Tag: perpetual war

Senate passes ‘meaningless’ Iran resolution as Trump closes in on lasting peace deal

The Senate has approved a House-passed resolution directing President Donald Trump to withdraw U.S. troops from hostilities in Iran as the White House works to negotiate a lasting settlement with Tehran.

On Tuesday, the Senate voted 50 to 48 to approve the resolution, which cleared the House in a 215-208 vote a day prior. The measure directs Washington to remove U.S. armed forces from the country unless Congress authorizes further military action, as under the 1973 War Powers Act.

Since the resolution is a “concurrent resolution” it does not pass through the president’s desk for approval and carries disputed legal force. It does not have the force of law, however, despite the approval from both chambers.

The Act states that the U.S. Commander-in-Chief must alert Congress within 48 hours of deploying troops into hostilities. Once the notification is submitted, a 60-day period begins, during which the president must terminate the use of force.

Members of the Trump administration, however, clarified that the operation against Iran was already considered terminated as of the ceasefire agreement established by President Trump on April 7th.

Four Republicans voted for the measure: Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Bill Cassidy (R-La.).

The same four GOP senators voted last week in an effort to discharge a similar resolution from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee but it failed to advance due to attendance issues from Democrat members.

Notably, two GOP senators missed the vote: Senator Dave McCormick (R-Pa.) and Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). Both senators had previously voted multiple times against Iran powers resolutions.

Senator Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) voted “no” on Tuesday after alleging that he was open to hearing arguments from both sides of the debate. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) was the only Democrat member to join the majority of Republicans in voting against the measure.

Keep reading

When Military Fellows Replace Hill Staff

The pattern is obvious. In an overworked House office, whoever has time and capacity to produce a clean draft often decides what gets written. On defense portfolios, that is increasingly a uniformed fellow on detail from the Department of Defense. In practice, executive-branch detailees do not supplement staff capacity; they replace it on key tasks, shaping agendas, drafting text, and gatekeeping information that will later govern their own departments.

About ninety military fellows cycle through the Hill each year, with roughly two dozen each from the Army, Navy, and Air Force, and a dozen more from the Marine Corps. Their credentials are strong and intentions usually public-spirited. The problem is institutional. A congressional staffer owes undivided loyalty to Article I. An officer owes loyalty to a chain of command that runs to Article II. When workloads are crushing, that conflict is resolved by inertia rather than deliberation. The fellow who can deliver tonight becomes the author of governing text tomorrow. It is a story of structural capture by convenience.

Over 60 years ago, in his farewell speech, President Eisenhower warned us that “[i]n the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” That warning rings truer than ever in 2026.

The consequences show up at every stage of the legislative cycle. On agenda setting, the person who can assemble a background memo first defines what “the options” are and which studies count as credible. On drafting, the earliest pass at bill or report language anchors debate. Overworked offices edit at the margins rather than reopen baseline assumptions. On oversight, the same fellow who helps frame hearing questions may later return to the department whose programs those questions were meant to scrutinize. Even the most ethical detailee will struggle to elevate uncomfortable data from inside the building where they will soon work again. In practice, the executive’s representative becomes the de facto author of legislative text that will govern the executive.

Defenders of the model claim Congress cannot meet deadlines without fellows. That is an indictment of congressional resourcing, not a defense of blurred powers. Speed at the price of independence is not a neutral trade. Second, they say members direct fellows’ work, so the institution remains in control. Direction is not authorship. When staff are underwater, authorship migrates to the person with time, not the person with authority.

There is also a practical equity problem. In many House offices the fellow becomes the defense staffer by default. That is replacement, not augmentation. Civilian staff lose chances to develop subject matter expertise, and offices become dependent on a pipeline they do not control. When the fellow rotates out, the capacity gap reopens. The department’s institutional memory remains intact. The House’s does not.

