It seems medical schools and law schools are as fed up with being ranked just as students hate ranking when applying to school, and post-graduate medical education

Law schools set the scene for an exodus when they began to pull out of U.S. News' rankings in November. Among the first to leave were Harvard's, Stanford's and Columbia's law schools; the same institutions' medical schools were first to back out of their respective rankings, too. The law schools cited many of the same concerns that medical school deans have expressed in community letters and news releases detailing the reasons for their withdrawal. U.S. News rankings lean on peer assessments from deans, admissions directors, and academics, which some say creates an elitist "legacy" mentality. Who has withdrawn? 

The following schools have pulled out of U.S. News and World Report's ranking system,

1. Harvard Medical School (Boston) 

2. Stanford (Calif.) School of Medicine

3. Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons (New York City)

4. University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine (Philadelphia)

5. Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (New York City)

6. University of Washington School of Medicine (Seattle)

7. Washington University School of Medicine (St. Louis)

8. University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine 

9. Chicago Medical School at Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science 

10. Duke University School of Medicine (Durham, N.C.) 

11. University of Michigan Medical School (Ann Arbor) 

12. Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine (Baltimore)

13. Kaiser Permanente Bernard J. Tyson School of Medicine (Pasadena, Calif.)

People began to question hierarchies, social and institutional. In a Nov. 9 Becker's feature titled "Does prestige belong in medicine?" Gary Kaplan, MD, former CEO of Virginia Mason Franciscan Health, said, "I'm not advocating for medicine to not be a sought after or prestigious profession, but the reason people go into medicine should not be because they want to be in a prestigious profession." 

"Medical education cannot be reduced to a set of numbers that purport to reflect its quality," said David Muller, MD, dean for medical education at Mount Sinai's Icahn School of Medicine in New York City. "Candidates to medical school want to know about culture and climate, mentorship, opportunities for research and community service, wellness initiatives, curricular outcomes, and the depth and breadth of student support."

An argument is ongoing whether COVID-19 originated in the wild or was produced in the Wuhan Virology Laboratory. Unbelievably the answer depends upon whether you are a Republican or a Democrat.

GOF has been studied for decades. It is nothing new or groundbreaking.

In The Scroll Seigel and Cooper talk about ‘The Big Story”, The White House said on Monday it would support state science laboratories conducting controversial gain-of-function (GoF) research, just as a new Department of Energy report said the COVID-19 virus likely originated after a GoF accident at a laboratory in Wuhan, China. “[The president] believes there has to be legitimate scientific research into the sources, or potential sources, of pandemics,” John Kirby, National Security Council spokesman, said at a White House press conference. Research like GoF, which involves tampering with viruses to make them more dangerous in order to better understand them and create prevention measures, “must be done in a safe and secure manner and as transparent as possible to the rest of the world.” As Norman Doidge pointed out in Tablet in February 2021, “GoF research is also the meat and potatoes of germ warfare, the manufacture of biological weapons, and—perhaps—measures to counter them.” Their credo is you have to make the germs to learn how to kill them. Each side of the germ warfare scenario is guessing which microbes the other side is developing. It is a bit like the nuclear arms race. Theoretically (or actually) a vault of biological weapons and vaccines is stored, just in case. Once a candidate vaccine is made then newer mRNA technology can create a huge armory of vaccines in a short time. The prospect of having a vaccine takes the burden off protagonists since a rapid antidote could be available. Perhaps we need a new moratorium on biological weapon research just as we did with nuclear weapons.

The Daily Signal stated that Wuhan Lab was funded by the EcoHealth Alliance, a global non-profit scientific research center through the Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease [NAID], headed by Fauci. EcoHealth is known for research into the critical connections between human, animal, and environmental health. The report also stated that the fund was granted without proper review and that the funding also covered gain-of-function research on a bat coronavirus, which might have created SARS-CoV-2. We were relatively lucky with this most recent outbreak of SARS Covid. It might have been much worse. Covid 19 created severe illness in old, infirm, and immune-suppressed patients. Young adults and children had flu-like illnesses. The morbidity and lethality of COVID-19 were much less than the media frenzy would indicate.

The politicization of truth vs fiction will carry forth into the 2024 Presidential campaign. Republicans are more than twice as likely than Democrats to back the lab leak theory

While over 2 in 5 U.S. adults said they believe the pandemic began because the virus spilled from the Wuhan lab, roughly 1 in 4 think the virus moved naturally from animals to humans. Both figures are virtually unchanged since a June 2021 survey on the topic.

About 2 in 3 Republicans back the theory that the virus leaked from a lab, more than double the share of Democrats (32%) who said the same. Meanwhile, just 14% of Republicans believe the pandemic began because of the natural transmission of the virus, compared with 39% of Democrats.

Among independents, 43% said they don’t know or have no opinion on the pandemic’s origins, while 38% believe the virus leaked from a lab, and 19% believe it was transmitted naturally. Even more interesting are these pronouncements;

Fact Check: Did Anthony Fauci Fund Bat Research in Wuhan Lab by Bypassing Rules?

We have to go back two decades to find how the NIAID funded scientists both in the United States and around the world for GOF research. A quick study on Medline reveals how many papers were published during this time period on GOF. I remember when I was an NSF grantee in 1964 reading about GOF.

Antony Fauci, the chief medical advisor to the President of the USA, is under attack by Republicans yet again. This time, he is being called the father of the actual virus, referring to coronavirus. Some publications also claimed that Fauci had bypassed rules to fund bat research in Wuhan Lab. Here is a fact check.

Various reports including the one published in The Daily Signal stated that Wuhan Lab was funded by the EcoHealth Alliance, a global non-profit scientific research center through the Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease [NAID], headed by Fauci. EcoHealth is known for research into the critical connections between human, animal, and environmental health. The report also stated that the fund was granted without proper review and that the funding also covered gain-of-function research on a bat coronavirus, which might have created SARS-CoV-2.

Working on these biological agents is like standing next to a nuclear reactor. You are safe only if the shielding works.

There is a process for research grants that applicants must reveal procedure, caution, and diligence in their facility to be granted NIH funding for said research. Whether these provisions were applied to Wuhan has never been disclosed. Was it Fauci’s responsibility? We will never know. There is a lot to unwrap.

President Trump directed the U.S. Navy to halt the use of the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) and magnetic elevators on future Ford-class aircraft carriers, starting with the future USS Doris Miller (CVN-81), and return to traditional steam catapults and hydraulic systems. [1, 2, 3]

Background and Rationale

• The Directive: Trump issued a presidential memo and directed the Navy to step back from advanced electromagnetic tech, calling EMALS “too complex,” “expensive,” and “no good” compared to tried-and-true steam systems. [1, 2]

• Targeted Ship: The mandate applies specifically to the fourth Ford-class carrier (Doris Miller), leaving earlier ships like the USS Gerald R. Ford, USS John F. Kennedy, and USS Enterprise unaffected, as their construction is too far along. [1, 2]

• Stated Benefits by the White House: Reverting to mechanical and steam architecture is argued to fix long-term reliability issues and bypass over-budget development hurdles. [1, 2]

Criticisms and Challenges

• Engineering Hurdles: Naval analysts point out that forcing a fundamental design reversal on a carrier class engineered entirely around electric power generation and advanced reactors is exceptionally difficult and risks steep cost growth and schedule delays. [1, 2, 3]

• Operational Capabilities: Supporters of EMALS—including the Navy’s own deployment data—note that electromagnetic catapults allow for a higher sortie generation rate, put less physical stress on aircraft airframes, and require significantly fewer sailors to operate than legacy steam systems. [1, 2]

• Global Context: Other major military powers, including China on its newer carriers, are actively embracing electromagnetic launch technology rather than moving backward to steam. [1, 2]

Watch this video to learn more about the engineering differences between electric and steam aircraft catapults:

Switching back means ripping out the sleek, modern tech designed to launch planes more smoothly, faster, and with fewer crew. Instead, we’re sticking with a system that’s clunky, labor-intensive, and way more expensive in the long run. We’re talking billions—more maintenance, more personnel, more delays. It’s like choosing a horse and buggy over a Tesla.

And here’s the real kicker: while other countries like China and France are investing in electromagnetic tech to stay ahead, we’re going backward. We’re risking our naval edge just to save a few bucks today. The redesign could slow down carrier production, reduce operational capacity, and force us to rely on outdated infrastructure.

What really stings? This isn’t just about tech. It’s about strategy and future readiness. We’re betting on the past, not the future. We’re risking our ability to project power and stay ahead of adversaries who are already moving forward with cutting-edge tech.

In addition, the USS Doris Miller is under construction. Redesigning and already installed EMAL would increase its costs by millions.

So, to everyone out there who cares about our military strength: speak up. Question the cost over the long haul. Demand smarter decisions. Because rebuilding a shipyard, re-engineering carriers, and sticking with old tech aren’t saving us—they’re setting us back.

Let’s get real. Our Navy deserves better.

United Airlines sees a future for its regional aircraft hubs in electric airplanes

In a piloted demonstration flight, the Heart X1 experimental plane

• Heart X1 becomes the largest battery-electric aircraft ever flown, with a 106-foot wingspan and takeoff weight exceeding 25,000 pounds.
  

• Piloted first flight used approximately $5 worth of electricity, highlighting electric aviation’s potential to deliver structurally lower commercial aircraft operating costs.
  

• Flight demonstrates electric aviation at the scale of a commercial airliner, marking a major step toward bringing electric aircraft into everyday airline service.
  

• Milestone advances development of Heart’s ES-30, a 30-seat hybrid-electric regional airliner targeted for 2031 entry into service, with commitments from United Airlines, Air Canada, and JSX.

The flight was conducted under an FAA Special Airworthiness Certificate in the Experimental Category (SAC-EC), with a test profile that included taxi, takeoff, climb, maneuvering, and landing. The mission was designed to demonstrate all-electric flight at a scale relevant to commercial airline operations.

The flight took place on Wednesday, August 12^th, 2026, at Heart’s X1 flight-test base at Plattsburgh International Airport, a regional commercial airport serving a community of 20,000 people in upstate New York. The piloted mission lasted 27 minutes, during which X1 reached an altitude of 1,100 feet AGL and its all-electric propulsion system delivered more than one megawatt of power.

The flight was conducted under an FAA Special Airworthiness Certificate in the Experimental Category (SAC-EC), with a test profile that included taxi, takeoff, climb, maneuvering, and landing. The mission was designed to demonstrate all-electric flight at a scale relevant to commercial airline operations.

