'90s Action Movie Star, 73, Is Unrecognizable in Rare Public Appearance
His most well-known movies are Under Siege and Under Siege 2: Dark Territory, where he played Navy SEAL, Casey Ryback.
However, his acting days are now behind him, and fans won't believe just how different he looks today.
Seagal was spotted attending the Russian Victory Day military parade in Moscow on May 9th.
There were mixed reactions from people who saw the clip, as it's no secret that Seagal has been a controversial subject for many years. He was granted Russian citizenship in 2016, and he's also a known supporter of president Vladimir Putin.
While many people left comments stating simple things like, "Respect 💪," others made it perfectly clear that they are no longer fans of the actor.
One person said, "I'm not a fan of you anymore," and another made a bold statement, saying, "Steve Seagal is a spy from Russia 🤔"One thing's for sure, Seagal looks absolutely nothing like he did in his Casey Ryback days. He was quite the heartthrob back then.
And who could ever forget this iconic flick?
🎬SIGN UP for Parade's Daily newsletter to get the latest pop culture news & celebrity interviews delivered right to your inbox🎬
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
10 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Zelensky Reveals How ‘Cynical' Russia Responded to Trump-Putin Call
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky accused Russia of launching one of its largest air attacks almost immediately after the July 3 call between U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. "This was one of the most large-scale air attacks-deliberately massive and cynical," Zelensky posted to X on Friday morning, July 4. He said Russia launched 550 missiles and drones in the attack. "Notably, the first air raid alerts in our cities and regions yesterday began to blare almost simultaneously with media reports discussing a phone call between President Trump and Putin," Zelensky said. "Yet again, Russia is showing it has no intention of ending the war and terror. Only around 9 a.m. today did the air raid alert end in Kyiv. It was a brutal, sleepless night." Trump said he was "very disappointed" by the Putin call and that he did not think the Russian leader wanted to end the war. Zelensky and Trump are due to speak on Friday. Putin's aide Yury Ushakov said the Russian president told Trump on the call that "Russia will achieve its goals" and that "Russia will not retreat from these goals." Ushakov described the conversation as "frank, business-like and concrete". This is a breaking news story. Updates to follow. Related Articles Trump Shares Candid Assessment of Putin CallDonald Trump Reveals Details of Vladimir Putin CallRussia Celebrates US Stopping Ukraine Weapons ShipmentsUkraine Kills Top Russian Navy Commander Who Putin Just Promoted 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
The Hill
13 hours ago
- The Hill
US aircraft carriers should now leave the Middle East
Although the seven B-2 bombers launched from Missouri's Whiteman Air Force Base that hit Iranian nuclear facilities received the most media attention, they were accompanied by an additional 120 aircraft. These included F-35 and F-22 stealth fighters, as well as refueling tankers and various intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft. Submarines also launched Tomahawk cruise missiles at Iranian targets as part of what was termed 'Operation Midnight Hammer.' All the while, the Navy had five Aegis ships operating in the region, with SM-3 interceptors that were critical elements in Israel's defense against incoming Iranian ballistic missiles. The Navy had two aircraft carriers operating in the region, with a third deploying to Europe that could also be redirected to the Middle East. Carrier-based F-35Cs provided air superiority and also acted as decoys in the strike on Iran. The massive American military operation would appear to undermine the case — which a number of senior officials in the Trump administration have long put forward — that the U.S. should pull its forces from the region in order to redirect them toward the Western Pacific to confront the increasingly potent and sophisticated Chinese threat. Yet the strike on Iranian facilities, which may yet have to be repeated, would appear to demonstrate that Washington remains enmeshed in the region for the foreseeable future. The case for the U.S. military withdrawing from the Middle East is not particularly new. As far back as the early 1990s, Secretary of State James Baker sought to have the U.S. disentangle itself from the ever-volatile Middle East. He failed, however, as have policymakers ever since. Nevertheless, despite their role in the attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, it is arguable that at least one and perhaps both aircraft carriers, as well as several of their escorts, currently operating in the region could be redeployed to the Western Pacific. Even in the absence of carriers and their F-35s, the U.S. has a large remaining fighter force spread throughout the Arabian Gulf. This force — which includes F-35A, F-22, F-15 and other fighter jets — operates from Qatar's sprawling Al Udeid Air Base, Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia, the UAE's Al Dhafra Air Base, as well as Kuwait. Various intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft are already stationed in the Gulf as well. Other fighter aircraft could be rotated into these bases as a given contingency