Tag: military industrial complex

Military General Surgeons Are Not Adequately Prepared for Saving the Lives of Wounded Service Members in Large-Scale Combat Operations

The United States military may be ill-prepared to treat those wounded in a large-scale combat operation. As it stands, the Military Health System (MHS) would find itself caught off guard with limited manpower and proficiency to save lives.

On March 11, 2025, the Senate Committee on Armed Services (SASC) held a hearing “to receive testimony on stabilizing the Military Health System to prepare for large-scale combat operations.” Three retired Air Force senior officers, to include Lt. Gen. (Dr.) Douglas Robb, Maj. Gen. (Dr.)  Paul Friedrichs, and Col. (Dr.) Jeremy Cannon, provided witness testimony.

The Gateway Pundit spoke to retired Air Force Lt. Gen. (Dr.) Paul Carlton. The former Surgeon General of the Air Force and board advisor for Stand Together Against Racism and Radicalism in the Services (STARRS) said he is gravely concerned that “military surgeons are not ready to go to war as a result of the criteria the Military Health System (MHS) has established and tried to abide by for the last 20 years.”

Carlton pointed to what he considers one of the most concerning statements of the one-and-a-half-hour committee hearing where Col. (Dr.) Cannon, Professor of Surgery at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, stated “only 10 percent of military general surgeons get the patient volume, acuity, and variety they need to remain combat ready.”

Keep reading

Senate Rejects Bids To Block Arms Sales To Israel

The Senate voted on July 30 to reject two resolutions that would have blocked arms sales to Israel in response to concerns over civilian casualties in the Gaza Strip since Israeli forces began military action against the Hamas terror group.

Senators rejected two motions introduced by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) that would have stopped the export of over 5,000 bombs and guidance kits and 20,000 firearms. The resolutions failed by 73–24 and 70–27, respectively, in the 100-member chamber.

Sanders, who aligns with the Democrats, said on the evening of July 30 before the vote: “American taxpayer dollars are being used to starve children, bomb schools, kill civilians, and support the cruelty of [Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu and his criminal ministers. That, Mr. President, is why I have brought these two resolutions of disapproval to block offensive arms sales to Israel.”

Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Jim Risch (R-Idaho), who voted against both motions, called the resolutions misguided, and said before the vote that if they were adopted, it would “reinstate the failed policies of the Biden administration, and would abandon America’s closest ally in the Middle East.”

Risch said that the situation in the Gaza Strip and the impact on its residents was the fault of Hamas, who he said “use the people of Gaza as human shields.”

“These are not good people, and it is in the interest of America and the world to see this terrorist group destroyed,” he said.

Israel began its military operations against Hamas after the terror group’s deadly Oct. 7, 2023, attack, when Hamas militants killed about 1,200 civilians in Israel and kidnapped 251. According to the Israeli government website, 49 of those who were abducted that day are still being held in captivity. One additional hostage is still being held in Gaza, who has been held since 2014.

The Gaza Strip’s Hamas-controlled Ministry of Health reported that more than 60,000 people have been killed since Oct. 7, 2023. The ministry does not differentiate between civilians and combatants in these casualty figures, and The Epoch Times cannot verify their accuracy.

Throughout the conflict, Israel has said that it tries to avoid harming the civilian population and only targets Hamas terrorists.

Keep reading

Lockheed Martin Ready to Ship Typhon Missiles to Germany To Strike Moscow

The American defense contractor Lockheed Martin has pledged to accelerate the production of Typhon strike complexes for Germany if the United States and Germany sign a relevant agreement. The report was published by Defense News.
According to Edward Dobek, program director for launch systems at Lockheed Martin, the company’s facility in Moorestown, New Jersey is capable of delivering Typhon launchers to Germany within a year. He added that the faster delivery would depend on the governments of both countries reaching a timely agreement.
Earlier, the American magazine Military Watch Magazine reported that Germany is seeking to acquire Tomahawk cruise missiles and Typhon missile launchers from the United States, with the goal of gaining long-range strike capabilities potentially reaching as far as Moscow.

German Defense Ministry Confirms Interest in Typhon Systems

In July, following talks with his American counterpart Pete Hegseth, German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius stated that Berlin is considering the purchase of Typhon missile complexes from the United States.

