US Navy warships picked up multiple new Iranian ballistic missile kills in the latest defense of Israel
Israel launched a new military operation against Iran on June 13, prompting Tehran to retaliate with waves of missile attacks. The US Navy moved five of its Arleigh Burke-class destroyers into the Eastern Mediterranean Sea for support if needed.
The destroyers — USS Thomas Hudner, USS Arleigh Burke, USS The Sullivans, USS Oscar Austin, and USS Paul Ignatius — are equipped with high-end interceptors that are specifically designed for ballistic missile defense.
Officials had previously confirmed that the US ships were providing air defense for Israel, but it was unclear if they scored any hits. However, in a statement on Sunday, the Navy revealed the destroyers intercepted "multiple" Iranian ballistic missiles since June 14.
The Navy did not say which interceptors the destroyers used against the Iranian missiles and referred additional questions to US Central Command, which oversees Middle East operations. Business Insider reached out to CENTCOM for more information but did not receive a response.
The disclosure comes as Navy leadership raises concerns that the sea service is burning through one of its top ballistic missile interceptors, the Standard Missile-3. Just last week, Adm. James Kilby, acting chief of naval operations, told lawmakers that American warships were using the SM-3 "at an alarming rate."
Navy warships fired multiple SM-3 interceptors to defend Israel from large-scale Iranian missile attacks in April and October of last year.
The SM-3 missile is an important element of the Navy's Aegis Combat System, equipped on Arleigh Burke-class destroyers and Ticonderoga-class cruisers. It uses a kinetic kill vehicle to destroy short- to intermediate-range missiles during the midcourse phase of their flight.
The SM-3 is produced in multiple variants, which can cost as little as $10 million on the low end and nearly $30 million on the high end, according to the US Missile Defense Agency.
Analysts have argued that the Navy is depleting its SM-3 stockpile in the Middle East without sufficient plans to replace it, which could be an issue in a Pacific conflict, where these interceptors would likely be needed in large quantities. China, a leading concern, has a large arsenal of ballistic missiles.
And the SM-3 is not the only missile interceptor that the Navy is heavily expending in the Middle East. American warships have fired hundreds of SM-2s and SM-6s to defend against attacks by Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen.
US military planners have said that one of the challenges of the Red Sea conflict is being forced to use expensive interceptors to defeat cheap Houthi drones. Trying to get on the right side of that cost curve — saving the higher-end missiles for more advanced threats — is an ongoing focus in training across NATO.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
DC becomes Republicans' favorite target — again
Republicans who've made a habit of using their power over DC to undercut progressive policymaking are mounting a new push to rein in the capital — and this one may have legs. Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., told Semafor that he is inclined to support a House-passed bill that would bar noncitizens from serving in local office as well as voting locally in the city lawmakers call a home away from home. The bill passed the House with 56 Democratic votes in June. 'Voting in American elections should be limited to American citizens,' said Fetterman, whose wife Gisele became a US citizen in 2009. 'I say that as a guy that's absolutely very pro-immigration. The opportunity to vote, that should be for American citizens.' A similar ban passed the House last year with support from two Democrats who've since ascended to the Senate, Arizona's Ruben Gallego and Michigan's Elissa Slotkin. While it's not clear if they'd change their votes this time, should it come to the Senate floor, support from those three Democratic senators would put the GOP closer than ever to the 60 votes needed for passage. Congress has substantial constitutional power over DC, which Republicans frequently deploy to undermine the city's elected government — and point a finger at unpopular leftwing policies. After the GOP took back the House in 2023, it reversed a criminal justice reform passed by the DC council. Local Democrats expected then-President Joe Biden to veto it; he signed it into law. Democratic control of the Senate had, until this year, stalled action on other Republican-passed legislation to rein in the DC government. But under complete GOP control of Washington, the capital's government has taken further hits. A stopgap government funding bill slashed $1 billion from the DC budget, and the House GOP continues to decline to take up a Senate-passed fix. Then this month, as the Senate focused on President Donald Trump's tax-cuts bill, House Republicans passed a trio of proposals that would force DC to cooperate with Trump's immigration enforcement, scrap another police reform, and remove noncitizens' local voting rights. Senate Majority Leader John Thune's office did not return a request for comment on the chamber's timetable for taking up the House-passed bill. Republicans sold the noncitizen voting ban as a defense of DC citizens' rights. The city's rules don't affect voting in federal elections, which has long been limited to US citizens. But for the GOP, they raised the possibility that some Americans might be out-voted in DC elections by people who were neither born here or naturalized. 