Russia launches air strikes against Ukraine
WASHINGTON (NEXSTAR) – Russia carried out one of its largest aerial attacks against Ukraine Friday, just hours after President Donald Trump said it may be better to let the two countries 'fight for a while.'
The U.S. has been trying to broker a peace deal to no avail, largely because Russia will not agree to the ceasefire terms.
Members of Congress warn the U.S. should be paying more attention to this style of drone warfare.
'The United States has to be prepared,' said U.S. Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-Texas.).
Gonzales said the U.S. has a blind spot right now.
'We don't know how many drones are being flown every day,' he said. 'We don't know the intentions. I'm not saying they're all negative intentions, but we just need to know.'
Gonzales said Congress can do that through legislation and appropriations to various government agencies.
'Not just telling them or giving them extra work,' he said. 'But giving them extra funds.'
Lawmakers also want to play a larger role in ending the war by passing more sanctions against Russia to pressure President Putin.
'Then maybe he'll come to the table,' said U.S. Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas.).
However, McCaul said after Ukraine's surprise drone attack against Russia Sunday, Putin is now planning what McCaul called a 'brutal response' for Ukraine's capital.
'Which was before kind of hands-off because of the churches there,' McCaul said. 'But I think you're gonna see Kyiv get hit really hard.'
President Trump changed his tone Thursday, straying from his usual calls for peace. He said he delivered this comparison to Putin himself during their phone call Wednesday.
'Sometimes you see two young children fighting like crazy,' President Trump said. 'They hate each other, and they're fighting in a park, and you try and pull them apart. They don't want to be pulled. Sometimes you're better off letting them fight for a while.'
President Trump has yet to endorse the sanctions legislation against Putin. It would also levy new tariffs against any country that purchases Russian energy, targeting China and India, the top supporters of Russia's war effort.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
24 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Ukraine Destroys Russian Fighter-Bombers in Precision Air Base Attack
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Four Russian fighter-bombers were targeted in a Ukrainian drone strike hundreds of miles away from the frontline, according to Ukraine's military. The drones destroyed two Su-34 fighter jets and damaged two others following the strike in Russia's Volgograd Oblast overnight Friday, according to Ukraine's General Staff. Newsweek has contacted the Russian defense ministry for comment. Russian Sukhoi Su-34 fighter-bombers fly over Red Square during a rehearsal for the Victory Day military parade in Moscow on May 7, 2017. Russian Sukhoi Su-34 fighter-bombers fly over Red Square during a rehearsal for the Victory Day military parade in Moscow on May 7, It Matters Over the course of Russia's full-scale invasion, Ukrainian drone technology has fast developed into a cost effective way of taking out expensive Russian military assets and Kyiv's report shows the latest stage of this campaign of hitting targets far from the frontline. What To Know The operation was carried out by the Special Forces and the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) in cooperation with other military units, according to the General Staff. The statement said that two Russian Su-34 fighter-bombers have been destroyed and two others damaged at the Marinovka airfield over 560 miles southeast of Moscow in an operation carried out by long-range drones. The attack also sparked a fire in the airport's technical maintenance area used to prepare aircraft ready for missions. Russian Su-34s are the main aircraft Russia uses to launch missile and bomb strikes on Ukrainian positions and settlements. As of Saturday, 37 Russian Su-34s and 158 aircraft in total had been destroyed or damaged since February 2022 according to Oryx, a website tracking war losses by using imagery as proof. The latest strikes come as Russia steps up aerial attacks on Ukraine which said Moscow's attacks had killed 10 people and injured at least 50 others on Friday. Ukraine's Air Force reported it had downed 21 out of the 23 drones, including Shahed-type attack drones and decoys. But a Russian drone attack on the city of Odesa hit a high-rise building, killing a married couple and injuring at least 14 other people, according to local authorities. Video on social media showed firefighters battling a blaze and residents trying to escape down the stairwell of the 21-story building. Meanwhile, a Russian missile strike on the city of Samar in Dnipropetrovsk Oblast killed five people and injured at least 25 others, according to the regional governor Serhii Lysak. What People Are Saying In a statement, Ukraine's General Staff said Ukrainian forces "carried out a joint special operation that resulted in the destruction of two Russian Su-34 fighter-bombers and damage to two others at the Marinovka airfield." What Happens Next As Russia continues with its strikes on Ukrainian civilian infrastructure, Kyiv will step up its drone production. Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky said in his video address on Friday that ramping up the financing and production of drones was a priority for Kyiv to defend the country following a meeting with his military chiefs.
