Latest news with #AmericanSoldiers
Times
23-06-2025
- Politics
- Times
Trump is breaking his promises — and it will cost him supporters
D onald Trump never let Joe Biden forget the 13 American service members killed during the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan as he built his campaign around becoming a 'peacemaker' president. Trump claimed, falsely, that not a single American soldier was killed in Afghanistan during the last 18 months of his presidency after he agreed a deal with the Taliban. Not only did this deny the fact of the 12 soldiers who lost their lives in hostile action during this period but it revealed one of the greatest threats to his carefully nurtured image — the deaths of American soldiers overseas on his watch. Any casualties in the Middle East as a direct result of his actions will shatter his image with his adoring Make America Great Again (Maga) base.
Fox News
22-06-2025
- Politics
- Fox News
DAVID MARCUS: Trump might have broken Iran, but he didn't buy it
Print Close By David Marcus Published June 22, 2025 One of the most famous moments in the lead-up to the Iraq war in 2003 was when then-Secretary of State Colin Powell cited the Pottery Barn rule regarding the Middle East: "If you break it, you buy it." Sadly, that is precisely what happened back then, as the war turned into a 12-year slog in which almost 5,000 American soldiers made the ultimate sacrifice without achieving the goal of a stable and modern Iraq. That is the cloud under which American B-2 bombers pierced the night sky in Iran on Sunday, just after 12 a.m. local time, attacking three Iranian nuclear facilities in an operation aptly dubbed Midnight Hammer. RUBIO DECLARES IRAN'S DAYS OF 'PLAYING THE WORLD' OVER AFTER TRUMP'S DECISIVE STRIKE What the Trump administration understands here is that while it is good to learn the lessons of the Iraq War, it is bad to be paralyzed by them, and Saturday's strike was a good example of both principles. Obviously, the most vital difference between this weekend's strike on Iran and the Iraq War is that we do not even have boots on the ground in Iran, much less designs on occupying it, which is what created the quagmire of Iraq. Back then, we had Army colonels who, instead of leading battles, were trying to negotiate with rival tribal leaders in a culture they barely had time to understand, and no, they were not greeted as liberators. That leads us to the second major difference between now and the Iraq War. Trump is only using the military for military actions, not some vague viceregal nation-building and policing mission. A third major distinction between Iraq and our current hard place is that the government of Iran is still intact. In Baghdad there was no one in charge after Sadaam Hussein was chased off. Here, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khameini can still come to his senses and give up his country's nuclear weapons program, or whatever is left of it. Last, but not least, the Iraq War was squarely led by the United States, with our "coalition of the willing" some distance behind us. This is a war between Israel and Iran. All we did was assist a close ally with a mission that caused no Iranian deaths. On Sunday morning, both Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance were making the TV circuit and both unequivocally stated that the United States is not "at war" with Iran, the polar opposite of 2003. Any choice Trump made on Iran, to attack, not to attack, was going to come with risk. And there is certainly a legitimate fear that Iran could respond with attacks on our troops in the region, or even a terror attack in the U.S. that would draw us into a Middle East meat grinder. But this was also true when Trump killed Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani back in 2020. Swift and deadly revenge was promised by the mullahs, but it never materialized. They knew then, and likely still do, that a wider war against America is madness. Meanwhile, unlike Barack Obama, who drew more redlines in the sand of the Middle East than Yosemite Sam, all while never backing it up, Trump just showed America's foes that he will do what he says. That's as powerful a negotiating tool as there can be. Even just hours after the attack, carried off flawlessly by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and his forces, you can sense that there is no great building fear of a wider war here. Democrats, with a few exceptions such as staunch Israel-supporter Sen. John Fetterman, of Pennsylvania, are upset that Trump didn't get Congressional approval. But they aren't really warning about forever wars. CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION The non-interventionist wing of the MAGA movement, which was very loud online against military action, has lost this one internal battle, but is mostly back in the fold. Nobody wins them all. In the end, Trump did what he always does. He looked at a problem everyone said had no solution, like moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, or closing the border, and decided he would be the one who finally slammed the door on Iran's nuclear ambitions. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP One week before Saturday's attack, the United States Army celebrated its 250th birthday with a military parade in Washington D.C. Critics called it pointless, or self-aggrandizement by Trump, when in fact, it was a display of America's incomparable military might. On Saturday, Iran and its supreme leader learned that those lines of marching troops, those machines and flyovers were much, much more than simply a parade. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM DAVID MARCUS Print Close URL
Washington Post
13-06-2025
- Politics
- Washington Post
Political turmoil strains the Army as it marks a milestone birthday
When President Donald Trump took to a dais at Fort Bragg in North Carolina this week, he opened by praising the courage and toughness of the American soldier. But soon, with a phalanx of camouflaged paratroopers behind him, his speech took a dramatic turn. He declared that people who burn the U.S. flag should be jailed, despite First Amendment protections established by the Supreme Court. He trashed the news media, a favorite foil. And he needled political opponents, including former president Joe Biden. 'You think this crowd would have showed up for Biden?' Trump said, as soldiers laughed and booed. 'I don't think so.' The partisan display, though downplayed by the president's faithful, has left senior Army leaders disappointed and concerned, said three defense officials. Soldiers are taught that 'the Army as an institution must be nonpartisan and appear so too,' while 'not favoring any specific political party or group,' according to the service's field manual. Doing so 'assures the public that our Army will always serve the Constitution and our people loyally and responsively.' 'We're treating it as a teachable moment,' said one senior Army official, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity because the issue is sensitive. 'It was not a great look.' Trump's rally is the latest event since his return to office that has showcased the president's disregard for civil-military norms and thrust the Army, specifically, to the center of his most partisan machinations. The turmoil has run headlong into Saturday's 'grand parade' in Washington celebrating the Army's 250th birthday, a display of its might — replete with tanks, helicopters, bands and thousands of troops in uniform — that has drawn withering criticism from Trump's political opponents. The spectacle at Fort Bragg was organized by America 250, the same group overseeing the parade. The group, which did not respond to a request for comment, is meant to be nonpartisan and is overseen by a bipartisan commission. In recent months, it has brought on several people affiliated with Trump, including Ari Abergel, a onetime spokesman for first lady Melania Trump, now serving as executive director. 'Make America Great Again' caps and other pro-Trump paraphernalia were made available for purchase during the event over the objections of Army officials, defense officials said. The merchandise booth, as reported earlier by is now the focus of an Army investigation. It arrived at Fort Bragg with others tents selling food and drinks, catching military leaders off-guard, and was eventually moved farther from the president's speaking engagement but allowed to remain on the base temporarily, the officials added. Anna Kelly, a White House spokeswoman, declined to answer questions about the rally but said in a statement that 'Thanks to this President's leadership,' the Army 'is getting the grand celebration it deserves for 250 years of honor, courage, and sacrifice.' A senior adviser to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Sean Parnell, called scrutiny of the Fort Bragg rally 'a disgraceful attempt to ruin the lives of young soldiers.' The Pentagon's press secretary, Kingsley Wilson, responded to scrutiny of how Trump administration officials have interacted with the military by attacking the Biden administration for allegedly injecting 'radical ideology' into the Defense Department. She cited 'drag queen performances' on military bases and the ouster of troops who declined to get the coronavirus vaccine. 'Under Secretary Hegseth's leadership,' she said, 'the Army and every branch of our military is refocusing on warfighting. Enthusiasm to serve, on full display at Fort Bragg and in record-breaking recruiting, has never been higher.' Since taking power in January, the Trump administration has moved swiftly to bring the Defense Department to heel. Top military officers, including a disproportionate number of women, were fired without cause; a new investigation was opened into the 2021 fall of Afghanistan with vows of 'accountability' for those in charge; the number of generals in the military stands to be slashed; and senior Army leaders have been bypassed for prestigious assignments in favor of officers from other services. Hegseth, an Army National Guard veteran and former Fox News personality, also has terminated diversity initiatives and restored the names of nine Army posts the where renamed under Biden because of their association with the Confederacy. And in addition to the 4,800 National Guard troops and Marines deployed in California, about 13,000 U.S. troops remain on the southern border in an effort to seal it from illegal crossings. It has relied in part on 20-ton Stryker combat vehicles — a rare sight on American soil that has blurred the line between military operations and domestic law enforcement. The Army, by far the military's largest branch of service, has launched a broad overhaul of how it is organized, trained and equipped, seeking to modernize for warfare defined by one-way attack drones, artificial intelligence, hypersonic missiles and other weapons that were not common during the two decades of counterinsurgency operations that rose from 9/11. While those efforts began under Biden, Hegseth and Army Secretary Dan Driscoll have moved to slash weapons programs and reinvest in newer systems that could be relevant in the future. Hegseth, testifying at three congressional hearings this week, sought to highlight the president's 'peace through strength' agenda, casting the moves as popular with many who serve while rejecting the blowback he and the president have received from Democrats and within the military for injecting politics into the historically nonpartisan institution. Hegseth, to the approval of Trump's supporters on Capitol Hill, argued that it was the Biden administration that politicized the military first with its promotion of diversity, equity, and inclusion, and extending opportunities to transgender troops. 'We are restoring the warrior ethos,' Hegseth said at a House Armed Services Committee hearing Thursday. 'President Trump charged me to focus relentlessly on warfighting, lethality, meritocracy, standards, and readiness, and that is exactly what we've done since day one.' Under Trump and Hegseth, the Army has been shunned in the screening to lead major joint military headquarters across the globe. Trump's choice to oversee operations in Europe, Lt. Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, and Africa, Lt. Gen. Dagvin Anderson, are Air Force officers. His choice to lead missions in the Middle East, Vice Adm. Brad Cooper, is a Navy officer. So is Vice Adm. Frank Bradley, a Navy SEAL nominated to lead the elite Joint Special Operations Command with its focus on counterterrorism missions and daring raids. Trump administration officials also are considering nominating a Marine Corps officer, Gen. Christopher Mahoney, to become the next vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Pentagon's No. 2 officer, defense officials said. If selected and confirmed, he will join Gen. Dan Caine, an Air Force officer who Trump, in a highly unusual move, plucked from retirement to replace Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr., who was fired without cause as Joint Chiefs chairman in February. There is no requirement for the president to choose an Army general for any of those positions, and all of those nominated are considered credible selections. But in the aggregate, people familiar with internal deliberations said, it looks like an effort by the president to punish leaders associated with the tumultuous fall of Afghanistan, even though they were required to carry out decisions made by the Biden administration. During the presidential campaign, Trump pledged to fire any general who had a role at the end of the 20-year war, which occurred months after Biden, rejecting senior military leaders' advice, ordered the full withdrawal of U.S. troops as Trump himself agreed to do in a pact he made with the Taliban before his first term ended. Though Trump has not followed through on his threat, among those bypassed for advancement are two Army officers who had key roles in the evacuation of Kabul: Gen. Christopher Donahue and Gen. James Mingus. Neither could be reached for comment. Donahue, a Special Operations veteran with time in the elite Delta Force, was dispatched to the Afghan capital after the crisis erupted to manage security operations at the airport. More than 120,000 people were airlifted to safety, but scenes of desperation and violence were common. He was promoted late last year to four-star general but only after an extended hold on his nomination by Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Oklahoma). Mingus was director of operations on the Pentagon's Joint Staff, reporting to Gen. Mark A. Milley, then the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Milley and Trump have a contentious history dating to Trump's first term, and the now retired general has criticized the president on several occasions, making him a singular target of the MAGA movement's ire. Donahue was seen as a rising star and a leading contender to become the next commander of U.S. European Command, while Mingus was the Biden administration's planned choice to lead U.S. Central Command, both among the military's most high-profile postings. Kelly, the White House spokeswoman, noted the fall of Afghanistan when asked for comment about the two generals being bypassed. The Defense Department under Biden, she said, 'was fraught with one disaster after another, including the failed Afghanistan withdrawal, which was the most embarrassing day in American history.' Parnell, the Pentagon spokesman, said in a statement that the Trump administration's oft-stated goal of 'restoring the warrior ethos' requires 'a class of senior military leadership that puts warfighting first.' 'Under the previous administration, our senior military leaders were asked to put ideology before mission and diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives before merit,' Parnell said. 'You saw the deadly cost of that distraction play out during the disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal. That nonsense ends now.' Trump, Hegseth and Caine are working closely on each senior military nomination, and Hegseth has 'complete confidence' in each one so far, Parnell said. Heidi Urben, a retired Army colonel and Georgetown University professor, said it is not clear to her whether the Army getting bypassed for top assignment, continued scrutiny of the fall of Afghanistan, and the restructuring and consolidation in the service all are related. But some Army officials may see connections, she said, and there are comparable periods in recent history 'when a particular service felt it couldn't get out of the crosshairs' of the defense secretary or felt like it was falling behind in terms of influence. 'While there may always be a few kernels of truth there, each of the services tend to be very sensitive to any perception that they're losing standing, resources, or influence vis-à-vis the other services,' Urben said. Jason Dempsey, an Army veteran who studies civil military affairs for the Center for a New American Security, said he has been struck by what he called Hegseth and his team's negativity as they explain personnel decisions. Their 'bombastic' tone, Dempsey said, 'implies that there is more there than meets the eye, and this is a very political move.' 'It reveals that this has less to do with lethality than with retribution,' he said. 'Over time, this is the kind of stuff that actually degrades military responsiveness.'
Bloomberg
10-06-2025
- Politics
- Bloomberg
China and Its Neighbors Are Ravaging the Mekong
The Mekong River is more than the sum of its nearly 3,000 miles. It's one of the world's most valuable waterways and has been vital to political power in Southeast Asia for centuries. As a prized strategic and financial asset, commerce and violence have marked the basin's story. The French tried — and failed — to re-engineer the river to anchor their imperial rule. American soldiers fought fiercely in its delta, and the Khmer Rouge casually meted out atrocities not far from its banks. Today, the river is again under siege. Dams may provide electric power to boost economic growth, but extract a terrible toll on the flora and fauna that villages have depended upon for millennia. Statecraft is colliding with major power tensions and national development goals, and the Mekong is coming off worse. Rarely, if ever, has the river's future been more embattled. Co-operation is in short supply, just as it's needed most.
Bloomberg
06-06-2025
- Climate
- Bloomberg
What D-Day Tells Us About How Tech Goes from Niche to Mass
Today is the 81st anniversary of D-Day, the Allied invasion of France that began the liberation of Western Europe. I always mark the date, but this is the first time I've been able to commemorate it so personally: Last week, I fulfilled a lifelong dream of hiking the Normandy beaches stormed by those unimaginably brave American, Canadian and British soldiers. Like most who visit, I've tried to imagine how they must have felt. Unlike most, I suspect, I also spent the walk thinking about weather forecasting. Why? The first and most important decision of D-Day wasn't made on D-Day. It was made two nights before — based on the weather forecast. And the role it played has something to teach us about how revolutionary innovations change the world.