'The right to vote is a defining privilege of American citizenship,' said House Oversight Chair James Comer, R-Ky., during the bill's markup this month. 'Diluting that right, to its non-citizens, whether here legally or illegally, undermines the voice of DC residents.' The bill's proponents described reform as not just necessary but politically popular, and a mistake for Democrats to vote against. 'Once again, Democrats are taking the 20% side on another 80-20 issue,' said Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas. 'The American people do not want illegal aliens voting. They shouldn't be here to begin with.' For some local politicians, the legislation would hit home — in a very big way. Last year, for the very first time, Mónica Martínez López decided to run for office. Born in Mexico City, she had lived for a while in DC's Brookland neighborhood and gotten involved in the Vision Zero initiative to end traffic deaths. When her member of the Advisory Neighborhood Commission moved away, Martínez López ran for her seat. By a 734-341 vote margin, she won. The House bill would remove Martínez López, along with fellow ANC member Jingwen Sun, from the voter rolls and from their posts on the commission. 'It's another example of the lack of self-determination for our city,' Martínez López told Semafor. 'The close to 1,000 neighbors/residents who registered to exercise their right to participate in local electoral processes now face the limits of Home Rule that US citizens who live in Washington DC have long faced.' Sun, who ran for council while having a green card but not citizenship, said that he would stay in the city and keep up his work, even if his vote and job were erased initially. 'I'm pretty positive that I will speak to the DC council and mayor, and run for ANC again, whenever the time comes that I become a US citizen,' Sun said. Democrats have conducted a somewhat circular conversation about how their party needs to change, less about specific policies than about a battered 'brand.' What sort of policies could they moderate or jettison, if they wanted to move right? On paper, noncitizen voting could be sacrificed without much downside for the party. The few hundred people who take advantage of it in DC can't support the party in any other way (federal voting, donations) unless they obtain citizenship. Non-citizens are often less progressive than the Democrats who give them the franchise — as we saw three years ago in San Francisco, when opponents of left-wing school board members registered recent immigrants to help recall them. So why would a majority of congressional Democrats vote with DC? They feel solidarity with the city's residents, whose progressive votes are undermined whenever Republicans run Congress. Some of them, in seats that are too blue to become GOP targets, are comfortable defending the concept that people who raise families and pay taxes in a city deserve some say in who runs their local government. But other Democrats are less eager to make a stand for that idea. Which makes it a soft target for Republicans. The House-passed bill has vocal Democratic opponents, and it's still an open question whether it would get the necessary seven votes needed to overcome a filibuster — and that's assuming all Senate Republicans vote in favor. DC Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton and Rep. Maxwell Frost, D-Fla., argued against the measure on the House floor in June, making the case that Republicans were being hypocrites and hurting American citizens as well as non-citizens. 'Republicans claim that voting is a core right for the privilege of American citizenship,' Frost said. 'Republicans have fought tooth and nail to defeat legislation that would give the American citizens who reside in DC voting representation in the House and the Senate.' Frost, like voting reform advocates in DC, pointed out that other cities let non-citizens vote in local elections, and that there was some history — not recent, but real — of letting people vote in US elections if they weren't yet Americans. That was at the heart of the reasoning when DC's city council first passed the measure. 'The idea clicked for me when I realized DC has many people who live here, pay taxes, work locally, and don't have a voice in even their local government,' said Charles Allen, the DC council member who chaired the committee that approved the voting amendment. 'My colleagues and I make decisions every day that spend their tax dollars and impact their work,' he added. 'If they can prove they live here, why shouldn't they have a say locally?' In the Austin-American Statesman, Tony Quesada an investigation into noncitizen votes in Texas, which proved less than promised. 'It turns out that a bunch of those people were naturalized citizens who were labeled possible noncitizens based on outdated — i.e., false — data.' For NPR, Mikaela Lefrak into how many noncitizens take advantage of these open systems, and how the people who control the rolls prevent fraud. 'They know that one slip-up, like a presidential ballot being mailed to a noncitizen, could end up on the national news.' In The Washington Post, Olivia George and Meagan Flynn to the DC elected officials who'd have to resign if Republicans passed this into law. 'The repeal would force special elections for those seats [and] the unpaid positions could remain vacant, leaving residents without representation.'
