Michigan National guard company deploys to Middle East to locate, diffuse explosives
The says the 745th Ordnance Company, based out of Grayling, recently gathered at the Grayling Army Airfield Armory for a sendoff with friends and family.
This is the company's fourth deployment since the terror attacks on Sept. 11, 2001. According to the DMVA, the company was last deployed to the Middle East in June 2020 as part of Operation Spartan Shield and Operation Inherent Resolve.
This deployment could last as long as a year.
'These soldiers will be supporting Operation Spartan Shield throughout the Middle East to strengthen defense relationships and build partner capacity,' U.S. Army Major Megan Breen . 'Their mission will focus on safely identifying, disarming and disposing of hazardous explosive devices and conducting concurrent training with partner nations.
MSP K-9 back to work months after dangerous drug exposure
'The explosive ordnance disposal mission not only ensures the safety of U.S. and partner nation military operations throughout the region but also ensures the safety of the local population.'
U.S. Army Brig. Gen. Ravindra Wagh, the commander of the Michigan Army National Guard, says while the 745th is serving overseas, it is the National Guard leadership's mission to also serve their families.
Middle schooler raises funds for Mid-Michigan Honor Flight
'Our military families sacrifice a lot during these long separations and their support is crucial to the success of our soldiers as they deploy overseas,' Wagh said in a statement. 'It is our mission to support these families while they support their loved ones serving our nation.'
According to the U.S. Department of Defense, is an overarching mission in the Middle East to help countries there become more self-reliant and secure. It formally launched in 2012.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
The S&P 500 Has Reached an All-Time High: Should You Invest Now or Wait for a Correction?
Key Points Market indexes have been reaching new heights, and right now is an incredibly expensive time to buy. Some investors are worried a correction or recession may be looming, making it smarter to wait. However, history suggests that there's never necessarily a bad time to invest. 10 stocks we like better than S&P 500 Index › The S&P 500 (SNPINDEX: ^GSPC) has been breaking records over the last few weeks, officially reaching a new all-time high in July. As of this writing on Aug. 1, it's up by about 25% from its low point in April. However, not everyone is optimistic about the market right now. In fact, one-third of U.S. investors say they are feeling "bearish" about where stocks will be in the next six months, according to the most recent weekly survey from the American Association of Individual Investors. With stock prices near record-breaking highs, some investors may be tempted to wait until the next downturn to buy at a discount. Here's what history says about whether you should buy now or hold off. Is it safe to invest now? Nobody can predict where stocks will be a few months or a year from now, and new policies out of Washington could change things on a dime. However, several scenarios are possible. For one, stock prices could continue soaring like they have over the past few months. If that happens, right now would be a fantastic time to buy to see immediate gains. Scenario two is that the market takes a sharp turn for the worse, like it did earlier this year amid tariff uncertainty. Between February and April, the S&P 500 fell by close to 20%, leaving many investors panicked and eager to sell. But those who stayed the course and held their investments reaped the rewards when the market quickly rebounded. A similar situation played out in March 2020, when the S&P 500 experienced one of the fastest crashes in history at the start of the pandemic. The short term was rough, but the S&P 500 has since earned total returns of nearly 112%. The third scenario may be the one that concerns investors the most: a prolonged recession. But even if that is on the horizon, investing at record-high prices doesn't necessarily mean you'll lose money. A market downturn may result in your portfolio losing value. But if you hold your investments until the rebound without selling, you likely won't experience any actual losses. Say, for example, you invested in an S&P 500 index fund in December 2007. The market was reaching record highs at the time, but it was about to slip into the Great Recession, which would last until 2009. In that time, your investment would have plunged by more than 50%. Selling at any point during that recession could have locked in significant losses, since you would have likely been selling your investments for far less than what you paid for them. However, if you simply stayed in the market, you would have earned total returns of around 75% after 10 years and 312% by today -- more than quadrupling your money. In other words, even if you had invested at the seemingly worst possible moment -- at record-high prices immediately before one of the most severe recessions in U.S. history -- you would still have made a significant amount of money over time. Now, could you have earned more if you had waited until the market was at its lowest point to buy? Definitely. But hindsight is 20/20, and nobody knows when the next correction or bear market will begin. Timing the market accurately is next to impossible, and if your timing is even slightly off, you could potentially lose a lot of money. Rather than waiting for a chance to "buy the dip," it's often wiser to invest consistently. You can always increase the amount you invest during the next slump, when stocks are at a discount. But in the meantime, continuing to buy can ensure you're not missing out on immediate gains if stock prices stay on the rise. One major caveat to remember The key to ensuring your portfolio survives a downturn is to only invest in long-term quality stocks. Sometimes weak companies can thrive in the short term, earning exponential growth in a matter of months. But those investments are far less likely to pull through tough economic times. Healthy companies with strong business foundations have a much better chance of seeing long-term growth despite short-term hiccups. When a company has a solid competitive advantage, a competent leadership team, robust financials, and a long-term plan for the future, it's much more likely to survive even the worst recessions or bear markets. The most important thing you can do right now, then, is double-check that every stock in your portfolio deserves to be there. Once you're certain that all of your investments have healthy fundamentals, you can rest easier knowing that you're well prepared for whatever may lie ahead. Should you buy stock in S&P 500 Index right now? Before you buy stock in S&P 500 Index, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and S&P 500 Index wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $624,823!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,064,820!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,019% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 178% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of July 29, 2025 Katie Brockman has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. The S&P 500 Has Reached an All-Time High: Should You Invest Now or Wait for a Correction? was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Sen. Padilla on BLS chief firing: ‘I think an investigation is certainly in order'
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) said on Sunday he would support an investigation into President Trump's firing of the commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 'I think an investigation is certainly in order,' Padilla said in an interview on NBC News's 'Meet the Press.' Padilla noted he recently called for an investigation into potential violations of the Hatch Act related to the White House's involvement in the GOP redistricting effort. 'The example after example of Donald Trump weaponizing, no longer just the Department of Justice, but he's trying to weaponize the Bureau of Labor Statistics,' Padilla said. Trump on Friday directed his team to fire the BLS Commissioner Erika McEntarfer following a large jobs data revision that he blamed squarely on the appointee of former President Biden. The jobs report released Friday showed a significant downturn in May and June of this year, suggesting the U.S. added 258,000 fewer jobs over those months than had initially been reported. Trump said McEntarfer 'faked the Jobs Numbers' before the 2024 election in order to boost former Vice President Kamala Harris's White House bid, citing labor statistics revisions during the Biden administration that boosted job numbers ahead of the election. Padilla said Trump's decision to fire the commissioner reveals their anxiety about the economy. 'That tells you a lot about their insecurity about the economy and the state of Economic Affairs in America because everything that they're claiming to be true is not true,' he said. 'Prices are still going up. This is from a president who promised to bring prices down. And so the American people are feeling it. The impact of tariffs, $2,400 a year for working families across the country. That's the reality of tariffs.'
