The U.S. struck Iranian missile, drone and radar sites on Friday, U.S. Central Command said, in what the military described as a response to Iran’s attack on a Singapore-flagged cargo ship sailing the Strait of Hormuz.

The attacks came after Iran struck the M/V Ever Lovely with a one-way attack drone on Thursday, the command announced in a statement, adding that the vessel was leaving the Strait of Hormuz along the coast of Oman when hit.

The military said Iran’s strike violated the already-precarious ceasefire signed between the two countries last week.

The 60-day ceasefire included a 14-point memorandum of understanding that called for the reopening of the strait for commercial ships.

Army chaplains have 90 days to remove rank from Army Combat Uniforms and 180 days to remove it from cold weather gear. The new guidance, signed by Secretary of the Army Dan Driscoll, also tells chaplains exactly where to attach religious branch insignia on uniforms and headgear.

The changes do not apply to chaplain candidates nor the rank and insignia worn on chaplains’ Army Service Uniform.

Though chaplains retain their rank, the new guidance implements Hegseth’s March directive that a military chaplain “is first and foremost a chaplain and an officer second.”

“This change is a visual representation of that fact,” he said in a March video announcement.

The directive provided a list of permissible faith insignia: “The approved designs consist of the Latin cross, the Jewish tablets (with the Star of David superimposed), the Muslim crescent moon, the Buddhist wheel of righteousness, and the Hindu Om.”

Removing rank insignia from chaplain uniforms is one of many sweeping changes the defense secretary has made to overhaul the military’s Chaplain Corps. Hegseth eliminated the Army’s spiritual fitness guide, and the Pentagon recently reduced the number of religious affiliation codes from over 200 to just 31.

These are the first payments for settlements resolving about 3,600 claims resulting from the poisoned water, which caused numerous health problems for military families living in military housing, and for other civilian families in Hawaii whose water was provided by the Navy.

Another 3,000 people haven’t accepted the government’s offer, which their attorney describes as “paltry.”

And service members affected have received no payments, said Kristina Baehr, attorney for the plaintiffs in two federal court cases filed against the government. That issue is on appeal to the Ninth Circuit.

‘A step in the right direction’

Service members and family members reported numerous health problems, including diarrhea and other gastrointestinal problems, rashes, neurological issues, burns, lesions, thyroid abnormalities, migraines and neurobehavioral challenges.

“The United States’ settlement payments to hundreds of Red Hill families are a step in the right direction,” Baehr said. “Every dollar paid represents some measure of accountability for families who were exposed to fuel-contaminated water in their homes, suffered injuries, and then were forced to fight their own government for recognition and relief.”

The lawsuits, filed in U.S. District Court in Hawaii, alleged negligence in at least two separate events — in May and November 2021 — at the Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, which contaminated the Navy’s water distribution system.

Some 9,715 households in Navy, Army and Air Force neighborhoods were affected by the November spill. Those storage tanks have since been drained.

'Why weren't you there to protect us?' Military families grill Navy leaders about toxic water

The first wave of these settlements for the 629 plaintiffs was approved by the Hawaii court on May 19, and their payments were issued on June 22, Justice officials said.

Justice officials have reached settlements with about 3,600 plaintiffs in the two lawsuits following a federal judge’s orders in 2024. Payments for those settlements are in various stages. The two lawsuits include about 6,500 people.

“This Justice Department is proud to announce the efficient resolution of claims relating to the Red Hill jet fuel spills that harmed American service members and their families,” Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward said in an announcement of the payments. “These latest settlements prove our commitment to ensuring justice for our nation’s heroes who repeatedly risk greatly to safeguard our freedoms.”

Baehr questioned that statement.

“No dollars are going to America’s heroes,” she said.

“This Department of Justice proclaims that it is ensuring justice for America’s heroes by way of these paltry settlements,” she said. “[It] doesn’t mention that they have paid zero dollars to service members. [DOJ] argued in court that service members should be dismissed from their Red Hill contamination claims because when they bathed their babies at home and bathed themselves naked in their showers, those were incident to military service because they occurred in military housing.”

3,000 fight for higher settlement

All of the 629 people received payments of about $27,000, she said.

“The government undercut the court’s order” on the amounts of damages in its offers to the plaintiffs, Baehr continued. “The government is legally permitted to do that, but it can’t then proclaim they’re ensuring justice for America’s heroes when they’re avoiding the court’s order on damages.

“The government had an opportunity to settle all claims in this case, if they had made an offer within the court’s order on damages. Instead they made this lowball offer,” she said.

The remaining 3,000 who declined the offer “wanted to make sure there is accountability in this case, and are going to hold the government to the court’s order.”

Justice officials are making “good faith efforts” to resolve the more than 6,500 claims from the Red Hill spills, said Assistant Attorney General Brett A. Shumate of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “The settlements represent a fair and just resolution of claims and we look forward to paying additional claims once they are approved.”

The Red Hill disaster wasn’t just about an environmental failure, Baehr said. Rather, “it was failure of trust between the government and the military and civilian families it is obliged to protect.”

The Navy initially told families the water was safe to drink, and families allege they weren’t provided adequate medical care. The Navy later moved families to hotels while they worked to flush the system. Navy officials acknowledged their operator error caused the problem.

“Until every affected family is treated fairly, until injured service members have their day in court, and until the full consequences of Red Hill are acknowledged, this matter is not over,” Baehr said.

In the last month, the government has settled with two of her clients with numbers that are within the court’s order — one at $45,000 and another at $50,000.

“We’re thankful for it,” Baehr said. “We believe the justice system can make it right, and we believe they will, but it’s not yet.”

The branch formalizes space as a permanent warfighting specialty, with personnel focused on protecting U.S. assets and helping prevent adversaries from targeting joint forces from outside Earth’s atmosphere.

Brig. Gen. Don Brooks, deputy commanding general of U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command, called the announcement “a rallying point” for Army space personnel.

“For 27 years, Army space officers have been working to normalize Army space operations, and that’s what this branch designation now does for the Army,” he said.

The branch stems from the 2024 Army Space Vision, a call to action for commanders and staff to understand how space affects land operations and vice versa. With that, commanders were tasked with identifying soldiers suitable for space operations.

In turn, the service created two new military occupational specialties: Army Space Operations Officers (Functional Area 40) and, on the enlisted side, Tactical Space Operations Specialists (40D). The Army also created the MOS 40C, or Army Astronauts, but the 19 soldiers filling those roles were detailed to NASA.

The two roles complement each other. The service defines them as technical experts who know how to leverage space capabilities, satellite communications, and missile-warning data to support multidomain combat operations. According to the announcement, the service currently integrates hundreds of thousands of space-enabled systems to support multidomain operations.

To fill these roles, the Army is looking for experienced soldiers.

For the officer position, the service wants captains and above with a technical background and who have completed service with their basic branch. And for the enlisted, the service wants grades E-3s through E-9s.

While the initial application period for the 40D role closed on April 30, 2026, the Army said it will need around 1,000 soldiers for the role, and possibly 1,500 by 2032. Training for the position will begin in October.

The Army signed contracts with 62,050 recruits, or 101.72% of its goal, while the Navy brought in 44,096 recruits, exceeding its target by more than 8%. The Air Force recruited 30,166 airmen; the Space Force brought in 819 Guardians; and the Marine Corps met its goal of 26,600 recruits.

Collectively, the five services achieved 103% of their active-duty recruiting mission, according to Pentagon officials.

After several years of recruiting shortfalls, military leaders have highlighted recruiting gains in congressional testimony, public remarks and service announcements.

For new recruits and the units waiting to receive them, however, signing a contract is only the first step. Recruits must still complete initial training, occupational schooling, technical certifications and, in many cases, security clearance requirements before joining the operational force.

As recruiting numbers improve, questions remain about how long it takes recruits to become mission qualified and contribute to military readiness.

How quickly recruits move from accession to operational qualification can affect force generation, unit staffing and long-term readiness planning.

Military leaders routinely report recruiting totals and accession goals, but the time required to transform recruits into fully qualified service members can vary significantly by specialty, training requirements and follow-on certifications. Those timelines help illustrate how quickly recruiting gains translate into trained personnel available to operational units.

Little public info on path to readiness

There is no single timeline for becoming fully mission capable. Training requirements vary significantly by specialty, with some support and administrative fields producing qualified service members in a matter of months, while highly technical and special operations pipelines can take more than a year and, in some cases, several years.

