Trump deploys nuclear submarines in row with Russia
Trump and Dmitry Medvedev, the deputy chairman of Russia's security council, have been sparring on social media for days.
Trump's post on his Truth Social platform abruptly took that spat into the very real -- and rarely publicized -- sphere of nuclear forces.
"Based on the highly provocative statements," Trump said he had "ordered two Nuclear Submarines to be positioned in the appropriate regions, just in case these foolish and inflammatory statements are more than just that."
"Words are very important, and can often lead to unintended consequences, I hope this will not be one of those instances," the 79-year-old Republican posted.
The nuclear sabre rattling came against the backdrop of a deadline set by Trump for the end of next week for Russia to take steps to ending the Ukraine war or face unspecified new sanctions.
Despite the pressure from Washington, Russia's onslaught against its pro-Western neighbor continues to unfold at full-bore.
An AFP analysis Friday showed that Russian forces had fired a record number of drones at Ukraine in July.
Russian attacks have killed hundreds of Ukrainian civilians since June. A combined missile and drone attack on the Ukrainian capital Kyiv early Thursday killed 31 people, including five children, said rescuers.
Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has consistently rejected calls for a ceasefire, said Friday that he wants peace but that his demands for ending his nearly three-and-a-half year invasion were "unchanged".
Those demands include that Ukraine abandon territory and end ambitions to join NATO.
Insults, nuclear rhetoric
Trump did not say in his post whether he meant nuclear-powered or nuclear-armed submarines. He also did not elaborate on the deployment locations, which are kept secret by the US military.
The United States and Russia control the vast majority of the world's nuclear weaponry, and Washington keeps nuclear-armed submarines on permanent patrol as part of its so-called nuclear triad of land, sea and air-launched weapons.
Trump also did not refer specifically to what Medvedev had said to prompt his order.
Medvedev had criticised Trump on his Telegram account Thursday and alluded to the "fabled 'Dead Hand'" -- a reference to a highly secret automated system put in place during the Cold War to control the country's nuclear weapons.
This came after Trump had lashed out at what he called the "dead economies" of Russia and India.
Medvedev had also harshly criticized Trump's threat of new sanctions against Russia over Moscow's continuing invasion of Ukraine.
Accusing Trump of "playing the ultimatum game," he posted Monday on X that Trump "should remember" that Russia is a formidable force.
Trump responded by calling Medvedev "the failed former President of Russia, who thinks he's still President."
Medvedev should "watch his words," Trump posted at midnight in Washington on Wednesday. "He's entering very dangerous territory!"
Medvedev is currently deputy chairman of Russia's Security Council and a vocal proponent of Putin's war in Ukraine -- and generally antagonistic to relations with the West.
He served as president between 2008-2012, effectively acting as a placeholder for Putin, who was able to circumvent constitutional term limits and remain in de facto power.
The one-time reformer has rebranded over the years as an avid online troller, touting often extreme versions of official Kremlin nationalist messaging. His influence within the Russian political system remains limited.
Agence France-Presse
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Gulf Today
2 hours ago
- Gulf Today
Could this be the way Starmer placates his revolting MPs?
'Keir cannot afford another fiasco like welfare,' one Starmer loyalist told me, recalling the government's humiliating climbdown on proposed cuts to disability benefits after a revolt by Labour MPs. The prime minister knows the episode showed that his way of governing is unsustainable. He is consulting people widely this summer about how to turn things round. There's a fierce internal debate taking place. In Keir Starmer's right ear, Morgan McSweeney, his influential chief of staff, tells him to focus on wooing back voters in the red wall from Nigel Farage. In his left ear, soft-left cabinet ministers urge a more progressive approach to woo centre-left voters who have deserted Labour for the Liberal Democrats and the Greens. They argue that these lost voters outnumber defectors to Reform by a margin of three to one. The soft left's allies in Downing Street want Starmer to emulate Bill Clinton, who fought back against a right-wing populist — Newt Gingrich, the Republican speaker of the House of Representatives — after a rocky start to his first term in 1993. One minister admitted: 'There is a battle over the direction of the government. There is only one person who can resolve it. Keir has got to decide for himself - based on his values, who he is, who he wants to be.' The left-ear whisperers want the PM to trust the instincts that are serving him well on foreign affairs and apply them to the domestic agenda, too. Starmer appeared to be tacking leftwards when he told Tom Baldwin for the paperback version of his biography, published on Thursday: 'We have to be the progressives fighting against the populists of Reform — yes, Labour has to be a progressive party.' He has hinted that he wants to tackle child poverty by scrapping the two-child benefit limit. Peter Kyle The PM has nodded to Labour critics who argue — persuasively — that his government has sometimes acted left but talked right, and that it's no wonder, therefore, that it gets little credit from progressive voters. He said that issues such as clean energy, nationalising the railways and increasing the national minimum wage should be shouted louder from the rooftops. 'We should show we're proud of all that,' he told Baldwin. Starmer views this as part of 'telling a better story'. But you can only tell one if you know the direction in which you are heading. The battle isn't over yet; I'm told McSweeney is not convinced about a shift to the left. His critics say the shortcomings of attacking Reform head-on were illustrated when the science secretary Peter Kyle claimed Farage was on the paedophile Jimmy Savile's side in the heated debate over internet regulation. The attack line was reportedly approved by No 10, but it backfired. It was the sort of smear we might expect from Reform. The lesson for Starmer: Labour can't 'out-Farage Farage', and the public will vote for the real thing if Labour tries to look like Reform-lite. Allies of McSweeney believe the red wall will decide the next general election, so Labour's primary pitch must be to the white working class. His internal opponents insist that trying to re-run the 2024 election triumph, McSweeney's greatest hit, will not work next time. They dispute the idea that Labour 'won' the north and the Midlands last year, saying that it reaped the benefit of a split on the right between the Conservatives and Reform, and that Labour regained seats seized by the Tories in 2019 mainly because Tory voters switched to Reform. At the next election, Farage will likely hoover up the right-wing vote. Crucially, the left vote will be split this time — inflicting deep damage to Labour unless Starmer can appeal to left-of-centre voters. He won't do that by tacking right, cutting benefits for the disabled and pensioners or aping Farage. For Starmer to win a presidential contest against the Reform leader, being the anti-Farage candidate will not be enough: he will have to offer progressive voters more than he has offered them so far.
