SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
drones
Drone Attacks Drove Record-Breaking Violence Against Aid Workers in 2025: UN
A majority of aid workers who were killed last year died in attacks in Gaza, despite a ceasefire that was reached last October.
Aug 19, 2026
"The technology may change, but the laws of war do not," said the United Nations' top humanitarian official on Wednesday as the international community marked World Humanitarian Day—and a record number of violent attacks against aid workers in 2025, with the expanded use of drones partially driving the increased threat to workers' safety.
According to the Aid Worker Security Database and the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), 907 aid workers were killed, injured, or kidnapped last year.
Nearly 300 more were detained or arrested, said OCHA.
The number of humanitarians who were killed dropped slightly from the previous year, down to 350 from 387. But the death toll was the second highest ever recorded, and a majority of those killed—186—were attacked in Gaza, despite a "ceasefire" agreement that was reached last October.
More than two-thirds of those killed in Gaza were victims of aerial bombardment.
OCHA noted that "cheap and adaptable armed drones are putting lethal capabilities into more hands," with armies now able to wage more explosive attacks from afar and reach "deeper into towns and cities."
The prevalence of armed drones has been linked to 80% of civilian deaths in Sudan in the first four months of this year, while in Colombia, weaponized drone attacks quadrupled between 2024-25.
As the technology of war changes, said OCHA, "our humanity must not... Civilians, including humanitarians, must be protected."
One aid worker was killed in March in the Democratic Republic of Congo when a drone struck a residential building, while four humanitarian convoys were attacked by drones in a single week in May in Ukraine.
"Weaponized drones have become the new face of an old danger: the deliberate or reckless destruction of civilian life,” said Tom Fletcher, the UN humanitarian chief.
“But just calling it out will not protect the next aid worker," Fletcher added. "States must uphold international humanitarian law and use every tool to protect civilians and our colleagues. And for those who break the rules, there must be real consequences."
So far in 2026, 82 aid workers have already been killed, while 322 have been injured and 235 have been kidnapped.
"On World Humanitarian Day, we honor humanitarian workers everywhere, and the courage and sacrifices they make every day to help others," said the global humanitarian group Oxfam. "We stand in solidarity with our staff and partners on the frontlines, often working at immense personal risk, and urge governments to uphold their obligations to protect them."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Travelling the Winding River of History to the Sea of Justice
Despite Donald Trump and all the other horrors of this century, I still believe that the essential human trajectory is upwards: We continue to widen the circle of beings that matter; we continue to become braver, and maybe even a bit wiser.
Jun 01, 2026
This is my last article for TomDispatch. For over a decade, Tom Engelhardt has given me a platform to write about pretty much anything that grabs my—I’ll admit it, easily attracted—attention. It’s been a wonderful partnership for me, offering not just a place to publish, but a chance to think, talk, and often argue with the best editor I’ve ever worked with.
A rarity in the age of Internet insta-publishing, TomDispatch subjects every article to the scrutiny of three separate proofreaders. Not for Tom the misplaced apostrophe or the confusion between “their” and “they’re.” Unlike The New York Times in a May 12, 2026 headline, no article appearing in TomDispatch would ever go rogue and ask the question, “Did the Fifth Circuit Go Rouge With Its Abortion Pills Ruling?” (The face of the copyeditor who let that one pass should have looked as if some blusher had been applied.)
While over the last 12 years, I’ve written about a wide variety of subjects, a number of themes stand out to me for their recurrence: racial justice, war (and US military misadventures), and the insistence of women on claiming our humanity. Mostly, I’ve tried to reflect the many ways that we human beings continue to struggle for a good life in a just world, despite all the forces ranged against us. More than once I’ve had recourse to a sentiment frequently attributed to the Reverend Martin Luther King (though it didn’t originate with him): the idea that the arc of the moral universe is long, but invariably bends toward justice.
One Recurrent Theme
A couple of weeks ago, I had a conversation with a woman I’d met a few times before. She’s a Black veteran in her 90s, the newish lover of an old friend of mine. We were reflecting on the fact that so much of what we’ve fought for in our lifetimes—civil rights, women’s rights, LGBTQ rights—has been all but demolished in the first year of Donald Trump’s second term. “People died for those victories,” she said to me, “and now they’ve been undone so fast.”
After all these years, it feels like the arc of the moral universe is bending not toward justice, but in the opposite direction, toward inequality and fascism, nationally and globally.
It was the Sunday after the Supreme Court finished dismembering the 1965 Voting Rights Act (VRA) with its decision in Louisiana v. Callais. That prolonged judicial murder by the Roberts court began with its 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder, which snuffed out a key provision of the VRA. Prior to Shelby County, jurisdictions identified in the VRA as having a history of suppressing the vote in Black, Latino, or Native American communities had to obtain federal “preclearance” before changing their voting laws. In the Shelby decision, however, the court’s conservative majority held that the passage of time had made such preclearance unnecessary, because voter suppression was no longer a problem in such places. In her dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg famously described that position as “throwing out your umbrella in a rainstorm because you’re not getting wet.”
As the Brennan Center for Justice put it 10 years later, it was clear that Ginsberg had been right—that it was still raining in the Southern states. “The effects of the ruling were immediate. The same day, Texas officials announced that they would implement the nation’s most restrictive voter ID law, which had previously been blocked in the preclearance process.” In fact, “without that ‘preclearance’ regime, the revival of discriminatory tactics was immediate: In the last 10 years, at least 29 states have passed 94 laws that make it more difficult to vote, particularly for communities of color.”
Then, in its next major attack on the VRA, the court gave two of Arizona’s laws its stamp of approval. As I wrote in 2022, a year earlier, a court that was by then already significantly shaped by Donald Trump “issued a ruling in Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee upholding Arizona’s right to pass laws requiring people to vote only in precincts where they live, while prohibiting anyone who wasn’t a relative of the voter from hand delivering mail-in ballots to the polls. The court held that, even though in practice such measures would have a disproportionate effect on non-White voters, as long as a law was technically the same for all voters, it didn’t matter that, in practice, it would become harder for some groups to vote.”
Now, in 2026, the court has essentially finished the job with its decision in Callais, which allows states to redraw their voting maps to eliminate majority-minority districts. Not a month later, Southern states (including Alabama, Louisiana, South Carolina, and Tennessee) have rushed to redistrict. Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, and Texas are likely to follow suit between now and the 2028 general election. As The Guardian reports, Michael Li, a redistricting expert at the Brennan Center, observed that “this is a five-alarm fire for Black representation in the south.”
I’m glad that congressman and civil rights hero John Lewis didn’t live to see this day.
