US To Build Base On Gaza Border – Thousands Troops To Support Ceasefire

This story is developing…

The Hebrew news outlet YNET is reporting the United States will spend $500 million to establish a base on the Gaza border in order to ensure implementation of the Gaza peace deal negotiated by The White House. The location is reported to host ‘thousands’ of American troops.

In related news, YNET is reporting Hamas is regaining control over the Gaza population as residents move to camps in Gaza due to the inability of residents to live amongst the rubble.

The next stage of the Trump plan envisions a further IDF withdrawal beyond the yellow line, creation of a transitional governing authority, deployment of a multinational force to replace Israeli troops, Hamas’s disarmament, and the start of reconstruction. But no timelines or enforcement mechanisms have been agreed upon. Hamas refuses to disarm, Israel opposes any Palestinian Authority involvement, and uncertainty persists over the multinational force.

“We’re still working out ideas,” Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi said this month at a security conference in Manama. “Everybody wants this conflict over, all of us want the same endgame here. Question is, how do we make it work?”

Keep reading

US Army Prepares Million Drone Acquisition To Secure Domain Dominance On Modern Battlefield

Nearly four months after U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced sweeping reforms aimed at achieving “drone domain dominance” by 2027, including a Pentagon-wide procurement overhaul led by the DOGEReuters reports that the U.S. Army is preparing to acquire at least one million drones over the next few years, marking one of the largest drone procurement cycles in the military service’s history. 

Learning from the modern battlefield in Ukraine, the Army plans a massive ramp-up in drones: purchasing at least a million drones over the next 2-3 years, with potential purchases of half a million or more per year thereafter.

This is a significant jump from today’s 50,000 drones per year procurement cycle, and comes as Russia and China have ramped up production of their own

U.S. Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll told Reuters that this new drone acquisition plan is a “big lift. But it is a lift we’re very capable of doing.” 

Here’s more from the report:

He spoke by phone during a visit to Picatinny Arsenal, where he described learning about experimentation with “net rounds,” defenses that capture a drone in nets, as well as new explosives and electromagnetic tools synched into weapon systems.

Driscoll and Picatinny’s top commander, Major General John Reim, spoke to Reuters about how the United States was taking lessons from Russia’s war in Ukraine, which has been characterized by drone deployments on an unprecedented scale.

Tiny, inexpensive drones have proven to be one of the most potent weapons in the Russia-Ukraine war, where conventional warplanes are relatively rare because of a dense concentration of anti-aircraft systems near front lines.

Ukraine and Russia each produce roughly 4 million drones a year, but China is probably able to produce more than double that number, Driscoll said.

Driscoll said his priority is getting the United States into a position where it can produce enough drones for any future war, stimulating domestic production of everything from brushless motors and sensors to batteries and circuit boards.

. . . 

We expect to purchase at least a million drones within the next two to three years,” Driscoll said.

President Trump’s June executive order to “unleash American drone dominance” calls for scaling up domestic production. However, the challenge lies in the fact that supply chains for critical components, such as brushless motors, sensors, batteries, and chips, remain concentrated in China and other Southeast Asian countries.

Drones are the future of warfare and America will come from behind to lead the way,” Sequoia partner Shaun Maguire stated over the summer on X. 

Keep reading

Dutch court upholds arms exports to Israel despite acknowledging ‘grave risk’ of genocide

A Dutch appeals court on 6 November confirmed the dismissal of a case filed by pro-Palestinian organizations demanding that the Netherlands end arms exports to Israel and cease trade with Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories.

In its written judgment, the court said it was not within the judiciary’s authority to dictate such measures, stating that the decision lies with the government.

The plaintiffs argued that as a signatory to the 1948 Genocide Convention, the Dutch state is obliged to take all available steps to prevent genocide, citing Israel’s ongoing mass killing of civilians in Gaza. 

The court agreed that the Netherlands holds that legal obligation and acknowledged “a grave risk” that Israel is committing genocide.

However, the judges maintained that the government already evaluates the risk of human rights abuses before approving military exports and noted that some applications have been denied.

The court also upheld an earlier ruling from December last year that sided with the Dutch state, which claimed it had taken sufficient precautions and halted certain shipments.

The pro-Palestine groups had alleged that Dutch companies supplied Israel with radar systems, F-16 components, warship equipment, police dogs, surveillance cameras, and software. 

The government countered that it has stopped most arms exports to Israel and now only authorizes deliveries of parts used in defensive systems such as the Iron Dome.

Israel has rejected all accusations of genocide, despite a UN inquiry officially announcing it in mid-September, insisting its Gaza campaign targets Hamas.

The appeals court concluded that the pro-Palestine organizations failed to demonstrate that the state systematically neglects its obligations when assessing export risks and therefore could not justify a blanket ban on arms or dual-use items.