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US slams ‘smear campaign' as pro-Iran hackers threaten to release Trump material
Pro-Iran hackers have threatened to release emails supposedly stolen from people connected to Donald Trump, according to a report, in a move federal authorities called a 'calculated smear campaign.' The US warned of continued Iranian cyberattacks after American strikes on Tehran's nuclear facilities and the threats they could pose to services, economic systems and companies. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency said the threat to expose emails about the president is 'nothing more than digital propaganda' meant to damage Mr Trump and other federal officials. 'A hostile foreign adversary is threatening to illegally exploit purportedly stolen and unverified material in an effort to distract, discredit and divide,' CISA spokeswoman Marci McCarthy wrote in a social media post. 'These criminals will be found, and they will be brought to justice.' Reuters reported that it contacted the alleged hackers online, and they told the news organisation that they had a large cache of emails from Trump chief of staff Susie Wiles, other senior advisers and porn actress Stormy Daniels, to whom a hush money payment led to Mr Trump's criminal conviction. Federal prosecutors charged three Iranians last year on allegations of hacking into Mr Trump's presidential campaign. Hackers also targeted the campaign of Democrats Joe Biden and Kamala Harris and unsuccessfully tried to leak material supposedly taken from Mr Trump to Democrats and members of the media. The threat to release more hacked emails was reported on the day that CISA, the FBI and the National Security Agency issued a public bulletin warning that hacking groups supportive of Tehran may attack US interests despite a fragile ceasefire between Iran and Israel. The hackers, authorities warned, could seek to disrupt or disable critical infrastructure systems such as utilities, transportation and economic hubs. They also could target defence contractors or other American companies with ties to Israel, the agencies said. The bulletin outlined recommendations, including the use of regular software updates and strong password management systems to shore up digital defences. Hackers backing Tehran have targeted US banks, defence contractors and energy companies after American strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, but so far have not caused widespread disruptions.
The Intercept
32 minutes ago
- The Intercept
Trump's Budget Just Passed the Senate. Brace for a Massive Increase in ICE Raids.
Masked immigration enforcers have swept through American cities in the months since President Donald Trump took office, using flash bangs during restaurant sweeps, slamming people's heads into the ground, violently arresting gardeners on video, and provoking mass protests against their raids. This may only be the beginning. The massive Senate budget bill, which passed on Tuesday and awaits a final House vote, gives Donald Trump's administration the money to rapidly ramp up mass deportation to unprecedented levels, according to immigration experts. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement will have a budget for more officers than the FBI. The nation's immigration detention centers will have more funding than the federal Bureau of Prisons. There may be only one limit on how fast the Trump administration can spend: how quickly it can hire. 'It is hard for people to imagine what immigration enforcement is going to look like once all this money goes,' said Daniel Costa, the director of immigration law and policy research at the Economic Policy Institute, a left-leaning nonprofit think tank. 'It already looks really bad and scary, like we're turning into a police state and surveillance state. The orders of magnitude are going to be multiplied.' The dueling House and Senate bills differ on details but agreed on a key point: Both would massively expand federal spending on immigration enforcement. Overall, the Senate version will dedicate $175 billion to an immigration crackdown, including an extra $30 billion for ICE, which can be spent over four years. To put that in perspective, ICE's current budget is about $8 billion per year. The bill also designates $45 billion for detention facilities, which can also be spent at any time over the next four years. By comparison, the U.S. spends about $8 billion a year on the Bureau of Prisons. Although the Senate budget bill contains a dizzying array of provisions, ranging from tax breaks for the wealthy to massive cuts to Medicaid, Vice President JD Vance argued Monday that immigration is the main reason to pass it. 