Powered entirely by batteries, X1 used approximately $5 worth of electricity during its first flight. The flight came amid a sustained surge in global jet fuel prices, which averaged $3.50 per gallon for the week ending August 7, up 63% year over year, highlighting the potential for electric propulsion to deliver structurally lower aircraft operating costs while decoupling airlines from the volatility of global oil markets.

“With the first flight of X1, Heart Aerospace has demonstrated electric flight at the scale of a commercial airliner,” said Anders Forslund, Founder and CEO of Heart Aerospace. “Electric commercial aircraft have the potential to fundamentally reshape airline economics and, ultimately, lower the cost of air travel for passengers. This is at the heart of our vision for abundant air travel, with electrification enabling more affordable, frequent, and cleaner air service to and from airports closer to home.”

X1 is a full-scale demonstrator representative of Heart’s ES-30 production aircraft, designed to validate key technologies, aerodynamics and flight performance, and Heart’s organizational capabilities. The ES-30 is a conventional fixed-wing, 30-seat hybrid-electric regional airliner being developed for FAA Part 25 certification. It has attracted customer commitments from major air carriers including United Airlines, Air Canada, and JSX.

“The first flight of X1 is a major technical achievement for Heart Aerospace, a company United has been proud to support,” said Michael Leskinen, Chief Financial Officer of United Airlines. “Electric commercial aircraft have real potential to deliver a better travel experience for passengers while strengthening our business, and we look forward to Heart’s continued development of the ES-30 and its potential future role in United’s network.”

“The energy transition for aviation will require a range of solutions, from operational efficiencies to sustainable aviation fuels, and ultimately the development of new aircraft technologies,” said John Di Bert, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Air Canada. “Our investment in Heart Aerospace and the ES-30 reflects Air Canada’s commitment to supporting innovative technologies that have the potential to transform aviation. X1’s first flight is an important milestone in that journey, and we look forward to continuing to work with Heart Aerospace as the ES-30 program progresses and plays its part in the future of regional aviation.”

With entry into service targeted for 2031, Heart expects the ES-30 to reduce aircraft operating costs by more than 40% compared with legacy regional aircraft. This reduction is driven by lower energy costs, reduced maintenance requirements from simplified electric propulsion and electrified flight systems, and greater aircraft uptime and reliability enabled by an integrated electronics and software architecture.

Heart foresees this cost advantage widening over time through advances in battery technology, technology-enabled gains in crew efficiency, and the ES-30’s low exposure to a growing range of emissions-related aviation taxes and fees worldwide.

Heart is currently developing the first pre-production ES-30 at its pilot manufacturing plant in Los Angeles, with flight testing scheduled to begin in 2028.

The full X1 media kit, including high-resolution photos and video, is available at https://www.heartaerospace.com/x1.

The Electric airplane will require substantial limitations, including

1. Short-range flights

2. Limited altitude (due to energy requirements for climb.)

3. Charging availability at regional destinations

In a combative face-to-face confrontation on Thursday night in San Diego, angry military families challenged the acting secretary of the Navy, Hung Cao, over difficult conditions aboard the USS Lincoln as its combat mission against Iran stretches onward with no clear date to return home, according to two people who attended the in-person meeting.

Tensions boiled over again during a separate virtual meeting later that night between Navy leadership and family members of the 5,000 sailors and Marines aboard the Lincoln, according to audio and video recordings of the virtual meeting reviewed by MS NOW.

In both of those meetings, family members expressed concerns directly to Navy leaders about the well-being and safety of their loved ones after the aircraft carrier set a modern-day record during the ongoing Iran war for the most continuous days at sea.

Among the concerns brought up in the contentious meetings: the sailors’ mental health, safety on deck, a lack of supplies, food shortages, water contamination and disruptions in the mail system, which have caused many care packages en route to the ship to be lost in transit for months.

Loved ones pleaded for information on when their sailors would return home. It remains a question that does not have any answer.

In the tense and fiery in-person town hall at Naval Air Station North Island in San Diego, Cao said that the Navy is preparing another carrier strike group — the USS Theodore Roosevelt — to deploy to the Middle East to relieve the Lincoln, according to two people who attended.

But Cao was unable to specify when that relief would come, citing operational security.

About 200 family members packed into a banquet room at the Island Club, a catering and event center on base, demanding answers from the acting secretary of the Navy. At times, spouses of sailors on the ship were in tears asking leaders what was being done to address issues of mental health and exhaustion, the two people who attended told MS NOW.

One parent said her daughter feels that she is never going to come home and believes she is going to die on the ship. Others asserted that the Navy had not done enough to take care of the sailors as they fight this war.

One woman questioned the mission and said she found it difficult to be proud of her sailor when she believed the military was “killing innocent civilians” and her sailor expressed guilt about what he was doing. Her comment was met with applause from the audience.

While the deployment of the Lincoln appears to have been extended for a second time, in both meetings Navy leaders emphasized the professionalism and grit of the sailors on board.

Vice Adm. Joseph Cahill and Vice Adm. Douglas Verissimo, the top commanders for Naval surface forces and Naval air forces for the Pacific Fleet, along with the senior enlisted leaders addressed the 200-plus attendees virtually Thursday night.

“I cannot even tell you how proud we are of them. They have executed with a level of precision and professionalism that just goes to the quality of our people that have chosen to put the cloth of our nation on our shoulder and answer this call,” Cahill told attendees, noting that the families are an important touchpoint for leadership to understand the challenges the sailors are facing.

As of Friday, the aircraft carrier had been on deployment for 259 days, after leaving its home port of San Diego on Nov. 21. The ship has only stopped twice, once in Guam in December and then July 7, when it briefly pulled into Oman — keeping the crew at sea for 208 continuous days.

After this deployment, the Lincoln and its sailors will be assigned to a different home port in Bremerton, Washington, from San Diego, which has left many of the families stuck in limbo as they wait to figure out when they should make the move north from California.

For now, Navy leaders say that there is a 58-day window for the families to move after the Lincoln comes back and that they are looking at Dec. 31 as a potential target for them to have a “time frame” of when that could happen.

The families expressed frustration that their loved ones were missing many once-in-a-lifetime events, including births of new children and funeral services for close relatives.

One spouse said they have a baby at home who was born during the Lincoln’s deployment.

“My husband has gotten no time with her,” the spouse said. The spouse acknowledged other attendees were feeling the same way, as many expressed their frustrations via the town hall’s virtual chat room, according to audio and video of the virtual meeting reviewed by MS NOW.

“We have friends that are on this boat as well that — they have yet to meet their children,” the spouse continued. “And I just think, like, a lot of us are kind of confused and just feeling frustrated that right now we’re in limbo of not having a date to come home.”

“I wish we could give that to you,” Verissimo responded. “We are working to finalize that, and I can’t … I look forward to the day when we can have at least a date window for home port, and that means they’re heading in the right direction. But we don’t have that right now.”

Verissimo acknowledged that long deployments seem to be becoming “more frequent” in the Navy, reflecting back to deployments during Covid-19, but he said he recognized that the circumstances are different, as the military is engaged in active fighting.

“We hear you loud and clear the impact this has on families, on service members, and the long-term ability of us to stand, sustain our forces’ health,” Cahill said.

Recommended

News

Democratic senator presses Pentagon over ‘broken toilets’ and ‘mental health’ aboard USS Lincoln

Priya Sridhar

News

Moldy showers and no soap: Military families are outraged by conditions on USS Lincoln

Priya Sridhar

But many family members are concerned about potential exhaustion, low morale and the mental health of the sailors and Marines as the war with Iran nears its 23rd week with no clear end in sight.

Many in the virtual town hall questioned what mental health resources are currently available on the carrier and what will be made available upon its return, according to audio and video of the meeting reviewed by MS NOW.

Cahill detailed an approach that includes having deployment-resilience counselors and chaplains on the warships, paired with “Human Factors Councils,” which Navy policy says are “designed to review the human factors that impact the wellness of individuals within the command and identify primary prevention efforts to reduce relevant risk(s).”

“It’s about the unit understanding and sitting down with sailors individually on their Human Factors Councils and having a conversation about where they’re at in their moment in time,” Cahill said.

As for when the Lincoln will return home, Cahill said the leadership team is addressing a number of requirements to “understand each individual sailor” that will be communicated back through a team of fleet and family support centers.

On top of the timeline and mental health concerns, family members expressed worry about the living conditions and food supply on board the carrier, conditions recently reported by MS NOW.

The leaders acknowledged that there had been a “stubborn clog” that caused many of the toilets in a certain zone on the ship not to work for an extended period of time, but maintained that sailors on the ship had been trained to address these plumbing issues and that most of the non-operational toilets were repaired quickly.

They also said that what many sailors think is mold in the showers might actually be mildew “that is not appealing to any of us” as a result of difficult ventilation systems on a ship, but that they take these health concerns seriously and use industrial hygienists to test the bathrooms to make sure fans are working and air is flowing.

They also discussed the unique supply chain challenges that caused a domino effect for timely deliveries of mail, inventory for the ships’ stores and food to the aircraft carrier and the supporting ships that are part of the larger carrier strike group.

The active war with Iran in the Persian Gulf made it hard for supplies to get to the ship from the Navy 5th Fleet’s base in Bahrain, Verissimo said during the virtual town hall meeting.

“When Bahrain was no longer a port for logistics, food and mail … all of the gear that was there when the shooting started got stuck there,” Verissimo said, according to audio and video of the meeting reviewed by MS NOW.

“So, that was an initial very large backlog. That also caused us to, under very contested logistics, very difficult and long supply lines, we had to prioritize food, which was also a challenge and remains on occasion to be a challenge,” Verissimo said.

Verissimo said the Navy prioritized food, then items for the ship’s store like toothpaste and shampoo, and then mail when it can figure out the logistics of getting shipments out to sea. The officials said getting fresh fruit and vegetables to the ship will continue to be a problem because the food spoils by the time it gets there.

“We’re doing a better job with supplies and mail. It’s getting better, it’s still not good, and it was extremely bad for a little while,” Verissimo said. “But we are, we are as a nation doing the best we can.”

Near the end of the virtual town hall, a force master chief said they had been “texting the Lincoln” to get answers on some of the concerns. The text messages that came back, they said, said there was no mold but there was working air conditioning on board, as well as clean water and two protein options for meals. It is unclear whom the force master chief was texting.

The leaders closed out the virtual meeting by thanking the families for their support of the service members during the deployment and encouraging them to reach out to their ombudsmen with any concerns or questions.