Gulf Today
2 hours ago
- Gulf Today
Donald Trump voters wanted relief from medical bills
President Donald Trump rode to reelection last fall on voter concerns about prices. But as his administration pares back federal rules and programmes designed to protect patients from the high cost of health care, Trump risks pushing more Americans into debt, further straining family budgets already stressed by medical bills. Millions of people are expected to lose health insurance in the coming years as a result of the tax cut legislation Trump signed in July, leaving them with fewer protections from large bills if they get sick or suffer an accident. At the same time, significant increases in health plan premiums on state insurance marketplaces next year will likely push more Americans to either drop coverage or switch to higher-deductible plans that will require them to pay more out-of-pocket before their insurance kicks in. Smaller changes to federal rules are poised to bump up patients' bills, as well. New federal guidelines for COVID-19 vaccines, for example, will allow health insurers to stop covering the shots for millions, so if patients want the protection, some may have to pay out-of-pocket. The new tax cut legislation will also raise the cost of certain doctor visits, requiring copays of up to $35 for some Medicaid enrollees. And for those who do end up in debt, there will be fewer protections. In July, the Trump administration secured permission from a federal court to roll back regulations that would have removed medical debt from consumer credit reports. That puts Americans who cannot pay their medical bills at risk of lower credit scores, hindering their ability to get a loan or forcing them to pay higher interest rates. 'For tens of millions of Americans, balancing the budget is like walking a tightrope,' said Chi Chi Wu, a staff attorney at the National Consumer Law Center. 'The Trump administration is just throwing them off.' White House spokesperson Kush Desai did not respond to questions about how the administration's health care policies will affect Americans' medical bills. The president and his Republican congressional allies have brushed off the health care cuts, including hundreds of billions of dollars in Medicaid retrenchment in the mammoth tax law. 'You won't even notice it,' Trump said at the White House after the bill signing July 4. 'Just waste, fraud, and abuse.' But consumer and patient advocates around the country warn that the erosion of federal health care protections since Trump took office in January threatens to significantly undermine Americans' financial security. 'These changes will hit our communities hard,' said Arika Sánchez, who oversees health care policy at the nonprofit New Mexico Center on Law and Poverty. Sánchez predicted many more people the center works with will end up with medical debt. 'When families get stuck with medical debt, it hurts their credit scores, makes it harder to get a car, a home, or even a job,' she said. 'Medical debt wrecks people's lives.' For Americans with serious illnesses such as cancer, weakened federal protections from medical debt pose yet one more risk, said Elizabeth Darnall, senior director of federal advocacy at the American Cancer Society's Cancer Action Network. 'People will not seek out the treatment they need,' she said. Trump promised a rosier future while campaigning last year, pledging to 'make America affordable again' and 'expand access to new Affordable Healthcare.' Polls suggest voters were looking for relief. About 6 in 10 adults — Democrats and Republicans — say they are worried about being able to afford health care, according to one recent survey, outpacing concerns about the cost of food or housing. And medical debt remains a widespread problem: As many as 100 million adults in the US are burdened by some kind of health care debt. Despite this, key tools that have helped prevent even more Americans from sinking into debt are now on the chopping block. Medicaid and other government health insurance programs, in particular, have proved to be a powerful economic backstop for low-income patients and their families, said Kyle Caswell, an economist at the Urban Institute, a think tank in Washington, DC. Caswell and other researchers found, for example, that Medicaid expansion made possible by the 2010 Affordable Care Act led to measurable declines in medical debt and improvements in consumers' credit scores in states that implemented the expansion. 'We've seen that these programs have a meaningful impact on people's financial well-being,' Caswell said. Trump's tax law — which will slash more than $1 trillion in federal health spending over the next decade, mostly through Medicaid cuts — is expected to leave 10 million more people without health coverage by 2034, according to the latest estimates from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. The tax cuts, which primarily benefit wealthy Americans, will add $3.4 trillion to US deficits over a decade, the office calculated.
Middle East Eye
7 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
Thousands of Israeli protesters demand deal to release captives, end war on Gaza
More than 60,000 Israelis took to the streets in Tel Aviv demanding an end to the war on Gaza and a captive exchange deal. Speaking at the rally, Einav Zangauker, the mother of Israeli captive Matan Zangauker, accused the Israeli government of thwarting the process for a deal. "Israel is setting unrealistic conditions and without real feasibility. We will not return our children if the Israeli government doesn't put a real proposal on the table," Haaretz reported Zangauker saying. "If, instead of putting a comprehensive agreement on the table, the Israeli government decides to expand the military operation, it will issue a death sentence to the living hostages and exhume the dead," she said, adding that "we must force the government into a comprehensive agreement to end the war." A demonstrator speaks on a megaphone during an anti-government protest calling for action to secure the release of Israeli captives, outside the Israeli Defence Ministry headquarters in Tel Aviv on 2 August, 2025. (AFP)