Keep reading

Entering a Golden Age for War Profiteers

When, in his 1961 farewell address, President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned of the dangers of the unwarranted influence wielded by a partnership between the military and a growing cohort of U.S. weapons contractors and came up with the ominous term “military-industrial complex,” he could never have imagined quite how large and powerful that complex would become.  In fact, in recent years, one firm — Lockheed Martin — has normally gotten more Pentagon funding than the entire U.S. State Department. And mind you, that was before the Trump administration moved to sharply slash spending on diplomacy and jack up the Pentagon budget to an astonishing $1 trillion per year.

In a new study issued by the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft and the Costs of War Project at Brown University, Stephen Semler and I lay out just how powerful those arms makers and their allies have become, as Pentagon budgets simply never stop rising. And consider this: in the five years from 2020 to 2024, 54% of the Pentagon’s $4.4 trillion in discretionary spending went to private firms and $791 billion went to just five companies: Lockheed Martin ($313 billion), RTX (formerly Raytheon, $145 billion), Boeing ($115 billion), General Dynamics ($116 billion), and Northrop Grumman ($81 billion). And mind you, that was before Donald Trump’s Big Beautiful Budget bill landed on planet Earth, drastically slashing spending on diplomacy and domestic programs to make room for major tax cuts and near-record Pentagon outlays.

In short, the “garrison state” Eisenhower warned of has arrived, with negative consequences for nearly everyone but the executives and shareholders of those giant weapons conglomerates and their competitors in the emerging military tech sector who are now hot on their trail. High-tech militarists like Peter Thiel of Palantir, Elon Musk of SpaceX, and Palmer Luckey of Anduril have promised a new, more affordable, more nimble, and supposedly more effective version of the military-industrial complex, as set out in Anduril’s “Rebooting the Arsenal of Democracy,” an ode to the supposed value of those emerging tech firms.

Curiously enough, that Anduril essay is actually a remarkably apt critique of the Big Five contractors and their allies in Congress and the Pentagon, pointing out their unswerving penchant for cost overruns, delays in scheduling, and pork-barrel politics to preserve weapons systems that all too often no longer serve any useful military purpose. That document goes on to say that, while the Lockheed Martins of the world served a useful function in the ancient days of the Cold War with the Soviet Union, today they are incapable of building the next-generation of weaponry.  The reason: their archaic business model and their inability to master the software at the heart of a coming new generation of semi-autonomous, pilotless weapons driven by artificial intelligence (AI) and advanced computing.  For their part, the new titans of tech boldly claim that they can provide exactly such a futuristic generation of weaponry far more effectively and at far less cost, and that their weapons systems will preserve or even extend American global military dominance into the distant future by outpacing China in the development of next generation technologies.

Keep reading

Lockheed Has Something ‘Magical,’ Costly as Hell, and Totally Secret Up its Sleeve

Defense giant Lockheed Martin just reported a rare — and yuge — quarterly loss of $1.6 billion, but CEO James D. Taiclet sounded unfazed, thanks to a “magical” classified aeronautics program he claims will create a “game-changing capability for our joint U.S. and international customers.”

Is it a bird? A plane? Superman?

Before we get to the speculation — and there is some juicy stuff — a quick look at how the company lost so much money on something that Taiclet said Lockheed “probably won’t be able to talk about what that is for many years to come.”

Lockheed launched Program X with the Pentagon in 2018 during the Trump 45 administration on a fixed-price basis. That strikes me as a bit odd (albeit awesome for taxpayers) because exotic weapons systems that require developing bleeding-edge technologies are usually done on a cost-plus basis. That’s just because you can’t price something when half the parts haven’t even been invented yet.

So Lockheed signed on to a fixed-price contract just a couple of years before Bidenflation knocked 25% off the value of the dollar. “But I can assure you,” Taiclet said of Project X, “that it’s going to be in high demand for a very long time, well beyond the fixed price commitments.”

What might generate so much revenue, not just from the Pentagon, but from our allies around the world? I did a little poking around on Reddit and other forums where nerds like to geek out and found some fascinating possibilities.

Lockheed lost the contest to produce the Air Force’s Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) stealth fighter — now known as the F-47 — to rival Boeing. So there’s been some speculation that Project X is a carrier-based version of Lockheed’s NGAD for the Navy. But Lockheed denies this.