It turns out that white racism has been a consistent theme of my writing for TomDispatch, which is hardly surprising, given what a constant reality it’s proven to be in 21st-century America (especially in the Trump years). In 2025, I described how the Department of Government Efficiency’s decimation of the federal workforce constituted a direct attack on the Black middle class, and especially Black women. In “No More Dog Whistles,” I wrote that, under Trump, “racism isn’t just the subtext, it’s the text.” A decade earlier, I was examining race and police violence in my home city of San Francisco, which had seen a spate of police murders of Black and Latino residents. And so it went, and so it still goes.
The Ethics of War, Torture, and Terrorism
That subhead is actually the title of a college course I used to teach. It’s also been the focus of my “scholarly” work since the 9/11 attacks shocked the world and pushed the George W. Bush-Dick Cheney administration over to “the dark side.” My first piece for TomDispatch described how, a decade and a half after the 9/11 attacks and the launching of the Global War on Terror, the United States was still torturing people. President Barack Obama might have closed the CIA’s infamous black sites—its global chain of secret torture bases—but the practice continued, including at the US prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. Subsequent articles of mine covered torture here at home, including at police stations and in our jails and prisons.
Now, we’re seeing a new kind of black site: hundreds of Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention centers, many already established, some still in the planning stage, strung out across the country as our own American gulag archipelago. And like the Soviet gulag, some of those sites are intended not just as holding pens, but as labor camps. As Public Citizen reported this month, “Working for $1 a day in the government’s so-called Voluntary Work Program (VWP) while detained is the only option available to earn any money for the more than 60,000 immigrants held in hundreds of active detention centers across the United States by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency.” It seems that the program is “voluntary” in name only, as it’s the only way detainees can get money for basic hygiene items like toothpaste, and because refusal risks retaliation, such as being placed in solitary confinement.
I’ve labeled such centers “black sites” because, like the ones run by the CIA during the “war on terror,” they remain opaque to ordinary US citizens—or even many members of our federal and local governments. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which administers the ICE detention camps nationwide, has made a show of not permitting local officials or members of Congress to enter them. Like the CIA’s black sites, those camps represent an elaborate version of homeland security theater, designed to remind Americans of just how dangerous unauthorized immigrants supposedly are, as evidenced by how harshly DHS must treat them. They function both as a direct form of repression and as a warning to the rest of us about what could happen to anyone who resists the Trump regime. In that sense, such concentration camps (for that’s indeed what they are and what I’ve called them) are very much like another tool of repression, institutionalized state torture, about which (some years ago) I wrote a book called Mainstreaming Torture.
Another continuity between the Bush torture program and today’s ICE concentration camps is the outsourcing of the work of imprisonment and interrogation to private contractors. In the “war on terror,” private contractors—operatives from private outfits like Erik Prince’s oft-renamed Blackwater—engaged in such “interrogations.” Today’s ICE centers are also run by private contractors: the country’s two main for-profit prison companies, the GEO Group and CORE-Civic. The latter is responsible for the infamous Dilley Immigration Processing Center in Texas. ICE cemented its status as a public-private partnership in May 2026 when David Venturella was appointed its acting director. He left a job at GEO Group to take the post (after leaving ICE to join GEO in the first place). Some things are beyond irony.
War! What Is It Good For?
Other war-related themes have recurred in my writing for TomDispatch. I’ve written about US military interventions in Latin America, the Middle East, and Africa. And now we’ve witnessed perhaps the ultimate pointless intervention—Trump’s war on Iran, which, if it doesn’t end up frying us all, seems likely to wreck the world economy and plunge millions into starvation.
When unpiloted aircraft were still new, I wrote about how the Obama administration had used drones for assassinations in places like Yemen. Today, we’ve become jaded by their use—and by extrajudicial killings in general. Now, there’s hardly a journalistic ripple when the Trump administration sinks yet another tiny boat allegedly carrying drugs—and occasionally just carrying fish—in the Caribbean Sea or Eastern Pacific Ocean. Almost 200 people had died that way by the first week of May 2026.
I’ve long thought that liberation is sort of like an imprisoned genie: Once it escapes, it’s awfully hard to get back in the bottle.
The exponential rise of artificial intelligence has refueled a discussion I entered back in 2022 with an article on LAWS (lethal autonomous weapons systems). The United States has been pursuing its dream of deploying an “automated battlefield” since the Vietnam War. One major AI company, Anthropic, seems to have taken itself out of the running to assist the Department of Defense (still its name, despite Trump’s proclamations to the contrary) in fully automated kill decisions. However, Peter Thiel’s Palantir will undoubtedly be happy to step in to fill the spot. It has, after all, already been helping Israel in its genocide in Gaza. Palantir will likely be ready as well to assist in another realm Anthropic refused to enter: using AI for mass domestic surveillance. After all, this is what its flagship program, Gotham, is for.
It’s All About Hatred of Women
I didn’t grow up in a religious household. My father, though raised in an Orthodox Jewish home, had abandoned most religious practice by the time he and my mother got together. She was a lapsed Episcopalian, so I suppose it’s not entirely weird that I call myself a nice Jewish girl who goes to an Episcopal church. The point is, there was no reason for me to be praying as a six-year-old, but I often did, asking God to let me wake up the next morning as a boy. As second-wave feminists used to say, I didn’t envy the penis. I envied what it could get you: opportunity, freedom, and most of all, respect.
I lived through the movement for women’s liberation, which saved my life. It brought me the right to control my own body; to decide if and when I would have sex; to decide if and when I would have children; to decide if and when—and whom—I would marry. In truth, I never wanted to do that last one, but the vagaries of US tax law made married life much easier than a California domestic partnership. Still, I used to wonder why my gay leaders thought the two things I wanted most in the world were to join the army and get married.
So, it’s not surprising that I’ve used my TomDispatch platform to write about feminist concerns like abortion rights, my own experience of abortion, and staring down misogyny in the aftermath of Trump’s second election victory. Now, of course, his administration is advised by men who want to repeal women’s suffrage and follow up on the Supreme Court’s rollback of Roe v. Wade with white natalist dreams like an end to no-fault divorce and restrictions on birth control.
A Simple Arc?
So much of what I’ve written about over the last 12 years is now at least as bad as it ever was and possibly significantly worse. We’ve lost so much with the rise of Trump. After all these years, it feels like the arc of the moral universe is bending not toward justice, but in the opposite direction, toward inequality and fascism, nationally and globally. And yet…
All over the country, people are indeed fighting back. Minnesotans inspired a nation with their resistance to an occupying ICE army. Local communities are mobilizing to try to keep energy-eating AI data centers and detention camps out. (Just recently, ordinary people in Florida forced the closure of the notorious Alligator Alcatraz detention center.) Millions have turned out for No Kings demonstrations. And maybe it was fear of a growing backlash that kept the Supreme Court from allowing Louisiana to outlaw the abortion medication Mifepristone. I’ve long thought that liberation is sort of like an imprisoned genie: Once it escapes, it’s awfully hard to get back in the bottle.