Fast Company
39 minutes ago
- Fast Company
WhatsApp just got banned on Capitol Hill. Here's how you can make the Meta messaging platform more secure
The U.S. House of Representatives' Chief Administrative Officer (CAO), Catherine Szpindor, informed congressional staffers this week that WhatsApp is now banned from government phones. The move came after the CAO's Office of Cybersecurity deemed the Meta-owned app to be 'high-risk to users'—a claim that WhatsApp quickly rebutted. But the CAO is correct. While WhatsApp is one of the more secure messaging apps out there, it does have some privacy and security risks. Users can mitigate some of these risks, but others are beyond their control. Here's why WhatsApp is now banned in the U.S. House of Representatives and how you can make the app more secure on your phone. What the Office of Cybersecurity said, exactly The news that the CAO's Office of Cybersecurity had announced a ban on WhatsApp this week came from Axios. On Tuesday, the publication published parts of an internal CAO memo it received, which was sent to congressional staffers on Monday, announcing that WhatsApp was now verboten on government phones. The memo stipulated that 'House staff are NOT allowed to download or keep the WhatsApp application on any House device, including any mobile, desktop, or web browser versions of its products.' It went on to add: 'If you have a WhatsApp application on your House-managed device, you will be contacted to remove it.' The reason? According to the memo, 'The Office of Cybersecurity has deemed WhatsApp a high-risk to users due to the lack of transparency in how it protects user data, absence of stored data encryption, and potential security risks involved with its use.' The CAO didn't provide further details in the memo regarding the above risks. Still, it's easy to interpret some of the things that may have made the CAO leery about the continued use of WhatsApp by Congressional staffers. WhatsApp's transparency issue WhatsApp, like competing secure messaging apps including Apple's iMessages and Signal, is end-to-end encrypted, meaning that no parties other than the ones in the chat, even including Meta, can read the chat messages. But WhatsApp collects a lot more metadata from each chat than other secure messaging apps do, and it sends this info to Meta A chat's metadata includes information such as the identities of the chat participants, IP addresses, phone numbers, and the timestamps of messages. No one knows exactly what Meta does with this metadata. Still, it is shared with Meta's other platforms, including Instagram and Facebook. It is likely used to help the company build social graphs of users, leveraged for advertising purposes, and analyzed by the company to understand who is using their apps, and when and where. This opaqueness is likely some of the 'lack of transparency' risk that the CAO was referring to. As for the 'absence of stored data encryption,' the CAO may have been referring to the default method by which WhatsApp backs up a user's chats. While WhatsApp chats are end-to-end encrypted, if a user backs up those chats to the cloud, the backup itself is not end-to-end encrypted by default. This means that if a bad actor gains access to a WhatsApp user's cloud backup, they could read all of that user's messages. It's no wonder the CAO's Office of Cybersecurity finds this worrying. WhatsApp also doesn't have other privacy and security features on by default, including the ability to lock the app behind biometrics and requiring two-step verification when a WhatsApp account is installed on another phone. If you don't work in the House of Representatives, you can still keep WhatsApp on your phone. But you might want to mitigate its privacy and security risks. Here's how. How to make WhatsApp more secure on your phone Unfortunately, there's nothing you can do about WhatsApp's metadata problem. Meta designs WhatsApp so that the metadata of your chats is sent directly to the company. There's no way you can turn this data collection off. But you can make the app more secure on your phone by following some simple steps, including: End-to-end encrypt your WhatsApp backups: In WhatsApp, go to Settings>Chats>Chat Backup>End-to-End Encrypted Backup and turn this option on. Now your chat backups saved in the cloud will be end-to-end encrypted. Lock WhatsApp: You can set WhatsApp to refuse to open without further authentication by locking the app. This means that even if someone has access to your unlocked phone, they won't be able to open WhatsApp unless they know your phone's PIN, or have your face or fingerprint. To lock WhatsApp, go to WhatsApp's Settings>Privacy>App Lock and toggle the feature on. Enable two-step verification: If someone logs into your WhatsApp account on their phone, they'll be able to see your messages. That's why you should set up two-step verification for your account. This will require a PIN that you set to be entered whenever an attempt is made to log into your WhatsApp account on a new device. If the PIN isn't entered correctly, the new device won't have access to your account. To enable two-step verification, go to WhatsApp's Settings>Account>Two-Step Verification and toggle the feature on. Apps the CAO suggests using instead When reached for comment on the CAO's decision to ban WhatsApp, the organization's chief administrative officer, Catherine Szpindor, told Fast Company, 'Protecting the People's House is our topmost priority, and we are always monitoring and analyzing for potential cybersecurity risks that could endanger the data of House Members and staff. We routinely review the list of House-authorized apps and will amend the list as deemed appropriate.' In the past, the CAO has banned or imposed partial bans on various foreign apps, including those from ByteDance, such as TikTok. But the CAO has also previously announced bans or restrictions on apps made by American companies, including Microsoft Copilot and the free versions of ChatGPT. As for Meta, a company spokesperson told Fast Company that it disagrees with the CAO's characterization of WhatsApp 'in the strongest possible terms.' The spokesperson also asserted that, when it comes to end-to-end encryption, WhatsApp offers 'a higher level of security than most of the apps on the CAO's approved list that do not offer that protection.' In the Office of Cybersecurity's memo, the agency provided guidance on alternative secure messaging apps that House staffers could use now that WhatsApp had been banned. According to Axios, those apps include Apple's iMessage and FaceTime, Microsoft Teams, Wickr, and Signal.