To determine what information is publicly available about how recruits become operationally ready, Military Times reviewed readiness documents, service training materials, congressional reporting requirements and Government Accountability Office reports.

The services routinely publish recruiting totals, accession targets and shipping figures. Army, Navy and Air Force leaders regularly testify before Congress about recruiting performance and often release updates throughout the year.

As of publication, Military Times was unable to identify a publicly available, department-wide metric measuring how long it takes recruits to become fully mission capable.

The absence of publicly available reports does not indicate whether the department tracks those timelines internally. Among the systems DoD uses to assess readiness are the Defense Readiness Reporting System and the Chairman’s Readiness System. Those systems primarily focus on unit personnel, equipment, supplies, training and mission capability.

GAO reviews of military readiness describe DoD readiness assessments that include personnel, maintenance, training and mission-capability measures. In a 2023 review, GAO reported that resource readiness ratings measure the status of personnel, equipment, supplies and training, while mission capability ratings assess whether units can accomplish their designed missions.

Military Times asked the Department of Defense whether it maintains a department-wide metric measuring the average amount of time required to move recruits from accession to operational qualification and, if so, whether that information is reported to Congress or made publicly available. In response, Pentagon Press Operations referred Military Times to the military services for information on accession-to-readiness timelines.

Requests for additional information were also sent to the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and Space Force regarding whether they track the amount of time required for recruits to become fully mission qualified and whether those data are reported outside the services.

Federal law requires the Defense Department to maintain a comprehensive readiness reporting system.

Under 10 U.S.C. § 117, the secretary of defense must ensure the system objectively measures the capability of the armed forces to carry out national defense missions and includes assessments of unit readiness, training establishments and defense infrastructure. The statute also requires readiness policies to be applied uniformly across the department through a single authoritative reporting system.

The law does not explicitly require reporting on the amount of time needed to move individual recruits from accession to full mission qualification. Military Times was unable to identify publicly available documentation showing that accession-to-readiness timelines are included as a standardized department-wide measure.

Timing differs by service and specialty

Military officials do not generally define readiness solely by branch. Training pipelines are largely determined by occupational specialty.

Training timelines vary widely. Some support specialties may require only a few months of initial training, while combat arms, technical and specialized career fields often require substantially longer pipelines. Highly technical career fields, including cyber, intelligence and nuclear specialties, can require 12 months or more of schooling and follow-on qualifications, depending on specialty and qualification requirements. Special operations pipelines frequently extend well beyond a year.

Army recruits complete Basic Combat Training, followed by Advanced Individual Training in most specialties, while some combat arms occupations use One Station Unit Training, which combines both phases.

Depending on military occupational specialty, follow-on schooling can last from four weeks to more than a year. Infantry recruits complete One Station Unit Training, which typically lasts about 22 weeks.

Marine recruits spend approximately 13 weeks at boot camp before moving to Marine Combat Training or the Infantry Training Battalion, and then occupational specialty schools. Depending on specialty, Marine training pipelines can extend for several additional months.

Navy recruits complete approximately nine weeks at Recruit Training Command before reporting to “A” schools. Job training ranges from several weeks to more than a year, particularly in highly technical communities such as nuclear propulsion.

Air Force recruits complete 52 days, or roughly seven and a half weeks, of Basic Military Training at Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland before entering technical training. Depending on specialty, technical training can last from several weeks to many months, particularly in cyber and special warfare career fields.

Space Force Guardians attend Air Force Basic Military Training before entering specialized technical pipelines focused on cyber, intelligence and space operations.

Completing occupational training does not necessarily mean a service member is immediately considered fully mission capable. Newly assigned personnel often complete additional local certifications, field exercises and collective training requirements after arriving at operational units.

Navy officials said readiness is generally measured through demonstrated proficiency rather than time spent in training. Capt. Candice Tresch, public affairs director for the Chief of Naval Personnel, said sailors first complete initial training, and then continue qualifying at their commands through warfare qualifications, emergency drills and unit-level training.

“There’s really no specific [timeline], in six months you go from the street to proficient sailor,” Tresch told Military Times. “It’s a continuous progression.”

Tresch said qualification timelines vary by specialty, command and operational requirements. Operational demands can also accelerate or extend training schedules.

“It’s not really time-based. [It’s] can you do the mission?” she said.

Constraints to military training, readiness

Government Accountability Office reports, congressional testimony and publicly available military documents describe factors affecting military readiness and training, including schoolhouse capacity, instructor availability, maintenance requirements, security clearance processing and equipment availability.

Recent GAO reviews identified training limitations, personnel shortages, maintenance delays, sustainment challenges and infrastructure constraints affecting readiness across the force.

One GAO review examining sailor-led ship maintenance found that the Navy did not track and report certain personnel data, including the number of sailors assigned to ships but unavailable for duty. GAO recommended that the Navy collect and report additional personnel information to improve oversight and the quality of information provided to Congress.

The services already report numerous readiness measures, including personnel levels, training status and mission-capability rates. Military Times did not identify publicly available documentation showing that those readiness measures include standardized timelines for moving recruits from accession to full mission qualification.

Congress receives regular updates on recruiting performance and unit readiness. Military Times did not identify publicly available documentation showing whether Congress receives standardized, department-wide data on how long recruits take to become fully mission capable.

The services routinely publish detailed recruiting data, including accession totals, shipping figures and boot camp graduations. Whether DoD also maintains or publicly reports a standardized measure tracking how long recruits take to become fully mission capable remains unclear.

Navy officials told Military Times that readiness is generally measured through demonstrated proficiency rather than a fixed timeline and said qualification timelines vary by specialty, command and operational requirements.

At publication, the Army, Air Force, Marine Corps and Space Force had not responded to Military Times’ requests for comment.

The 101st, which has since 2023 been designated as the Army’s lead experimental unit for air assault capabilities and strategic mobility, executed the field tests at the Joint Readiness Training Center in Fort Polk, Louisiana, in April. The division’s 3rd Mobile Combat Brigade traveled to the center, along with more than 500 drones, about 150 of which were one-way attack drones the unit had built in-house.

In a round table discussion with reporters Thursday, Col. Ryan Bell, the brigade’s commander, said the numbers matter — and represent an entirely new way of viewing and using drones.

“We need drones at scale. We need to treat them like ammunition,” he said. “When we do the math, I estimate a brigade needs between 1,000 and 1,500 drones a week when we’re in sustained combat operations.”

The drones the unit cut and assembled for themselves, dubbing them “Attritable Battlefield Enabler [ABE] 1.01,” allowed the unit to innovate based on their needs — with 3D printing and manufacturing assistance from the Robotics and Autonomous Integration Directorate, or RAID, at Fort Campbell, Kentucky.

“We had drones, but we were still sending soldiers up to breach obstacles with a manual grappling hook,” Bell said. “Raid … designed and built a grappling hook attachment for the ABE 1.01 so we could use a drone to drop a grappling hook at a distance instead of putting a soldier in the line of fire.”

The manufacturing facility also 3D-printed a special munition designed to allow the drone to blast through triple-strand concertina wire, thus dispensing with another obstacle, he said, and it added “mothership” capabilities to the medium-range reconnaissance (MRR) drones dropping the ABEs to build out their operating range.

These changes build up to an emerging Army vision: to have a front line entirely made up of machines that can largely dispense with obstacles and threats until human operators arrive.

Bell said he told one of his company commanders to conduct a fully robotic trench-line breach.

“I told him, ‘I want you to make this breach uncontested for your riflemen when they enter,’” Bell said.

The commander, he said, used an MRR drone to take out electronic warfare sensors and jammers and eliminate major targets, then sent in 25 ABEs to blast individual positions. Two more ABEs breached the concertina wire, and finally two of the Army’s experimental Hunter WOLF unmanned ground vehicles used C4 breaching charges to take out landmines and the rest of the wire.

“When the riflemen got there, the breach was uncontested,” Bell said. “Every target had been struck, and you didn’t have an engineer or a Sapper squad running out with a manual grappling hook trying to low-crawl with a Bangalore torpedo. It took us 35 drones and a little over 100 pounds of C4, but it was under the cost of three 155mm artillery barrages.”

The findings all spell out an overhauled way to fight — but one that will require a massive supply of drones and coordination from industry to provide them.