“I couldn’t be more proud of young people, old people, all of them working together in some extremely tough circumstances, tougher than I’ve ever experienced in 39 years in uniform,” Verissimo said in closing. “This has been some prolonged work that the Lincoln Strike Group has been under, and I am personally looking forward to the day that we can declassify some of the work that they’ve been doing.”

Homeland Security Paid $464 Million for Airplanes. Then It Parked Them.

The agency used a no-bid contract to buy 10 used jets, saying they were urgently needed for deportation flights. But the fleet has largely sat idle for months.

By David A. FahrentholdAndrea FullerJulie TateNicholas Nehamas, and Hamed Aleaziz

To understand this Department of Homeland Security contract, the reporters talked to people with knowledge of it and examined flight tracking data, contracting records, and internal documents.

Aug. 13, 2026, 5:03 a.m. ET

Starting last fall, the Department of Homeland Security spent $464 million on a no-bid contract to buy 10 used airplanes from a firm in Northern Virginia.

That was an enormous price tag, but the department said it had no time to consider other offers. The planes were needed urgently for deportation flights.

But since then, the department has barely used this new fleet — for deportations, or anything else.

Three of the aircraft are luxury business jets. Just months after acquiring them, the department sought to loan or lease two to other agencies, including one for the use of FBI Director Kash Patel, according to a letter to the department sent Wednesday by top Democrats on the Senate Appropriations Committee.

The other seven are older Boeing 737 passenger jets, which the government has left parked at an airport in Lake Charles, La., for months at a time. An internal government document, obtained by The New York Times, said the agency did not have the staff necessary to operate them.

Advertisement

SKIP ADVERTISEMENT

The acquisitions were part of a surge of rushed contracts handed out recently by the Department of Homeland Security, which has repeatedly used the need for “urgency” to bypass regular contracting procedures. The idled planes highlight the risks of that approach. The agency rushed headlong to spend nearly half a billion dollars, only to end up with planes it did not fly.

The contract also illuminated a broader trend within the second Trump administration: no-bid contracts awarded to people with connections to Mr. Trump or his cabinet secretaries. The company that received this contract, Daedalus Aviation Corporation, is led by a chairman who had donated to a political committee supporting the previous Homeland Security Secretary, Kristi Noem.

Flight records show that seven of the planes purchased by the Department of Homeland Security have largely sat for months at a small airport in Lake Charles, LA.Credit...Kathleen Flynn for The New York Times

The department’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency has long outsourced its deportation flights by chartering planes from private companies. It also uses military and Coast Guard aircraft. Because of that, former immigration officials said there seemed to be little need for the department to take on the expense of buying and maintaining a significant number of its own aircraft.

“If you asked me to write a list of the things ICE needed to increase the number of deportations, buying its own fleet of airplanes would absolutely not make the top ten,” said John Sandweg, a former acting director of ICE during the Obama administration.

In a written statement, the Department of Homeland Security sought to shift responsibility for the contract to Ms. Noem. President Trump fired her in March and appointed Markwayne Mullin, a Republican Senator from Oklahoma, as secretary.

“The contract for Daedalus was made and approved by department leadership before Secretary Mullin was sworn in,” the department said in a statement. The agency said it “reserves the right to adjust course in an environment with evolving requirements and demands.”

A spokeswoman for Ms. Noem sought to place the responsibility on Mr. Mullin instead, saying the purchase was “finalized” under his leadership.

Contracting records show that the size of the contract increased by $303 million on the day that Mr. Mullin was sworn in as secretary.

The agency said that the idle 737 passenger jets had been undergoing maintenance checks, and that there were plans for two of them to begin deportation flights later this month.

The situation with the planes was reminiscent of the department’s about-face on a plan to acquire warehouses to hold detainees. The department spent heavily on those when Ms. Noem was secretary, but reversed itself just months later under Mr. Mullin. The department is now giving away or selling seven warehouses that it bought for more than $700 million.

A letter sent to the department Wednesday by Democratic senators Patty Murray of Washington and Christopher Murphy of Connecticut, who sit on the Senate Appropriations Committee, said Homeland Security officials had already conceded to the committee that most of the planes would not be used for deportations.

“The American people deserve a full accounting of this gross misuse of their tax dollars,” the letter, which was reviewed by The Times, said.

The senators asked for details about the purchase price of each plane and how they would be used.

The agency said that the idle 737 passenger jets had been undergoing maintenance checks. Credit...Kathleen Flynn for The New York Times

Federal law generally requires government agencies to seek competing bids before awarding a contract, to ensure taxpayers get the best deal. But the department sidestepped that requirement for the plane’s contract by invoking an exemption for cases of “unusual and compelling urgency.”

That exemption can be used only when delaying the contract would result in “serious injury, financial or other,” to the government. Historically, it has been used during natural disasters, war, and the coronavirus pandemic.

The department declined to answer questions about what serious injury it was trying to prevent. Contracting regulations require agencies to publish the rationales for no-bid contracts, but the department refused to release this one, saying it “would compromise national security or create other security risks.”

The department has invoked the urgency exemption to justify more than $29 billion in spending across about 500 contracts awarded during Mr. Trump’s second term, according to an analysis of federal data by The Times. Much of that total came from border wall spending. Urgency claims were also used to justify projects like the $220 million in media contracts awarded to firms tied to Ms. Noem and her allies, scrutiny over which contributed to her ouster.

The exemption accounts for nearly two-thirds of the $34 billion that the department has spent on contracts signed in 2026. That’s up sharply from past years. In 2025, the figure was about one-quarter. In 2024, it was less than 1 percent.

Watch and listen carefully to their plan.

America cannot defeat Iran militarily.

Iran has caused a rift in the Arab world by attacking their Gulf neighbors.

If the United States withdrew all military forces from the Middle East, it would trigger a massive power vacuum, force regional allies to rapidly alter their security calculations, and end decades of American-led maritime and counterterrorism patrols. Such a shift would pivot U.S. strategy outward toward other global arenas while fundamentally destabilizing local state balances. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Regional Power Shifts and Security

• Empowerment of Iran: Tehran would face fewer immediate regional deterrents, potentially increasing its leverage over the Strait of Hormuz and projecting greater influence across Iraq, Syria, and the Persian Gulf.

• Hedging by Gulf States: Saudi Arabia and smaller Gulf monarchies would likely stop relying on American security guarantees and instead hedge their bets by drawing closer to regional rivals or courting external powers like China for economic and security protection.

• Resurgence of Extremism: Without embedded U.S. logistics and training support (such as remaining positions in parts of Iraq and Syria), local partner forces could struggle to contain remnants of ISIS or other militant networks.

• Self-Reliance for Israel: Israel possesses an independent, highly advanced military capable of defending itself, but a full U.S. exit would remove vital integrated regional air-defense coordination and alter its strategic posture against hostile state and non-state actors. [2, 10, 11, 12, 13]

Geopolitical and Domestic U.S. Impacts

• Reduced Financial and Material Drain: The U.S. federal budget would save billions currently spent on maintaining regional bases, naval strike groups, and logistics networks.

• Shift in Global Focus: Washington would free up military assets, command bandwidth, and attention to prioritize strategic competition in Europe and the Indo-Pacific.

• Loss of Freedom of Navigation: Without permanent naval staging and air cover in the Gulf, the U.S.'s ability to unilaterally guarantee commercial shipping lanes and respond rapidly to sudden regional crises would sharply diminish. [2]

[

Sources

1] https://www.foreignaffairs.com/united-states/america-must-let-go-middle-east

[2] https://jinsa.org/jinsa_report/keep-u-s-forces-in-the-middle-east-but-move-them-to-israel/

[3] https://www.defensepriorities.org/reports/a-plan-for-us-withdrawal-from-the-middle-east/

[4] https://quincyinst.org/research/will-a-military-withdrawal-from-the-middle-east-leave-a-vacuum/

[5] https://www.reddit.com/r/geopolitics/comments/a1zd3u/what_would_happen_if_the_us_removed_all_their/

[6] https://www.foreignaffairs.com/iraq/dont-abandon-iraq

[7] https://www.thecommonsense.co.za/undefined/the-war-in-iran-and-the-strait-of-hormuz-six-scenarios-and-how-they-will-shape-the-global

[8] https://newlinesinstitute.org/global-security-mil-priorities/the-consequences-of-u-s-forces-leaving-iraq-and-syria/

[9] https://www.facebook.com/CBSNews/posts/the-us-military-is-on-track-to-pull-all-of-its-forces-out-of-iraq-by-the-end-of-/1472275854764254/

[10] https://www.defensepriorities.org/reports/the-case-for-withdrawing-from-the-middle-east/

[11] https://agsi.org/analysis/what-does-u-s-withdrawal-from-the-middle-east-mean/

[12] https://www.facebook.com/WIONews/posts/can-israel-take-on-iran-without-us-supportisrael-iran-war-tomorrowshivan-chanana/1381097317462772/

[13] https://www.facebook.com/IsraeliPM/posts/statement-by-prime-minister-benjamin-netanyahudear-citizens-of-israela-year-ago-/1528252198664904/

Israel’s overlooked diplomatic mission: Winning back the American public

Commentary: Israel’s alliance with Washington may look stronger than ever, but support among Americans and US Jews has eroded; the next government must rebuild ties that cannot depend on whoever occupies the White House

Sharon Kidon|Yesterday | 18:38

The relationship between Israel and the United States may appear closer than ever. Throughout the latest phases of the war, the U.S. administration and the Israeli government worked closely and in coordination, even when their interests diverged.

But that apparent intimacy should not obscure a far more troubling reality: the distance between Israel and the American public has rarely been greater.

For decades, sympathy for and support of Israel were part of a broad American consensus. That consensus had already begun to erode before the latest war, and restoring it must become one of the most urgent diplomatic missions of Israel’s next government, whatever its political composition.

Historically, Israel invested heavily in its relationship with Diaspora Jewry, particularly American Jews, viewing them as a source of political influence and leverage in Washington. AIPAC, the pro-Israel lobby, was for years one of the most powerful organizations on Capitol Hill. Today, more and more members of Congress are distancing themselves from it.

Did this begin with the latest war? No. American Jewry is extraordinarily diverse, and only a minority is Orthodox. Over the past decade, successive Israeli governments have increasingly privileged Orthodox Judaism while tensions with other Jewish denominations have intensified.