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Trump's tariffs are making money. That may make them hard to quit.
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'The good news is that Tariffs are bringing Billions of Dollars into the USA!' Trump said on social media shortly after a weak jobs report showed signs of strain in the labor market. Advertisement Over time, analysts expect that the tariffs, if left in place, could be worth more than $2 trillion in additional revenue over the next decade. Economists overwhelmingly hope that doesn't happen and the United States abandons the new trade barriers. But some acknowledge that such a substantial stream of revenue could end up being hard to quit. Advertisement 'I think this is addictive,' said Joao Gomes, an economist at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School. 'I think a source of revenue is very hard to turn away from when the debt and deficit are what they are.' The Port of Baltimore on June 30, 2025. ALYSSA SCHUKAR/NYT Trump has long fantasized about replacing taxes on income with tariffs. He often refers fondly to American fiscal policy in the late 19th century, when there was no income tax and the government relied on tariffs, citing that as a model for the future. And while income and payroll taxes remain by far the most important sources of government revenue, the combination of Trump's tariffs and the latest Republican tax cut does, on the margin, move the United States away from taxing earnings and toward taxing goods. Such a shift is expected to be regressive, meaning that rich Americans will fare better than poorer Americans under the change. That's because cutting taxes on income does, in general, provide the biggest benefit to richer Americans who earn the most income. The recent Republican cut to income taxes and the social safety net is perhaps the most regressive piece of major legislation in decades. Placing new taxes on imported products, however, is expected to raise the cost of everyday goods. Lower-income Americans spend more of their earnings on those more expensive goods, meaning the tariffs amount to a larger tax increase for them compared with richer Americans. Tariffs have begun to bleed into consumer prices, with many companies saying they will have to start raising prices as a result of added costs. And analysts expect the tariffs to weigh on the performance of the economy overall, which in turn could reduce the amount of traditional income tax revenue the government collects every year. Advertisement 'Is there a better way to raise that amount of revenue? The economic answer is: Yes, there is a better way, there are more efficient ways,' said Ernie Tedeschi, director of economics at the Yale Budget Lab and a former Biden administration official. 'But it's really a political question.' Workers welded steel components together at a Thomas Built Buses plant in High Point, N.C., on July 21, 2025. TRAVIS DOVE/NYT Tedeschi said that future leaders in Washington, whether Republican or Democrat, may be hesitant to roll back the tariffs if that would mean a further addition to the federal debt load, which is already raising alarms on Wall Street. And replacing the tariff revenue with another type of tax increase would require Congress to act, while the tariffs would be a legacy decision made by a previous president. 'Congress may not be excited about taking such a politically risky vote when they didn't have to vote on tariffs in the first place,' Tedeschi said. Some in Washington are already starting to think about how they could spend the tariff revenue. Trump recently floated the possibility of sending Americans a cash rebate for the tariffs, and Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., recently introduced legislation to send $600 to many Americans. 'We have so much money coming in, we're thinking about a little rebate, but the big thing we want to do is pay down debt,' Trump said last month of the tariffs. Democrats, once they return to power, may face a similar temptation to use the tariff revenue to fund a new social program, especially if raising taxes in Congress proves as challenging as it has in the past. As it is, Democrats have been divided over tariffs. Maintaining the status quo may be an easier political option than changing trade policy. Advertisement 'That's a hefty chunk of change,' Tyson Brody, a Democratic strategist, said of the tariffs. 'The way that Democrats are starting to think about it is not that 'these will be impossible to withdraw.' It's: 'Oh, look, there's now going to be a large pot of money to use and reprogram.'' Of course, the tariffs could prove unpopular, and future elected officials may want to take steps that could lower consumer prices. At the same time, the amount of revenue the tariffs generate could decline over time if companies do, in fact, end up bringing back more of their operations to the United States, reducing the number of goods that face the import tax. 'This is clearly not an efficient way to gather revenue,' said Alex Jacquez, a former Biden official and the chief of policy and advocacy at Groundwork Collaborative, a liberal group. 'And I don't think it would be a long-term progressive priority as a way to simply collect revenue.' This article originally appeared in