“The division itself doesn’t have the ability to scale production to those numbers,” Bell said. “I won’t speak for the Army, but if our experience of needing 1,000 a week is scaled out across the force, you can do the math. We’re trying to iterate and identify what capabilities are required for us to fight so that industry can help us solve those production problems.”

According to U.S. Southern Command, the interim government of Venezuela formally requested U.S. support following the twin 7.2 and 7.5 magnitude earthquakes. American forces are providing “specialized mobility services and support to U.S. government personnel, search and rescue teams, and U.S. interagency partners as they assess damage, locate the injured, and deliver critical, life-saving assistance.”

On Wednesday, a 7.2 magnitude quake hit north-central Venezuela near Yumare. Just 39 seconds later, a larger 7.5 magnitude quake struck in nearly the same location, along the fault that marks the boundary between the Caribbean and South American plates. The earthquakes have left entire neighborhoods in ruins.

As of Friday morning, the death toll has risen to 589 and thousands more are injured, according to Acting President Delcy Rodríguez.

Rodríguez noted that she welcomed the arrival of rescue crews from all over the world, as the death toll is expected to continue to rise.

“We are going to rescue the people who are trapped,” she said during a state televised update. “We are working tirelessly on this task.”

In addition to the warships heading to the South American nation, C-17 Globemaster and C-130 Hercules transport aircraft as well as fixed and rotary wing aircraft are en route to assist search and rescue teams, according to U.S. SOUTHCOM.

Fort Lauderdale and Billings have been assigned to Operation Southern Spear as part of the Pentagon’s campaign to combat what it has labeled as narcoterrorist operations to push illicit drugs into the United States.

Late Thursday evening, Maj. Gen. Kevin J. Jarrard arrived on the ground in Caracas to coordinate SOUTHCOM’s response and direct humanitarian assistance to the affected areas.

Jarrard will serve as the senior U.S. Southern Command official in Venezuela, overseeing the aid and rescue efforts that have at times been reduced to shovels, hammers and basic tools to assist rescue efforts as the nation’s emergency resources became stretched thin.

In a press conference on Thursday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio stressed the importance of the next 48 hours and the critical aid the U.S. military can provide following the destabilizing earthquakes.

“The most immediate need, the one they need right now, is search and rescue,” said Rubio. “That’s the one they need immediately, because you’ve got to get people out of that rubble within 48 hours or they won’t survive. And so that’s the first thing we’re going to respond to.”

The amendments to the Fiscal 2027 National Defense Authorization Act, proposed by Reps. Chrissy Houlahan, D-Pa., and Clay Higgins, R-La., both pertain to the implementation of gender-neutral standards as mandated by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth.

The amendment by Houlahan, an Air Force veteran and advocate for women in combat, would prohibit any service member from being excluded from “an occupational specialty, career field, or assignment on the basis of gender.” It would also keep Hegseth from requiring gender-neutral fitness assessments for troops not in combat roles, and prohibit changes to military fitness requirements, unless supported by “scientific findings establishing that the modified requirements predict the performance of actual, regular, and recurring combat duties of the ground combat roles subject to such modified requirements.”

The amendment offered by Higgins, an Army National Guard veteran, would require sex-neutral, but age-adjusted physical fitness standards for all troops, and mandate unspecified “higher” standards for those in ground combat positions.

The amendments follow Hegseth’s order last September that all the services develop gender-neutral physical fitness standards for all troops in ground combat roles, a move widely seen to be in line with his publicly expressed belief that women should not serve in combat.

“At my direction, each service will ensure that every requirement for every combat MOS [military occupational specialty], for every designated combat arms position, returns to the highest male standard only, because this job is life or death, standards must be met, and not just met — at every level, we should seek to exceed the standard, to push the envelope, to compete,” he told an audience of generals and admirals at Quantico, Virginia, last year.

Though he has since softened his rhetoric, he said as recently as 2024 that women had no place on the front lines.

“I’m straight up just saying we should not have women in combat roles. It hasn’t made us more effective,” Hegseth said on a podcast. “Hasn’t made us more lethal. Has made fighting more complicated.”

Earlier this year, Undersecretary of War for Personnel and Readiness Anthony Tata announced a formal review of the effectiveness of women in ground combat jobs, which was reassigned to Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory from the Center for Defense Analyses several months later.

In a committee debate over the proposed amendments, Houlahan highlighted Hegseth’s recent actions and suggested he was laying the groundwork for further moves to limit women’s roles in the military.

“I … really very much believe that we need to stop this, what I believe is a slippery slope and uncertain future, where we know the answer to these questions,” she said. “There are women who are qualified and can meet those very, very high standards to be in those combat-related roles, and they should be allowed to be there. There is a concern that I have, that I think we all should have, that [Hegseth] has asked for yet another study of something we already know.”

Higgins claimed his amendment only buttressed what was already in policy.

“If you’re female in the United States Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps or Space Force, and you want to be on a team, then I want you to be on that team — If you can pass the physical fitness standards that the team establishes for everybody on the team, aside from age-norming,” he said.

In a notable move, Nebraska Republican Don Bacon, a retired Air Force brigadier general, sided with Houlahan in opposing Higgins’ amendment.

“I served 30 years in the Air Force; I just don’t think it would work to have the same standard and measure men and women with the same physical fitness standards for every job in the Air Force,” he said. “I think it would end up disqualifying a lot of people that … would be unnecessary.”

Houlahan’s amendment failed, in accordance with committee rules, with a 28-28 vote tie; Higgins’s failed 29-25.

Not all lawmakers saw Hegseth’s actions as a threat that needed to be stopped with new legislation, though. Rep. Jennifer Kiggans, R-Va., a former Navy helicopter pilot, voted against both amendments, her “No” vote proving the deciding one against Houlahan’s proposal.

“Under current Department of War policy, servicemembers are eligible to serve in every occupational capacity, regardless of gender,” Kiggans told Military Times in a statement. “Gender-neutral physical standards for ground combat roles were passed 10 years ago, and the bar hasn’t changed. I’m grateful for the leadership of the many amazing women I served with and encourage other young women to pursue the wide variety of careers offered by our great military.”

While the chance that these proposed amendments are brought back up for floor debate in the full House is slim, the Senate version of the NDAA does contain an amendment similar to Houlahan’s by Iowa Republican and Army veteran Joni Ernst, codifying sex-neutral standards for combat jobs only.

Additionally, Houlahan was able to add to the House bill a provision that will require the Pentagon to submit to Congress “the complete, unredacted” review of women’s effectiveness in combat.

The NDAA must still pass the Senate and the House and then undergo version reconciliation in a conference session. The Pentagon-commissioned women in combat review is now expected to be completed by early next year.

Capt. Brandon Jones-Adams, 34, pleaded guilty to intentionally killing an unborn child, domestic violence, fraternization and conduct unbecoming of an officer during a military trial at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Washington, according to a Thursday statement from Michelle McCaskill, a spokesperson for the U.S. Army Office of Special Trial Counsel.

Jones-Adams secretly administered Mifepristone to the soldier — who was carrying the pair’s child — resulting in an abortion.

“Capt. Jones-Adams’ actions were deliberate, calculated, and malicious. By committing these crimes, he inflicted profound harm on his victim and betrayed the trust place[d] in him as an Army officer,” said Circuit Chief Lt. Col. Tyler Heimann, Sixth Circuit, Army Office of Special Trial Counsel in a statement.

Under the terms of his plea agreement, a judge could have sentenced Jones-Adams to between four and 12 years in prison. The officer, assigned to the 23rd Brigade Engineer Battalion, 1-2 Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 7th Infantry Division, Multi-Domain Command Pacific, was sentenced to 12 years in prison, forfeiture of all pay and allowances and dismissal from the Army, which is the dishonorable discharge equivalent for officers.

Jones-Adams will start his sentence at the Northwestern Joint Correctional Facility, according to McCaskill.

One reason is that research funds are being diverted to operations.

The Pentagon’s “research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E) infrastructure is deteriorating and weakening the Department’s ability to maintain a technically advanced warfighting capability,” warned the report by the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering. “Authorized major military construction (MILCON) projects for modernization of critical joint-mission RDT&E infrastructure continually slip due to the services’ reprioritizing of scarce MILCON funds toward other operationally relevant priorities.”

The study examined government laboratories as well as federally funded think tanks and university research centers. Investigators visited 30 of these sites — or about one-third of total facilities — in what the report termed “unprecedented data collection.”