So, about that arc of the moral universe: Maybe it’s not a single curve but something more like a river winding its way toward a great ocean. Or maybe it’s like a sine wave on a slant. It has both peaks and valleys, and we’re definitely sitting in one of those valleys right now. Nonetheless, despite Donald Trump and all the other horrors of this century, I still believe that the essential human trajectory is upwards. We continue to widen the circle of beings that matter. We continue to become braver, and maybe even a bit wiser.
That’s been my story all these years and, dire as things seem today, I’m sticking to it.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Admin Claims of Cuban Plans for Drone Attacks Denounced as 'Ludicrous Pretext' for War
"Like any country, Cuba has the right to defend itself against external aggression," said the Cuban embassy. "It is called self-defense, and it is protected by International Law and the UN Charter."
May 17, 2026
Cuban officials said the Trump administration is making "increasingly implausible accusations" against the country as it pushes to justify, "without any excuse, a military attack against Cuba," after an unnamed White House official told the news outlet Axios that the Cubans have been "discussing plans" to launch drones against the US.
"Cuba is the country under attack," said the Cuban embassy in a statement, months into a ramped-up oil blockade by the US that has left the island's electric grid in a "critical state" and forced frequent rolling blackouts as well as causing a healthcare crisis, with tens of thousands of people waiting for surgeries.
But in Axios' article, the Trump administration official took pains to push the notion that the US, with its nearly $1 trillion-per-year military, could face attacks from the tiny Caribbean nation 90 miles south of Florida because officials there have been preparing defensive capabilities.
Axios reported that, according to classified intelligence it viewed, Cuba has acquired more than 300 drones and has been considering plans to attack the US military base at Guantanamo Bay, various US military vessels, and Key West, Florida.
The country has been acquiring drones from Russia and Iran since 2023 and has sought more aid from Russia in recent months, according to the report. Intelligence intercepts have also shown Cuba is "trying to learn about how Iran has resisted us," the official said, referring to Iran's use of unmanned aircraft, its closure of the Strait of Hormuz, and its attacks on US military outposts in the Middle East in response to the US-Israel war on the country that began in February.
The Cuban embassy further responded with a reminder that "like any country, Cuba has the right to defend itself against external aggression."
"Those from the US who seek the submission and, in fact, the destruction of the Cuban nation through military aggression and war, do not waste a single moment fabricating pretexts, creating and spreading falsehoods, and distorting as extraordinary the logical preparation required to face a potential aggression," said the embassy.
Journalist José Luis Granados Ceja, who is based in Mexico City and covers Latin America for Drop Site News, emphasized that "Cuba has the right to self-defense."
"It would be arguably be wise for Cuba to incorporate a tool that has proven to be an extraordinary effective weapon and a powerful tool of dissuasion as part of its self-defense strategy," said Granados Ceja.
Axios said the classified intelligence "could become a pretext for US military action" that President Donald Trump has expressed an interest in taking numerous times, before acknowledging toward the end of the article that "US officials don't believe Cuba is an imminent threat, or actively planning to attack American interests."
Rather, the intelligence showed that Cuban officials "have been discussing drone warfare plans in case hostilities erupt as relations with the US continue to deteriorate"—suggesting they could use drones in self-defense if attacked by the US.
The reporting carried echoes of Secretary of State Marco Rubio's rationale for attacking Iran in February. He stunned legal experts days after the war began by explaining that the US had decided to wage war on the Middle Eastern country because it feared Iran would retaliate after Israel began attacking it.
"The imminent threat was that we knew that if Iran was attacked, and we believed they would be attacked, that they would immediately come after us," Rubio said.
The claim that Cuba's reported preparations make the island a threat to US security "is a lie—with purpose," said David Adler, co-general coordinator of Progressive International.
"Marco Rubio and his stenographers at Axios are manufacturing consent for the invasion of Cuba," said Adler. "To fall for this flimsy propaganda is to fail the most basic test of civic literacy. And the stakes are millions of Cuban lives off our coast."
Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants, has long sought regime change in the socialist country.
Axios' reporting came days after CIA Director John Ratcliffe traveled to Cuba to pressure officials into complying with US demands, likely including political and economic reforms, heightening fears that the US could be planning a military attack unless the country complies.
White House officials also told CBS News Friday that the Department of Justice is preparing to criminally indict former Cuban President Raúl Castro for shooting down planes that belonged to a US group that had flown into Cuba's airspace in the 1990s. In January, US forces invaded Venezuela and abducted President Nicolás Maduro, bringing him to the US where he was charged with drug trafficking, and pleaded not guilty.
Former Obama administration staffer and Pod Save America co-host Tommy Vietor said Sunday that "lots of signals pointing towards an imminent US regime change operation against Cuba."
"The latest," he said of the Axios article, "is this blatant effort to launder a pretext for war through the media."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Cheap Drones and the Iran War Blowback Threat
You do not have to be a cynic to predict that Trump would relish such mayhem.
Apr 06, 2026
While our intelligence agencies and the Defense Department have long studied possible “domestic blowback scenarios” to our aggressive wars overseas, what happened last month was a troubling, unexplained reality. ABC News reported that the large Barksdale Air Force Base (BAFB) in Louisiana, where B-52 bombers are stationed, “detected multiple unauthorized drones operating in our airspace during the week of March 9th, quoting Capt. Hunter Rininger of the 2nd Bomb Wing. These drone flights continued for nearly a week.
More specifically, according to what ABC News described as a confidential Air Force briefing document dated March 15, 2026, “the drones came in waves and entered and exited the base in a way that may suggest attempts to ‘avoid the operator(s) being located.’ Lights on the drones suggested the operators ‘may be testing security response’ at the base.”
“Between March 9-15, 2026, BAFB Security Forces observed multiple waves of 12-15 drones operating over sensitive areas of the installation, including the flight line, with aircraft displaying non-commercial signal characteristics, long-range control links and resistance to jamming,” the document added.
These flights lasted around four hours each day. The confidential document obtained by ABC News considered these “incursions” to be criminal offenses under federal law, calling them “a significant threat to public safety and national security since they require the flight line to be shut down while also putting manned aircrafts already inflight in the area of risk.”