Decisions involving prayer arrangements at the Western Wall, conversion and the broader treatment of Reform and Conservative Judaism alienated significant parts of the American Jewish community. Leaders of major Jewish organizations repeatedly warned Israeli officials about that anger.

But domestic Israeli politics, particularly governing partnerships with ultra-Orthodox parties, repeatedly outweighed those concerns, leaving many Reform and Conservative Jews feeling that Israel treated their Judaism with contempt.

Israel entered the latest war as the victim of Hamas’ brutal surprise attack. The world, and certainly American Jewry, was horrified by what happened to Israeli civilians on October 7.

For Jews abroad, the images and testimonies evoked some of the darkest periods in Jewish history. October 7 was not the Holocaust, but for many Jews it triggered a profound Holocaust-related fear and raised a devastating question about whether the promise of “never again” had truly been fulfilled.

Yet as the third anniversary of October 7 approaches, after a devastating multi-front war and amid a national trauma that still grips Israel, much of the world and a growing share of the American public are no longer standing with Israel as they once did.

Israel’s aggressive policy in the Gaza Strip, including its impact on civilians, the expansion of settlements and escalating violence in the West Bank, and the continued military presence in parts of Lebanon, has transformed the way many abroad perceive the country. Israel increasingly shifted, in their eyes, from victim to aggressor and toward a state employing practices they regard as immoral.

Statements by some Israeli ministers contributed to international investigations and legal proceedings in The Hague and further alienated the Democratic left in the United States, which had already been distancing itself from Israel. Even the arrival of the Trump administration, with unprecedented political support for Israel and active American participation in the war, did not bring the broader American public back.

Many Americans focused instead on the costs of the fighting, the attention Washington devoted to overseas conflicts, and rising fuel prices.

The current crisis also rests on bigger political changes. Historically, most American Jews have identified with the Democratic Party.

Benjamin Netanyahu’s decision to align himself closely with Donald Trump and effectively endorse him during U.S. election cycles broke with Israel’s longstanding effort to maintain bipartisan support. That shift had consequences when the Biden administration later faced decisions involving Israel.

Political developments inside the United States have only accelerated the trend. The far-right alt-right is increasingly isolationist. The progressive left, in its own way, is also skeptical of overseas commitments and increasingly hostile to Israel. The result is an extraordinary convergence between two political extremes that agree on very little except one issue: reducing American support for Israel. That convergence poses a genuine strategic danger.

Alongside Israel’s existential security challenges, any government formed after October 2026 must treat this diplomatic threat with the utmost seriousness. Israel needs a new strategy for reconnecting with the American public broadly and with American Jewry in particular.

That strategy cannot depend on one administration, one president or one political party. Israel’s relationship with the United States has always rested on more than government-to-government cooperation. Its durability depended on a wide base of public, Jewish, and bipartisan political support. That foundation has weakened.

Rebuilding it is not a public-relations exercise and cannot be reduced to better messaging. It requires policy, political restraint, renewed respect for the diversity of American Jewry, and an understanding that long-term alliances ultimately depend on societies, not only governments.

For a country facing so many enemies and strategic threats, restoring that connection is not secondary diplomacy. It is part of Israel’s national security.

Jackie was hatched in the Big Bear area of the San Bernardino Mountains.

Jackie and her mate Shadow lived in the woods in a tall tree. Jackie seemed so humanoid that it was chilling. This girl had emotions! Her love for Shadow was obvious. They loved and fought just as humans do when married. They agreed and disagreed like all mates. Shadow and Jackie had different opinions about the interior decorations of their home. Sticks were their greatest challenge…when Shadow brought a stick and placed it in a corner, Jackie would always disagree, moving it to a different corner. What man would disagree or could win an argument with his spouse?

The children, Sandy and Luna, were uppermost in the minds of Shadow and Jackie. Both eagles were so gentle with their sharp talons, which are strong enough to crush a mouse or other prey. Their talons were a mismatch for their body size.

Jackie and Shadow frequently vocalized when returning home to the nest. Jackie would call out well before Shadow arrived, as if saying I’m here, as if Shadow did not know where the nest was located.

Upom returning to their home in the sky Jackie and Shadow would “kiss’ rubbing their beaks together.

Their offspring were incubated by each of them, sitting on them until the. shift change. Both birds seemed reluctant to leave their children making certain it was all clear, and their mate was ready. Jackie was most present, while Shadow would fly off to hunt and do whatever fathers do. The lake provided ample fish, Shadow rarely appeared without a speared fish in his beak. He would place his catch in the nest, and fly off while Jackie sliced the meal feeding it piecemeal to the eaglets.

I still tune in to he homestead. It is very quiet belaying the many years of love shared fromt their place, here on earth.

Will Shadow return, or fly away to find a new mate?

We await the next chapter of FOBV

Chips, Robots, Data Centers, Solar manufacturing.

Musk is following his business model.

Find cheap land to buy (Boca Chica), rural Texas, build a city, build a power plant, and use whatever resources are present at the location.

A cooling water source is available at Gibbons Creek Reservoir. A partially demolished coal-fired power plant that can be converted to a gas-fired power plant.

Governor Abbot has nothing to lose from this project: with employment and a tax base

The planned 100-million-square-foot combined SpaceX and Tesla facility, known as Terafab, in a rendering. The futuristic aerial view hints at a starship.

The chips manufactured at the Terrafab will be used for data centers, earthbound or in-orbit robots, and A.I.

El-Sayed’s win further solidified what geopolitical experts were calling the “New Middle East,” as the state of Michigan was now firmly under Arab rule, making it a more natural fit with other Islamic nations rather than part of the American Midwest.

“When you walk around, you can tell you’re in the Middle East,” said sociologist Harold Morgan. “While in generations past Michigan was very much identifiable as part of the Upper Midwest, just a cursory glance at your surroundings and the demographics make it clear that it is part of the Middle East now.”

Longtime Michigan residents offered mixed reactions. “Part of me always wanted to live somewhere totally foreign,” said Dearborn resident Fred Kline. “Now, without even having to sell the house I’ve lived in for 30 years, I now feel like I’m living in the heart of Beirut. It’s amazing.” Others were not as excited. “Do I need to convert to Islam now?” asked Shirley Becker, who has lived in Grand Rapids her whole life. “I guess I probably should, if for no other reason than to avoid being publicly executed for being an infidel.”

Will Sharia courts replace American Courts? Will I need a passport to visit Dearborn?

Will there be oil drills in Dearborn? How is the filafel, and will bagels be banned?

The White House said on Monday it met its deadline to establish a voluntary framework for evaluating advanced AI models — but it won’t say what the framework contains, who’s seen it or when companies will start using it.

Why it matters: The framework is being closely watched beyond the industry players it directly applies to.

• Policymakers, AI safety advocates, and U.S. allies have been waiting to see what the rules for the most powerful models in the world look like.

What they’re saying: “The voluntary framework outlined in the June 2nd executive order was completed by the deadline,” a White House official said.

• “Discussions with industry about next steps are underway,” the official said, adding that the administration is engaging with “many more” industry partners than just Anthropic, OpenAI and Google.

• Leading up to the deadline, the three labs gave the administration feedback on a draft of the framework.

What’s inside: The framework is meant to give AI developers a structure for engaging the government to determine whether models under development would be covered.

• The framework is supposed to spell out the confidentiality, cybersecurity, insider-risk, intellectual-property protection use, and nondisclosure requirements that would apply when the government gets access to models for up to 30 days before they’re released.

• The framework should also include which “trusted partners” will also have early access to models.

Zoom in: The executive order explicitly says the benchmarking process to assess advanced cyber capabilities of AI models will be classified.

• The threshold for which models are covered under the order is also classified and will only be shared with AI developers and researchers “as appropriate.”

• The order does not similarly designate the voluntary framework as classified, and policymakers and other observers expected to see details.

Between the lines: Companies are seeking clarity early so they know whether models under development are likely to fall under the framework.

• “Just because things are unclassified that doesn’t mean we are going to broadcast them to everyone,” the White House official said.

If you have tried to purchase American goods, consumer products or electronics. Good Luck. Click here to see what is made in MAGA country. The list says 6900 to be exact.

Many electronic devices, smartphones, televisions, and some appliances are not manufactured in the United States. Even if tariffs drive consumers to American manufacturers, no factories are manufacturing them. It will take several years for factories to be built and new logistics for delivery

Here Are 250+ Brands That Are Made in the USA

Clothing

• All American Clothing

• All USA Clothing

• American Giant

• American Trench

• Ayla

• Birdwell

• Black Halo

• Buck Mason

• Clara Sunwoo

• Duckworth

• Ebbets Field Flannels

• Epaulet

• Faherty

• Fox Creek Leather

• Gitman Bros.

• Goodwear USA

• Grown & Sewn

• Hackwith Design House

• Hanky Panky (Most items)

• Hart Schaffner Marx

• Harvest & Mill

• Hillside USA Leather

• Homegrown Cotton

• Huckberry

• Imogene and Willie

• Johnson Woolen Mills

• Joseph Abboud

• Karen Kane (Most products)

• Karina Dresses

• L.C. King

• LA Made Clothing

• Left Field

• Loggerhead Apparel

• Love of Country

• Michael Stars

• North Star Leather

• Oscar Mike

• Origin

• Oxxford Clothes

• Raleigh Denim

• Red White Blue Apparel

• Rendall Co

• Retrolicious

• Rockmount Ranch Wear

• Royal Apparel (Select products)

• Round House Jeans

• R Heroes USA

• Schott NYC (Select products – original designer of the motorcycle jacket!)

• Tanner Goods

• Taylor Stitch (Select products)

• Thorlo socks

• Todd Shelton

• The Vermont Flannel Company

• Vanson Leather

• Wintergreen Northern Wear

• Xelos

Jeans & Denim

• All American: Jeans

• Bullet Blues: Designer Jeans

• Dearborn Denim & Apparel

• Gusset

• Round House Jeans

• Texas Jeans

• Todd Shelton

Handbags, Accessories & Jewelry

• Alchemy Goods

• Bario Neal: Jewelry

• Bollman Hat Company (Some items)

• Brook & York

• Calleen Cordero

• Colonel Littleton

• Darn Tough

• Duluth Pack: Handbags, belts, scarves, wallets

• eNewton

• Estex Mfg. Co.: Tool sheaths, aprons, buckets, holsters

• Farm to Feet: Socks

• Fox River Mills: Socks

• Frank Clegg: Handbags

• Go Forth Goods

• Grip6: Belts, socks and wallets

• Havstad Hat Co.