The Intercept
2 hours ago
- The Intercept
Fetterman Voted With GOP to Make Sure Trump Can Attack Iran Again
In a Friday evening vote, the U.S. Senate rejected a war powers resolution that would have blocked President Donald Trump from making further attacks on Iran, despite widespread disapproval of last week's strikes. Senators voted 47-53, largely along party lines, on a measure offered by Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., that would have prohibited Trump from offensive measures while preserving his ability to defend U.S. forces. Kaine's resolution drew near-unanimous support from Democrats, including Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. 'I am hoping that the members of this body will stand up for the constitution.' In a floor speech Friday night, Kaine underscored the continuing need for the measure despite a fragile ceasefire, noting that Trump said as recently as Friday that he would be willing to bomb Iran again. 'I am hoping — I am realistic — but I am hoping that the members of this body will stand up for the constitution, will stand up for the proposition that war is too big to be decided by one person,' Kaine said before his measure failed. A single Republican, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who often opposes foreign interventions, supported Kaine's measure. Aside from Paul, the resolution drew pushback from Senate Republicans. Critics said it would prevent the U.S. from defending Israel, despite an amendment from Kaine specifically designed to address that concern. 'President Trump seized the moment — responsibly, constitutionally, and decisively,' said Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyoming, the majority whip, on the Senate floor. 'America and our allies are safer today because of it. The resolution from Senator Kaine is not needed — and I oppose it. If passed, it would prevent the president from protecting us in the future.' The strikes revealed divisions within the Democratic caucus. Progressives largely opposed the strikes outright, while some pro-Israel Democrats offered qualified or full support. One of the most full-throated boosters was Sen. John Fetterman, D-Penn., who voted against Kaine's resolution. Fetterman has emerged as a leading proponent of the use of military force against Iran. 'Blow it up! Blow it up! I think we should waste what's left of their nuclear facilities,' he said in March. His aggressive stance has alienated former donors, who have requested refunds, and staffers, who have resigned at a steady pace. The war powers resolution was always considered a longshot, since it would have required the support of a veto-proof majority of both chambers of Congress. A similar attempt in 2019 to end the Trump administration's involvement in Saudi Arabia's war on Yemen faltered when Trump vetoed it, and Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont, pulled a similar resolution from consideration in 2022 amid pushback from Joe Biden's administration. Kaine's measure, however, did put senators on the record about how they feel about Trump's unpopular strikes. Americans disapproved of the strikes 56 percent to 44 percent, according to a snap CNN poll conducted immediately after the attack. The results mirror other surveys. Many Democrats sought to criticize Trump without directly addressing the strikes by voicing concern over the administration's failure to obtain congressional approval before the attack, or to adequately brief Congress after it. 'The Democratic Party needs to clearly stand up against this war.' In the House, progressives and ranking committee leaders have offered two alternative war powers resolutions. Advocates say the version offered by Democratic leaders would do little to prevent Trump from launching future strikes if he justifies them as defending Israel. At a press conference Wednesday, Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., said the party should back the tougher resolution, which he cosponsored with Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky. 'The Democratic Party,' Khanna said, 'needs to clearly stand up against this war and take the mantle again of being the anti-war party, the party that stands up against wars of choice, against these endless wars in the Middle East.'