Keep reading

Half Of Crimea Goes Dark After Ukrainian Strike Hits Thermal Power Plant

Yet more drone attacks sent by Ukraine’s military has crippled much of the infrastructure of the Crimean peninsula. Reuters is confirming significant power outages, while some regional reports say as much as half of all Crimea is without power Tuesday.

One of the regional publications specified that “Yevpatoria, Saki, Krasnoperekopsk, Dzhankoy, and surrounding areas were left without electricity, reports the Ukrainian service of Radio Svoboda.”

“Preliminary, electricity supply is planned to be restored within 24 hours” – after several facilities in Crimea suffered direct hits by inbound drones. Fires have been witnessed at at railway and military facilities. Importantly, a large fire is being reported at a thermal power plant in Kerch, which left the greatest impact in terms of the widespread regional blackout:

Telegram channel “Crimean Wind” has written, “The CHP plant fire in Kerch is confirmed; the fire spread to a reservoir. The monitoring group, relying on satellite imagery, records a smoke plume about 47 kilometers long.”

According to more: “A strike on an oil depot, a TPP-Terminal, port infrastructure, and facilities in the area of Henichesk and the Arabat Spit is also reported.”

It was only two days ago, on June 21, that an oil depot in the Crimean city of Kerch was attacked, it is reportedly still burning, with reports of fires at the sprawling terminal complex’s Kavkaz port.

Life for millions in Crimea is already seriously strained, after those prior Sunday attacks resulted in the most severe fuel restrictions imposed on the population since the war began over four years ago.

Crimean Governor Sergey Aksyonov had previously confirmed the fuel crisis for the whole region, saying, “Today, June 21, starting from 09:00 am, fuel sales at Crimean petrol stations have been suspended” – though he added that fuel would only be sold to state enterprises.

He made clear in a Telegram post that starting Sunday morning local time gas stations across the peninsula would stop selling fuel to individuals and businesses. All cash, card and fuel coupons were immediately halted.

Relentless, nightly drone attacks making life harder on common Russians – in tandem to the Ukrainian population also having suffered immensely under Russia’s bombs and drones…

Keep reading

NYT and Telegraph SURRENDER to the Truth, Report on Russian Siege of Konstantinovka and the Advance for the Final Donetsk Battle: The Kramatorsk-Slavyansk Fortress Belt

The end of the war in Donbas is near.

In the last few weeks, an Information Op was taking place in the western mainstream media, in which all voices chanted in unison that ‘finally, Ukraine is winning the war’.

But while there’s no denying the increased success of the Kiev regime’s long-range strikes, the fact of the matter in the ground is that, not only is Russia winning, but it is moving into the endgame in the vital Donbas region – the cradle of the war.

We have been reporting on the siege and encircling of Konstantinovka, and how this fortified bastion was the key for the final assault on the Slavyansk-Kramatorsk agglomeration, the last region of Donetsk still held by Ukrainian forces.

But yesterday (22), with the usual delay, we watched several MSM outlets discreetly acknowledge the Russian advances and the oncoming endgame.

The British ‘Conservatives’ from The Telegraph, who are rabid Kiev regime fans, reported:

“Russian troops have infiltrated Ukraine’s fortress belt city of Konstantinovka, a crucial gateway to the rest of the Donbas. Ukrainian soldiers said the entire city, which is part of the country’s eastern defenses, was effectively in a ‘grey zone’, no longer controlled by either side. Russia’s defense ministry claimed its forces had intensified operations in the south-west of the city, surrounding Ukrainian units.”

So, while the posh hyphenated-name columnists laugh and laugh of ‘clueless Vladimir Putin’, they were forced to report the obvious truth.

With their tried and tested playbook, the Russian forces don’t smash head-on against the fortified city, but rather flank it in multiple prongs, encircle it, attack the supply lines, put the defenders into fire pockets, conquer it.

“Last month, reports citing Ukrainian intelligence claimed Russia’s top commanders had convinced Vladimir Putin they could seize Kramatorsk and Slovyansk, the towns at the center of the fortress, by the end of the year.

