Tag: perpetual war

FBI offers $200K reward for ex-U.S. agent charged with espionage for Iran

A $200,000 reward is being offered by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for information regarding the arrest of Monica Witt, a former U.S. service member and counterintelligence agent, who is charged with espionage for Iran.

On Thursday, the FBI announced in a statement that Witt, 47-years-old, was indicted by a federal grand jury in the District of Columbia in February 2019 on espionage charges, including allegedly transmitting national defense information to the Iranian government.

Witt intentionally provided information that endangered U.S personnel and their families who were stationed overseas and conducted research on behalf of the Iranian regime which allowed them to target her former colleagues in the U.S. government, according to the statement.

“Monica Witt allegedly betrayed her oath to the Constitution more than a decade ago by defecting to Iran and providing the Iranian regime National Defense Information and likely continues to support their nefarious activities,” said Daniel Wierzbicki, special agent in charge of the FBI Washington Field Office’s Counterintelligence and Cyber Division.

Keep reading

Milton Friedman’s All-Volunteer Military

Milton Friedman was one of the most influential leaders of the libertarian and classical liberal movement in the second half of the 20th century. A staunch advocate for applying free-market principles to government policy, he served as Professor of Economics at the University of Chicago from 1946 until his retirement in 1980.

In 1976, Friedman was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics—during the time your columnist was an undergraduate at the university. Many of his students became known as the “Chicago Boys,” who helped introduce free-market reforms across Chile and much of Latin America. Today, President Javier Milei of Argentina stands as one of their prominent intellectual heirs.

A prolific writer, Friedman often collaborated with his wife, Rose, whom he met as a graduate student in economics at Chicago in the 1930s. Together they produced two of his most influential books:

1. Capitalism and Freedom (1962); and
2. Free to Choose: A Personal Statement (1980), which was later adapted into a popular PBS television series.

Both works championed the idea that voluntary exchange and market mechanisms could deliver public services more effectively than government mandates—including areas such as education (charter schools) and national defense.

Proposing an All-Volunteer Army

Friedman’s most impactful public policy achievement was his long campaign for an all-volunteer military. He argued that instead of conscripting young men, the government should hire willing volunteers at market wages. While the Navy, Marines, and Air Force had always relied on volunteers, the threat of being drafted into the Army often drove young men to enlist in those other branches.

Friedman maintained there was no moral or practical justification for the draft. He viewed it as inequitable, arbitrary, and deeply intrusive—interfering with young men’s freedom to shape their own lives. Economically, he believed it was ultimately more expensive than a volunteer force that paid competitive wages.

In 1971, Congress held hearings on the transition to an all-volunteer force. Friedman testified in favor. Opposing him was General William Westmoreland, former commander of U.S. forces in Vietnam (1964–1968), who had a distinguished record including combat heroism in World War II, graduation from the Army War College, and an MBA from Harvard. During a break, Westmoreland approached Friedman and asked, “How would you like to be defended by mercenaries?”

Friedman’s swift reply: “Better than being defended by slaves!”

Keep reading

US Trapped by Iran’s Resilience; Why the Solution Is Agreement, Not Attrition

In recent months, a painful but increasingly undeniable conclusion has begun to emerge across Western think tanks, mainstream media, and U.S. intelligence assessments: contrary to Washington and Tel Aviv’s initial expectations, Iran has neither collapsed, fragmented, nor moved toward surrender. On the contrary, the conflict has exposed layers of what can only be described as Iran’s “structural resilience” – a resilience many in the West either underestimated or failed to include in their strategic calculations altogether. The central question is no longer whether the United States can inflict damage on Iran. The real question is whether such pressure is actually capable of producing Washington’s desired political outcome.An increasing number of Western analyses now suggest the answer is no. The United States and its allies are gradually realizing that they are confronting a country capable of enduring pressure, reproducing internal control, managing crises, and exporting the costs of war beyond its borders. This reality has drawn Washington into what may be called “the trap of Iranian resilience” – a situation in which continued pressure no longer changes Tehran’s behavior but instead exponentially raises the costs for America itself.