• Immodest Cotton (Some items)

• James Avery Jewelry (Most items)

• John Medeiros Jewelry

• Kifaru

• Lejon Belts

• Makr Carry Goods: Handbags, stools, wallets, belts

• Maptote: Bags

• Mountain Ridge Gear: Duffle bags, mule & horse packing equipment

• Randolph: Handcrafted eyewear

• Rogue Industries (Select items)

• Smartwool: Socks

• Sockwell: Compression socks

• Stetson: Hats, boots, belts

• Stormy Kromer (Most items)

• Thorlo: Socks

• Tom Bihn: Handbags

• Tough Traveler: Handbags

• Trayvax: Wallets, belts & more

• Walz Caps

• Weiss Watch Company

Shoes & Footwear

Zappos has a page dedicated to footwear made in the USA here.

• Allen Edmonds (Most items)

• Body and Sole Comfort: Insoles

• Calleen Cordero

• Carolina (Some items)

• Georgia Boot (Some items)

• L. L. Bean (Some items)

• Lucchese Boots (Select styles)

• Oakstreet Bootmakers

• Okabashi

• Quoddy (Select items)

• Rancourt and Company

• Red Wing Shoes (Select items)

• Russell Moccasin Co.

• SAS Shoes (Most styles)

• Sbicca

• Sloggers: Rain boots & garden shoes

• Softstar & SOM Footwear

• Sullivan Glove Co.

• Telic Footwear

• Thorogood (Some styles)

• Walter Dyer

• Wesco Shoe Company

Beauty & Personal Care

• Beekman 1802

• BOOM by Cindy Joseph

• Burt’s Bees (Some items)

• Chagrin Valley Soap & Salve

• Derma E

• Dr. Bronner’s

• Drunk Elephant

• Duke Cannon Supply Co

• Ella + Mila

• First Aid Beauty

• FootMate

• Glossier (Select products)

• Groom Mate

• Herbivore Botanicals

• ILNP Boutique Nail Polish

• Jardin du Soleil

• Jordan Essentials

• Kiehl’s (Some items)

• Kitsch: Solid shampoo bars

• Mary Kay (Many items)

• Merle Norman

• Mineral Fusion

• Not Your Mother’s haircare

• Pacifica (Most items)

• Paula’s Choice

• Philosophy

• Pure Haven

• Salt & Stone

• Sparrow Song Soap

• Stila Cosmetics (Some items)

• S.W. Basics

• Youth to the People

Cookware & Home

• 360 Cookware

• AeroPress coffee maker

• All-Clad: Cookware

• American Blossom Linens

• AmeriDown: Bedding

• Austin Air: Air purifiers

• Behring Made: Knives

• Best Drying Rack: Laundry equipment

• Blendtec (Partially made in the USA)

• CHEFtog

• CUTCO Cutlery

• Epicurean Kitchen Boards

• Faribault Woolen Mill

• Farmplast: Milk crates

• Fiesta: Servingware

• FlipFold: Folding tool

• Frame USA: Picture frames, custom framing

• Frankenmuth Woolen Mill

• Goldens’ Cast Iron

• Havens Luxury Metals

• Heritage Steel Cookware

• High Sierra Showerheads

• Igloo Coolers (Select items)

• KettlePizza: Pizza ovens

• Knife-Guard

• Lamson: Cutlery

• Larson: Storm doors

• Liberty Tabletop: Flatware

• Libman (Most items)

• Lloyd Pans & Kitchenware

• Lodge Cast Iron Cookware

• Made In Cookware (Select products)

• Malpaca: Pillows and bedding

• MIDE Products: Aluminum Hooks, hangers and storage products

• Middleton Made Knives

• Modern Memory Design: Custom frames

• Mosaic Weighted Blankets

• Mrs. Meyer’s (Most items)

• MyPillow (Some items)

• Nordic Ware: Cookware

• Oransi Air Purifiers (Some items assembled in the USA)

• Pella Windows

• Peterboro Basket Company

• Pure Country Weavers

• Rada Cutlery

• Riccar Vacuums

• Rubbermaid: Select items

• Soft Coolers

• Sterilite

• Thomasville at Home

• USA Pan

• Virgin Timber Lumber Co.

• Vitamix (Manufactured in the USA)

• Warther Cutlery

• Weber: Grills (Some items)

• West Bend Cookware

Furniture

• Avocado Organic Mattress

• Aslan Mattresses

• Bear Mattress

• Brooklyn Bedding

• Casper Mattresses

• Colonial Furniture

• Contemporary Craftsman Furniture

• Countryside Amish Furniture

• Darafeev

• DutchCrafters

• DreamSofa

• Flexsteel (Some items)

• Fremarc

• Fusion Designs

• Gerstner & Sons

• Giorgi Brothers Furniture Showroom

• Grand Rapids Chair

• Helix Mattresses

• Home Reserve

• James + James

• Kestell Furniture

• La-Z-Boy (Many items)

• Leesa Mattresses

• MotionCraft by Sherrill Furniture

• My Green Mattress

• Olhausen Shuffleboards & Billiards

• Original Mattress Factory

• Rustic Red Door

• Sherrill Furniture

• Simplicity Sofas

• Step2

• Stickley

• The New England Trading Company, Ltd

• Thurstron Vermont Made Furniture

• Transfermaster

• Tuft & Needle Mattresses

• USAOutdoorFurniture

• Vaughn Bassett

• Vermont Wood Studios

• Virco: School & office furniture

• Victor Mill Incorporated

• Vitro Seating Products

• Wren & Cooper

• YardCraft

Electronics

• Audio Research: Audio products

• Blackbox Case: Wooden laptop cases

• Excel: Hand dryers

• Grado Labs: Headphones and phone cartridges

• Klipsch: Speakers (Some are made in the USA.)

• Purism: Smartphones focused on privacy

• Unicomp: Keyboards & accessories

• Vandersteen Audio: Speakers

Tools

• ABC Hammers

• Aloris

• Bondhus

• BraunAbility: Wheelchair lifts and ramps, transit vehicles

• Channellock

• Council Tool: Hand tools

• Craftsman (Some items)

• Dimide

• Edelbrock: Specialty vehicle parts, some items

• Eklind

• Estwing

• Fusion Tools

• Hyde

• Klein Tools (Many items)

• KnKut

• Leatherman

• Made Here

• Maglite: Flashlights

• Maxivolt

• Snap-on (Select items)

• Starrett

• STIHL tools (Some items)

• TEKTITE

• Vaughan

• Wilde Tool

Cars, RVs & Motorcycles

• Airstream: Campers

• Casita Travel Trailers

• Ford (Some models)

• Forest River Motorhomes

• General Motors (Some models)

• Harley-Davidson: Motorcycles (assembled in the USA)

• Honda (Some models)

• Hyundai (Some models)

• Indian Motorcycles (Mostly made, assembled in the USA)

• Janus Motorcycles (Mostly made, assembled in the USA)

• Jayco

• Lance Campers

• Rivian

• Stellantis (Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, Ram, some models)

• Tesla

• Toyota (Some models)

• Thor Motor Coach

• Winnebago: RVs & motor homes

Toys

• Bannor Toys

• Crayola (Many items)

• Green Toys (Most items)

• Lincoln Logs (Select items)

• Little Tikes (Most items)

• Luke’s Toy Factory

• Maple Landmark

• Slinky (Originally produced in the USA)

• Step2

• Uncle Goose

• Vermont Teddy Bear Company

• White Mountain Puzzles

• Wikki Stix

Pets

• All American Canine

• DERMagic Skin Care

• Goodness Gracious

• The Honest Kitchen

• Kona’s Chips

• Lupine Pet

• Petmate (Select items)

• Planet Dog

• Portland Pet Food Company

• RuffDawg: Premium rubber dog toys and dog chew toys.

• Solid Gold

• West Paw

• Wolfgang: Dog harnesses & leashes.

Other

• Allegiance: American flags

• Annin Flagmakers

• Aqua Lily Products: Made in the USA floats

• Argonaut: Carbon fiber bicycles

• Blodgett Ovens

• Case Knives: Pocket and hunting knives

• The Cold Life: Cold plunges

• Color Street

• Concept 2: Fitness equipment

• Detroit Bikes

• Etsy (There are thousands of handmade items in all categories on this website! Check for “Made in America” in the product description.)

• Fischer Space Pen

• Frosted Frog Coolers (Can be found for sale on Amazon)

• GE Appliances (Select appliances)

• Gibson Guitars

• GoRuck: Backpacks and rucksacks

• Grace Alley: American flags

• Grain Surfboards

• Great Dane Trailers

• Halland Guitars

• Henry USA

• Heritage Bikes & Coffee

• Hillerich & Bradsby: Louisville Slugger baseball bats

• King Saddlery: Western saddles, tack, ropes

• Kona Coffee

• Kopf Percussion

• Lawn Chair USA

• Liberty Safe (Most products)

• Litespeed Bicycles

• Maytag (Select appliances)

• Nalgene: Water bottles

• Nokona: Baseball and softball equipment

• Night Owl Paper Goods

• Heavenly Honey Company

• Paul Hoge Creations: Odor eliminator candles

• Pelican: Cases, coolers and flashlights

• Relic Wood

• Renu Therapy: Cold plunge tanks

• Roam: Luggage

• Ruger

• Scrolls Unlimited

• Speed Queen: Washers & dryers

• Stern Pinball

• Uncommon Goods (There is a section dedicated to its Made In The USA goods.)

• Vero Frescobol

• Victus: Baseball bats

• Watershed Drybags

• WeatherTech (Most items)

• Whirlpool (Select models)

• Zippo: Lighters

Although pardoned by President Biden, Fauci has been targeted politically.

Admittedly, I have been an admirer of Tony Fauci, M.D., who was recently vilified by several U.S. Senators who know better. At the top of the list is Senator Rand Paul (MD), who is an ophthalmologist trained at Duke University, a highly ranked ophthalmology residency center.

Paul, being a supposedly well-educated MD, must have missed his courses on the Scientific Method. He did not display a notable career in ophthalmology following his graduation. His five years of ophthalmoloogy practicee was with an optometry group.

Dad, Ron Paul, also an MD (Ob/Gyn), guided him into the U.S. SENATE by riding him on his coattails.

From that point forward, Rand Paul has spiralled downhill and is unable to discern truth, fact, and real science from hearsay and attempted political assassination.