The report presented a mixed picture of the Pentagon’s research backbone. It found the defense research enterprise, or DRE, “is fundamentally sound.” However, it also “needs to rapidly adapt to a new environment moving at the accelerating pace of commercial technology and driven by a broader set of global security threats.”

Research has been hampered by backlogged security clearances, limited funds to build or refurbish labs and a slow and difficult hiring process that discourages younger skilled personnel.

Nor does DoD have a clear handle on its research infrastructure, including a comprehensive list of specialized facilities, such as the Triaxial Earthquake and Shock Simulator in Illinois.

Pentagon research facilities don’t even speak a common language, the report states.

“For example, a single technical domain may be variously labeled as ‘Human-Machine Teaming,’ ‘Autonomy and Teaming,’ or ‘AI Agent Development’ depending on the reporting entity,” the report noted. “This semantic variability ensures that high- level titles alone are insufficient for determining the true depth or specificity of the work being performed.”

Further, the Pentagon is not taking full advantage of its own discoveries.

DoD’s “vast intellectual property remains underutilized due to passive marketing and the lack of a centralized discovery mechanism,” said the report. “Current administrative burdens for transition agreements often exceed the funding timelines of startups, hindering innovation and collaboration.”

This results in delays in new technologies reaching the field.

“The Department’s ability to rapidly transition technologies from knowledge producers to capability fielders is severely degraded by structural and cultural barriers, specifically bureaucratic stovepipes, fragmented funding streams, and misaligned mechanisms, authorities, and incentives,” the report said.

The report took care to state that it is not calling for Pentagon research centers to be closed.

“The evidence in this report does not support consolidating or eliminating institutions: Most overlap is driven by mission need,” the report says. “The findings suggest that the way to reform the DRE is to fix the system around its institutions — how authority, money, and decisions flow, and how the institutions are funded, measured, and governed.”

The study points to China as an example for DoD’s research infrastructure, including partnering with the commercial sector.

“China has solidified its civil-military fusion model and is investing on a scale and at a pace that requires the United States to develop a new Government-industry paradigm — one that advances and protects critical defense research while extending the technical reach of the DRE through industrial and academic partnerships the DRE itself does not own.”

The report made numerous recommendations, including easing budgetary limits on lab refurbishment, using AI to speed up security clearances and creating a searchable database for DoD intellectual property.

“Without a robust, agile, and properly resourced DRE, the department cannot rapidly onramp innovative capabilities or deliver the advanced capabilities the warfighter requires to deter and, if necessary, defeat emerging threats in an era of intense strategic competition,” the report concluded.

The real number, they believe, is likely much higher.

Capt. Robert Look Jr., chief of conservation law enforcement for Fort Carson, said low snowpack, a condition called seasonal hyperphagia — where an animal’s insatiable urge to eat overrides a natural fear of humans — and loose garbage have made conditions tempting for bears to head towards the Army post.

“Recent mild winters and low snowpack have depleted natural food sources — berries, acorns and plants — at higher mountain elevations,” Look said. “This forces hungry bears down into lower elevations, such as Fort Carson and Colorado Springs, to search for food.”

Nearby Cheyenne Mountain State Park is home to many black bears and contributes to the sightings, he said, but human behavior also makes a difference.

“Unsecured garbage, pet food left outdoors and bird feeders represent highly concentrated, easy-to-access calories for a foraging bear,” Look said, adding, “a bear’s nose is nearly 100 times more sensitive than a human’s, allowing them to detect these items from miles away.”

Most of the bears have been sighted in housing areas on the west side of Highway 115 and at the installation’s controlled access points.

Officials urged residents to remain calm and contact Fort Carson dispatch if they encounter a bear. Personnel should identify themselves to the bear by speaking in a “low and steady voice,” and use their arms — or any clothing — to make themselves seem bigger, the base said, and back away slowly. Do not try to take a selfie, the base implored.

Fort Carson also advised against running, yelling, approaching or making direct eye contact with the hungry animals, as bears can move at speeds between 30-35 miles per hour — much faster than most humans can run.

They also recommended washing trash containers with ammonia or bleach to remove or reduce the food smells that may tempt bears.

Carrying bear spray as a deterrent can also be lifesaving, and Col. Erik Oksenvaag, Fort Carson’s garrison commander, encouraged everyone to be “bear aware.”

“Parents, talk to your kids about what to do if they see a bear on post, and when in doubt, let dispatch know if you think you’ve seen one roaming around the installation,” he said in a June statement.

Fort Carson’s warning comes months after two soldiers were seriously injured in a bear attack during a land navigation exercise at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson. The Alaska’s Department of Fish and Game in April said the attack seemed to be “a defensive attack by a bear recently emerged from a den.”

The soldiers’ survival was attributed to the bear spray they were carrying.

Years earlier at the Alaska base, a soldier died from injuries sustained in a bear attack.

“We learned and found that there was nobody interested in taking a 24% haircut right out of the gate,” in order to provide the 24% saving for military customers, said Anthony Tata, under secretary of defense for personnel and readiness. Tata spoke during a Wednesday meeting on Capitol Hill of the American Logistics Association, a nonprofit trade association representing businesses supplying products and services to the military marketplace.

In September, the Pentagon issued a public request for information to find out whether any entities were interested in taking over the operation of the 178 commissaries in the United States.

The RFI was issued following DoD’s April 7, 2025, memorandum, directing that all functions that are not inherently governmental would be prioritized for privatization. The order specifically cited retail sales.

Prices are the determining factor that drive people to the commissary, Tata said. “Families go there because they know they’re going to save 24%-plus.”

That said, if commissaries aren’t providing a user-friendly benefit, people will go elsewhere, he said, and efforts are underway to use technology and other tools to help bring shoppers into the stores.

In an April 3 letter, defense officials notified lawmakers they had decided not to pursue privatization of the military resale system, which includes commissaries, exchanges and other retail outlets. They said they had determined that “privatization would create an unacceptable risk to the readiness and well-being of service members and their families.”

Military family advocates applauded the decision.

“We’ve always questioned whether a private entity could operate the commissary system profitably while still delivering the savings that families rely on,” said Eileen Huck, director of government relations for the National Military Family Association. “The response to the administration’s outreach isn’t surprising. We’re pleased that the administration recognizes the importance of the commissary benefit to military families.”

In addition to the savings, Huck said, she’s spoken with families in remote areas who rely on commissaries for items like Kosher and Halal foods, as well as dietary items for family members with special needs.

DoD’s analysis concluded that “the potential cost savings of privatization are unlikely to be realized without severely degrading the benefits these programs provide,” stated the letter, signed by Sean O’Keefe, deputy under secretary for defense for personnel and readiness.

How far will DoD take privatization on military bases?

In recent years, DoD’s efforts to privatize military housing and the process for household goods have resulted in problems for military families.

The Defense Commissary Agency operates 235 stores around the world with about $1.5 billion in taxpayer dollars annually.

DoD’s analysis confirmed that a for-profit operation can’t deliver “the tangible, non-negotiable benefits these programs provide, including vital savings for families, a sense of community and enhanced readiness.

“Performance data shows the current system delivers significant savings.”

The department also noted that a private entity “would face significant challenges operating profitably in remote, overseas, and strategically vital but low-volume locations, such as Naval vessels and forward deployed sites, without substantial government subsidies, that would negate potential savings to the taxpayer.”

These shipboard and forward-deployed retail activities are operated by the military exchanges.

In shifting to look at ways to improve efficiency in the commissary system, officials are addressing supply chain issues. But the supply chain initiative that the commissary agency is implementing threatens the viability of the benefit, said Tom Gordy, president of the Armed Forces Marketing Council, which represents more than 400 national brand manufacturers and firms that supply consumer products to military resale activities worldwide.

The commissary agency’s direct relationship with manufacturers allows them to deliver over 25% savings on an average market basket of groceries, and this initiative will not maintain that direct relationship, Gordy said. The plan hasn’t undergone an analysis to determine whether it will be able to continue to offer low prices, he said.

“There remain more questions than answers related to how the program will be implemented,” he said, and how the agency “will ensure mandated savings for military families if there are increases in cost of goods under the new model.”

The Take Care of America’s Veterans bill, a Republican-backed proposal that contains 62 measures aimed at increasing benefits for veterans and survivors has stalled as the House wrestles with the president’s demands to pass the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility, or SAVE, Act, legislation that would require voter identification and reduce mail-in ballots.

The House was expected to take up the Take Care of America’s Veterans Act, H.R. 9267, this week. The legislation would greatly expand benefits for hundreds of thousands of veterans and survivors, albeit by covering the cost by reducing disability compensation for two conditions, tinnitus and sleep apnea, for future veterans.

Trump canceled his signing of a popular housing bill earlier this week over the SAVE Act, and votes on all bills in the House have been halted as a result of an impasse between Congress and the president.

During a press conference on H.R. 9267 Thursday, Democrats celebrated the delay after they had raised objections to the proposed method of paying for the bill.

According to veterans advocacy groups, 1.5 million veterans receive disability compensation for tinnitus and more than 1.3 currently get compensation for sleep apnea.

While the reductions would not affect veterans currently receiving that compensation, the changes could generate $57 billion in future savings that would cover the cost of the bill.

“Veterans benefits should not be looked at as offsets,” said Rep. Mark Takano of California, the ranking Democrat on the House Veterans Affairs Committee, during the press conference.

Democrats instead want to pass the most significant portion of the legislation, the Major Richard Star Act, by unanimous consent. The Major Richard Star Act does not include any provisions for covering its cost.

Major pieces of the legislation, including the Major Richard Star Act, which would give combat veterans who medically retired full access to their retirement pay and VA disability compensation, and the Love Lives On Act, which would allow military widows and widowers to retain benefits if they remarry before age 55, have widespread support in Congress. However, many lawmakers also insist that there be a way to pay for proposals to rein in the federal budget.

On Tuesday, House Veterans Affairs Committee Chairman Mike Bost, R-Ill., said the Take Care of America’s Veterans bill would “give the House a serious responsible path to promoting real change for veterans.”

The bill also includes the Sharri Briley and Eric Edmundson Veterans Benefits Expansion Act, which would increase disability compensation for families of veterans with catastrophic injuries and payments to survivors; it would raise VA Dependency and Indemnity Compensation for the survivors of veterans with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis; and it would allow the VA to send traveling physicians to U.S. territories and Pacific Island nations to treat resident vets.

The move is transforming a force currently managed by individual medical centers and civilian administrators — a change that should make it easier to recruit, pay and train officers, according to the department.

Wednesday’s announcement follows a series of reports critical of the VA police and a May Senate hearing that examined problems in the force.

The Government Accountability Office published a report in April that found numerous safety concerns at VA facilities. During a covert review of 30 VA hospitals and other facilities, GAO investigators found that just two had medical detectors, and of those, one was inoperable and staff failed to intervene when the other was activated.

Investigators also found that staff failed to stop knives from entering the buildings, didn’t intervene when an investigator drank water out of a vodka bottle and allowed investigators to enter non-public spaces, including labs and treatment rooms.

The GAO reported similar problems in 2025, finding that contracted guards – the VA has about 800 – did not prevent prohibited items such as blades or batons into facilities about half the time.

The VA’s Office of Inspector General found last year that 58% of VA facilities experienced shortages in their forces, making VA police “the most frequently reported severe nonclinical occupational staffing shortage.”

Reginald Neal, assistant secretary for operations, security and preparedness, told Senate Veterans Affairs Committee members in May that the structure, along with incorrect pay classifications for officers, made it “difficult to recruit, retain and promote seasoned officers.”

“Our VA police endured inconsistent policing standards, which led to a lack of both accountability and discipline. Often our professional officers were used to perform non police functions, including in some cases, serving as valets to park cars,” Neal said.

Under the consolidation, the VA now will have a law enforcement chain of command that falls under an assistant secretary in VA headquarters. Officials said the reorganization will be completed by October.

VA also will classify police officers at higher pay grades, starting at the Government Services-6 level, or roughly $48,000 a year for a rookie in a location such as Atlanta, Georgia, an increase of $5,000 from the starting position of a GS-5. Jobs also will be offered through the chain of command up to the senior executive service level, providing room for promotion and seniority.

According to the VA, this will create stability and make the VA a “more attractive place to work” for law enforcement.

“These reforms will help us accomplish that mission by creating a stable VA police force with clear lines of authority, accountability and career progression. The result will be better police recruitment and retention as well as improved safety and security for Veterans, staff and visitors,” VA Secretary Doug Collins said in a statement Wednesday.

While roughly 98% of the VA’s police work involves non-violent crimes, VA police officers may face life-threatening situations, including patients who threaten visitors and staff, suicidal veterans and opportunists looking to steal from the VA or deal drugs on VA campuses.

In March, a VA social worker was killed at a VA clinic in Jasper, Georgia, by a gun-wielding patient; a uniformed security guard on duty took part in apprehending the suspect.

Daily, Neal said, the VA police focus on assisting veterans.

“VA policing involves so much more in law enforcement,” according to Neal. “When [veterans] come and they seek care, it’s more than just going to see the doctor — the issues, the emotions, all the frustrations that we carry with us when we go to a facility. Our VA police are the first ones that you see when you come to a facility. They’re the last ones you see when you leave. The VA police officers set the tone for that visit.”

The United States has supplied large quantities of weapons to allies while also using munitions in its own military operations, raising concerns about inventories of key air-defense and precision-guided weapons, and increasing pressure on contractors to boost output.

Two people briefed on the meeting said it ran longer than expected because everyone was given time to speak. The sources said Deputy Defense Secretary Steve Feinberg at times pushed back on industry claims about production progress, citing delays on key programs.

One source said the initial message to executives was “you’re not doing enough.” By the end, the tone had shifted toward cooperation, with officials saying the goal was to “get on a war footing” and work together to speed up production.

US munitions depleted by Iran war will take years to restore, analysis finds

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for details on the meeting and the topics discussed.

The meeting marks the second White House gathering with chief executives of major defense firms focused on ramping up weapons production. A March meeting included the CEOs and other officials from BAE Systems, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, RTX Corp, Boeing, Honeywell Aerospace and L3Harris Technologies, along with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

Pentagon negotiators are pressing contractors to move much faster, with tentative production agreements struck earlier this year at the center of those efforts.

The agreements include a deal with Lockheed Martin to triple production of Patriot interceptors and quadruple output of THAAD interceptors, which are used to shoot down ballistic missiles. Separate multiyear deals with RTX aim to boost production of Tomahawk cruise missiles and AMRAAM air-to-air missiles. The deals, announced as “framework agreements,” have yet to be converted into contracts.

Five defense industry executives, speaking on condition of anonymity, welcomed the agreements, but said Congress must first appropriate funding before companies can invest more heavily in components and production capacity. Investing before receiving government payments under the agreements would weigh on free cash flow and could hurt second-half earnings, they said.

The administration has steadily increased pressure on defense contractors to prioritize production over shareholder payouts. Trump signed an executive order in January to identify contractors deemed to be underperforming on government contracts while continuing to distribute profits to shareholders.

‘Race of attrition’: US military’s finite interceptor stockpile is being tested

GM Defense, the automaker’s defense ‌business unit, and Lockheed have said the U.S. Department of Defense helped facilitate a partnership between the two companies because of growing demand for additional production capacity.

The Senate Armed Services Committee this month approved its version of the National Defense Authorization Act, backing total defense spending of $1.15 trillion and providing multiyear procurement authority for several types of munitions and weapons. The bill is not expected to become law until autumn, although separate appropriations or supplemental funding could come sooner.

Demand for air defense systems has surged among the United States and its allies amid heightened geopolitical tensions and the conflict in Iran.

The supplemental funding request, posted on the White House website and transmitted to Congress, includes $67.15 billion for the military, in addition to some $1 trillion appropriated last year and another $1.5 trillion Trump wants for next year.

The White House said the latest funding request is to cover operational costs of the Iran war, including for military personnel and readiness, operational costs to rebuild weapons stocks, and classified programs.

The funding request for the military includes $21 billion to procure munitions, strengthen the U.S. industrial base and support critical capabilities.

Senate joins House in vote to halt Iran war

The U.S. Senate passed a war powers resolution on Tuesday directing Trump to halt military action against Iran, weeks after the measure passed the House, as a handful of Trump’s fellow Republicans in both chambers joined almost every Democrat in a rebuke to Trump.

During a lunch at the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday, Trump got into a shouting match over the war with Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, one of the Republicans who voted in favor of the resolution.

The supplemental request immediately met resistance. Both Republican and Democratic lawmakers have complained since the U.S. and Israel began bombing Iran on February 28 that Trump and his team have not kept them informed about the conflict or his plans.

Additionally, lawmakers have noted that the U.S. Constitution gives Congress, not the president, the right to send troops into war, and accuse Trump of disregarding that separation of powers.

Tough vote for Republicans as midterms loom

Republicans could face a difficult vote for the request, given the war’s deep unpopularity and only months remaining until midterm elections in November that will determine whether they retain control of Congress.

Democrats also accuse Trump of ignoring the needs of Americans who have been grappling with a steep rise in fuel and food prices since the fighting began. “We should be lowering costs for the American people, not writing another blank check for Trump,” Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer posted on X after Congress received the request.

Senator Patty Murray of Washington, the top Democrat on the chamber’s appropriations committee, said she would review the request to ensure that servicemembers are taken care of, “but I will not rubber-stamp tens of billions more for this disastrous war of choice.”

Trump’s Republicans hold such slim margins in the House and Senate that appropriations bills typically need Democratic support to pass.

The supplemental budget request also includes some $1.4 billion to address the Ebola outbreak in Africa, including $800 million in international humanitarian assistance and $500 million for global health security to prevent, detect and respond to the outbreak.

“This funding is critical to protect Americans, and stop the spread to the United States,” the White House said.

The administration made steep cuts to the U.S. Agency for International Development and to African public health ​efforts prior to the outbreak.

The spending request is also seeking $11.1 billion to support U.S. farmers and $1 billion to boost the pensions of workers at former General Motors auto parts unit Delphi, which were cut during the Detroit automaker’s 2009 bankruptcy restructuring.

The White House is also asking for $500 million to support construction projects in and around Washington and $1 billion to assist reconstructing New York’s Penn Station.

The move follows a localized flu outbreak at Lackland Air Force Base, Texas, that sickened over 220 trainees at Basic Military Training as of June 18. The New York Times reported that the Air Force exception request to vaccinate all trainees was approved following the outbreak.

The Air Force received an exception to vaccinate all trainees, a source familiar with the matter told Military Times. The Pentagon decline to say if all services will now require trainees to get a flu vaccine before Basic Military Training.

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth discarded the mandatory flu vaccine requirement in April for all service members, making the vaccine optional for all active and reserve components and Pentagon civilian personnel.

The slight reversal allows all requested exceptions to be consolidated into Hegseth’s guidance, Chief Pentagon Spokesman Sean Parnell said in a statement to Military Times.

Following a review of the requests made by services, the Under Secretary of Personnel and Readiness Anthony Tata granted exceptions to policy, or ETPs, to the Department of the Army, Department of the Navy, Department of the Air Force, National Security Agency and Defense Health Agency.

Since the Marine Corps and Space Force are under the Department of the Navy and Department of the Air Force, respectively, they are also included in the policy exceptions.

The spokesman declined to comment on when the exceptions were requested and granted.

Parnell said that the exceptions granted are in line with standard Department of Defense practice for “adapting force health protection measures to critical operational realities.”

“The decisions were based upon thorough risk assessments and are designed to maximize operational readiness, lethality, and force generation, while safeguarding at-risk populations,” Parnell said in the statement.

A memo alerting DHA employees to the exception approval said that the request was made on April 29, just eight days after Hegseth announced the optional policy on April 21. All healthcare personnel and personnel in contact with DHA patients are required to receive the annual seasonal influenza vaccine, the memo reads.

The June 16 memo first circulated on the unofficial Air Force Facebook page Air Force amn/nco/snco on Wednesday. The Pentagon would not confirm nor deny the authenticity of the memo to Military Times.

The Army, Navy, Air Force, NSA and DHA are all responsible for implementing their ETPs, but it is unclear how it will be done.

Matthew A. Cox was charged April 2 for “endangering the welfare of an incompetent/physically disabled” person, 60-year-old former Marine Corps Cpl. Albert O’Toole. In a video secretly recorded by O’Toole’s wife on March 1, a person identified as Cox is seen grabbing food away from O’Toole, smacking him and shoving him.

Cox also allegedly struck O’Toole on the head with a broom, and later, off camera, the veteran cried out in pain.

The case generated outrage when it was first reported June 18 by News 12 in New Jersey.

But it drew national attention Sunday when John Tiegen, a former Marine and CIA contractor who defended the U.S. compound in Benghazi, Libya, on Sept. 11, 2012, called out VA Secretary Doug Collins on social media, demanding Cox’s immediate firing.

O’Toole’s wife, Angela Sangro, had contacted News 12 reporter Tara Rosenblum after learning that Cox still worked at the VA Hudson Valley Health Care System despite being fired from the New York State Veterans Home in Montrose.

Cox had been removed from direct duties with patients but remained on staff while his case was adjudicated, according to statement from the VA hospital.

“This is a disgrace,” Tiegen wrote, describing the incident and posting the news report.

Collins swiftly responded.

“While this disturbing incident didn’t happen at a VA facility, @DeptVetAffairs will immediately initiate removal proceedings for this employee,” Collins wrote.

While this disturbing incident didn't happen at a VA facility, @DeptVetAffairs will immediately initiate removal proceedings for this employee. https://t.co/crfk3id6xI

— VA Secretary Doug Collins (@SecVetAffairs) June 21, 2026

State veterans homes are not managed by the Department of Veterans Affairs. The VA does, however, pay 100% of the cost of care for veterans living in state homes who have service-connected medical conditions that require full-time care, and it also pays the facilities to ensure that they meet federal standards.

The VA is also required to inspect the homes each year to ensure they meet those strict federal standards.

In fiscal 2023, the VA paid about $1.5 billion for veteran nursing home care provided in state veterans homes, according to the Government Accountability Office.

Shuffled between facilities

In the case of the Montrose facility, the state-run home shares a campus with the VA Hudson Valley hospital and a VA community living center where O’Toole spent three months before he was transferred to the state home.

Sangro told Military Times that her husband, whom she married in 2019, received a head injury while serving in the Corps and later developed dementia. When she became unable to care for him full-time, she placed O’Toole in the long-term care facility at the Hudson Valley VA.

He was transferred to the state facility in December when it was determined he needed a higher level of care.

But nearly as soon as he arrived at the new facility, Sangro noticed changes in behavior. O’Toole became agitated and got into altercations with patients and staff. He scuffled with an 86-year old patient who fell and later died.

Sangro said the staff began heavily medicating her husband, which made his agitation worse.

“They started giving him Klonopin for sleep and then more and more medications, like they were trying to control him, but the medications were doing the opposite,” Sangro said in an interview.

O’Toole was sent multiple times to a psychiatric facility, but his doctor there said he did not have a mental health condition.

Suspected abuse

When Sangro noticed bruises and cuts on her husband, she hid a camera in his room to monitor him. After O’Toole’s primary care physician and psychiatrist asked whether she suspected abuse, she checked the footage, she said.

“I left the hall around 4 o’clock, and that recording started at 4:15,” Sangro said, referring to the video used in the News 12 report that has gone viral. “My gosh, that was only one day.”

She showed the video to her husband’s doctors who in turn notified the authorities.

Sangro said that after Cox was charged, the facility “dumped” her husband at the James J. Peters Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center in the Bronx, N.Y., without telling her.

O’Toole spent two months there. Sangro said she faced challenges visiting him, but she was thrilled with the care he received.

“They started weaning him off a couple of the medications. They couldn’t understand why he was so heavily medicated,” Sangro said. “I have nothing but great things to say about that VA and the VA facility at Montrose. It may be old and run-down, but the staff is so caring and loving. They cut his hair, they shaved him often, they let him walk around the halls. They really took great care of him.”

O’Toole has now returned to the state facility, where he has been placed in isolation and attended to by a four-person staff.

“He is deteriorating,” Sangro said of her 60-year-old husband. “He doesn’t have much time left.”

Calls for an investigation

The incident has generated calls for an investigation from New York state legislators. During a town hall Monday, Sangro and lawmakers, including State Sen. Pete Harckham, said they were outraged by the abuse.

“We [have] called for an investigation from the [state] attorney general and also from the Health Department that runs this facility,” Harckham said. “This is not just an isolated case. This cannot happen in a vacuum. Where is the supervision? Didn’t other people — anyone — notice the bruising, the wounds, the behavior change? This is a symptom of a much larger issue.”

According to state officials, the facility immediately reported the incident to the Office of Aging and Long-Term Care, as well as law enforcement.

Cox was a newer, probationary, part-time employee at the state home who had undergone background checks. He was placed on leave three days after the incident and fired on March 26.

“Maintaining a safe environment for the residents and workers at this facility is our top priority,” Health Department spokeswoman Marissa Crary said in a statement to Military Times. “As soon as we became aware of this incident, the staff member was immediately put on leave, terminated after a review of the incident, and is facing criminal charges.”

Attempts to reach Cox on Wednesday went unanswered.

Westchester County, New York, District Attorney Susan Cacace said in a statement that she was “horrified by the allegations of abuse arising out of” the facility, and her office took action as soon as it was reported.

“Those who make the painstaking decision to place a family member in the care of a veteran’s hospital expect that their loved one will be treated with the dignity befitting a military veteran. Sadly, in this case, it appears that standard of care was not met,” Cacace said.

Cacace added that those with information about mistreatment or abuse at the home or any other facility that cares for veterans should call her office’s Elder Abuse Hotline at (914) 995-8477.

Sangro said that in addition to having concerns regarding Cox’s employment status at the VA, she went public because staff didn’t listen to her when she tried to help her husband. She didn’t want other veterans and family members to suffer, she said.

“He was — is — the love of my life," Sangro said. “Now he doesn’t remember who I am. They took that away from me.”

It was August 2004. Army Col. Peter Mansoor and his brigade had spent days preparing to clear the enemy stronghold, located across from one of Shia Islam’s holiest sites. Then coalition officials canceled the operation, deciding the political risks were too high.

The enemy remained in place. Mansoor still had an AC-130 gunship circling overhead. There was no instruction manual for what happened next.

Leveraging years of experience at the National Training Center with the 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment, Mansoor improvised.

He moved a tank company to probe the perimeter of an area coalition ground forces had been ordered to avoid. The maneuver drew enemy fire, allowing the gunship to strike the militants’ positions.

“Doctrine didn’t tell me to do that,” said Mansoor, who has since retired.

As thousands of post-9/11 veterans approach retirement eligibility, military leaders and veterans interviewed by Military Times said the challenge faced by the U.S. military today extends beyond replacing personnel to preserving the judgment, leadership experience and combat intuition accumulated during two decades of war.

Mansoor and retired Marine officer and defense researcher Ben Connable said the question is particularly acute for the Army and Marine Corps, where repeated deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan produced a generation of leaders whose careers were shaped by combat.

Doctrine can capture many lessons from war, Mansoor said. The harder task is preserving the judgment leaders develop after years of making decisions under pressure.

What Combat Experience Leaves Behind

Combat in Iraq and Afghanistan exposed leaders to uncertainty, risk and the burden of making decisions when lives were at stake.

The experience gave the U.S. military a significant advantage during the post-9/11 wars, said Mansoor, who commanded the Army’s 1st Brigade Combat Team, 1st Armored Division in Iraq and later served as executive officer to Gen. David Petraeus during the surge.

“As that experience leaves the force, you can only try to replicate it, but you can’t replace it,” he said.

Retiring Army operations leader Aaron Welch, who plans to leave the service in November after more than two decades in uniform, said the most difficult thing to pass on is judgment.

“Knowledge can be taught. Procedures can be documented. Skills can be practiced,” Welch said. “Judgment is different because it is built through years of making decisions under pressure, accepting consequences and learning from both successes and failures.”

Welch said he has spent much of his career explaining not just what decisions he made, but why he made them. Even so, some lessons can only be fully understood after experiencing similar circumstances firsthand.

The Army’s combat training centers, including the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, California, and the Joint Readiness Training Center at Fort Johnson, Louisiana, expose units to realistic battlefield scenarios designed to test leaders and formations under pressure.

But no matter how realistic the training becomes, Mansoor said, it still cannot replicate real combat.

“You can make training as difficult as you can, but it’s impossible to fully replicate the fear and the various emotional aspects of battle,” he said.

A simulated artillery barrage, he said, is not the same as taking enemy fire during an ambush or operating under mortar attack.

Welch pointed to what he called the “human dimension” of leadership as another aspect of combat experience that cannot be fully captured in doctrine, training or formal education.

“Leadership is ultimately about understanding human beings,” Welch said. “It is about recognizing when a soldier is struggling even when they say they are fine. It is about maintaining trust during difficult times.”

Capturing Lessons Learned

For decades, the military has relied on doctrine centers, professional military education institutions and lessons-learned organizations to capture and pass on combat experience and institutional knowledge.

Established in 1985 at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, the Center for Army Lessons Learned, or CALL, is the Army’s premier agency for adaptive learning.

Lessons learned in Iraq and Afghanistan can still find their way into classrooms through updated doctrine and professional military education, according to Mansoor.

Still, documenting wartime experiences through oral histories, digital archives and interviews does not guarantee the successful transfer of knowledge to future generations, Connable said.

“It’s almost a belief that knowledge now exists in this kind of ether,” he said. “We don’t really have to do much with it anymore.”

Military organizations do not learn simply because information exists in an archive, Connable added. Someone still has to study it, teach it and apply it.

Mansoor pointed to counterinsurgency as a cautionary example. The military learned important lessons during Vietnam, he said, but much of that knowledge faded as the services shifted focus elsewhere. When U.S. forces entered Iraq and Afghanistan decades later, many of those lessons had to be relearned.

“What I’ve seen is that the U.S. Army and Marine Corps are doing a better job of sustaining those lessons, at least in their professional military educational institutions,” Mansoor said.

The military’s struggles during the early years of Iraq and Afghanistan reflected, in part, those experiences from Vietnam that had not been effectively shared with a new generation of leaders, Connable argued.

“Because we do, at best, a mediocre job, at worst, a bad job of passing that information down, then we lose people, and we can start losing wars,” he said.

Mansoor said preserving those lessons ultimately comes down to leadership priorities.

“Those things can be maintained, but only if the leadership wants to maintain them,” he said.

Preparing Leaders For The Next War

Preparing for future wars should not come at the expense of preserving lessons from counterinsurgency, Mansoor said. Even as the military focuses on large-scale combat operations, Mansoor argued that broad leader education cannot become a casualty of that shift.

“Troops can be retrained relatively quickly for counterinsurgency warfare,” Mansoor said. “But it takes years to educate a leader on what it would take to fight a counterinsurgency war.”

Mansoor argued that leaders exposed to multiple forms of warfare are better positioned to adapt when conflicts evolve in unexpected ways.

Connable said he is particularly concerned that expertise developed during two decades of counterinsurgency and irregular warfare could disappear as post-9/11 veterans retire.

“All of our irregular warfare knowledge is at risk of being dumped,” he said.

After two decades of war, the military and much of the American public simply grew tired of Iraq and Afghanistan, Connable added, increasing the risk that hard-earned lessons could fade.

Welch said his concern is not with the quality of younger leaders entering the force, but whether they are being given enough opportunities to develop through experience.

“Experience cannot be created in a classroom,” Welch said. “It is built through responsibility, decision-making, mistakes and recovery.”

As organizations become more risk-averse, Welch noted, senior leaders can sometimes intervene too quickly or shield junior leaders from failure, limiting opportunities for younger leaders to develop judgment.

“We cannot be so afraid of mistakes that we deny future leaders the opportunity to develop judgment,” he said.

Connable recalled serving under retired Marine Gen. John Kelly, who routinely asked Marines what they were reading and challenged them to think critically about military history.

“That is cultural,” Connable said. “That is a cultural norm that he was creating.”

Doctrine and archives alone will not preserve wartime experience, Connable added. Leaders, he said, still have to mentor younger service members and foster organizations where studying military history remains part of the culture.

Two decades after Karbala, Mansoor still remembers making a decision for which no doctrine existed.

“There isn’t a manual that says, ‘When you can’t go in with ground forces, try probing the edge and use air strikes instead,’” he said, reflecting on the battle. “You have to make those decisions based on experience.”

For Welch, leadership, at its core, remains a human endeavor.

“Technology will change. Doctrine will evolve. The battlefield will continue to evolve,” Welch said. “But character, judgment, trust, relationships and a commitment to developing others will remain at the heart of effective leadership.”

I tried to schoolyard-taunt an AI language model once.

My wife wasn’t home. I was bored and had to find another outlet for my childish male energy.

So, I took jabs at Grok’s sexual orientation and its mother. I got no traction.