Such a breakthrough would bring the Kremlin closer to achieving one of its most significant remaining war aims: the conquest of the entire Donbas region.”

Keep reading

Thou Shalt Not Kill – Making War No More

An argument the Trump administration is using to justify massive increases in war spending is that the U.S. military is short on munitions. What a surprise! After the Iran War, attacks on Yemen and Somalia, supplying Israel with all sorts of air defense missiles as well as bombs and who knows what else (some of it is classified), the ongoing Russia-Ukraine War, and so on, it’s no wonder munitions are in short supply.

Bottles of nips may be in short supply after an alcoholic raids a hotel minibar. Is it wise to resupply it while the drinker is still there, intoxicated, begging for more?

Fascinating to me are the lack of moral arguments against America’s orgy of murderous weapons. The Bible says “Thou shalt not kill.” Killing is immoral and a crime unless as a last resort in self-defense. When our nation goes to war, it is also supposed to be in self-defense to uphold our Constitution and our highest ideals.

We always hear about a shared Judeo-Christian tradition – there’s a moral imperative here that demands fewer swords and more ploughshares. A God-given mandate to make war no more. To be peacemakers, not warfighters.

America, the shining city on a hill, should celebrate the sanctity of life rather than building more weapons to destroy life. But today’s America is much more akin to a heavily armed garrison-state, bristling with weapons, with satellite garrisons around the world.

Keep reading

Feds: Operative with ‘Direct Ties to IRGC’ Tried to Enter US Posing as Iranian World Cup Soccer Team Prez

The Iranian government was caught trying to sneak a terrorist into the U.S.A. as a fake member of its World Cup national men’s soccer team, American officials say.

U.S. officials refused entry to an Iranian who they say has direct ties to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and who was claiming to be the president of Iran’s soccer federation, the New York Post reported.

Department of Homeland Security chief Markwayne Mullin told the media that the Iranian was prevented from entering the U.S. with the Iranian team when they tried to prepare to fly to the U.S. from Mexico.

“When we started doing the research on him, he had only been put in place since 2022, and we didn’t allow him to board the plane, ” Mullin told the host of Fox News’ Sunday Morning Futures.

The IRGC is the paramilitary arm of the Iranian military that answers directly to the mullahs and has been responsible for terrorist attacks all across the world.

Mullin added that the U.S. had taken pains to hold “multiple” conversations with representatives of Iran’s soccer team to ensure they understood their travel restrictions and entry criteria.

Iran head coach Amir Ghalenoei has bemoaned the treatment his team has received from his own government. He has also said that the harsh treatment has hurt his players’ performance.

The denial of entry to the Iranian IRGC member comes as the Trump administration continues to negotiate the end of the current military actions between the U.S. and Iran.

Keep reading

Trump’s Attempt To End the Iran War Infuriates the Uniparty

Against the odds, the Memorandum of Understanding signed by the US and Iran appears to be holding, after threats and counter-threats. It may collapse, but it has survived a first round of talks between the two sides in Switzerland over the weekend.

President Trump started a war on Iran against all sober guidance and in violation of the US Constitution’s requirement that only Congress can declare war. There must be a reckoning for our elected leaders who violate their oath of office, the Constitution, and simple common sense.

However, what is more telling is the reaction when President Trump finally took the correct move and attempted to end the war. The neocons who had hailed him as a great leader – Levin, Bolton, Pompeo, etc. – suddenly turned against him when he turned against further escalation of the war.

Even Trump’s top funder, Miriam Adelson, attacked Trump in her newspaper Israel Hayom. “You could have been the greatest president of all, but you failed,” the newspaper wrote in an editorial.

Not much gratitude from the Israel-first crowd, even if the war was started to benefit Israel.