Well, Mr. Trump, even your MAGA loyalists may be wondering why your “Department of War” did not intercept these drones, bring them down, and learn whose sending them. One would also think, this would be a huge newsworthiness episode for the mainstream mass media. The American people were left with a vague assurance that the Air Force’s investigation was being assisted by the Louisiana State Police.
Since then, there has largely been silence, from the media, from Congress, and from the war-mongering Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, who would be expected to overcome this unauthorized “unmanned aerial system.”
This is the kind of provocative event that generates conspiracy theories.
There is a larger puzzle here, given how much the Pentagon is given by Congress to spend on defense – over 50 percent of the entire federal government’s operating expenditures. Ellen Mitchell, writing in The Hill newspaper on March 7, 2026, gives us an expert’s assessment: “Brett Velicovich, a former Army intelligence special operations soldier who has worked with Ukraine’s drone forces in its defense against Russia, said he and other drone experts have been warning the US to prepare for drone warfare for years.” He added, “Our counter drone systems need work.”
Small Ukraine is ahead of the US in developing low-cost drones and drone interceptors, while the US builds $13 billion aircraft carriers, which in modern missile warfare would become sitting ducks.
The US military is presently experiencing Iran’s response to Trump’s February 28th treacherous attack, in the middle of negotiations no less, of their advanced, inexpensive Shahed drones, which can be assembled in a garage.
Those garages assembling drones could soon be in the US, which now are included in the blowback assessments noted earlier by US intelligence agencies. The more the US Empire blows up people abroad in countries that pose no threat to the US, the more the grieving survivors may be motivated to retaliate. Certainly, if the shoe were on the other foot and some giant military powers were obliterating US civilians and civilian infrastructure, does anyone doubt there would be vengeful retaliation?
Iran has the added grievances of having their elected prime minister overthrown by the CIA in 1953, followed by the US-installed dictator Shah for 25 years. Then, following the Iranian overthrow of the Shah in 1979, the US backed Iraq’s dictator, Saddam Hussein, to invade Iran, causing about 500,000 Iranian fatalities in this multi-year aggression. Since then, the US and Israel have been sabotaging Iran, annihilating its leaders, and imposing crushing economic sanctions on that country (twice the size of Texas) of 93 million people.
Is it a surprise that the militarily surrounded and massively infiltrated by Israeli spies Iranian theocratic regime imposes very harsh measures internally? By comparison, without any external threat, Tyrant Trump has imposed police state measures in our country, illegally seizing and imprisoning innocent people by the thousands, and causing casualties among United States citizens.
It is evident from warnings by specialists that the US is unprepared for ‘lone wolf’ drone attacks, much less more organized drone retaliations.
You do not have to be a cynic to predict that Trump would relish such mayhem, which he would immediately exploit to bolster his failing dictatorial regime and dropping poll numbers. Dictators know exactly how to brutally suppress dissent and consolidate their domination with exaggerated rhetoric to pursue massive violent revenge. Trump, in his lie-filled and violent televised diatribe to the nation on Wednesday, told the Iranian people that “We are going to hit them extremely hard over the next two to three weeks. We’re going to bring them back to the Stone Age, where they belong.” That is the grisly playbook that dictators have launched for generations to cover their own crimes of death and destruction.
The American people had better be alert to this predictable reaction by the dangerous Trump. His more extremist supporters, including some convicted violent criminals who he has pardoned, may not wait and are capable of trying to pull off a “false flag” operation to provoke worse impacts from Trumpian fascism.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Artificial Intelligence in an Age of Human Idiocy and Stupid Wars
Who needs God on its side if you have AI?
Apr 05, 2026
The latest technology can prove decisive in war. Think of the atomic bomb in World War II. Or the stirrup in the Mongol conquest of Europe and the Middle East.
More recently, after the two sides had been deadlocked for decades, Azerbaijan defeated Armenia in 2020 in a matter of days and took over the enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh. Armenia prided itself on its powerful army and fearsome soldiers. They were no match for the drones that Azerbaijan bought with the proceeds from its oil exports.
“Azerbaijan used its drone fleet — purchased from Israel and Turkey — to stalk and destroy Armenia’s weapons systems in Nagorno-Karabakh, shattering its defenses and enabling a swift advance,” reported the Washington Post‘s Robyn Dixon. “Armenia found that air defense systems in Nagorno-Karabakh, many of them older Soviet systems, were impossible to defend against drone attacks, and losses quickly piled up.”
Ukraine has similarly used drone technology to level the battlefield in its war against Russia. The Kremlin has more money, more soldiers, more heavy artillery, even more drones than Ukraine. But the Ukrainians have proven more adept at producing new varieties of drones that can substitute for scarce Patriot missiles in defending against Russia’s daily aerial assault. Ukraine has also used a variety of drones to strike at targets deep in Russian territory. Drones are the slingshot by which little David hopes to bring down the Russian Goliath.
And now the war in Iran.
Perhaps Donald Trump was persuaded—by his generals, by his buddies in Silicon Valley, by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—that American military superiority would make quick work of the Iranian military. In addition to the aircraft carriers, the Stealth bombers, the Tomahawk missiles, and the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System, Trump could also call upon the assistance of Claude and his buddies.
Claude, of course, is the artificial intelligence system developed by the company Anthropic, which had objected to the misuse of its model in the U.S. raid that captured Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro and his wife. Trump retaliated against Anthropic’s caution by ordering the Pentagon to sever its relationship with Claude—only to discover that the AI was already too integrated into U.S. military operations. Not the first conscript ordered to fight against its will, Claude helped the Pentagon identify Iranian targets, prioritize them, and furnish precise coordinates. Going forward, however, the Pentagon will rely instead on Open AI’s ChatGPT.
All of this technological sophistication has not brought Donald Trump the quick victory he so desired. What Trump and company didn’t anticipate—but which any reasonably competent foreign policy professional could have pointed out if DOGE hadn’t cashiered so many of them—was that Iran could rely on much simpler tactics to stymie the combined U.S.-Israeli forces.
History provides plenty of examples of adversaries who successfully defeated U.S. forces despite facing much more technologically advanced weaponry. The Vietnamese endured massive bombing campaigns, Iraqi insurgents relied on IEDs to destroy U.S. infantry forces, and the Taliban outwaited the occupying army. These experiences presumably inspired Donald Trump to promise, as a presidential candidate, not to get involved in any quagmires or expose U.S. troops to such risks again.
All that went out the window when he attacked Iran.
And now, Iran has used its location and the unchangeable facts of geography to their full advantage. It has effectively blocked the Strait of Hormuz, restricted the flow of oil and natural gas to the global market, and driven up the price of petroleum at the pump. It. It has also relied on the utter stupidity of the industrialized world. If global gas-guzzlers had weaned themselves of their addiction to fossil fuels—as they had promised in climate negotiations—the reduced flow of oil would not now be having such a great impact.