The Republican Senate now houses other questionable, intellectually deficient senators who were apoplectic, asking Dr. Fauci, “What the f-k did you think about starting the COVID preventive methods designed to lessen the pandemic. I was stunned by a Senator using this term in a committee meeting.

When I was a young physician, I was drafted into the US Navy (1969) when virtually all interns were being drafted for the Vietnam Conflict.

His potential was recognized, and he was diverted into a peaceful environment at the NIH. This was a highly competitive career route.

• In 1968, Dr. Fauci joined the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland, as a clinical associate in the Laboratory of Clinical Investigation (LCI), part of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). In 1974, he became head of the Laboratory’s Clinical Physiology Section.

In addition to his accomplishments in high school basketball, he ranked number one in his medical school. Anthony Fauci reportedly ranked first in his class at Cornell University Medical College, graduating with his M.D. in 1966. His academic performance has been a point of discussion, particularly in the context of his later career decisions and public health leadership.

Anthony Fauci is now retired after 57 years at NIH. He is either the greatest or an example of the Peter principle

Gary’s Newsletter reports, You decide;.

Analysis of seven key munitions shows that the United States has enough missiles to continue fighting this war under any plausible scenario. The risk—which will persist for many years—lies in future wars.

Remote Visualization

Table 1: Status of Key Munitions

Table with 5 columns and 7 rows. (column headers with buttons are sortable)MunitionUnit Cost (USD)Estimated Prewar InventoryEstimated Use in the Iran WarDelivery Timeline (Months)Tomahawk $2.6M3,1001,000+ 47JASSM $2.6M4,4001,100+ 48PrSM $1.6M9040-70 46SM-3 $28.7M410130-250 64SM-6 $5.3M1,160190-370 53THAAD $15.5M360190-290 53Patriot $3.9M2,3301,060-1,430 42

Note: This table was updated after publication to incorporate reporting by the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times on Tomahawk and JASSM expenditures. Estimates are rounded to the nearest ten for readability. Unit cost of the latest variants of each missile is listed, as provided in FY 2026 budget documents. “Delivery timeline” here includes (1) contract lead time between defense appropriation and contract award date, (2) manufacturing lead time between contract award and first delivery, and (3) full lot production time between first and last delivery. See Table 2 for the breakdown.

Source: Authors’ calculations based on “Defense Budget Materials,” U.S. Department of Defense, https://comptroller.defense.gov/Budget-Materials/Budget2027/. See the methodological primer for details.

In the 39 days of the air and missile campaign before the ceasefire, U.S. forces heavily used the seven munitions in Table 1. For four of them, the United States may have expended more than half of the prewar inventory. Rebuilding to prewar levels for the seven munitions will take from one to four years as missiles in the pipeline are delivered. These missiles will also be critical for a potential Western Pacific conflict. Even before the Iran war, stockpiles were deemed insufficient for a peer competitor fight. That shortfall is now even more acute, and building stockpiles to levels adequate for a war with China will take additional time.

Diminished inventories will also affect the U.S. supply of Patriot, Terminal High Altitude Area Defenses (THAADs), and Precision Strike Missiles (PrSMs) to Ukraine and other allies and partners that use them. The United States will compete with those countries that also want to replenish and expand inventories.

Many Munitions Have Acceptable Inventories

Before delving into munitions with shortages, it is worth recognizing that many munitions have acceptable inventories. Thus, even if critical munitions run low or run out, the United States will be able to continue the fight.

For ground attack munitions, available alternatives are far cheaper but with the same explosive yield. To illustrate the cost difference, a BLU-110 bomb fitted with a Joint Direct Attack Munition guidance kit costs less than $100,000 while a Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) costs $2.6 million. Both accurately deliver 1,000-pound payloads. These munitions, however, have a shorter range and, thereby, put launch platforms in more danger. Air superiority is required to use them extensively. The alternatives include, but are not limited to:

• Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM): The JDAM ($66,000) is a guidance kit that gives “dumb” bombs the ability to precisely hit targets, with a Circular Error Probable of 5–30 meters. The kit is field-installed on general-purpose bombs with 500-, 1,000-, and 2,000-pound yields. Inventories ran low during the counter-ISIS campaign, which prompted a bump in procurement beginning FY 2016.

• Joint Air-to-Ground Missile (JAGM): The JAGM ($249,000) replaces the Hellfire as an air-launched munition for attack helicopters and Reaper-like drones to target ground targets. Its counter-UAS role is being explored, alongside ship and ground launch options.

• Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) I and II: The SDB I ($67,000) and SDB II ($265,000) are air-launched, precision-guided glide bombs. SDB II allows attacks on moving targets.

Remote Visualization

Figure 1: Alternative Strike Munitions, Estimated Inventory

Low

estimate

High

estimate

020K40K60K80K100K120K140K160K180K

JDAM

Hellfire

SDB I

JAGM

SDB II

Source: Authors’ calculations based on “Defense Budget Materials,” U.S. Department of Defense, https://comptroller.defense.gov/Budget-Materials/Budget2027/.

For countering drones and cruise missiles, the U.S. military has developed several low-cost interceptors, which are detailed in a subsequent section of this analysis. U.S. forces also have abundant—though not necessarily inexpensive—air-to-air missiles as backups.

• AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM): The AMRAAM ($1.03 million) is an air-launched, radar-guided missile. A ground-launched version—developed jointly with Norway—is called a National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System (NASAM). It has been extensively supplied to Ukraine. However, U.S. fielding has been limited with the Army opting instead for an Indirect Fire Protection Capability.

• AIM-9X Sidewinder: The Sidewinder ($447,000) has a shorter range than AMRAAM. It has been repeatedly upgraded since the 1950s—with the current variant, 9X Block II, procured since FY 2011.

Remote Visualization

Figure 2: Alternative Air Defense Munitions, Estimated Inventory

Low

estimate

High

estimate

01K2K3K4K5K6K

AIM-9X

AIM-120

Source: Authors’ calculations based on “Defense Budget Materials,” U.S. Department of Defense, https://comptroller.defense.gov/Budget-Materials/Budget2027/.

The final category is countering ballistic missiles. Here, there is no good substitute for Patriot, THAAD, and Standard Missiles. These are part of the seven critical munitions discussed below.

The Seven Critical Munitions

These seven munitions come in two groups: (1) long-range ground attack and (2) air and missile defense. They have been highly effective in fighting this war, and expenditures have accordingly been high. Large numbers are also needed for a future conflict in the Western Pacific. Many allies and partners use these systems as well, creating competition for output.

The Trump administration recently announced a series of agreements with industry to boost production and put missile inventories on a “wartime footing.” The large quantities of munitions in the president’s FY 2027 budget request further underscore the urgency of rebuilding and expanding the inventory. Near-term deliveries, however, are relatively low because of small orders in the past. Even if Congress appropriates the requested FY 2027 funds, it will take years for these missiles to be delivered.

The figures below show inventories, operational usage in the Iran war, proposed FY 2027 procurement, and expected deliveries of the seven critical munitions in FY 2026. A technical note at the end of this report describes the methodology behind the estimates and calculations.

Long-Range Precision Fire Against Ground Targets

These munitions allow platforms to launch at a long, standoff distance from adversary air defenses. They would be particularly valuable in a conflict with China, which has strong air defenses and a large inventory of long-range cruise and ballistic missiles.

The United States struck more than 13,000 targets over 39 days before the ceasefire took effect. The share of exquisite strike munitions was high in the first few days of the war, as discussed in our previous analysis. As U.S. forces destroyed Iranian air defenses, they transitioned to using short-range, more plentiful munitions listed in Figure 1. Apparently, the United States continued to use some long-range munitions to strike targets too far away or too heavily defended for the alternative systems up until the ceasefire.

Tomahawk Land Attack Missile

The Tomahawk Land Attack Missile (TLAM) is a long-range missile fired from sea at ground targets. Ground-launched versions exist but are not in theater. TLAMs have been in the U.S. Navy inventory since the 1980s, but earlier versions have since been retired. Tomahawks have been used extensively since their first use in Operation Desert Storm: ships can get into firing position without needing authorization from other countries and can also stay ready for extended periods.

The Washington Post reported that U.S. naval assets fired more than 850 TLAMs in the first month of the Iran war. Use evidently continued until the ceasefire, with the Wall Street Journal reporting an updated Tomahawk expenditure of more than 1,000. This could account for nearly all available Tomahawks in the region, assuming two guided missile submarines (SSGNs) are on station. In-theater inventory is constrained as ships cannot yet reload at sea and must return to port. While the exact loadout is classified, 10–50 percent of vertical launch system (VLS) cells on destroyers and cruisers—or 10–61 missiles—are typically loaded with Tomahawks. Each SSGN can carry up to 154 Tomahawks.

Remote Visualization

Figure 3: Tomahawk, Estimated Inventory

Inventory

Reported

usage

05001K1.5K2K2.5K3K

Inventory before 2026 Iran war

Expended during 2026 Iran war

FY 2026 anticipated deliveries

FY 2027 requested quantity

Note: This figure was updated after publication to incorporate reporting by the Wall Street Journal on Tomahawk expenditures.

Source: Authors’ calculations based on “Defense Budget Materials,” U.S. Department of Defense, https://comptroller.defense.gov/Budget-Materials/Budget2027/.

The small number of FY 2026 deliveries reflects, in part, an upgrade and life extension program for older TLAM versions, but these are not counted as new deliveries. RTX announced it will increase annual TLAM production to more than 1,000 under the framework agreement with the Trump administration.

Japan has reportedly been told that its deliveries of 400 Tomahawks may be delayed because of the Iran war. This is a blow to the U.S. position in the Western Pacific at a time when Japan builds a more robust military capability against China and needs these missiles to make that policy viable. A Japanese destroyer recently completed modifications to launch TLAMs.

Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile

The JASSM is a stealthy, air-launched, long-range missile with a 1,000-pound payload. The current Extended Range (JASSM-ER) version has a longer range than the baseline version. An even longer-range version—Extreme Range (JASSM-XR)—is in development, but none have been delivered yet. An earlier version, the baseline JASSM, is available in the inventory as shelf life is typically 20 years. JASSMs were first used in 2018 when President Donald Trump ordered strikes against the Assad regime’s chemical weapons facilities.

Bloomberg reported that more than a thousand JASSMs have been used in Operation Epic Fury’s first month. B-52s from Royal Air Force bases continued to fly attack sorties with these missiles, and around 1,100 JASSM-ERs have now been used according to the New York Times.