And more telling even than this was the reaction of the “opposition” party in Congress, the Democrats. They attacked him harder for ending – or at least pausing – the war more than for starting the war in the first place! Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) called the MOU a “capitulation.” Sen Chris Murphy (D-CT) called the MOU an “embarrassing document.” Sen. Amy Klobuchar falsely claimed that President Trump was paying Iran $300 billion to re-open Hormuz.

This is more evidence – as if any is needed – that our foreign policy is run by the “uniparty.” When it comes to wars, there is no Republican Party nor is there a Democratic Party. There is only the “yes!” party.

Congress remains silent in the run-up to war. Congress remains silent when the President launches a war. Congress even remains silent when the war begins going badly. It is only on those rare occasions that a president takes steps to correct his mistake that Congress finds its voice.

Yes, there is plenty to criticize. After weekend talks, the US side, led by Vice President JD Vance, is celebrating as a “breakthrough” that the Strait of Hormuz is open again and that Iran has reportedly agreed to the return of UN inspectors. But the Strait was open before this war and UN inspectors were in Iran before President Trump unilaterally pulled out of the JCPOA “Iran Deal” in his first term.

The only difference now is that we burned through likely several hundred billion dollars, we lost dozens of aircraft and other military equipment, and we likely lost more service members than the Pentagon is admitting.

Keep reading

Swiss Government Discusses Revoking Protections, Benefits For Military-Aged Ukrainians

During the opening years of the Russia-Ukraine war European states were quite welcoming to Ukrainian refugees and anyone fleeing the carnage and chaos, but now in the conflict’s fifth year the general sentiment among EU populations and governments is changing.

Switzerland, once hailed as Europe’s most neutral state – and among the most ‘welcoming’ countries for asylum seekers – is mulling a policy change which would exclude Ukrainian men of military age from protections granted to refugees.

The Swiss Federal Council announced in a statement Friday that it has begun consultations over the legal status of some 66,000 Ukrainian nationals who fled to Switzerland after the conflict erupted.

Welfare assistance and refugee protections are quite good in Switzerland, given individuals receive basic living items as well as government payouts, and can even freely travel in and out of the country.

For now, protections are expected to extend to Ukrainians in the country, but there’s new talk of revoking this status for men of military age at a moment the Ukrainian military continues to face a severe manpower shortage:

The government announced on Friday that, at a national asylum conference in November 2025, the State Secretariat for Migration (SEM), the cantons, cities and municipalities had been tasked with drawing up clear regulations for the future of S protection status.

The results of this deliberation are now set out in a concept paper entitled “The Future of S Status”. According to the government, it serves to prepare for three possible scenarios: the continuation of S status; its abolition in the event of a stable ceasefire; and a phasing out of S status in the event of a protracted conflict.

Specifically pertaining to men of fighting age, the government is considering “a possible future restriction for Ukrainian men subject to conscription,” a new statement reads.

“This is because the EU is currently considering an extension of temporary protection with a possible restriction for these men,” the country’s Federal Council has explained. A final decision could come by the end of the summer, but political pushback is said to be growing.

It should be remembered revocation of protected status is something the Zelensky government itself has long asked Western allies to do. It wants the rapid return of military-aged men, at a moment Ukrainian recruiters have resorted to harsh tactics cracking down on what are seen as draft dodgers.

EU Migration Commissioner Magnus Brunner has also confirmed “This is also what the Ukrainians are asking us to do” – commenting on the question of no longer extending protections to Ukrainian men in EU states.

For now, no major policy shifts are expected, but as the war goes on and on, the tone of the conversation has shifted among many European officials. Washington in particular has emphasized that Ukraine’s populace must stand up for itself, and has even leaned heavily on Kiev to make the mandatory conscription age younger.

Keep reading

The Real Reason Russia Would Invade Europe

The press keeps insisting Russia is preparing to invade all of Europe as if Putin wakes up every morning dreaming about inheriting Germany’s industrial collapse and France’s pension protests.