might require. Similarly, tankers can be deployed to bases in the region; over 30 were repositioned in anticipation of the strike on Iran. Intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance systems could also be deployed to the Middle East to augment those already stationed there. The fiscal year 2026 budget proposal, together with the budget reconciliation package, provides for 19 new naval ships, including two attack submarines and two more Aegis ships. Yet it will take years before these ships enter the fleet, and in the meantime the Navy, at less than 280 ships, will be hard put to provide a presence in the Mediterranean, the Indian Ocean and the Western Pacific. Something has to give. The administration should therefore consider whether now is indeed the time to reposition part of the carrier force away from the Middle East. This is not to argue that all Atlantic-based aircraft carriers and most of their escorts should be permanently redeployed to the Western Pacific. There remain numerous requirements for carrier task forces as part of America's ongoing commitment to NATO. Indeed, so long as there is a Russian threat to the alliance — likely the case for years to come — America's aircraft carrier force will remain a critical element of NATO's deterrent. But the Middle East is another matter. There are numerous bases hosting American aircraft throughout the Arabian Gulf that could take more aircraft if necessary, giving Washington a powerful land-based deterrent. The flexibility of the submarine force adds to that deterrent. And the ability of the bomber force to transit from either American bases or Diego Garcia further underscores American power in the region. If the naval fleet were large as it had been decades ago, it would have been beneficial to supplement America's Middle Eastern forces with a carrier presence. But the fleet is half the size it was in the 1970s, and aircraft carriers in the Middle East, even as part of a major military operation like Operation Midnight Hammer, are a luxury that America can no longer afford. Dov S. Zakheim is a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and vice chairman of the board for the Foreign Policy Research Institute. He was undersecretary of Defense (comptroller) and chief financial officer for the Department of Defense from 2001 to 2004 and a deputy undersecretary of Defense from 1985 to 1987.
Politico
a day ago
- Politico
Dems are gearing up to weaponize Trump's megabill
Tina Shah, a doctor who launched her bid against Rep. Tom Kean (R-N.J.) this week, attacked Republicans for 'gut[ting] Medicaid,' and Matt Maasdam, a former Navy SEAL who is challenging Rep. Tom Barrett (R-Mich.) , said 'the price of healthcare is gonna go up … all to line the pocketbooks of billionaires.' Some Democratic strategists are urging the party to capitalize on this momentum even more aggressively. 'We need to be doing early, paid communications on this — not just the same old cable buys, token digital buys in swing districts and press conferences,' said Ian Russell, a Democratic consultant who served as the DCCC's political director in 2014 and 2016. 'Democrats need to take some risks here, mobilize early, spend money they may not have because voters' views harden over time, and this is when we can shape it.' In 2024, Democrats failed to break through with their message after President Joe Biden dug the party into a hole with voters on the economy. Trump successfully cast himself as focused on bringing down costs while painting Kamala Harris as overly obsessed with social issues like protecting transgender people. Harris, for her part, ran a scatter-shot, three-month messaging blitz that jumped from cost-of-living to abortion rights to Trump's threats to democracy, which ultimately didn't move voters. Republicans, for their part, plan to emphasize the megabill's tax cuts, especially those on tips and overtime, and increased funding for border security. On Medicaid cuts, they hope to neutralize Democrats' attacks by casting them as reforms: tightened work requirements and efforts to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse, a pair of Medicaid-related changes that generally polls well among voters. 'This vote cemented House Democrats' image as elitist, disconnected, snobby, unconcerned with the problems Americans face in their daily lives, and most of all — out of touch,' said NRCC spokesman Mike Marinella in a statement. 'House Republicans will be relentless in making this vote the defining issue of 2026, and we will use every tool to show voters that Republicans stood with them while House Democrats sold them out.' But as Republicans look to sell their bill, public polling on it is bleak. Most Americans disapprove of it, in some polls by a two-to-one margin, according to surveys conducted by Quinnipiac University , The Washington Post , Pew Research and Fox News . Meanwhile a pair of Democratic groups, Priorities USA and Navigator Research, released surveys this week showing majorities of voters aren't fully aware of the megabill. Nearly half of Americans said they hadn't heard anything about the bill, according to Priorities USA, a major Democratic super PAC. Of those who had heard about it, only 8 percent said they knew Medicaid cuts were included in the legislation. Two-thirds of survey respondents who self-identified as passive or avoidant news consumers, the kinds of tuned out and low-information voters Democrats failed to win in 2024, said they knew nothing about the bill.