Remote Visualization

Figure 4: JASSM, Estimated Inventory

Inventory

Reported

usage

01K2K3K4K

Inventory before 2026 Iran war

Expended during 2026 Iran war

FY 2026 anticipated deliveries

FY 2027 requested quantity

Note: This figure was updated after publication to incorporate reporting by the New York Times on JASSM expenditures.

Source: Authors’ calculations based on “Defense Budget Materials,” U.S. Department of Defense, https://comptroller.defense.gov/Budget-Materials/Budget2027/.

While Poland, Australia, and Finland also operate JASSMs, because they have not used any recently, competition for new production will not be as intense as for systems like Patriot or THAAD.

Precision Strike Missile

The PrSM is ground-launched by field artillery units—Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS) or High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS). It succeeds the Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) with a longer range (>500 km vs. 300 km). The need to have access to friendly territory within range of targets limits their use. In the current conflict, these missiles have struck a wide variety of targets—including a submarine, apparently. An Army official reportedly shared that the “entire inventory of PrSM” had been expended in the Iran war, though other officials maintain some remain in the inventory.

Remote Visualization

Figure 5: PrSM, Estimated Inventory

Inventory

Estimated

usage

02004006008001K1.2K

Inventory before 2026 Iran war

Expended during 2026 Iran war

FY 2026 anticipated deliveries

FY 2027 requested quantity

Source: Authors’ calculations based on “Defense Budget Materials,” U.S. Department of Defense, https://comptroller.defense.gov/Budget-Materials/Budget2027/.

PrSM inventory is limited as it is a relatively new system with deliveries beginning in 2023. Some of the shorter-range ATACMSs, perhaps as many as 800, are still available. Lockheed Martin has been scaling up PrSM production, setting an annual target of 400 units last year and announcing further increases under the framework agreement with the Trump administration. Ukraine has received ATACMSs and would like PrSMs. The shrinking inventory likely precludes further deliveries in the immediate future.

Highly Effective Air and Missile Defense

These munitions are needed in the Western Pacific because China has thousands of missiles that threaten U.S. and coalition forces in the region. They are not suitable for defense against drones because of their high cost and scarcity.

Standard Missile 3

The Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) is a ship-launched interceptor against ballistic missiles. Shore-based versions exist (“Aegis ashore”) but are not in theater. Block IIA is the latest variant with improvements to the rocket and kinetic warhead. The Missile Defense Agency continues to procure the previous Block IB missile, despite previous plans to stop new production. Its first use in combat was in April 2024 when four to seven were fired to intercept Iranian ballistic missiles launched at Israel. Around 80 more were fired during the Twelve-Day War in 2025. As with the TLAM, in-theater inventory is constrained because of the need to be reloaded in port.

Remote Visualization

Figure 6: SM-3, Estimated Inventory

Inventory

Estimated

usage

0100200300400

Inventory before 2026 Iran war

Expended during the 2026 Iran war

FY 2026 anticipated deliveries

FY 2027 requested quantity

Note: The shaded area shows the estimated range. Actual use depends heavily on the munitions mix and allied air defense contributions—see the methodological primer for details.

Source: Authors’ calculations based on “Defense Budget Materials,” U.S. Department of Defense, https://comptroller.defense.gov/Budget-Materials/Budget2027/.

Standard Missile 6

The Standard Missile 6 (SM-6) is also ship-launched, primarily against aircraft and cruise missiles, but can also be used against ships and ballistic missiles. It is a follow-on to the SM-2 but with greater range and a larger target set. Some SM-2s remain in the inventory. RTX plans to increase SM-6 production to more than 500 missiles a year.

Remote Visualization

Figure 7: SM-6, Estimated Inventory

Inventory

Estimated

Inventory before 2026 Iran war

Expended during the 2026 Iran war

FY 2026 anticipated deliveries

FY 2027 requested quantity

Note: The shaded area shows the estimated range. Actual use depends heavily on the munitions mix and allied air defense contributions—see the methodological primer for details.

Source: Authors’ calculations based on “Defense Budget Materials,” U.S. Department of Defense, https://comptroller.defense.gov/Budget-Materials/Budget2027/.

Terminal High Altitude Area Defense

The THAAD is ground-launched against ballistic missiles, with a longer range and higher intercept altitudes than the Patriot. The interceptor numbers were already limited, particularly after more than 150 were fired against Iranian ballistic missiles during the Twelve-Day War. The United States also has only eight THAAD batteries. At least two were outside the continental United States in Guam and South Korea before this war; several batteries have been deployed from the United States to the Middle East for Operation Epic Fury. The United Arab Emirates also has two, and Saudi Arabia has one. A THAAD battery consists of six launchers with eight interceptors each, one AN/TPY-2 radar, and various fire control and communications systems. The United States may have moved some THAAD components from South Korea to the Middle East in March to replace destroyed components or replenish expended interceptors.

Remote Visualization

Figure 8: THAAD, Estimated Inventory

Inventory

Estimated

usage

0200400600800

Inventory before 2026 Iran war

Expended during the 2026 Iran war

FY 2026 anticipated deliveries

FY 2027 requested quantity

Note: The shaded area shows the estimated range. Actual use depends heavily on the munitions mix and allied air defense contributions—see the methodological primer for details.

Source: Authors’ calculations based on “Defense Budget Materials,” U.S. Department of Defense, https://comptroller.defense.gov/Budget-Materials/Budget2027/.

The large FY 2027 budget request reflects the low inventory and high demand. There have been no new deliveries of THAAD interceptors since August 2023.

The cost of one battery, including launchers, radars, and guidance computers, is

Air Defense System Estimated Battery Cost Cost Per Interceptor Missile THAAD (Upper-Tier)$1.0B – $2.8B$12.7M – $15.5MPatriot PAC-3 MSE (Mid-Tier)$1.1B$3.7M – $4.2MDavid's Sling (Israel Medium-Range)Varies$700,000Arrow 3 (Israel Exo-atmospheric)$450M – $630M$2.0M

Deliveries are set to resume by April 2027. Under the Trump framework agreement, Lockheed Martin announced it will increase THAAD interceptor production capacity to 400 a year from the current 96. Of the seven critical munitions, THAAD interceptors are the most critical due to their low inventory and lack of alternatives. Beyond the interceptor inventory, the possible damage or loss of multiple AN/TPY-2 radars that provide targeting data for THAAD batteries will cause a capability gap and take time to replace. Only 13 radars have been delivered to the United States so far.

Patriot

The Patriot is ground-launched against aircraft, ballistic missiles, and cruise missiles. The current version is called the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) Missile Segment Enhancement (MSE) with upgraded rockets and guidance technology. Figure 9 includes earlier PAC-3 interceptors procured throughout the 2000s and that remain in the inventory. Up to 400 of the older PAC-2 missiles may also still be in the stockpile but are not included in Figure 9.

Remote Visualization

Figure 9: Patriot, Estimated Inventory

Note: The shaded area shows the estimated range. Actual use depends heavily on the munitions mix and allied air defense contributions—see the methodological primer for details.

Source: Authors’ calculations based on “Defense Budget Materials,” U.S. Department of Defense, https://comptroller.defense.gov/Budget-Materials/Budget2027/.

Because 18 other countries use the Patriot, these missiles are highly sought after. About half of the annual production goes to support these allies and partners. Ukraine is also a major user, having received more than 600 from the U.S. and other allies over the course of the war.

Lockheed Martin plans to increase annual PAC-3 MSE production to 2,000 by 2030—up from the current 600. Until this increased production becomes available, the United States will face choices on allocating production to meet demands. Pacific-oriented strategists will want the United States to withhold Patriot and other missile production for use in the Western Pacific. Meanwhile, Ukraine would want more interceptors. President Volodymyr Zelensky has pointed out that every Patriot fired in the Middle East is one fewer that Ukraine can acquire. The Swiss have threatened to buy an alternate system after being told its purchase might be delayed. Other U.S. allies are also in the queue.

Unpacking the $1.5 Trillion FY 2027 Defense Budget Topline

Deliveries Take Many Years

There are many steps before these FY 2027 budget proposals become missiles in the field and on ships. First, Congress must pass an appropriation—difficult in the best of times and particularly challenging this year when much defense procurement spending is in a FY 2026 supplemental and a FY 2027 reconciliation bill.

Then, there is the manufacturing lead time for the first delivery. Historically, that has been about 24 months, but as munitions orders have outstripped production capacity in recent years, lead times have stretched to 36 months or more. Production time for the entire lot is another 12 months. That is about 52 months in all—over four years.

Remote Visualization

Table 2: Key Munitions, Five-Year Average Production Rate and Time

Table with 5 columns and 8 rows. (column headers with buttons are sortable). Production Rate (Missiles per Year)Contract and Manufacturing Lead Time to First Delivery (Months)Production Time for Full Lot (Months)Total Delivery Time (Months )Tomahawk 79351247 JASSM 385381048 PRSM 5638846SM-3 IB 40421052SM-3 IIA 1357764SM-6 96421153THAAD 2849453PAC-3 MSE 183291342

Note: Figures above are five-year averages of recent procurement. A 4-month contract lead time is assumed for all munitions. Actual contract time varies depending on when the defense appropriation becomes available.

Source: Authors’ calculations based on “Defense Budget Materials,” U.S. Department of Defense, https://comptroller.defense.gov/Budget-Materials/Budget2027/.

Many of these systems are constrained by production capacity, so manufacturing lead time is even longer. On the bright side, prior funding dating back to the Biden administration supported expanding production rates for many systems, so cycle times will come down.

Low-Cost Alternatives

The high-cost/low-inventory dynamics described above have driven many experts in and out of government to recommend that the United States build low-cost systems to complement or even replace the high-cost systems. Indeed, the FY 2026 reconciliation bill contains several billion dollars for this purpose (Sections 20004 and 20005).

As Figure 1 shows, the United States already has many inexpensive and short-range systems for ground attack. First-person view drones—which are vital to fighting in Ukraine—are not useful here because of their limited range of roughly 20 miles. To field an inexpensive and long-range system, the United States copied the Iranian Shaheed-136 (as did Russia). The result was the Low-Cost Uncrewed Combat Attack System (LUCAS).

The LUCAS ( $35,000) provides an affordable way to deliver standoff precision attacks, with a range of roughly 500 miles. The tradeoff is that it carries a small warhead of 40 pounds. The United States used some in the Iran war but did not have enough to match the salvos launched by Iran in this war or by Russia in Ukraine.