In the early stages of escalating confrontation, the dominant assumption in Washington was that a combination of military strikes, maritime pressure, infrastructure destruction, and psychological warfare could disrupt Iran’s decision-making system. Yet even some recent U.S. intelligence assessments now acknowledge that Iran possesses the capacity to withstand sustained pressure over a prolonged period. When classified evaluations speak of Iran’s ability to endure months of maritime pressure and blockade, it effectively means that America’s most important coercive lever has failed to produce the rapid strategic results initially anticipated. This issue extends far beyond the military battlefield. One of the most significant dimensions of Iran’s resilience lies in its ability to transfer the costs of conflict to the global economy. Rising insecurity along energy routes, scattered attacks in strategic waterways, and disruptions to maritime security have directly affected global energy markets. The surge in oil prices beyond psychologically critical thresholds is not merely an economic indicator; it is a geopolitical message. Iran has demonstrated that if it is forced to bear the costs of war, those costs will not remain confined within its own borders. Instead, part of the burden will be shifted onto the global economy, international energy markets, and even the domestic political environment inside the United States. This is precisely where America’s strategy begins to erode. Washington has entered a conflict that becomes more costly the longer it continues – from inflationary pressure and domestic political divisions to the depletion of military stockpiles and growing criticism regarding the war’s unclear objectives. What was initially framed as an operation to rapidly contain Iran has increasingly become a stage upon which the limitations of American power are being exposed.

Inside Iran, meanwhile, the war has not produced the kind of social collapse many Western circles expected. New Western analyses openly acknowledge that the wartime atmosphere has actually helped the Iranian state reassert security control over public space. The political system has relied on loyalist networks, security organization, and the cohesion of the regime’s hard core to reinforce social control. In other words, rather than weakening the political structure, the conflict has given it an opportunity to redefine and rebuild its security order. This point is strategically significant for the United States because a major part of the initial calculations rested on the assumption that external pressure could widen internal fractures and transform public dissatisfaction into political crisis. Yet even some Western media outlets now concede that the wartime environment has reduced the visibility and activity of opposition groups while restoring a more securitized atmosphere in urban spaces. This means one of the central indirect objectives of maximum pressure has also failed to materialize.

At the same time, Iran’s power structure has not suffered the kind of paralysis Western strategists anticipated. Recent intelligence assessments suggest that even under wartime conditions, Iran’s political system has managed to establish a form of controlled distribution of power – a model in which decision-making is coordinated across institutions, preventing a complete breakdown of command structures. This is precisely what distinguishes Iran’s structural resilience from many other regional actors. In numerous states, severe military pressure can trigger the collapse of the chain of command. In Iran, however, the system appears designed to preserve operational continuity even under crisis conditions.

Keep reading

Xi Jinping Warns Trump of ‘Clashes’ Over Taiwan During Tense Beijing Summit

Chinese President Xi Jinping warned President Trump that Taiwan could trigger “clashes and even conflicts” between the United States and China.

The warning injected a dangerous note into an otherwise warm Beijing summit focused on trade, investment and global power.

Xi Issues Taiwan Warning

Xi raised Taiwan during Wednesday’s high-stakes meeting with President Trump in Beijing.

China’s Foreign Ministry later described Taiwan as the most important issue in U.S.-China relations.

“President Xi stressed to President Trump that the Taiwan question is the most important issue in China-U.S. relations,” spokesperson Mao Ning said.

Keep reading

Russia Launches Massive Drone And Missile Assault On Ukrainian Western Border Crossings Amid Escalation Signs. Pentagon Halts 4,000 Troop Deployment To Poland.

In one of the largest aerial assaults of the ongoing conflict, Russia on Wednesday unleashed hundreds of kamikaze drones and missiles targeting Ukrainian infrastructure, with a notable focus on border crossings to Western neighbors. Ukrainian officials and regional reports described the strikes as unprecedented in scale, raising concerns about efforts to isolate Ukraine economically and logistically from Europe.

According to Ukrainian Air Force data, Russian forces launched 753 strike drones—primarily Geran-2 (Shahed-type) models, along with decoys—between 08:00 and 18:30 local time. Air defenses reportedly neutralized or suppressed around 710 of them, though strikes caused damage in multiple regions, including western areas near NATO borders, reported Military.com.