The propaganda has become so absurd that perhaps we should finally discuss the REAL reasons Russia would supposedly invade Europe:

  1. To acquire Germany’s energy policy expertise and finally learn how to shut down functioning nuclear plants while importing expensive energy from everyone else.
  2. To seize Britain’s world-renowned knife-control strategy where criminals ignore the laws while grandmothers get arrested over tweets.
  3. To capture France’s revolutionary spirit, which now mostly consists of setting garbage piles on fire and blocking highways every few months over retirement age increases.
  4. To inherit the European Union’s debt structure because apparently Russia looked at its own sanctions and recession risks and thought, “You know what we really need? Italian debt too.”
  5. To revive the Dutch tulip market and reignite the original speculative bubble. At least tulips are tangible unlike modern sovereign bonds.
  6. To gain control over Europe’s magnificent demographic strategy where birth rates collapse while governments debate banning gas stoves and regulating pronouns.
  7. To seize all of Switzerland’s chocolates, since they’ve already soured their offshore banking.
  8. To experience the thrill of open borders and historic levels of crime in culturally enriched cities.
  9. To inherit Europe’s university system where students graduate with debt, activism experience, and no employable skills whatsoever.
  10. To inherit Europe’s industrial competitiveness, which now largely consists of closing factories and importing products from China while lecturing everyone about carbon emissions.
  11. To govern government’s government by overtaking the European Commission.
  12. To take control of the ECB’s brilliant strategy of printing trillions while pretending inflation was “transitory.”
  13. To secure Europe’s military stockpiles, assuming they can locate them first.
  14. To acquire London real estate prices so inflated they make Manhattan look reasonable.
  15. To learn from Brussels how to regulate artificial intelligence before figuring out how to generate reliable electricity.
  16. To seize Europe’s famous “green economy” where citizens pay some of the highest electricity prices on earth while China builds coal plants by the week.
  17. To inherit NATO procurement systems where a coffee machine probably requires six committees and seventeen consultants before approval.
  18. To finally gain access to Europe’s remaining middle class before they relocate outside of the EU.
  19. To experience firsthand the excitement of driving through fifteen countries while being investigated online for “hate speech” because someone made a joke.
  20. To save the euro before Brussels itself finishes destroying it.

The reality is that the political class in Europe needs Russia psychologically more than Russia needs Europe economically. Fear justifies military spending, centralized power, censorship laws, surveillance expansion, debt issuance, and political unity around failing leadership. Historically governments always need an external threat during periods of internal decline.

Keep reading

Who’s the Weak Link? The New York Times Strikes Again

I love getting The New York Times daily summary of the news. It makes for great hilarity.

Here’s today’s example:

Top News
Lebanon Emerges as Weak Link in U.S.-Iran Deal to End War

The conflict between Israel and Hezbollah, once seen as a secondary front to the American-Israeli war on Iran, has become one of the main obstacles to ending it.

It’s not Lebanon that’s the weak link here – it’s Israel.

Israel is the attacker. The aggressor. The country that wants to scupper the MOU between the USA and Iran. Everyone knows this – except the NYT, apparently.

I like too how the NYT describes it as the “American-Israeli war on Iran.” At the very least, it should be Israeli-American war of aggression against Iran.

And when was Lebanon a “secondary front” to the USA? America has no desire to seize land and water in southern Lebanon. That goal is entirely Israel’s, as is its fight against Hezbollah, which is responding to Israeli aggression.

The Iran War has been a huge loser (to put it in Trumpian terms) for the U.S., and only Israel seeks to prolong it. Again, who’s the weak link in the U.S.-Iran deal to end the war?

I’ve been playing with Trumpian language to describe the Iran War and its outcome. As Trump might say, it’s been a defeat for America the likes of which we’ve never seen before. No other defeat comes close.

I think Trump finally understands that. The question is, will “weak link” Israel let him withdraw or will the war become even more catastrophic?

Keep reading