Tag: military industrial complex

The ‘Projects’ That Could Ignite The Next World War

The Military, Industrial and Strategic Programs Reshaping the World in 2026

The most dangerous geopolitical developments of 2026 are not necessarily the weapons that have already been fired, but the systems being constructed in anticipation of the next crisis. Across Europe, the Indo-Pacific and the Middle East, governments are committing extraordinary resources to military production, strategic infrastructure, weapons procurement and long-term defence planning, creating a global security environment in which preparation for war has itself become one of the defining features of international politics. The official justification is almost always deterrence: stronger armies are supposed to prevent aggression, larger stockpiles are supposed to make adversaries think twice and new military infrastructure is supposed to close the gaps that might otherwise invite attack. Yet deterrence has an inherent paradox. Every military capability built by one state is examined by another as a potential threat, and every response can then be used to justify another round of preparation. What emerges is not necessarily an organized march toward a single global conflict, but something more unstable: a collection of increasingly sophisticated military projects operating simultaneously across several regions, each designed to prevent war while potentially making the consequences of miscalculation far more severe.

The scale of this transformation is no longer a matter of speculation. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, global military expenditure reached approximately $2.887 trillion in 2025, marking the eleventh consecutive year of growth. European military spending increased by 14% to approximately $864 billion, while military expenditure in Asia and Oceania rose by 8.1% to around $681 billion. The United States remained the world’s largest military spender at approximately $954 billion, followed by China at $336 billion and Russia at $190 billion. Together, those three countries accounted for roughly 51% of global military expenditure. SIPRI also reported that European NATO members increased spending sharply, while China’s military expenditure continued a decades-long upward trajectory and Taiwan increased its own military spending by approximately 14% in 2025. These figures do not prove that a world war is approaching, but they reveal an international system in which the largest military powers are simultaneously expanding or restructuring their strategic capabilities.

Keep reading

Humanoid War Robot Gets Advanced AMD-Powered AI Brain

At the start of February, we began tracking startup Foundation Robotics after publicly available news reports and X posts suggested it could become one of the first US companies to deploy humanoid robots on the modern battlefield.

TIME later reported that the company’s robots had been sent to Ukraine for testing and evaluation, raising the prospect that these war bots could soon reach the front lines in Eastern Europe.

Our February 2 report, “Watch: Russian Soldiers Surrender To Gun-Wielding Robot; Humanoid Warfare Nears,” and our February 3 report, “AI’s Next Frontier Is Physical As Humanoid Robots Begin March On Assembly Lines And Beyond,” both preceded TIME’s coverage of Foundation by a full month and showed how these robots were being positioned for testing in Ukraine.

In another signal that Foundation is preparing its war bots for battlefield deployment, Reuters reported that the startup partnered with Advanced Micro Devices to supply high-end AI processors for its second-generation Phantom MK-2 robot.

Foundation plans to open a factory in October capable of producing 5,000 robots per year, followed by a second facility with capacity for 50,000 units. Industrial robots will be leased for about $100,000 annually, while defense models designed for logistics and reconnaissance will be sold for $300,000 per unit.

Keep reading

Getting Away with Murder: Under Trump, the Buck Stops Nowhere

Having burned through billions of dollars and depleted critical munitions stockpiles, the Pentagon is running out of money.

Our money.

According to the Washington Post, the Pentagon is facing an urgent budget shortfall caused largely by the Iran war, with some critical funding accounts expected to run dry within weeks. Training, maintenance and other military priorities are reportedly being squeezed as the government struggles to sustain Trump’s escalating conflict.

Once again, the government is looking to the American people for a taxpayer-funded bailout—this time to the tune of $67 billion.

Nor is the $67 billion emergency infusion the end of it.

Trump’s fiscal year 2027 budget calls for an unprecedented $1.5 trillion in national-defense spending—a staggering increase that would pour still more money into a military apparatus that cannot account honestly for the costs of its current war, maintain its existing priorities, or keep from returning to taxpayers for another bailout.

The problem is not simply how much the war machine consumes. It is how little accountability accompanies that spending.

The government can launch a war, exhaust military resources, conceal its full costs, and return to Congress for billions more without anyone responsible being required to admit error, change course, or answer for the lives lost.

That is becoming a familiar pattern under Donald Trump.

He makes the decisions—others absorb the consequences.

He launches the war—the troops make the sacrifices, and taxpayers inherit the bill.

The Iran war is not merely another example of government waste, although the cost is already staggering. The war has already cost an estimated $80 to $100 billion, not counting its long-term economic impact, future veteran expenses, or the cost of repairing damaged military bases. Analysts estimate that the broader toll on American households could eventually reach as much as $1,000 per household.

Yet the true cost cannot be measured in dollars alone.

American service members are dying in a war Trump started without meaningful congressional authorization, without a credible plan for ending it, and without an honest accounting of what it will cost.

The Pentagon is draining resources from training, maintenance and weapons programs to keep the conflict going. Congress is being asked to supply billions more. And the American people—already struggling under the weight of debt, inflation and economic uncertainty—are expected to pay without question.

This is government without accountability.

When Trump’s decisions cost American lives, deplete military stockpiles and burn through billions of taxpayer dollars, the bill never finds its way to him. It finds its way to us, while Trump remains conspicuously insulated from the human and financial consequences of his own decisions.

That insulation from consequence is matched by a swaggering display of bluster and bravado that passes for leadership within the Trump administration.

Keep reading

ANOTHER ONE: Indian Illegal Alien Trucker with Valid California CDL Busted Hauling Nearly $3 Million in Stolen Military-Grade Powder – Now in ICE Custody

Here we go again.

An illegal alien from India who possessed a valid California commercial driver’s license is now in Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody after authorities caught him transporting nearly $3 million worth of stolen tungsten oxide powder.

The suspect, identified as 31-year-old Deepak Kumar, was arrested in Greenfield, Indiana, after police tracked his tractor-trailer traveling westbound on Interstate 70.

The truck was wanted in connection with a massive cargo theft reported in Pennsylvania on June 25.

According to the Greenfield Police Department, Kumar is suspected of using fraudulent documents to obtain nearly 40,000 pounds of tungsten oxide powder valued at a staggering $2,857,500.

The powder was being shipped to Mitsubishi Materials Corporation in Japan.

Keep reading

US-Israel Defense Integration on Horizon as House Keeps Section 219 in NDAA

The House is preparing to vote on the Fiscal Year 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) with Section 219 (formerly section 224) still embedded in the roughly $1.1 trillion bill.

The House approved the rule governing debate on H.R. 8800 by a 214-211 vote Tuesday, July 21. The vote allowed the chamber to proceed with the NDAA but excluded the amendment from Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) that would have removed Section 219.

Lawmakers will not receive a separate vote on the bipartisan amendment that sought to remove the section, a proposal to expand U.S.-Israel defense technology cooperation that has garnered strong rebukes in certain political and defense circles.

The House expects to hold a recorded vote on the complete NDAA on Wednesday.

What Section 219 Would Do

Section 219 would direct the defense secretary to designate a Pentagon “executive agent” to oversee the United States-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative. That official would coordinate bilateral defense research, development, testing, evaluation and industrial cooperation.

The proposal originated as the bipartisan, bicameral United States-Israel FUTURES Act, introduced in the House by Reps. Ronny Jackson (R-Texas) and Don Davis (D-N.C.) with companion legislation from Sens. Ted Budd (R-N.C.) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.).

Jackson framed the proposal as a way to preserve America’s technological advantage and deliver new battlefield capabilities to service members. Davis emphasized its potential to prepare troops for evolving threats, particularly unmanned systems and electronic warfare.

Sens. Budd and Gillibrand have similarly presented the initiative as an expansion of existing work on missile defense, drones, and underground threats as a means to strengthen American military and technological capabilities.

Keep reading

Four Republicans Vote AGAINST Codifying President Trump’s Executive Order Banning Transgender Service in the Military

Four Republicans just teamed up with Democrats to torpedo an amendment that would have locked in President Donald Trump’s critical Executive Order banning transgender individuals from serving in the U.S. military.

The amendment, sponsored by fiery Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO), aimed to codify Trump’s policy into law as part of the fiscal year 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

President Trump’s Executive Order rightly recognizes that military service demands the highest physical and mental standards, standards that biological reality and decades of data prove are incompatible with gender dysphoria and the radical “transitions” pushed by the left.

“Next to ensure that we have the most lethal fighting force in the world, we will get transgender ideology the hell out of our military. It’s going to be gone,” Trump announced last year.

“In addition, we will stop our service members from being indoctrinated with radical left ideologies such as critical race theory. We’re going to stop it. It’s already been stopped. It’s already been halted, totally halted.”

The amendment failed by a razor-thin 212-217 vote, with 210 Republicans supporting it and four Republicans voting against it, joining every voting Democrat in opposition.

The GOP lawmakers were Reps. Mike Lawler (R-NY), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA), as well as the non-voting Republican delegates from Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands.

Keep reading

House Narrowly Passes $1.15 Trillion Defense Bill That Integrates US Military Tech & Supply Chains With Israel

The House passed the Fiscal Year 2027 National Defense Authorization Act on Wednesday by a 216-212 vote, sending the $1.15 trillion measure to the Senate after one of the most partisan House votes in the must-pass bill’s recent history. Only six Democrats supported it, while seven Republicans voted no.

Armed Services Chairman Mike Rogers praised a topline that he said finally “accounts for the true cost of American deterrence.” The authorization is a centerpiece of President Trump’s push to raise total defense spending to $1.5 trillion in fiscal 2027. Democrats opposed the measure over the unauthorized war with Iran – which has flared again since the collapse of a memorandum of understanding intended to open peace talks – as well as the attachment of the SAVE America Act’s mail-voting restrictions and voter-ID requirements. They also objected to a price tag they argue would be financed through cuts to domestic programs.

The amendment votes exposed the chamber’s other fault lines. Rep. Eli Crane’s proposal to halt nearly all military aid to Ukraine was defeated 76-350, while Rep. Lauren Boebert’s attempt to codify the ban on transgender military service failed 212-217. The House nevertheless adopted two amendments from Rep. Nancy Mace restricting gender-related care through the military’s TRICARE health system and barring transgender athletes from girls’ sports at Defense Department-run schools.

Opposition also came from lawmakers objecting to the bill’s US-Israel defense-industrial integration provisions. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was among the Democrats who cited Section 219, while Reps. Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna had announced that they would oppose final passage on the same grounds. The provision remained intact after the Rules Committee declined to permit a floor vote on their amendment to remove it.

The bill now heads to the Senate, where the companion measure, S. 4784, is already stalled. On July 14, the Senate rejected cloture on the motion to proceed, 50-46, after Democrats opposed advancing the bill in protest of the Iran war. With the House scheduled to leave Friday for a recess lasting through the end of August, any eventual conference negotiations are likely to be pushed into the fall.

A separate party-line effort to authorize $60 billion in new war-related spending also remains far short of the $350 billion the Pentagon originally sought.

Keep reading

“Robin Hood In Reverse”: The Pentagon Is Stealing From the Working Poor to Pay for War and Enrich Contractors

In an era of high prices for fuel, food, and housing, an extra $4,000 could make a lifesaving difference for many families. But instead, that’s what the average household had to shell out for the Pentagon last year.

That’s right: The average US taxpayer in 2025 had over $4,000 taken out of their paychecks to fund the Pentagon, according to the National Priorities Project at the Institute for Policy Studies. In the coming years, that amount is set to rise as Congress considers a $1.5 trillion war budget for 2027.

For the growing number of working poor in the United States, that money can mean the difference between making rent or falling behind, or between being able to afford an emergency trip to the doctor or going without care.

Money directed to the Pentagon represents nothing but betrayal for many Americans. A large majority oppose our wars, especially the latest conflict in Iran. And roughly half of the Pentagon’s budget flows to for-profit contractors, fueling the billionaire (and now even trillionaire) class.

Take SpaceX, one of many companies built on government contracts funded by taxpayer dollars. Elon Musk’s company would not exist without US taxpayers. As early Tesla investor Ross Gerber put it, “There would not be (Tesla and SpaceX) if it weren’t for the government.”

Early investments and contracts from the US government helped propel SpaceX to success, while continued awards from the Pentagon provided the stable revenue that made the government one of Musk’s largest customers. The company is now valued at more than $1 trillion. Private investors alone did not make Musk a trillionaire—taxpayers across the United States did.

But Musk isn’t the only person who made himself rich off the backs of American workers.

Lockheed Martin receives over 70% of its revenue from US government contracts. The numbers for Raytheon and General Dynamics are similar. These military contractors simply would not exist without the taxpayers—and a new $1.5 trillion budget would send hundreds of billions of dollars more to people who already have more than most Americans could even conceptualize.

At the same time, while taxpayers are subsidizing the military-industrial complex, the jobs those industries are allegedly providing are in decline, with the war industry creating over 2 million fewer jobs than it did 40 years ago.

Worse still, under the so-called “Big Beautiful Bill” Republicans passed a year ago, the money for these ever-rising Pentagon budgets comes directly from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), Medicaid, and other programs that help Americans make ends meet.

Under those cuts, millions of Americans—including children—have lost SNAP benefits already. And that’s impacting not just families but the farmers who helped feed them.

SNAP benefits were “guaranteed money in the pockets of farmers,” said Reese Amxy, a policy organizer at the Illinois Stewardship Alliance. But 150,000 people in the state have already lost eligibility.

It’s not just Illinois. Arizona has seen the steepest decline, with 50% of recipients—nearly half a million—already losing benefits. Louisiana (21%), Florida (20%), Oklahoma (16%), Virginia (16%), Texas (14%), Wyoming (13%), and Arkansas (12%) round out the rest of the hardest hit states so far.

Yet the person who lost SNAP and the farmer who lost their income alike will be asked to foot the bill for the $1.5 trillion war budget. This is Robin Hood in reverse. Worse still, the weapons those taxes buy are often to use to kill children like ours in Gaza and Iran.

The weapons and tech CEOs that would benefit from the massive war budget, and the politicians bought off by them, seek to keep this cycle going next year at an even grander scale. Americans need to demand their lawmakers say no more Pentagon spending—and invest in the things that actually keep our communities safe instead.

Keep reading

Anduril Unveils Tiltrotor Killer Drone Straight Out Of ‘Terminator’

Palmer Luckey’s defense company Anduril Industries unveiled Thunder, an autonomous aircraft designed to deliver missiles, drones, electronic-warfare systems and cargo into heavily contested airspace.

“In this new era of maneuver warfare, we need eyes for what’s ahead and a shield for what we can’t afford to lose,” Anduril wrote in a tweet.

Thunder is a Group 5 autonomous attack rotorcraft, meaning it weighs more than 1,320 pounds, as shown in the UAS classification chart below, courtesy of Piper Sandler.

Anduril noted, “A first of its kind for attack aviation. A thunderous step forward for maneuver dominance.”

Thunder’s modular payload bays can carry configurations including 10 air-to-ground missiles, 16 Altius-600 launched effects, or 76 70mm rockets, plus 12 counter-drone interceptors.

Pairing three Thunders with a single Apache helicopter could triple the formation’s available munitions without putting additional human pilots at risk.

Anduril added, “Mass is only achievable if the platform delivering it is producible and affordable. The common dual-use baseline behind Thunder drives the economies of scale, expanded demand, and broad supply chains critical to drive down costs and de-risk the pathway to large-scale production.”

X users are pointing out that Anduril just made the “tilt rotor version of the Terminator Hunter Killer drone.“

Keep reading

Lockheed Martin To Produce Cheaper Patriot Interceptor Missiles To Address Skyrocketing Demand for Air Defense

Air defense is the name of the game.

It’s an unfortunate fact that we live in an increasingly dangerous world full of conflict.

Everywhere you turn, countries are hearing the martial drums in the air, and are rearming like there’s no tomorrow.

And in this brave new world of cheap swarming drones, the biggest bottleneck in the defense procurement of these countries is the air defense systems and intercepting missiles.

It also doesn’t help that the most sought-after systems and missiles, the Patriot, are exceedingly expensive and slow to manufacture.

In this scenario, Lockheed Martin announced today (20) a lower-cost Patriot interceptor, as the established defense contractors ‘face competition from startups making low-cost weapons that can ​be produced at scale’.

Reuters reported:

“Lockheed said its new PAC-3 Adapted Capability Effector, or ​ACE, missile would cost less than half as much as its ⁠PAC-3 MSE interceptors, which cost roughly $4 million per missile, according to U.S. ​Army budget documents.

Initial production could start within 36 months, the company said, adding that ​it plans to develop and manufacture the weapon with U.S. and European industry partners.

‘American and allied warfighters need a solution that is battle-tested and budget-smart’, Tim Cahill, president of Lockheed Martin ​Missiles and Fire Control, said in a statement at Britain’s Farnborough Airshow.”

Keep reading