To turn the tables, the United States could seize Kharg Island, located in the Persian Gulf about 400 miles north of the Strait of Hormuz. If Iran were to lose the island, the transit point for 90 percent of Iran’s crude oil exports, much of its geographic advantage would disappear. Or would it?
Although it might not represent a huge challenge for the United States to take the island, it’s another matter altogether to hold it. The Iranians could keep up a steady barrage of aerial strikes on occupation forces hunkered down on the exposed island. The continued disruption of Strait traffic—along with the destruction of Iranian energy infrastructure—would not achieve Trump’s current primary goal: the reduction of prices at the pump.
What might seem like a war between two distinct adversaries—Armenia vs. Azerbaijan, Russia vs. Ukraine, United States vs. Iran—often boils down to a very different kind of conflict. The battle on the ground frequently pits old tactics against new tech. Sometimes the gadgets win; sometimes old-school approaches prevail.
Many countries still go to war believing that God is on their side. Just as dangerous are those that believe that they will win because technology is on their side.
Taking Humans out of the Loop
The era of the “intelligent kill web” has arrived.
The military planner sits like a venomous spider at the center of a web of AI applications that calculate targets, probabilities, and complex interactions faster than any human can comprehend. Linked to actual weapons, these AI models conduct war with ever increasing efficiency and lethality. The execution of kill chains—which connect the identification of a target with its destruction—has been compressed to mere seconds. In a targeting exercise conducted by the U.S. Air Force in January, the AI system was over 100 times faster than its human counterpart; it also achieved a “tactical viability” rate of 97 percent compared to the human’s 48 percent.
Such figures are no consolation to the families of the victims of the U.S. bombing of a primary school in Iran on February 28 that killed nearly 200 people, mostly little girls. The targeting of the U.S. aerial campaign was orchestrated by Maven, the AI platform designed by Palantir. But don’t blame the robots. As Kevin Baker points out in The Guardian, it’s people who are responsible for catastrophes like this: the ones who failed to update the database of targets, who designed Maven, and who put these systems at the center of their battle plans.
Analysts worry that countries like the United States are on the verge of removing people from the kill web because the human mind just slows things down and the smallest advantage can prove critical in determining the outcome of a battle.
That is certainly a concern. Equally terrifying, as the war in Iran is proving, is to keep a human being like Secretary of War Pete Hegseth at the center of the kill web. In other words, the only thing worse than an intelligent kill web is a stupid kill web.
Or, to put it more dismally, any human at the center of the kill web will be as stupid as Pete Hegseth because that’s just a function of the degree of magnitude that currently separates cyberspace and meatspace.
Will AI, without human guidance, escalate a war to the nuclear threshold and beyond? This is not a consoling thought, but at this point, frankly, the humans that run operations in the Trump administration are not morally distinguishable from killer robots.
Cyberoperations
To assassinate Iran’s top leader Ayatollah Khamenei, Israeli cyber-operatives hacked into the traffic cameras in Tehran. According to a Financial Times report:
Israel gained access to the cameras years ago, and found that one particular camera was angled in such a way that it showed where members of Khamenei’s security team parked their cars. Through the cameras, Israeli intelligence built files on the guards’ addresses, work schedules, and who they were assigned to protect. On the day of the attack, Israel and the US also disrupted cellular service on Tehran’s Pasteur Street, where Khamenei was assassinated, so those trying to reach the bodyguards and deliver possible warnings would receive busy signals.
Some years ago, the United States and Israel collaborated on smuggling the Stuxnet worm into Iran’s nuclear operations, which prompted the centrifuges that enrich uranium to spin out of control and destroy themselves. It was only a temporary setback for Iran. For the world, however, the consequences have been irreversible, given that this first large-scale cyberattack kicked off a digital arms race.
During this current war, Iran has conducted cyberoperations of its own, such as targeting a medical devices company and hacking into FBI Director Kash Patel’s email. However, Iran is at a serious disadvantage. The United States and Israel have been pouring money into such technologies for years.
So, too, has the Kremlin. Russian cyberops are especially widespread. U.S. media has focused on Russian efforts to swing U.S. elections, but Russia has focused most of its attention on Europe. There it has engaged in conventional sabotage, such as hiring single-use operatives to plant explosives, set fires, and generally cause havoc. The even more destabilizing operations, however, are hidden from view because they take place in cyberspace.
Beginning in September 2024, for instance, a new Russian group nicknamed Laundry Bear began to hack into the accounts of Dutch police officials and conduct cyber-espionage against high-tech companies. The Baltic countries have been dealing for years with Russian cyber operations that have jammed GPS navigation near airports, disrupted underwater cables, and hacked into energy systems. In one recent example, anonymous social media accounts started to call for the secession of a majority-Russian region around the Estonian city of Narva. The historical parallels are unnerving. Similar calls for secession, also stage-managed by Moscow, precipitated the Crimean and Donbas crises in 2014 that led to Russian intervention and war in Ukraine.
The Genie and the Bottle
Scientists warn against the futility of trying to stop scientific advances. The nuclear genie, despite some intermittent efforts at imposing controls, has not been stuffed back into the bottle, not even halfway. A similar debate is taking place today around AI, between techno-optimists and techno-pessimists.
One way around this debate has been to furnish AI with hard-and-fast constraints, something like the laws that Isaac Asimov imagined for his fictional robots. Anthropic has drafted a “constitution” for Claude that forbids it from, among other things, creating “cyberweapons or malicious code that could cause significant damage if deployed” or engaging “in an attempt to kill or disempower the vast majority of humanity or the human species as a whole.”
That seems reasonable. But when Donald Trump took office in 2025, he eliminated all efforts to apply such rules across the industry. Rules, regulations, laws—these are all impediments to “making America great again” or, more accurately, to preventing Trump from assuming autocratic control. So, Claude and its constitution are now out of the loop, much as Trump has taken the U.S. constitution out of the loop.
In any case, talk of techno-utopias and techno-apocalypses is really just a matter of projection. AI reflects the best and worst of humanity. “Garbage in, garbage out,” goes the slogan of Silicon Valley. Instead of just focusing on treating the end product, then, it would be better to address the waste farther upstream, nearer to the source. That means more funds for education, not just for science and technology but the ethics involved in translating discoveries into products.
Ah, but wait: the Trump administration is also cutting the funding to research and education. The secretary of health and human services is a fount of junk science. The executive branch is governed by the morality of Mordor.
It is a horrifying aspect of today’s politics in the United States that AI is an improvement on all that. Intelligence of whatever variety trumps stupidity almost every time, though not so much in U.S. elections.