Despite their public condemnations of Israel’s genocide of Palestinians in Gaza, European nations remain the largest buyers of Israeli-made weapons, purchasing over $8 billion worth last year, according to Bloomberg

Demand is projected to grow further as NATO members prepare to raise defense spending to five percent of GDP by 2035.

The move is heavily dependent on Israel’s deeply integrated defense industries, including Elbit Systems, Rafael, and Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI).

Keep reading

US To Establish Military Base In Syria’s Damascus

The US is planning to establish a military base in Damascus, Syria, Reuters has reported, as the Trump administration continues to strongly back the new Syrian government that’s led by former al-Qaeda leader Ahmed al-Sharaa.

The report said that the US will establish a military presence at an airbase on the outskirts of the Syrian capital for the purpose of enabling a security pact that Washington is attempting to broker between Israel and Syria.

The idea would be for the US military to monitor a potential deal that would include the demilitarization of areas to the south of Damascus. Officials compared it to the US monitoring of the ceasefire deal in Lebanon, which Israel has constantly violated, and the ceasefire deal in Gaza, which Israel has also been in breach of.

A Syrian Foreign Ministry official later told Syria’s state news agency SANA that the Reuters report was “untrue” but did not specifically deny that the US would establish a military presence in Damascus.

“The current stage marks a transformation in the US position towards direct engagement with the Syrian central government in Damascus, and towards supporting the country’s unity while rejecting any calls for partition,” the official said.

A Syrian defense official told Reuters that the US had flown to the base in military C-130 transport aircraft to ensure the runway was usable, and a security guard at one of the base’s entrances said that American aircraft were landing there as part of “tests”.

Previous reports have said that the Trump administration may sign an agreement with the new Syrian government to formalize its military presence in Syria.

The US has been closing bases in northeast Syria but is expected to maintain its presence at the al-Tanf Garrison in the south, which is situated where the borders of Syria, Iraq, and Jordan converge.

Keep reading

Who Would Jesus Bomb? The Gospel According to the Military-Industrial Complex

Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.”—Thomas Jefferson

For a man supposedly intent on winning a Nobel Peace Prize, Donald Trump spends an extraordinary amount of time waging war, threatening to wage war, and fantasizing about waging war.

Notwithstanding his dubious claims about having ended “seven un-endable wars,” Trump has continued to squander the American people’s resources and moral standing by feeding the military-industrial complex’s insatiable appetite for war—preemptively bombing nuclear facilities in Iran, blowing up fishing boats in the Caribbean, and flexing military muscle at every opportunity.

Even the Trump administration’s version of “peace through strength” is filtered through a prism of violence, intimidation and strongman tactics.

It is the gospel of power, not peace—a perversion of both Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount and the U.S. Constitution.

Thus we find ourselves at this peculiar crossroads: a president hailed by his followers as an “imperfect vessel” chosen by God to save the church and restore Christianity—while they turn a blind eye to his record of adultery, deceit, greed, cruelty, and an almost religious devotion to vengeance and violence.

If anything captures Trump’s worldview, it is the AI-generated video he shared on social media: a grotesque fantasy of himself wearing a golden crown, flying a military fighter jet, and bombing a crowd of protesters with brown liquid feces.

This is the man who claims to be “saving God”?

Dismissed by his devoted base as harmless humor—a cheeky response to the millions nationwide who took part in the “No Kings” protests on Oct. 18—Trump’s crude fantasy of assaulting critics with fecal bombs nevertheless begs the question: Who would Jesus bomb?

That question, of course, is meant less literally than morally.

To answer it, we must first understand who Jesus Christ was—the revered preacher, teacher, radical, prophet and son of God—born into a police state not unlike the growing menace of America’s own police state.

When he came of age, Jesus had powerful, profound things to say, about justice, power and how we are to relate to one another. Blessed are the merciful,” “Blessed are the peacemakers,” “Love your enemies.

A revolutionary in both spirit and action, Jesus not only died challenging the police state of his day—the Roman Empire—but left behind a blueprint for resisting tyranny that has guided countless reformers and freedom fighters ever since.

Far from the sanitized, domesticated figure presented in modern churches, Jesus was a radical nonconformist who challenged authority at every turn. He spoke truth to power, defied political and religious hierarchies, and exposed the hypocrisy of empire.

Keep reading

Military Personnel on Social Media Call for Soldiers to Disobey Orders – A Violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice

Numerous videos have surfaced on social media depicting individuals claiming to be active-duty military personnel, in uniform, instructing troops to disobey President Trump’s orders.

Some of these videos are likely fake, created by individuals engaging in stolen valor, pretending to be active-duty service members or veterans. However, others appear genuine.

This conduct seems to violate the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), which has long prohibited U.S. servicemen and women from making political statements or media appearances in uniform.

These posts not only violate that prohibition but could also be interpreted as insurrection or incitement.

Social media companies have explicit rules against “calls to action,” which are not protected under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Therefore, public calls to disobey lawful orders should be prohibited under both military and civilian law.

Yet because these posts target President Trump, social media platforms appear to ignore their own standards, while liberals applaud the so-called bravery of those who swore an oath and are now calling on others to break it.

One such video on YouTube, titled “Army Captain TELLS Troops to DISOBEY PRESIDENT’S ORDERS?!”, claims to show Army captain Dylan Blaha urging service members to defy orders if deployed under President Trump and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth.

The description reads, “An Army Captain is going viral after telling service members to disobey orders if deployed under Trump and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth.

He calls their actions ‘authoritarian’ and ‘fascism,’ warning troops about unlawful orders and invoking the Posse Comitatus Act.”

Another video titled “Army Drill Sgt Calls Out Pete Hegseth?! ‘Karma’s Coming…’” features Staff Sgt. Corina Martinez, who went viral after posting a TikTok about “karma” and respect in leadership.

The description explains, “An Army Drill Sergeant, Staff Sgt. Corina Martinez, has gone viral after posting a TikTok about ‘karma’ and respect in leadership.

Now she’s being accused of taking shots at Secretary of War Pete Hegseth after his hardline Quantico speech.”

Keep reading

DARPA is Exploring Physics’ Strangest New Frontier to Develop the Next Generation of Defense Technology

In an effort to reshape the foundations of military computing and electronics, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is exploring one of the newest and strangest frontiers in physicsaltermagnetism.

Recently, the agency’s Defense Sciences Office (DSO) issued a Request for Information (RFI) titled “Altermagnetism for Devices,” inviting researchers to help chart a course toward practical electronic and spintronic technologies that could harness this exotic magnetic behavior

Altermagnetism sounds like something pulled from science fiction. It combines properties of two long-known types of magnetism—ferromagnetism (the kind that drives refrigerator magnets) and antiferromagnetism (found in many metals but invisible to the naked eye). 

However, its true intrigue lies in what DARPA calls its “non-relativistic spin splitting,” a phenomenon that allows materials to act magnetically without producing any net magnetic field.

In practical terms, altermagnetic materials could enable circuits that manipulate the quantum spin of electrons without the interference, power drain, or sluggishness that plague conventional electronics.

The RFI notes altermagnetism “exhibits features of both ferromagnetism and antiferromagnetism.” Like the latter, the magnetic spins inside these materials point in opposite directions, canceling each other out. However, unlike antiferromagnets, the spins are related by a rotational symmetry that still allows for energy band splitting, a property more like ferromagnets.

That seemingly small structural quirk could be transformative. The agency notes that altermagnets “might sidestep the major roadblocks ferromagnets and antiferromagnets face when designing spintronic devices.” This makes it possible to design “ultralow energy computation” technologies that vastly outperform the energy efficiency of traditional semiconductor architectures.

If successful, DARPA’s program could lay the groundwork for an entirely new category of computing systems that are smaller, faster, and orders of magnitude more energy-efficient than anything in existence today.

Spintronics, short for “spin electronics,” has already found its way into the real world. Modern hard drives, magnetic sensors, and emerging MRAM chips all rely on the quantum spin of electrons rather than their charge to read, store, or sense information. These technologies are fast, durable, and energy-efficient. However,  they still use spin only in a limited way.

DARPA is looking to do something more ambitious by using spin to not only store data but also compute with it. That would require materials capable of switching and controlling spin states as quickly and precisely as transistors manipulate charge. 

Current existing options fall short. Ferromagnets, though easy to magnetize, create interfering magnetic fields and switch too slowly for logic operations. Antiferromagnets avoid interference but lack the internal spin-splitting needed to manipulate spin-polarized currents.

However, altermagnets could change that balance. With zero net magnetization yet naturally spin-split electronic bands, they offer the tantalizing possibility of fast, interference-free spin-based computation. This breakthrough could finally make true spintronic processors possible.

The big problem? No one yet knows how to build a working device out of altermagnets. “While several device-switching proposals have been put forward, the ideas remain experimentally untested,” DARPA writes. 

Additionally, as DARPA notes, “characterization of altermagnetism is also a challenge.” The current “gold standards” for verifying altermagnetism rely on techniques usually reserved for large-scale physics facilities, and methods like spin-resolved photoelectron spectroscopy, muon spin rotation, and neutron scattering.

That means many potential research groups lack the infrastructure to explore these materials at all, let alone integrate them into working prototypes.

To change that, DARPA is soliciting “realistic, data- or theory-supported information on the types of improvements expected when using altermagnetism versus state-of-the-art computing architectures.” The agency also wants feedback on the fundamental limitations of such devices, and on the technical hurdles that must be overcome to make them practical.

This suggests DARPA isn’t merely chasing a curiosity—it’s laying the groundwork for a new national research initiative that could parallel other efforts like “INSPIRE” (Investigating how Neurological Systems Process Information in Reality), which seeks to understand how the human brain constructs reality. 

While DARPA’s notice doesn’t explicitly mention defense applications, the potential implications are clear. Altermagnetic devices could become the foundation for ultralow-power AI processors, cryptographic accelerators, or radiation-resistant electronics suitable for space and battlefield conditions.

The Department of Defense has long sought to reduce power requirements for deployed systems, whether in satellites, autonomous drones, or field-deployable sensors. Altermagnetism could offer a way to shrink computational energy costs by orders of magnitude, enabling persistent surveillance and decision-making at the edge without the need for constant resupply or cooling.

It could also revolutionize secure communications. Spintronic devices based on altermagnets might allow quantum-level control of electron spins, paving the way for tamper-resistant data encoding and secure hardware architectures that are inherently immune to many forms of cyberattack.

All of these potential defense applications could also ripple far beyond the battlefield, shaping the commercial technology sector in profound ways. For example, a study published earlier this year showed that the Pentagon’s drive to cut fuel costs during the height of the Global War on Terror inadvertently helped ignite America’s modern clean energy boom.

Keep reading

How Much the U.S Really Spends to Defend Other Nations From Military Aid to Global Bases and Deploying Navel Fleets

The United States spends hundreds of billions of dollars every year to defend countries that pose no direct threat to its borders. From maintaining troops and bases across Asia and Europe to deploying carrier strike groups in distant seas, Washington shoulders an immense financial burden to uphold what it calls the global security order. Nations such as Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and Israel depend heavily on U.S. protection — a policy that blends deterrence, influence, and strategic dominance. But few Americans realize just how much this protection actually costs.

A vast network of overseas bases

The U.S. military maintains around 750 overseas bases in more than 80 countries, supporting about 200,000 active-duty troops stationed outside the continental United States. These facilities — from Okinawa and Yokosuka in Japan to Osan and Camp Humphreys in South KoreaRamstein Air Base in Germany, and Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean — serve as the backbone of U.S. global power projection.

Operating and maintaining these installations costs U.S. taxpayers approximately $55–70 billion annually, according to estimates by the Department of Defense and the Costs of War Project at Brown University. While host nations like Japan and South Korea contribute to housing and infrastructure expenses, the majority of the logistical, training, and personnel costs still fall on Washington.

For example:

  • Japan: The U.S. spends about $5.5 billion per year on operations, personnel, and logistics, even though Tokyo contributes about $2 billion through its “host-nation support” program.
  • South Korea: About $3.5–4 billion per year in U.S. military expenses, partially offset by Seoul’s contribution under the Special Measures Agreement.
  • Germany: Roughly $4–5 billion annually to sustain troops and infrastructure, including bases like Ramstein and Grafenwoehr.

These bases are not only costly but strategically positioned — allowing the U.S. to respond to crises in Asia, the Middle East, and Europe without delay.

Keep reading

Army Secretary: Love the killer drone or be left behind

Army Secretary Dan Driscoll’s opening remarks at this year’s United States Army (AUSA) Annual Meeting & Exposition — that drones will “absolutely dominate warfare in the twenty-first century” — set the tone for a conference swarming with them.

Describing them as cheap, yet cutting-edge warfighting tools, Driscoll sold drones as a fundamental shift in how wars will be fought — and thus an essential asset to the Army of the future.

“If small arms defined the twentieth century, drones will define the twenty-first. They are the perfect convergence of artificial intelligence, advanced materials, batteries and propulsion systems, sensor fusion and much more,” Driscoll told attendees. “They will absolutely dominate warfare in the twenty-first century.”

Drones “are reshaping how humans inflict violence on each other at a pace never witnessed in human history. They are cheap, modular, precise, multi-role and scalable, and we will rapidly integrate them into our formations,” he said.

Driscoll’s words were music to industry’ ears at AUSA, where scores of tech-forward companies hungry for collaboration with the DoD promoted their state-of-the-art drones to these ends.

Of course the drones’s lethal capacities were at center stage. Elbit America’s display presented its Skystriker loitering munition as a “one-shot, one-kill system” and as a “high lethality warhead for a variety of targets.” A representative for DraganFly, meanwhile, stressed their drones’ ability to carry explosives. And General Atomics’ flyers depicted one of its models equipped and firing a laser weapon — the “High Energy Laser (HEL) Weapon System.”

Keep reading