At least 150 Geran-2 drones specifically targeted Ukraine-side border crossings with Poland, according to preliminary assessments. Slovakia temporarily closed all its border crossings with Ukraine for security reasons after Russian drones approached the Zakarpattia region and the city of Uzhhorod. Operations resumed after a brief suspension.

Drones were also spotted in Moldovan airspace during the assault. Moldovan authorities reported the incursion but took no interceptive action, observing the drones flying near the Romanian border, wrote Spectator.

The attacks included a significant missile component, with reports of hypersonic Kinzhal missiles among the strikes on targets across Ukraine.

Analysts and observers note that the emphasis on western border infrastructure suggests an intent to disrupt not only weapons flows but also cross-border trade and economic links. This comes as some describe the conflict shifting from Russia’s initial “special military operation” framing to a more conventional full-scale war.

Keep reading

‘Zelensky thrives on war, why would he end it?’: Former press secretary exposes Ukraine’s posturing

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky is prolonging his country’s conflict with Russia in order to enrich himself and his associates in his cabinet, former spokeswoman Yulia Mendel has claimed in an interview with Tucker Carlson.

Mendel, Zelensky’s press secretary from 2019 to 2021, launched a series of stinging allegations of corruption and drug use as Andrey Yermak, Zelensky’s former influential chief of staff, was named a suspect in a money laundering case. Zelensky’s longtime former business partner, Timur Mindich, fled the country last year to avoid arrest in connection with another major corruption scandal involving energy-sector kickbacks that has seen several other close associates of the Ukrainian leader placed under suspicion.

In an episode of the Tucker Carlson Show released on Monday, Mendel described her former boss as a “dictator” who has grown “detached from reality” and employed “thousands of talking heads” to craft a favorable image both at home and abroad.

Keep reading

Kuwait Accuses Iran of Attacking Island with Chinese-Funded Port

Kuwait on Tuesday arrested four alleged members of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and accused them of attempting to infiltrate Bubiyan Island, a Kuwaiti territory close to shipping lanes and oil fields that has a port under construction with Chinese funding.

Bubiyan is the largest island under Kuwait’s control in the northern Persian Gulf, close to the border with Iraq. It is sparsely inhabited at the moment, but will change with the completion of the Mubarak al-Kabeer Port, a massive project under construction with Chinese assistance as part of Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

The ambitious $4.1 billion port is expected to become a major hub for container ships, greatly increasing Kuwait’s trading profile and China’s economic influence on the region. The facility could also be helpful for shipping from Iraq and Iran to Red Sea trade routes.

The initial stage of construction was completed in 2014, while Kuwait hopes the port will become operational before the end of 2026. Mubarak al-Kabeer is very important to the “Kuwait 2035” project, an agenda modeled after Saudi Arabia’s Saudi Vision 2030 initiative to reduce the country’s dependence on oil for revenue.

According to the Kuwaiti Interior Ministry, on May 1 a fishing boat “specially chartered to carry out hostile actions against Kuwait” approached Bubiyan Island with six Iranians on board. Five were apparently IRGC officers, while the sixth was the captain of the chartered boat.

The IRGC is the elite theocratically-controlled wing of the Iranian military and has been designated a terrorist organization by the U.S. government and European Union (EU). IRGC units handle most of Iran’s skullduggery in other countries, including recruiting and supplying proxy forces and destabilizing other Middle Eastern governments.

Keep reading

Treasury Department Alerts US Banks To Suspected Iranian Money Laundering Efforts

The U.S. Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes ​Enforcement Network (FinCEN) on May 11 issued an alert to financial institutions warning them of efforts by ​the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) to evade sanctions.

FinCEN said in a statement that the IRGC has been facilitating and laundering the proceeds of illicit oil sales using networks of financial facilitators and shell companies. The alert provides red flags on the IRGC’s oil smuggling, digital assets, and front-company abuse to aid financial institutions in detecting and reporting suspicious activity, the statement said.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said that financial institutions have a responsibility to stop this activity.

“Degraded by Economic Fury, the Iranian military is desperately trying to fund its weapons programs and terrorist proxies,” Bessent said.

“Treasury will continue to deny the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps access to the financial networks it exploits to fund its terrorist acts. Financial institutions should be on notice that they have a responsibility to detect suspicious activity and stop it in its tracks.”

The Treasury network describes the IRGC as a parallel organization to Tehran’s regular armed forces, which reports directly to the leader, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei. The IRGC is a U.S.-designated foreign terrorist organization.

Shadow Banking

FinCEN says the IRGC can make money from oil sales by misrepresenting its commercial activities. It smuggles oil using a “shadow fleet” of vessels that operate outside normal maritime rules and are often owned and operated by companies outside Iran.

Proceeds are then laundered through “shadow banking” networks to sell their oil and commodities abroad.

“By using front company accounts outside Iran to receive and remit payments, sanctioned entities like the IRGC are able to conduct transactions through the international financial system without repatriating funds to Iran,” FinCEN said.

The network says that with these proceeds, Iran can fund the procurement and development of weapons, as well as fund terrorist activity abroad.

Keep reading

Who’s Your Daddy Now? Failing War Empowering Euros To Break With Trump

Nearly a year ago, NATO Chief Mark Rutte of the Netherlands was excoriated for calling Donald Trump “daddy” in reference to the American president’s “tough talk” on Europe, whether it be on member states’ per capita contributions to the defense pot, or Washington’s demands to “take” Greenland.

This was at a time of course when European leaders believed that appeasing Trump in such ingratiating terms, and in dulcet tones pitched to soothe rather than challenge, was the way to the man’s heart, if not soul. It certainly did not work.

So after Trump’s second attack on Iran in Feb. 28 and the resulting Iranian closure of the Hormuz Strait happened, some Europeans decided to change their tune. In addition to Rutte never again uttering the word “daddy,” the Spanish president Pedro Sanchez closed off the country’s bases to U.S. military access and condemned Trump’s war as a violation of international law. Germany’s Frederich Merz called the Iran War “humiliating” for the U.S. Italy has closed its bases, and UK and French leaders said the U.S. could only use their bases to defend UK and French assets, not to launch operations against Iran.

Meanwhile, Trump looked around and demanded NATO member states help him wrench control of the strait from Iran. Aside from pledging to meet and come up with ideas to secure the strait after the war, no one has complied. To say Trump is agitated and lashing out as a result is an understatement.

The situation has called into question the future of NATO, as the administration has suggested that the alliance is falling down on its Article 5 obligations, which is not true — a member was not attacked and NATO is not an offensive alliance designed to enter wars at members’ behest. Regardless, if the cohesion of NATO was shaky before, some are saying it’s on life support now.

Keep reading

Is Trump Following in LBJ’s Footsteps?

On 12 May 2026, I was on “Judging Freedom” talking with the Judge about the growing realization in the American body politic that not only is the Iran war lost, but the defeat will have disastrous consequences for the US and countries all over the world. Of course, the Judge and virtually all of his regular guests have been saying that for a long time, but many refused to believe that the war was a lost cause. That is no longer the case, as the essay in The Atlantic by the prominent neoconservative Robert Kagan illustrates.

It seems to me, as I noted to the Judge, that the war appears to be having serious negative effects on President Trump. He often looks worn down and sometimes even disoriented. And his comments — especially his Truth Social posts — sound like the ravings of a desperate man, not someone who is in control of the events around him. He surely knows he has no war-winning strategy in Iran and that his presidency is likely to be badly damaged, if not ruined, by this war, which he foolishly started against the advice of his principal advisors.

As I remarked to the Judge, it reminds me of what happened to President Johnson during the Vietnam war. He was sworn in on 20 January 1965 (sixty years to the day before Trump was sworn in for his second term) after winning a landslide victory in the presidential election on 3 November 1964. Johnson was on top of the political world, but then in March 1965, he sent the first US combat troops into South Vietnam and launched the famous “Rolling Thunder” bombing campaign against North Vietnam. In effect, he started a losing war that destroyed his presidency and made his life a living nightmare. It looks like President Trump is heading into a similar situation.

Keep reading