Speaking of elections, now that Claude has been kicked out of the Pentagon, maybe it should run for president.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Sons Accused of Trying to Profit Off Father’s Iran War With Drone Investment
"The most corrupt family ever is profiting from all of the death and destruction Trump is responsible for," said one critic.
Mar 09, 2026
There's no end in sight to President Donald Trump's unprovoked and unconstitutional war with Iran, and two of the president's children appear ready to cash in.
The Wall Street Journal reported on Monday that Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump are investing in a Florida-based drone company called Powerus that "is vying to meet fresh demand from the Pentagon" for drones that started when the Trump administration banned foreign-made drones and drone components from the US in December.
The company will soon be going public by merging with Aureus Greenway Holdings, a publicly traded golf-course holding company that is also backed by the Trumps, and is expected to make its debut on the Nasdaq stock exchange in the coming months.
"Investors in the deal include one of the Trumps’ investment vehicles, American Ventures," reported the Journal, "and Unusual Machines, a drone components company where Donald Trump Jr. is a shareholder and advisory board member... Powerus is also a customer of Unusual Machines."
In an interview with the Journal, Powerus CEO Andrew Fox predicted robust demand for his company's products, commenting that the drone market "is certainly going to grow faster than, say, golf courses are."
Eric Trump confirmed and defended his investment in the drone firm, replying to the Journal in a social media post that "I happen to believe drones will be a much better investment than companies that still print newspapers."
Many critics, however, accused the two eldest Trump sons of seeking to profit off a war started by their own father. As the New York Times reported on Saturday, drones have become "a defining feature" of the Iran war, as they have been used by both sides in the conflict to launch explosives at targets at a fraction of what traditional missile barrages would cost.
"Rushing to cash in on Daddy's failed war before they've even gotten Barron and Kai to enlist," wrote journalist Marcy Wheeler. "Truly deplorable behavior, but what we expect from these corrupt reprobates."
University of Virginia political scientist Larry Sabato argued that the Trump sons' efforts to rake in cash from the war shouldn't be surprising.
"Always a money-making angle for the Trump family," Sabato wrote. "Why should the War with Iran be any different?"
Sabato's words were echoed by fellow political scientist Norman Ornstein, who observed "it’s always about the grift" when it comes to the Trump family.
Melanie D'Arrigo, executive director of the Campaign for New York Health, argued that the Trump sons' drone investment should cast a pall across the entire Iran war venture.
"Reminder as Trump starts wars, sells weapons and bombs everyone," D'Arrigo wrote. "The Trump family has a military drone company with military contracts, currently vying to meet Pentagon demand after the Trump administration recently banned new Chinese drones. The most corrupt family ever is profiting from all of the death and destruction Trump is responsible for."
In 2025, at least two companies backed by Trump Jr. received contracts collectively worth hundreds of millions of dollars from the US Department of Defense.
Kedric Payne, general counsel at the Campaign Legal Center, said in an interview with the Financial Times last year that the government deals scored by Trump Jr.-backed companies look ethically dubious even if the president’s son didn’t directly use his influence to procure them.
“Presidents are expected to avoid even the appearance that they are using their office to financially benefit themselves or their family,” he said. “While we do not know for certain if, or how, the president may have influenced this loan, it falls under the cloud of conflicts of interest we have seen throughout this administration.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Hegseth Demands Anthropic Let Military Use AI However It Wants—Even for Autonomous Killer Drones and Spying On Americans
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said the company that owns the AI assistant Claude would be punished unless it drops all ethical guidelines.
Feb 25, 2026
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has threatened to punish the artificial intelligence company Anthropic if it doesn't let the Pentagon use its technology however it wants—apparently even to create autonomous killer drones or conduct surveillance of Americans.
Anthropic's powerful AI model, Claude, is currently the only one permitted to handle classified military data, and the company was awarded a $200 million contract last year to develop AI capabilities for the Department of Defense to use alongside other AI firms.
However, the company's usage policy prohibits its use for mass surveillance and for the development of autonomous weapons—such as drones that attack targets without a human operator.
These limitations have infuriated the Defense Department leadership. On Tuesday, Hegseth called Anthropic's CEO, Dario Amodei, to a meeting at the Pentagon, where he demanded "unfettered" access to Claude without any guardrails.
This goal was outlined last month in the department's "AI Strategy" memo, which called for the US to adopt an "AI-first warfighting force" and for companies to allow their technology to be deployed for "any lawful use," free from ethical safeguards.
According to a senior defense official who spoke to Axios, Hegseth issued an ultimatum to Amodei on Tuesday: If he does not grant the Pentagon unrestricted use of Anthropic's technology by 5:01 pm on Friday, the department would take measures to coerce the company.
It would either declare Anthropic a "supply chain risk," effectively blacklisting it for military use and ending its contract, or it would invoke the Defense Production Act, which would force the company to tailor the product to the military's needs.
While it would not be an unusual step for the Pentagon to cut ties with Anthropic, threats to declare it a supply chain risk have been described as extraordinary.
Jessica Tillipman, the associate dean for government procurement law studies at George Washington University, who specializes in AI governance, wrote on social media that the threat of "declaring Anthropic a supply chain risk is deeply problematic," as it's "generally something we reserve for products that create security risks, and using it in this way undermines its purpose."
As Elizabeth Nolan Brown wrote on Wednesday for Reason, it "would mean anyone who wants to work with the US military in any capacity must sever ties with the AI company," which could deal a major blow to the business.
Last month, Amodei published an essay about how "AI-enabled autocracies" could use the technology to surveil and repress their citizens and wage war on less developed countries:
A swarm of millions or billions of fully automated armed drones, locally controlled by powerful AI and strategically coordinated across the world by an even more powerful AI, could be an unbeatable army, capable of both defeating any military in the world and suppressing dissent within a country by following around every citizen...
A powerful AI looking across billions of conversations from millions of people could gauge public sentiment, detect pockets of disloyalty forming, and stamp them out before they grow. This could lead to the imposition of a true panopticon on a scale that we don’t see today.
Amodei reportedly resisted Hegseth's demands to lift restrictions at Tuesday's meeting, refusing to budge on the two key issues of mass surveillance and autonomous weapons. Following reports of the meeting, the company has said it still wants to work with the government while also ensuring its models are used in line with what they could “reliably and responsibly do.”
A senior Pentagon spokesperson said the military must be free to use the technology how it sees fit. According to the Associated Press, the official argued that "the Pentagon has only issued lawful orders and stressed that using Anthropic’s tools legally would be the military’s responsibility."