There’s also the long-rumored Hypersonic Reconnaissance Aircraft to replace the long-retired SR-71 spy plane. But those are top-secret, highly specialized aircraft that would be unlikely to generate foreign sales, even if Congress decided to allow it. (Congress refused permission to sell the F-22 Raptor stealth fighter overseas to help keep its secrets.) I seriously doubt Project X is an SR-72.

Here’s where the possibilities get weirder — or should I say, “magical?”

Keep reading

Trump Doesn’t Support Government Doing Business With Musk’s AI Company: White House

President Donald Trump is not interested in allowing the federal government to do business with tech entrepreneur Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence (AI) company, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said on July 23.

During a White House press briefing on Wednesday, Leavitt was asked whether Trump supports federal agencies contracting with Musk’s company, xAI.

“I don’t think so, no,” Leavitt said.

But last week, the company, alongside Anthropic, Google, and OpenAI, scored a $200 million contract with the Department of Defense to boost the agency’s adoption of artificial intelligence.

When asked whether the president wanted to cancel the contract, Leavitt said she would discuss it with Trump.

All four companies were awarded contracts with the same $200 million ceiling from the Defense Department’s Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Office to advance the Pentagon’s adoption of AI.

The same day the contracts were awarded, xAI announced a new series of AI products for the U.S. government, referred to as Grok for Government.

Last year, Musk stepped into the political arena and decided to endorse Trump, donate to his campaign, and act in an advisory capacity. Trump then tapped him to lead his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which recommended a series of federal worker layoffs and steep cuts to multiple agencies.

Keep reading

HYPOCRISY ON STEROIDS, about the Gaza genocide

The U.S. supplies 69% of the weapons, Germany supplies 30%, for Israel’s extermination of the Gazans, but on July 21st, America’s AP headlined “UK, Canada and 26 other countries say the war in Gaza ‘must end now’”, and reported that, “Twenty-eight countries including Britain, Japan and a host of European nations issued a joint statement Monday saying the war in Gaza ‘must end now’ — the latest sign of allies’ sharpening language as Israel’s isolation deepens.” America’s AP did not headline “Israel-allied countries support but also condemn the genocide against Gazans” — which would have been the full basic truth — they instead reported only that these countries (which the AP didn’t even completely list) were, in this “joint statement” (to which the AP provided no link, so that the actual document — which they were allegedly reporting about, was instead being actually hidden by the AP — censored-out by them) was “saying the war in Gaza ‘must end now’” INSTEAD OF that Israel and America and Germany must cease their perpetrating this genocide. The AP was saying that “the war in Gaza ‘must end now’” — as-if this ‘war’ ISN’T instead an extermination of Gazans, but just a war between Gazans and Israel, which latter Government is actually leading this Israel-U.S.-German-perpetrated genocide to get rid of Gazans. Israel is leading this extermination-campaign, just as Germany had led the one against Jews; and, just as Germany’s Government had participating foreign Governments helping them, so too does Israel’s.

Keep reading

Space-Based Missile Interceptors For Golden Dome Being Tested By Northrop

Northrop Grumman is conducting ground-based testing related to space-based interceptors as part of a competition for that segment of the Trump administration’s Golden Dome missile defense initiative. Interceptors deployed in orbit are currently billed as a critical component of the overall Golden Dome plan, but actually fielding this capability presents significant technical challenges.

Kathy Warden, Northrop Grumman’s CEO, highlighted the company’s work on space-based interceptors, as well as broader business opportunities stemming from Golden Dome, during a quarterly earnings call today. Golden Dome is presently envisioned as a multi-part anti-missile architecture incorporating a swath of existing and future capabilities in space and within the Earth’s atmosphere, which will start entering into operational service by 2028. Golden Dome was originally dubbed Iron Dome before the name was changed earlier this year. It is also now being managed by an office that reports directly to the deputy secretary of defense.

“As we look to Golden Dome for America, we see Northrop Grumman playing a crucial role in supporting the administration’s goal to move with speed and have initial operating capability in place within the next few years,” Warden said today. “This includes current products that can be brought to bear, like IBCS [Integrated Battle Command System], G/ATOR [AN/TPS-80 Ground/Air Task Oriented Radar], Triton [drones], and programs in our restricted portfolio, just to name a few. It will also include new innovation, like space-based interceptors, which we’re testing now.”