The other category is counter–unmanned aerial systems (c-UASs). The Department of Defense (DOD) began work on the c-UAS about a decade ago, but that proceeded at a measured pace. The war in Ukraine demonstrated how important such systems were, so the United States sent some prototype systems to support Ukraine and accelerated its own efforts. These efforts have produced several low-cost ways to intercept the inexpensive Iranian drones:

• Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS): This is a helicopter-launched Hydra 70 rocket with a laser seeker.

• Roadrunner and Coyote: These are low-cost interceptor drones developed by Anduril and Raytheon, respectively. They intercept and destroy oncoming drones by crashing into them.

• Counter Rocket, Artillery, and Mortar System (C-RAM): This is a radar-controlled rapid-fire gun for close-in protection, based on the Navy’s Phalanx system. Although excellent for protecting specific locations against drones, its use in populated areas is limited because of collateral damage from descending projectiles.
  

Except in rare cases, the United States has not used the very expensive systems (Patriot or SM-6) against cheap drones (the Gulf states may have done that in the early days of the conflict). It also has not had enough cheap interceptors. As a result, the United States and the Gulf states have used helicopters with guns, fixed-wing aircraft with guns, and air-to-air missiles to conduct the intercepts. Some of these air-to-air missiles (AIM-120) cost $1 million each. It is better to use one of those than let the drone get through, but that is not a long-term solution.

A Methodological Primer on Missile Calculations

This section describes how CSIS developed the numbers in this analysis.

Munition inventories are classified, but publicly available information is sufficient to make estimates. The annual DOD budget documents are the starting point to calculate the total number of missiles delivered to the U.S. military:

• Exhibit P-5 provides the number procured and unit cost of missiles by each variant. Assuming a 20-year shelf life, older variants are included in the estimates, provided they were delivered during or after FY 2005. The estimated Patriot interceptor inventory, for example, includes around a thousand PAC-3 missiles—alongside the MSE variant. Excluded are munitions procured for Foreign Military Sales or research and development.

• Exhibit P-21 shows the delivery timeline and quantity. Inventory estimates in this commentary include missiles that the DOD projected for delivery by February 2026 when it released the FY 2026 budget documents in June 2025.
  

Of the total deliveries, 5 percent was deducted for training, lot testing, and other nonoperational uses. Reported and estimated expenditures in past campaigns were also subtracted, where applicable. Deliveries to Ukraine from U.S. stockpiles came from DOD releases and our previous estimates.

Estimated munitions use during Operation Epic Fury was derived from the approach used in CSIS’s cost estimate of the war, detailed in a previous commentary. The starting point here was, again, DOD-released numbers that were then combined with data from Gulf countries, the theater order of battle, and historical employment patterns. The high and low estimates take into account that the actual expenditures will be highly sensitive to the coalition’s contributions to air defense, share of long-range systems for strikes, and the mix of munitions used. For TLAM and JASSM, the analysis reflects expenditures reportedly shared by DOD officials.

The best source on the various munition programs is the Selected Acquisition Report, where available, because of its comprehensive acquisition data. The FY 2027 budget amounts came from the DOD-published materials in early April. Though these documents are incomplete, they provide the number of munitions to be funded. Unit cost of missiles can vary year-to-year. This analysis provides the latest figures based on the FY 2026 budget documents.

Conclusion: Risk in the Next War

If inventories are so depleted, how can the analysis conclude that the United States has enough munitions for this war? The answer lies in the dramatic drop in usage from the early days of the war. For ground attacks, the less expensive and more plentiful munitions of Figure 1 have largely replaced the long-range munitions (TLAMs, JASSMs, and PrSMs). Air and missile defense expenditures came down because Iran’s drone and missile attacks were way down after the first few days. Whereas Iran fired more than 2,000 drones and 500 ballistic missiles in the first four days, launches were down, respectively, by 83 and 90 percent after a week.

The diminished munitions stockpiles have created a near-term risk. A war against a capable peer competitor like China will consume munitions at greater rates than in this war. Prewar inventories were already insufficient; the levels today will constrain U.S. operations should a future conflict arise.

President Trump has accepted this munitions risk—alongside other tradeoffs like the diversion of forces from the Western Pacific. The theory here appears to be that it is important to decisively win the current war you are in, rather than to hold back and preserve capability for a future war that may never happen. Once Operation Epic Fury ends, the naval assets sent to the Middle East will return to the Pacific. Munitions inventories will start to recover, but restoring depleted stockpiles and then achieving the desired inventory levels will take many years.

Editor’s Note: This report was updated on April 24, 2026, with new details on Tomahawk missile and JASSM expenditure from the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times, respectively.

Mark F. Cancian (Colonel, U.S. Marine Corps Reserve, ret.) is a senior adviser with the Defense and Security Department at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, D.C. Chris H. Park is a research associate for the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at CSIS.

Madison Bruno and Sabina Hung reviewed and formatted this report with their characteristic—and sincerely appreciated—alacrity and diligence.

If you are interested in learning more about this topic, explore CSIS’s Executive Education courses Meeting China’s Military Challenge and Inside DOD’s FY 2027 Budget.

This report is produced by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a private, tax-exempt institution focusing on international public policy issues. Its research is nonpartisan and nonproprietary. CSIS does not take specific policy positions. Accordingly, all views, positions, and conclusions expressed in this publication should be understood to be solely those of the author(s).

© 2026 by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

Tags

Middle East, Iran, Defense and Security, Geopolitics and International Security, Missile Defense, Transnational Threats, and Ukraine War

Mark F. Cancian

Senior Adviser, Defense and Security Department

Chris H. Park

Research Associate, Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy

Programs & Projects

• Defense 360

• Defense and Security

• Latest Analysis: War with Iran

The pause in hostilities announced by President Trump is not so much a political ploy or point of negotiation, but a lack of munitions. Trump claims that the Biden Administration has exhausted supplies of Patriot Missiles given to Ukraine.

Trump weighs up his options after military chiefs warn of dwindling munitions stockpiles

Despite this proclamation by Vance and Caine, there have been contradictory claims offered by Mike Waltz stating the opposite. Mike Waltz, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, told NBC News’ “Meet the Press” Sunday that the U.S. has “everything that it needs” for military operations against Iran, dismissing reporting that U.S. weapons stockpiles are depleted.

“I want to be crystal clear: The U.S. military, and I’ve verified this every which way, has everything that it needs to conduct this campaign as effectively as it needs to be,” he said. “

Stockpile Impacts and Depletion

• Tomahawks: More than 1,000 fired, consuming roughly one-third of total pre-war inventory and exceeding annual production rates (about 100 built per year) by tenfold. [1, 2, 3]

• JASSMs: Over 1,100 air-launched stealth cruise missiles used, amounting to roughly a quarter of the pre-war supply. [1]

• Air Defenses: Over 1,200 Patriot interceptors and hundreds of THAAD/SM-series interceptors expended, putting heavy strain on regional defense

The warehouses are not empty; however, the strategic reserves must be maintained to deter other possible antagonists such as China and Russia.

He’s the face of Trump’s tariffs. But the 9/11 attacks put Howard Lutnick on the national stage

U.S. Commerce Secretary escaped death on Sept. 11, 2001, taking his son to school

Howard Lutnick avoided death on 9/11 because he decided to take his five-year-old son to his first day of kindergarten. His younger brother and best friend were among the 658 employees of Cantor Fitzgerald, the Wall Street firm he ran, who died that day, trapped in their offices on the 101st to 105th floors of the North Tower of the World Trade Center.

Lutnick’s life has been marked by unspeakable tragedy, incredible wealth, and a fair share of controversy, including serving as Secretary of Commerce for Pres. Donald Trump and being a high-profile figure in the notorious Epstein files.

Political activity

Lutnick, whose net worth is estimated to be between $2 billion and $4 billion, was, as recently as 2016, a key donor to at least some Democratic candidates, including U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer, Kamala Harris, and former secretary of state Hillary Clinton.

By the 2024 presidential election, however, Lutnick became a major fundraiser for Donald Trump. That August, he hosted an event at his house in the Hamptons on Long Island that raised $15 million for the campaign, part of the total $75 million he helped secure for Trump. Lutnick was also a major Trump surrogate on TV, endorsing the Republican candidate’s plans to cut taxes and impose tariffs on foreign goods. Lutnick knew Trump from the early 2000s and had once been on Trump’s TV show, The Celebrity Apprentice.

After the election, Lutnick served as the cochair of the Trump transition team and was a candidate to become treasury secretary before Trump announced that Lutnick would be nominated for commerce, saying in a statement, “He will lead our Tariff and Trade agenda, with additional direct responsibility for the Office of the United States Trade Representative.”

In his January 2025 Senate confirmation hearing, Lutnick couched Trump’s plans for tariffs as a matter of fairness, complaining that “our farmers, our ranchers, and our fishermen are treated with disrespect,” adding, “We need that disrespect to end. And I think tariffs are a way to create reciprocity, to be treated fairly, to be treated appropriately.” He also argued that tariffs would not cause inflation, a contention disputed by many economists.

The Senate confirmed him on a 51–45 vote in February 2025, putting him in charge of an agency that not only works to promote American business interests overseas, but also is in charge of the U.S. census, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, tariffs and fisheries, among other responsibilities.

Connection to Jeffrey Epstein

Lutnick and disgraced financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein were neighbors in Manhattan starting in the 1990s. But in 2025, as the scandal surrounding Epstein and the Epstein files embroiled the Trump administration, Lutnick gave an interview describing a 2005 visit that he and his wife made to Epstein’s townhouse, where he saw a massage table prominently displayed. The visit and Epstein’s comments about the table left Lutnick so disconcerted that “my wife and I decided that I will never be in the room with that disgusting person ever again,” he said.

Jeffrey Epstein’s New York City townhouse featured what was described as a spa or massage room.

U.S. Department of Justice

But the Epstein files indicate that the two had at least some ongoing business dealings. During Senate testimony in 2026, Lutnick admitted that in 2012, four years after Epstein had pleaded guilty to soliciting a minor for prostitution, he, his wife, their four children, and their nannies had lunch with Epstein on his infamous Little St. James Island.

Lutnick said there was nothing “untoward” about the interaction, which he said lasted about an hour. But the fact that his statements about having no interactions with Epstein after 2005 were, by his own admission, untrue, led to calls—mostly from congressional Democrats—for him to step down. Trump expressed his continued support for Lutnick, who is one of the most prominent government officials to have appeared in the files.

In May 2026, Lutnick faced questioning by the House Oversight Committee in a closed-door session