The question of whether the Pentagon has issued only "lawful" orders is in dispute—in fact, the Pentagon is fighting to cut the retirement pay of Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), a retired Navy captain, after he made a video in November reminding active duty troops that they have a duty not to obey illegal orders.
That video was made in response to reports that Hegseth had given orders to bomb the survivors of one of the administration's boat strikes in the Caribbean—an act described as a potential "war crime" amid a broader campaign that legal experts have said is illegal under both US and international law.
The military also reportedly used Claude as part of another legally questionable act last month: the operation to kidnap Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, which involved bombing across Caracas and killed at least 83 people. It is not clear how the model was used during the attack.
While the Pentagon has not specified which restricted activities it wishes to pursue using Anthropic's technology, Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) said that with his demands, Hegseth was essentially telling the company, "Let us use your AI for mass surveillance, or we’ll pull your contract."
Under President Donald Trump, Gallego added, “corporations are punished for refusing to spy on American citizens.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
The Algorithms of Collapse
Capitalism has elected AI as the next tool to distribute and dismantle labor, create a new power structure in the world, and repress social and political movements.
Jan 25, 2026
AI is being diffused throughout society under chatbots, models, and agents which are explicitly reactionary and create communicative and physical walls to defend the status quo.
Capitalism has elected AI as the next tool to distribute and dismantle labor, create a new power structure in the world, and repress social and political movements. Unchecked, it will bring us right up to a collapse brought on by war and climate chaos.
Forget about the Terminator stories of Artificial General Intelligence and Artificial Superintelligence. These are closer to sci-fi than to reality. We don’t need to speculate about things that don’t exist in the AI realm. What we do need to look at are the things that already exist and are being deployed massively.
The main objective of AI is the automation of historical automation itself. AI holds an irresistible promise for capitalist elites: to be able to automatically direct most of the instructions that guide human activity, reducing the power of social classes other than the owners of the algorithms. Complete economic and social planning for the rich. In particular, they want to reduce the power that the working class has exercised in the past, the power to push toward the future and gain the political, social, and economic transformations that reduce or eliminate inequality and injustice.
Data centers today are nightmare factories.
A key and complementary objective of AI is to create an overwhelming monopoly over knowledge, codified via Large Language Models, Computer Vision, Convolutional Neural Networks, and other Machine “Learning” models. This monopoly is being designed to utterly transform social relations and install a reactionary hegemony that widely surpasses neoliberal capitalism and feeds a far-right dystopia.
The third essential objective has to do with the control of violence and political repression. For that effect, AI provides different tools to be used in declared and now mostly-undeclared states of war. During the Gaza genocide, human targets were chosen with AI, its models were used to determine the biggest impacts for sequences of targets in order to achieve maximum infrastructure and human suffering consequences. Obviously, AI is used to maximize efficiency in all war logistics, calculating payloads, schedules, and material distribution. In Ukraine, most of the war is being conducted with drones, many of them autonomous and with self-selecting target capabilities powered by AI. Automated killing machines that don’t question orders or targets are not only available, but already deployed in different war fronts. On the other hand, automated political repression and persecution in the streets and protests is growing, though it is currently at the data gathering and training phase. In the USA, Immigration and Customs Enforcement is deploying different apps developed by companies like Palantir to maximize social disruption and to capture the most vulnerable people in the country.
There is huge pressure to prevent any meaningful regulation of AI, in particular for AI used by police and the military. Surveillance with facial (FRT) and body recognition is used outdoors to map out movements and participants in protests and actions. Mapping of movement connections and alliances can be done via online pattern recognition, as well as out in the streets. Automatic protest repression combined with purposeful miscommunication and disinformation might make the usual protests simply nonviable.
And of course, AI can is being used for hacking by private companies and states. Considering the hackable systems now in place throughout society and the economy—banking systems, social security, electric and transport systems, aviation and navigation systems, pension management, surveillance apparatus, healthcare systems and, of course, all the internet and the data in public and private servers—massively disruptive events at large or small scale are inevitable. Many political and social movements will be targeted. This can mean accounts erased, financial assets blockaded, and growing personal political repression via the suppression of communication capacities. This can also happen at a much bigger scale, targeting cities, countries or entire regions.
For the most important investments and political efforts, AI is being introduced as a labor replacement tool, a cultural hegemony monopoly creator, a military and surveillance weapon. Most of this is being done with people actively engaging and inviting the models into their everyday life (even more than it already was). The resistance to large data center projects is important and inspiring, but the overwhelming threat of AI goes well beyond its emissions, water consumption, and land occupation (although they plan on multiplying by many factors the current numbers, especially in Europe). Data centers today are nightmare factories.
So far, AI hasn’t been able to deliver on a key aspect: successfully automated processes that allow for the mass firing of people, substituted by effective algorithms. This is clear: 95% of all investment made by companies in AI has led to no profit, which is making capitalists nervous. But it hasn’t in any meaningful way stopped its spread.
When we say AI, we mean Machine Learning, Robotics, and Expert Systems. Currently AI is mostly a process of recognition, classification, and very high probability calculation, based on massive amounts of data with a good human interface. The interface is the most important trick for the general public. The public debate surrounding this issue is deeply anti-historical and anti-materialist, almost entirely it is white noise.
AI is not replicating or reproducing human intelligence. It is trying to encode human activities into repeatable procedures that can create reproducible algorithms. As it is not imitating our biological intelligence, it is trying to imitate what it can more or less “comprehend” about the previously referred algorithms—it is copying labor and social relations, their mechanisms and their predictable outcomes. Like other abstractions that rule our lives, such as money, algorithms produce real outcomes. AI ushers an irresistible promise for capitalist elites: to be able to automatically direct most of the instructions that guide human activity, reducing the power of social relations, in particular the power of the working class to impose political, social, and economic transformations that reduce inequality and injustice.
AI’s neural networks don’t mimic the human brain at all, but instead automate the “labor of perception,” classifying and interpreting written, numeric, and visual data and establishing associations. This creates a synthesis of knowledge, of the collective form of knowledge that comes from social cooperation. As explained before, another of its objectives has been to establish a monopoly over knowledge, scrapped from every website, database, online encyclopedia, and bite it is fed. It is then no wonder that Elon Musk and the far-right are going after Wikipedia.
These are some of the reasons why attempting to hard-code ethical rules or constraints into these models will not work, as they will not change the underlying political and economic functions of the data it is trained under and the algorithms generated and fabricated. Of course we understand that language itself is an algorithm, all the data as well and, of course, the internet as well. But with AI, we’re talking about a new level of control. The fundamental abstract purposes of AI as it exists now are the extension of quantification, control, and exploitation. The Labor Theory of Automation posits that AI is the result of a set of technological advancements that have abstracted automation to the point where it can automate itself. As we now have the technical ability to make such machines and capitalism has the economic incentive to massively deploy them, they want to use it to reorganize the division of labor even further in their favor. It is the apex of automation: Automation of Automation.