'Everything else — the CBO score, the proper baseline, the minutiae of the Medicaid policy — is immaterial compared to the ICE money and immigration enforcement provisions,' he said. The bill will give Trump years to spend the money, but observers predict that Trump will try to move quickly to hire more ICE agents, convert unused state prisons into detention centers, and hire pilots for deportation flights. The overall goal will be to create a new baseline — measured in terms of dollars, detentions, and deportations — that will be difficult for future presidents and Congresses to pare back. 'The incentive is to move quickly through that money, get the new system of internment camps that is going to go up around the country up and running,' Costa said. 'They are already spending the money as irresponsibly as you possibly could.' Another reason the administration is likely to spend the money quickly: It is already deep in the hole on this year's immigration budget. ICE is $1 billion overbudget by one estimate, Axios reported last month. 'If they don't get this money, then they are going to have to be releasing tons of people from detention and scaling back operations,' said David Bier, the director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute. 'They are already spending the money as irresponsibly as you possibly could. So I have no doubt they will spend the money as quickly as they possibly can.' Since Trump took office, ICE has shifted its tactics, arresting more immigrants without criminal convictions to meet a new goal, announced by White House adviser Stephen Miller in May, of 3,000 arrests a day. Miller, according to the Wall Street Journal, directed ICE officials to target immigrants at Home Depots and other gathering places for undocumented workers. ICE is already holding a record 59,000 people in detention, a 50 percent increase from the end of the Biden administration. Only about 40 percent of people ICE has detained since Trump took office had criminal convictions of any type, and only 8.4 percent had convictions for violent crimes, according to CBS News. Read Our Complete Coverage Bier predicted that with more cash in hand, the administration will double down on its current tactics and introduce new ones to meet arrest targets. 'We are going to see Border Patrol checkpoints way in the interior of the United States.' 'Really, when you look at what they have to do in order to increase arrests, they have to go out on the streets and racially profile people. And that is what they have been doing at work sites, on the streets, at Home Depot,' he said. 'We are going to see Border Patrol checkpoints way in the interior of the United States. This is going to be something quite unlike anything we have seen in the history of the United States.' The White House called the idea that ICE is engaging in racial profiling a smear against 'heroic ICE officers.' 'President Trump promised the largest mass deportation operation in history and a secure … border — the CATO Institute may disagree with that policy, but the American people don't,' said Abigail Jackson, a White House spokesperson. 'While the President has already been extraordinarily successful on securing the border and deporting illegal aliens, the One Big Beautiful Bill is critical to fortify his success and make the progress permanent by: finishing the border wall, detaining and deporting at least one million illegal aliens every year, massively expanding our detention capacity, and hiring additional Border Patrol and ICE agents.' Immigration experts say the Senate and House bills pave the way for the Trump administration to spend the new funding quickly. The biggest problem the White House could face is hiring enough people to staff agencies such as ICE. 'The biggest issue is just manpower. There just aren't enough people who can do those jobs,' said Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has said she would like to add 10,000 officers to ICE's ranks; hiring up to that level could take years. In the meantime, immigration experts predict that the administration will increasingly lean on private contractors — especially when immigrants are detained after their arrest. 'States are falling over themselves to try to get their hands on some of this money.' State and local governments, along with private prison companies, will almost certainly be tapped to provide detention beds for ICE. Bier noted that a drop in state prison populations over the last decade effectively means there is more space for immigration detention. There could be bottlenecks there too, however, since some facilities will have to be brought back into operation over a period of months. State prisons and local jails are already facing record-high vacancies for guard positions. 'States are falling over themselves to try to get their hands on some of this money,' Bier said. 'That will be the bulk of it. I think they do want to give these private prison contractors their due as well. A lot of them have already been gearing up to expand their operations as well in the longer term to get permanent facilities online. That is going to take some more time to construct.'