“These are ground-based tests today, and we are in competition, obviously, so not a lot of detail that I can provide here,” Warden added. “It is the capability that we believe can be accelerated and into the time frame that the administration is looking for.”

Warden declined to respond directly to a question about how the space-based interceptors Northrop Grumman is developing now will actually defeat their targets. TWZ has reached out to the company for additional information.

Keep reading

Analyzing The Ambiguity Over The American-NATO Arms Arrangement For Ukraine

The offensive dimension of Trump’s new three–pronged approach to Ukraine involves the sale of American weapons to NATO who’ll in turn transfer them to Ukraine.

This aligns with what Trump told NBC several days prior to the aforesaid announcement.

According to Reuters’ sources, however, “Trump presented a framework – not a fleshed-out plan”, and some of the six countries that NATO chief Rutte mentioned will participate in this scheme allegedly only found out about it during that time.

Other reports then circulated about France, Italy, and Czechia’s refusal to participate on various pretexts ranging from their principled support for the European defense industry, which would struggle to fulfill its potential if EU countries buy more expensive US arms, to simple budgetary concerns.

The resultant ambiguity over the American-NATO arms arrangement for Ukraine that Trump announced accordingly raises questions about what’s really going on.

There are three likely explanations.

  • The first is that there were innocent communication issues between the US, NATO, and the bloc’s individual members, but that’s difficult to believe since everyone just gathered for the latest NATO Summit less than a month ago. This arrangement was presumably discussed during that time. It would also contextualize their agreement to raise defense spending to 5% of GDP, especially if the Europeans expected to purchase more expensive arms for transfer to Ukraine as part of this arrangement.
  • The second explanation is that nothing concrete was agreed to, at least with all members, during that summit. This would account for why some of them were reportedly caught by surprise and others refuse to participate. In this scenario, Trump’s announcement would have been meant to pressure them into this profitable arrangement to “save face” since all but Hungary and Slovakia (which also won’t participate) have consistently claimed that they’ll support Ukraine “for as long as it takes”.
  • And finally, the last possibility is that the analyzed media reports are part of a deception campaign along the lines of what Israeli media claimed that Trump and Bibi pulled off ahead of them bombing Iran. This version of events assumes that there’s much more agreement between NATO members behind the scenes than has been reported. The purpose of claiming otherwise would be to get Russia’s guard down ahead of what could be NATO’s rapid rearmament of Ukraine with American weapons.

Whichever explanation(s) one adheres to, more clarity will be forthcoming from Russian media reports, which will reveal the existence of these new arms on the battlefield or lack thereof ahead of the expiry of Trump’s 50-day deadline. If lots of US arms flood into Ukraine, then it’ll show that there was enough agreement and capacity to back up his threat. If not, then he might blame the Europeans for fumbling it, after which he might only impose some secondary sanctions but no longer militarily escalate.

Keep reading

Pentagon shifts focus to drone warfare to bolster American military power

Drone warfare is emerging as a central strategic tool in the Trump administration’s plan to expand American military power.

The U.S. pioneered remotely piloted weapons during the war on terrorism in the post-9/11 era, when the term “drone” became a verb for effective strikes against al Qaeda figures in several corners of the world. The military term for missile attacks by large Predator and later Reaper unmanned aerial vehicles was simply “death from above.”

Since the early 2020s, drone weaponry has advanced dramatically from those initial, long-range missile carriers to an entirely new generation of warfare that has come into sharper focus during the Russia-Ukraine war.

In one recent two-day period, Russia fired 355 Iranian-made Shahed-type drones, including decoys, at Ukrainian targets. The wide-scale use of such one-way attack quadcopters and other pilotless aircraft underscores how drone warfare is rapidly becoming the face of modern warfare.

It’s not just Russia and Iran. Other U.S. adversaries are now in the drone manufacturing game, often pioneering inexpensive ways to mass-produce basic but deadly small drones.

China has notably developed a vast slate of drones for attack and support operations and is said to be producing as many as 100,000 small drones monthly. By contrast, the U.S. defense industrial base produces about 5,000 to 6,000 small drones monthly.

Keep reading