Facing such seemingly insurmountable odds, social and ruptural movements cannot but ask what to do about AI. There are basically two options: Drop out of the grid or acquire tech capabilities that allow us to resist the onslaught of these algorithms of collapse.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Extrajudicial Killings From Barack Obama to Donald Trump
If Obama could kill a 16-year-old American boy without accountability, why wouldn’t Trump believe he has the same power to snuff out the lives of civilians with no due process?
Dec 16, 2025
In May 2013, as President Barack Obama delivered a major foreign-policy speech in Washington, I managed to slip inside. As he was winding up, I stood and interrupted, condemning his use of lethal drone strikes in Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia.
“How can you, a constitutional lawyer, authorize the extrajudicial killing of people—including a 16-year-old American boy in Yemen, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki—without charge, without trial, without even an explanation?”
As security dragged me out, Obama responded, “The voice of that woman is worth paying attention to.” Perhaps my questions touched a chord in his conscience, but the drone attacks did not stop.
Just before that incident, I had returned from Yemen, where a small delegation of us met with Abdulrahman’s grandfather, Nasser al-Awlaki—a dignified man with a PhD from an American university, someone who genuinely believed in the values this country claims to represent. He looked at us, grief etched into his face, and asked, “How can a nation that speaks of law and justice kill an American child without apology, without even a justification?”
Under Obama, drone strikes killed thousands of people. Entire communities lived under the constant terror of buzzing drones—never knowing whether a flash in the sky meant death for them, their children, or the neighbors who ran to help.
We heard these horrors firsthand in 2012, when CODEPINK traveled to Pakistan to meet with victims’ families. A tribal leader from Waziristan described attending a peaceful jirga—a gathering of elders—when a US missile obliterated the meeting. Dozens were instantly killed. As survivors rushed to help the wounded, a second missile struck.
Forty-two people died, including elders and local officials. No one in Washington was held accountable. Not one person.
Faced with mounting outrage, Obama eventually scaled back the drone program—not because the killings were illegal, immoral, or strategically disastrous, but because the political cost was rising. The truth is that Obama’s drone war normalized the idea that the United States can kill whoever it wants, wherever it wants, without due process or oversight.
That normalization is the bridge to where we are today.
The Trump administration is now carrying out extrajudicial assassinations at sea, including “double taps.” With the latest December 15 strikes, 95 people have been blown to bits in the bombing of 25 boats. Meanwhile, the administration is refusing to release the memo that supposedly explains the legal basis for these killings or to release the video showing the September bombing that killed two shipwrecked sailors who survived an initial strike.
But let’s be clear: the actions of the Trump administration are not an aberration—they are the logical sequel to Obama’s drone killings. If Obama could kill a 16-year-old American boy without accountability, why wouldn’t Trump believe he has the same power to snuff out the lives of civilians with no due process?
One of the victims of Trump’s maritime strikes was Alejandro Carranza Medina, a Colombian fisherman killed on September 15 when a US missile tore apart his vessel. His family has filed a complaint with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. The family says he was working—fishing, not fighting—when the US government ended his life.
And even in cases where drugs are on board, let’s say the obvious: Smuggling narcotics does not turn the open sea into a battlefield, and it does not strip civilians of their right to due process simply because the Trump administration says so. The US cannot declare people “enemy fighters” to disguise what are, in reality, unlawful killings.
Civil liberties groups are suing the government to secure the release of the Office of Legal Counsel opinion and other documents related to these strikes on civilian boats in international waters. The public deserves to see this information. The American people also deserve to see the full video of the September “double tap” that killed two survivors desperately clinging to their overturned boat, as a bipartisan group of lawmakers is demanding. We deserve transparency, accountability, and answers—the same things we demanded under Obama and never received.
For more than twenty years, human rights advocates have warned that unchecked drone warfare would shred the boundaries between war and peace, between combatants and civilians, between military force and basic law enforcement.
Trump’s maritime killings are the predictable collapse of a system the Obama administration cemented into place: killing people far from any battlefield, without legal authority, without congressional approval, and without the slightest regard for human rights.
Once an administration insists that due process in the use of lethal force is optional, every future president inherits a blank check for murder.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Yet Another Trump Jr.-Backed Company Receives Massive Pentagon Deal
One legal expert said the contract "falls under the cloud of conflicts of interest we have seen throughout this administration."
Dec 04, 2025
For the second time this year, a little-known company backed by Donald Trump Jr. has scored a major contract with the US Department of Defense.
The Financial Times reported on Wednesday that Vulcan Elements—a tiny startup of 30 employees that specializes in producing rare-earth magnets used in drones, radars, and other pieces of military equipment—has scored a $620 million loan from the Pentagon as part of "a $1.4 billion deal to increase the supply of magnets for industries alongside partner ReElement Technologies."
Vulcan has received funding from 1789 Capital, a venture capital firm founded by pro-Trump donors in 2023 that brought Trump Jr. in as a partner last year. According to the Financial Times' analysis, "at least four of 1789’s portfolio companies have won contracts from the Trump administration this year, amounting to more than $735 million."
Revelations about the Vulcan Elements contract come just weeks after the Florida-based drone startup Unusual Machines, in which Trump Jr. has held a $4 million stake, received a contract from the US Army to manufacture 3,500 drone motors. Additionally, reported the Financial Times, the Army indicated that it planned "to order an additional 20,000 components" from the Trump Jr.-backed firm next year.
As Popular Information reported earlier this year, Unusual Machines first brought Trump Jr. on as an adviser just weeks after his father won the 2024 presidential election, even though he had "no notable experience with drones or military contracting."
A Popular Information report published Thursday noted that "both Vulcan CEO John Maslin and Unusual Machines CEO Allan Evans said that Trump Jr. played no role in securing the government contracts," although the report flagged statements by Trump Jr. made earlier this year about helping to screen candidates for key positions in the Pentagon who would be in position to reward companies he's backing without him having to make a direct appeal.
Kedric Payne, general counsel at the Campaign Legal Center, told the Financial Times that that the government deals scored by Trump Jr.-backed companies look ethically dubious even if the president's son didn't directly use his influence to procure them.
“Presidents are expected to avoid even the appearance that they are using their office to financially benefit themselves or their family,” he said. “While we do not know for certain if, or how, the president may have influenced this loan, it falls under the cloud of conflicts of interest we have seen throughout this administration.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy