Tag: perpetual war

US planning CIA foothold in post-Maduro Venezuela

The CIA is quietly working to establish a permanent US presence on the ground in Venezuela, spearheading the Trump administration’s plans to exert its newfound influence over the country’s future, according to multiple sources familiar with the planning.

Planning discussions between the CIA and State Department have centered around what the US footprint inside Venezuela will look like, both in the short and long term, after the dramatic capture of former President Nicolás Maduro earlier this month.

While the State Department will serve as the primary, long-term US diplomatic presence in the country, the Trump administration will likely lean heavily on the CIA to initiate that re-entry process due to the ongoing political transition and unstable security situation in Venezuela post-Maduro, the sources added.

“State plants the flag but CIA is really the influence,” one source familiar with the planning process told CNN, noting the agency’s near-term objectives include setting the stage for diplomatic efforts – including relationship building with locals – and providing security.

In the short term, US officials may operate out of a CIA annex, prior to the opening of an official embassy, allowing them to start making informal contact with members of different factions of Venezuela’s government as well as opposition figures and target third parties who may be threats, the source said, drawing a parallel to the agency’s work in Ukraine.

“Setting up an annex is priority number one. Before diplomatic channels the annex can help set up liaison channels, that will be with the Venezuelan intelligence and that will allow conversations that diplomats cannot have,” said a former US government official who engaged with the Venezuelans.

The CIA declined to comment.

Keep reading

Israel Replicating a Genocidal Mindset

On 29th of December 2025, The New York Times reprinted an article entitled, “At Last, a Name for the Face of a Nazi in an Iconic Holocaust Photo.”

The photo was taken on July 28, 1941, and here is how the article describes what the picture shows:

“One man kneels at the edge of a pit filled with bodies. He knows that, within moments, he will be dead. His drawn face burns with defiance. Behind him stands a uniformed, bespectacled Nazi soldier. In his extended right arm, the soldier holds a pistol, just inches from his victim’s skull. A crowd of other Germans stand watching, curious but undisturbed.”

The man about to be executed remains nameless and is guilty of nothing other than being Jewish. But who was the executioner? His identity is the revealing part of the story.

“The killer was Jakobus Onnen, 34, a former teacher [he taught languages, French and English as well as physical education] from the town of Tichelwarf, near the German border with the Netherlands.”

His identity was finally matched to other named photos identifying Onnen and attested to by living relatives.

It turns out that Onnen may be seen as an example of “well-educated, prosperous [German] professionals in early middle age” who were transformed into genocidal killers during the era of Nazi influence. How did this occur?

An explanation is offered by Dr. Christopher R. Browning in his 1992 book, Ordinary Men. This is a history of a German reserve police battalion and its role in genocidal violence carried out in 1942 Poland.

Brown argues that most of the men in this battalion did not begin as conscripted Nazi fanatics, rabid antisemites, or congenital killers. Instead they allowed themselves to be remade by “years of propaganda” absorbed within a community environment that “discouraged independent thought”[my italics]. 

The same environment encouraged “conformity, deference to authority, adaptation to new roles and responsibilities, and the altering of moral norms to justify the resulting actions.” In the end, they “perversely believed [murder] to be a professional obligation.”

Keep reading

Beyond MREs: The U.S. Army Is Testing 3D-Printed Food for the Battlefield

The future of military rations may move beyond the iconic plastic-sealed MREs, replaced by meals printed layer by layer, tailored to each Soldier’s needs, and prepared on demand near the battlefield.

A new study conducted by researchers at the U.S. Army Combat Capabilities Development Command (DEVCOM) suggests that while many Soldiers initially recoil at the idea of eating 3D-printed food, hands-on exposure and tasting experiences can rapidly shift attitudes—potentially paving the way for a new era of personalized military nutrition.

Set to be published in the June 2026 edition of Future Foods, the research offers one of the first direct looks at how U.S. Army personnel actually perceive food made through additive manufacturing.

The findings are significant not only for military logistics but also for the broader future of food technology, where customized nutrition, reduced supply burdens, and decentralized production are becoming strategic priorities.

Beyond the novelty of 3D-printed food is the reality that modern warfare increasingly demands mobility, endurance, and sustained cognitive performance under extreme conditions. Feeding Soldiers efficiently—without weighing them down—remains a persistent logistical challenge. The Pentagon believes that 3D-printed food rations could help solve that problem.

“Initially, Soldiers showed skepticism and reluctance towards use of the technology,” the researchers behind the recent study note. “However, after 3DFP technology was explained and 3D-printed prototypes were provided, Soldiers’ acceptance increased considerably.”

The Army-led research team conducted focus groups and tasting sessions with 17 U.S. Army Combat Medics to examine their reactions before and after encountering 3D-printed food prototypes.

Initially, most participants were skeptical, associating printed food with artificial, overly processed products or bland “calorie blocks.” However, attitudes evolved as Soldiers learned more about the technology and sampled 3D-printed food themselves.

One Soldier summed up a key concern voiced early in discussions, saying 3D food printing “takes the identity out of food,” explaining that “When you’re eating chicken, you see that it’s chicken. But if it’s just a brick, it almost makes the feeding process monotonous.”

Essentially, soldiers echoed a broader public sentiment: when food no longer resembles its original ingredients, the experience becomes less satisfying and more tedious.

This reaction captures a central challenge to technologically engineered meals. Food is not just fuel. It is cultural, emotional, and psychological. This can be especially true in high-stress operational environments that warfighters face.

The Army’s interest in 3D printing food stems from long-standing logistical realities. Traditional Meals Ready-to-Eat (MREs) are durable and calorie-dense, but they are also heavy and standardized. A Soldier on a week-long mission without resupply might carry more than 30 pounds of food alone, often prompting troops to cut rations and risk undernutrition.

Additionally, standard rations cannot easily account for individual differences. Soldiers vary in metabolic demands, mission intensity, climate exposure, and dietary preferences. Many end up modifying or discarding parts of their meals, a practice known informally as “field stripping,” to get something closer to what they actually need.

However, 3D printed food offers an alternative. Meals can be produced near the point of need, customized nutritionally and structurally for each Soldier. Instead of shipping finished meals across the globe, raw ingredients or shelf-stable printing materials could be transported and transformed into tailored meals in the field.

That possibility makes understanding acceptance critical. Technology is useless if Soldiers refuse to eat what it produces.

Keep reading

Rubio Hints at Preemptive Strike Option Against Iran

Secretary of State Marco Rubio, while testifying before the Senate, hinted that the United States could take preemptive action against Iran and told lawmakers that Tehran’s leadership is at its weakest point in years.

“I think it’s wise and prudent to have a force posture within the region that could respond and potentially, not necessarily what’s going to happen, but if necessary, preemptively prevent the attack against thousands of American servicemen and other facilities in the region and our allies,” Rubio said during Wednesday’s Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Venezuela, Gulf News reported.

The Trump administration’s push to strengthen U.S. assets in the Middle East, including the deployment of the USS Abraham Lincoln to the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility, is aimed at protecting more than 30,000 service members in the region.

“I hope it doesn’t come to that, but that’s, I think what you’re seeing now is the ability to posture assets in the region to defend against what could be an Iranian threat against our personnel,” Rubio said, referring to a potential preemptive strike.

He added that Iran’s military capabilities are “weaker” than they have ever been, but warned that the country has “thousands and thousands” of long-range ballistic missiles even though its “economy is collapsing.”

Meanwhile, President Donald Trump has publicly supported protesters in Iran, warning Tehran that violence against them would bring military consequences.

He repeated that warning Wednesday, saying future action against Iran would be “far worse” than last summer’s strikes on its nuclear facilities.

Keep reading

After Trump Declared Gaza War ‘Over,’ Media Lost Interest

Since President Donald Trump declared that “the war in Gaza is over” on October 3, 2025, US news outlets’ interest in the occupied territory has plummeted. In a FAIR search of US-related news sites using Media Cloud, a news media database, coverage of Gaza post-ceasefire agreement averaged just 1.5% of the news hole—significantly less than the level of coverage before the agreement.

From July 2 through October 1, 2025, mentions of Gaza appeared in 2.3% of news stories in Media Cloud’s US–National dataset, which indexes 248 online outlets. Starting October 2, the day before the ceasefire agreement, coverage in the next three weeks jumped to an average of 4.5%. For the following three months (October 23–January 22), that average dropped to 1.5%. That’s less than two-thirds the level of coverage it received prior to the agreement.

It’s also the lowest three-month average at any point since the current crisis began on October 7, 2023.

Keep reading

From Board of Peace to Board of Profit: Trump, Kushner, and the Gaza Master Plan Fantasy

At Davos, Jared Kushner, Donald Trump’s son-in-law and former White House adviser, unveiled a “master plan” for Gaza, a seven-slide spectacle of CGI skyscrapers, luxury apartments, data centres, and coastal resorts. Branded Project Sunrise, it promises to transform the bombed-out Gaza Strip into a high-tech Riviera. On screen, Gaza gleams. On the ground, it is a killing field. Over 70 thousands of Palestinians have been slaughtered, many of them women and children; millions are displaced and starving under siege. The United Nations has declared the situation a genocide and is accusing Israel of using hunger as a weapon. Yet Kushner’s presentation treats Gaza not as a humanitarian crisis, but as a blank canvas for profit, spectacle, and real estate development, erasing the ongoing Israeli bombardment and the engineered famine that continues to decimate civilian life.

Keep reading

Gaza: Caught Between Israel’s Ongoing Genocide, and Trump’s US-Led Neo-Colonial Takeover

In the Gaza Strip, the remaining Palestinian population, who have survived two years and three months of the most diabolically well-publicized and even relentlessly celebrated genocide in history, which is still ongoing, albeit at a slower pace than before, are squeezed into just 42% of their homeland — 60 square miles in total, less than the size of Washington, D.C.

The rest, the other 58%, has been occupied by Israeli forces since a ceasefire was declared on October 10, when they withdrew to an arbitrary “Yellow Line” that was meant to be temporary, a phase in a staged withdrawal from the whole of the Gaza Strip, but which is regarded by the occupiers as a new and permanent border with Israel.

Under the terms of the ceasefire deal, which was mainly negotiated by Qatar, Egypt and the US, although Donald Trump, predictably, made it all about himself, even staging a “Peace Summit” in Egypt to which world leaders were invited to fawn over him, Israel was prevailed upon to stop its relentless bombing raids, and its ongoing and merciless ground invasion of Gaza City, in return for the immediate release of all the surviving Israeli hostages seized on October 7, 2023.

This was a considerable achievement, given how enthusiastically Israel had sunk into relentless genocidal depravity over the previous seven months since it deliberately broke the terms of an earlier ceasefire deal at the start of March, resuming its slaughter of Palestinians with horrific brutality.

However, although the death toll has dropped over the last three months from a daily average of somewhere between 60 and a hundred Palestinians, Israel has never honored the ceasefire in any meaningful sense, and has continued to break its terms on an almost daily basis, killing at least 465 Palestinians and injuring 1,287 since October 10.

In addition, Israel has resolutely refused to allow the unimpeded access into Gaza of 600 trucks a day of humanitarian aid, as stipulated in the ceasefire deal, including desperately needed shelter, medical supplies and medical equipment, as well as food and fuel, all very deliberately to try to ensure that the Palestinians will continue to die in significant numbers, as though the latest confirmed death toll of 71,548, with 171,353 injured, many grievously so — and itself a massive undercount — is still insufficient to placate its incessant bloodlust.

Israel is perpetually triggered by a refusal to recognize that the 1,200 or so people killed in the October 7 attacks on southern Israel cannot be perpetually obsessed over as the victims of an unprovoked day of horror, entirely unconnected to the previous 75 years of Israel’s genocidal ethnic cleansing and dispossession of the Palestinians from their own land, and their relentless oppression and arbitrary imprisonment. Nor too, can they realistically be allowed to demonstrate a callous indifference, almost beyond belief, to the catastrophic death toll in Gaza over the last 27 months, which dwarfs the death toll on October 7 to a sickening degree.

Keep reading

Iran Is Not Libya: Why Destabilization Risks Global Chaos

The drumbeat of escalation against Iran has grown louder in Western capitals, from fresh sanctions rhetoric to renewed strike speculation. Beyond the headlines, a dangerous shift is occurring in the strategic thinking of policymakers. The old Neoconservative framework of “regime change”, which assumed one could swap a government while keeping the nation intact, is being shadowed by a far more perilous drift toward policies that risk state collapse.

Whether driven by the momentum of broad sanctions or a lack of viable alternatives, the current trajectory suggests that Western powers are risking a repetition of the “Libya Model” in Iran. A sober analysis of data, geography, and demographics indicates that this path would not lead to democracy, but to a geopolitical catastrophe that creates a security vacuum from the Caspian Sea to the Persian Gulf.

The Libya Mirage vs. The Iranian Reality

The allure of this strategy rests on a kind of amnesia about the outcome of the 2011 NATO intervention in Libya. Sold as a humanitarian necessity, the removal of central authority did not produce a liberal democracy. Instead, it shattered the state’s monopoly on violence. Over a decade later, Libya remains a fractured territory where rival militias compete for control and human trafficking networks operate with relative impunity.

Attempting to replicate this outcome in Iran involves a profound misreading of scale. Iran is not Libya. It is a nation of nearly 90 million people, roughly thirteen times the population of Libya in 2011. Geographically, it sits atop the Strait of Hormuz, a critical artery through which a major share of globally traded oil passes each day.

In contrast to the isolated Gaddafi regime, a destabilized Iran would not implode neatly. It would likely erupt across borders. The collapse of central authority in Tehran could plausibly trigger large refugee flows toward Europe and create conditions conducive to extremism and narcotics trafficking. From a purely Realist perspective, the cost of coexisting with a difficult Iranian state is significantly lower than the cost of managing a major zone of ungoverned instability in the heart of Eurasia.

Sanctions and the Fragility Trap

Some advocates of “maximum pressure” argue that economic strangulation creates leverage for democratization. The economic data suggests a different outcome. While sanctions have undeniably devastated the Iranian economy, driving high and persistent inflation and eroding the national currency, they have failed to produce political liberalization.

In practice, these policies create what economists call a “fragility trap”. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has warned that geoeconomic fragmentation and the weaponization of trade are fracturing the global economy. In Iran, this dynamic systematically hollows out the middle class. By destroying the economic foundation of independent civil society, Western policy eliminates the very social stratum historically required for stable democratic transitions.

As citizens are pushed into a struggle for biological survival, facing documented obstacles to accessing some critical medicines and shrinking purchasing power, their capacity for organized political activism diminishes. They rarely become builders of stable institutions; survival takes over. Thus, the current policy does not weaken the grip of the state; it weakens the resilience of the society.

Keep reading

Trump’s Greenland Gambit Pays Off

President Trump arrived in Davos with one item on his mind: Greenland.  The goal was to make a bid for the ice-covered landmass, which is so valuable to the United States from both a geopolitical and financial standpoint.  At the crossroads of the Arctic, the great “piece of ice,” as our President endearingly labeled it, is situated at a crucial intersection for trade and military operations.  It can provide a great strategic boost to any superpower which claims it, a reason for President Trump’s strong campaign to acquire it, and on the flipside of that, a reason for Chinese and Russian warships becoming an increasingly common sight off its coastline.

Greenland also has tactical utility: intercontinental missiles from any of the aforementioned nations may use Greenland as a strategic outpost for launching them.  Likewise, drones.  Its close proximity to the United States thus heightens the stakes for modern technological warfare if any of the other powers were to claim it for themselves.  While President Trump may have backed away from deploying troops to acquire Greenland by force, instead resorting to diplomacy, if heaven forbid China or Russia, and not our ally in Denmark, should claim this land for themselves, a military option for acquisition would then not only be revived, but perhaps foregone.

Thus, the strong campaign for Greenland is a rare example of an American leader responding to an evolving world order and mapping out a long term strategy in real time.  While the United States is enjoying something of a renaissance under the second Trump administration, Europe continues to languish.  By every metric, European strength, relative to the United States, depreciated exponentially over the last two decades, a trend forecasted to only accelerate in the years ahead.  Europe and the United States may be partners, but the union forged between them today is not that of co-equals.  President Trump knows this; based on similar principles, he understands that it is no longer realistic for Greenland to be managed by a country that has not been geopolitically significant in at least four centuries.

Then there are the resources.  Greenland, which is more than three times the size of Texas and five times that of California, is teeming with natural riches: from rare earths to precious metals to natural gas.  In this respect, it can be an economic windfall for the United States, a benefit that if annexed for Uncle Sam would accrue to the rest of the world as well.  This is because only the United States possesses the technological know-how and manpower to penetrate Greenland’s rough and lifeless tundra that stretches on for miles.  Denmark lacks the requisite drilling equipment; it also lacks the ability to secure the landmass militarily or otherwise.  Already, it has long managed Greenland in a semi-dependent partnership with the United States and other nations.  It is about time that it abdicates its role to greater powers, recognizing that the United States is the clear regional hegemon, and only it can maximize Greenland’s potential, with its vast mineral resources, and stave off hungry competitors like China or Russia in the process.

Beyond the economic upside, Greenland also symbolizes President Trump’s renewal of the Monroe Doctrine: a reinvigorated United States willing to defend its hemisphere responsibly, with a peace through strength foreign policy approach grounded in realism.  This is a gritty philosophy that aptly recognizes power dynamics for how the world is, not how liberals and globalist technocrats would like it to be.  The ideology of globalism, paired with its promise of a new world order, had long deluded European leaders into thinking borders were no longer necessary, human conflict had been permanently abolished, and that Europe could indefinitely profit off American industry, goods, and services, while never having to pay anything remotely close to a fair share in return.

Keep reading

Over 2 Million Ukrainians Are Dodging The Draft

The 2.2 million men that are currently on the run amounts to 6.8% of the Ukrainian population and is slightly larger than the percentage of Asians in the US.

New Ukrainian Defense Minister Mikhail Fedorov shockingly revealed that 200,000 men have already deserted thus far and ten times more (2 million) are actively dodging the draft, which are probably an underestimate but are in any case still very large numbers. To put that into context, Ukraine claimed in early 2025 to have had a population of 32 million, likely an overestimate, so the 2.2 million men who either deserted or dodged the draft amounts to at least 6.8% of the population currently on the run.

Rada Deputy Dmitry Razumkov claimed during a parliamentary session last month that his country had already lost half a million troops by then with an equal number wounded, possibly also an underestimate, while Ukraine is thought to currently field around 900,000 active troops. All of this data enables observers to better understand the significance of these “voluntary losses” since it should be clear by now that 2.2 million more troops would have certainly made a major difference for Ukraine.

That’s not to imply that it would have been able to reverse the military-strategic dynamics of the conflict that have trended in Russia’s favor since the epic failure of Ukraine’s NATO-backed counteroffensive in summer 2023, but perhaps it might have been able to decelerate the pace of its losses afterwards. Ukraine could have thus also been in a comparatively better diplomatic position too going into Trump 2.0 a year ago and that might have in turn predisposed him to a relatively harder line towards Russia as well.

For that reason, while the scale of its desertions and draft-dodging can’t credibly be described as a game-changer, it can still be considered a significant variable that adversely affected Ukraine’s fortunes. By contrast, this was never a relevant factor for Russia, which hasn’t conscripted anyone unlike Ukraine. On that topic, it’s worthwhile reminding readers about Ukraine’s forcible conscription policy that’s been made infamous by viral videos showing officials snatching young and old men alike off the streets.

Keep reading