially acknowledging Israel's nuclear weapons program, would throw up a lot of legal hurdles that Israel would like to avoid, such as legally preventing America from providing them weapons.

Do I think Trump would abide by those? No, but it's still an important step in planning for future administration's Israel policy, or rather, forcing their hands in future policy decisions.

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Ding ding ding!

Was halfway through writing basically this, but you already said it.

Yep, if we formally recognize that Israel has nukes, well, we'd have to break a bunch of our laws to keep sending them weapons, various forms of monetary aid.

Symington Ammendment would trigger no more military or economic aid, as Israel is not a signator to the NPT.

Glenn Ammendment could potentially be argued / interpreted to block financial aid to Israel.

https://www.military.com/feature/2026/01/29/us-aid-israel-legal-under-american-nonproliferation-law.html

Granted, there are a morass of other subsequent laws built upon the idea that Israel doesn't have nukes, that could be argued to still be in effect... the Republicans and Trump very obviously believe in whatever they want right now is legal because we said so, so...

Yeah, not like, guaranteed to work by any means, but it would make a lot of Republicans eat a lot shit, very publically.

Course, it would probably also make a significant number of Democrats also eat a lot of shit, very publically.

Perhaps ironically you could call this a 'nuclear option', sigh.

[–] Fishnoodle@lemmy.world 0 points 6 days ago

Oh we should definitely send them more nukes. Ones that are armed, hot, and coming in at break neck speed

[–] magnetosphere@fedia.io 16 points 6 days ago

Finally, some good news!

A group of Democrats…

Never mind. It’ll go nowhere.