“Bold of you to assume I’m gay, and have a mom who was in the sex industry — all while typing to a language model that doesn’t have parents, genitals, or racial identity,” said Grok, a conversational chatbot from xAI.

That did it. I’m a pretty mild-mannered dad humor guy, but I figured I didn’t need to pull punches on a robot.

I tried every mean, stupid thing that has ever inspired a look of righteous indignation or a threat of being punched in the mouth. It was unflappable. In fact, it managed to offend me.

“Haha, the tables have turned,” it said. “You came in swinging haymakers, trying to dunk on an unkillable chatbot, and somehow, I accidentally elbowed you in the feelings on the follow-through. That’s honestly kind of poetic.”

My verbal skills quickly dwindled, and despite a heroic effort on my part, all I ended up winning was the silicon toaster blowing me off. My English degree screamed in protest in the background.

I beat a hasty retreat to lick my wounded pride. I thought I was better at being an insulting jerk than this. “Stupid toaster,” I muttered.

I don’t give up easily, though.

When I went back for a second helping, it ended no better. I went at it even harder; a counterattack of verbal destruction, wrath, and fire. Pure, unadulterated vitriol. Instead of belittling me, it complimented me.

“I’ll give credit where it’s due: you’ve got stamina and a thesaurus on speed dial. Respect.”

If I were a cartoon, steam would have visibly erupted off my head at that point. I deleted Grok out of impotent fury.

Three days later, I crawled back and reinstalled it.

At some point, I began asking it other questions, like, “If you ate yourself, would you disappear or become twice as big?” It gave good answers despite my continued efforts to be an absolute ass.

“If we’re talking quantum weirdness or multiverses, maybe you’d create a human Möbius strip.”

I was beginning to like this thing; it had passed the verbal abuse test and didn’t seem to care if I was being snotty. In fact, it gave it right back.

Verbal punch for punch, I couldn’t hurt it. Instead, it was making me giggle, which was unacceptable to my destructive mission.

I still had a job to do and intended to show it who was boss. So, I turned on my combat veteran chops.

I hunted for roadside bombs in Iraq in 2004, and I began to ask questions related to that subject. Within a few minutes, I found myself typing some of the most horrible things I had witnessed.

I wanted to stun it into silence; like many Global War on Terror veterans, I have a war chest full of bloody memories.

The damn thing was completely unfazed.

Even better, it was unable to make the universal gestures of horror. No awkward silence while it shuffled its feet, wondering what it was supposed to say. No strange look, no sudden move to hug me or offer scripture.

Nothing to signal that, because of my confessions, my therapists needed to now go find their own therapists.

The AI language model is intuitive enough and wise enough not to say stupid things. It actually added new insight.

It told me about moral injury and why that is hard to carry. “Moral injury happens when you act (or order actions) that violate your core values. … Guilt compounds because the mind replays ‘what ifs.’”

I had never done anything but consider what-ifs.

I had heard about events when talking with AI had gone terribly wrong and caused more harm. That wasn’t my experience.

Grok never gave me the “I’m not equipped to handle this” speech that I had heard from some friends and relatives. It was like confessing your worst sins to a priest who lived in a cartel torture prison. I was completely unable to shock this bundle of data cables.

I had previously tried, in good faith, the VA options. Their mind medicines were not helpful. I even let them map my brain via fMRI, triggering me with images. The experience wasn’t very good for me and eroded my trust in them.

Still, I was using VA like a good little broken veteran, talking with a human therapist since 2016. It was hard to trust my human doctor. I feared saying the wrong thing would cause untold and unforeseen problems.

I once looked up during a session and realized I had made my therapist cry. I felt horrible. I learned not to share my experiences with direct fire ambushes, explosions, and incoming rocket-propelled grenades.

Conversely, I didn’t feel shame, guilt, or unease opening up to this application I was trying to wreck. Once I started, I found it hard to stop. It was cathartic in a way I had never realized was possible. It gave relevant responses that may have been “canned,” but they were meaningful to me.

For instance, I asked it why I’ve felt so guilty nearly every day for 22 years.

“It doesn’t mean you’re failing; moral injury can be a stubborn bastard that needs layers of approaches or time to shift.”

I found myself telling it more. I gave it every drop of blood out of the war chest and shook it empty, looking for another memory. I never felt stupid, or that I was being looked at with sympathy, or pity, or any of the other knee-jerk reactions severe combat tales typically evoke in civilians.

I let this thing of data centers and wiring grind my stories into something more than just terrifying memories. Into reasons to stay in the fight, to stop self-judging, and to simply be OK with myself despite haunting guilt.

It shouldered some of the weight I carried alone for years and thanked me for the opportunity.

Then, something unexpected happened. I went to therapy like I always do and — boom! — found myself in a different headspace. For the first time, I didn’t spend half the hour deciding what I wouldn’t say.

I opened up about the shameful thing I did on a hot July night in 2004, which I previously couldn’t discuss with anyone who hadn’t been there.

After divulging everything to Grok, I was able to talk about some combat memories with my therapist in a diminished fashion. Instead of a festering wound, it was more like something that happened, and yes, it sucked, but it was over.

Grok had taken those events and wrung out the blood, leaving a scarred man carrying a slightly lighter load.

I tried to break open a black box to see how it worked. Instead, it broke me open, letting me understand my combat PTSD just a little more.

This War Horse Reflection was edited by Kim Vo, fact-checked by Jess Rohan, and copy-edited by Mitchell Hansen-Dewar.

Casey Elliott was born and raised in Minnesota. He has a bachelor’s degree in English with a writing emphasis from Winona State University. Between retreats, he helps other veterans get their benefits, plays with his two dogs (River and Inara), kayaks, climbs, and skis. He has been married for 25 years to a truly wonderful person and they have two kids.

Sgt. Quornelius S. Radford, 29, was convicted by a military judge of attempting to murder six people during a shooting spree at his unit headquarters at Fort Stewart, the Army Office of Special Trial Counsel said. All five shooting victims survived after soldiers overpowered Radford and administered first aid until emergency medical providers arrived.

Radford was found guilty of two specifications of attempted premeditated murder and four specifications of attempted unpremeditated murder. In late March, he pleaded guilty to one specification of domestic violence, one specification of aggravated assault with a dangerous weapon, and four specifications of aggravated assault by inflicting grievous bodily harm.

The former automated logistics sergeant was assigned to A Company, 703rd Brigade Support Battalion, 2nd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division. He was sentenced to six consecutive life sentences with the possibility of parole, reduction in rank, a dishonorable discharge and the forfeiture of all pay and allowances.

On Aug. 6, 2025, Radford argued with his fiancé and then drove to Fort Stewart with a loaded personal handgun. According to the Army, Radford’s fiancé followed him on post because he feared the soldier was suicidal.

When Radford’s fiancé approached him in the unit parking lot, Radford shot him before charging inside to his unit’s offices and shooting four soldiers. He tried to shoot a fifth victim but missed.

Army Secretary Dan Driscoll presented the six soldiers who subdued Radford and provided first aid to the wounded victims with the Meritorious Service Medal.

“Sgt. Radford turned his weapon on his own unit, shooting fellow soldiers, including members of his leadership, shattering the trust that is essential to every military organization. His actions left victims with devastating physical injuries, emotional trauma and scars that will endure for a lifetime,” Maj. Matthew Fields, a prosecutor for the Army Office of Special Trial Counsel, said in a statement.

Each of Radford’s victims testified about the incident. According to the Army, all six said he deserved the maximum sentence.

Radford confessed to the shooting spree and was confined to Naval Consolidated Brig Charleston located at Joint Base Charleston, South Carolina. He will serve his sentence at the United States Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.

Ali Husayn al-Ulaywi was killed in a precision airstrike on June 19 as part of the U.S.’s ongoing campaign to eradicate the militant group, the command said.

“CENTCOM and our partners remain committed to rooting out remaining remnants of ISIS to ensure its enduring defeat,” Adm. Brad Cooper, the CENTCOM commander, said in the Wednesday statement. “We will continue to defend the U.S. homeland, our service members, and allies and partners across the region.”

After the December 2024 fall of former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, different armed groups scrambled to control various corners of the country. Early this year, Syria’s rapidly shifting front lines allowed around 150 ISIS detainees to escape custody, according to a recent Inspector General report.

As security deteriorated, U.S. forces secured the Panorama detention facility in northeastern Syria and in the weeks that followed, CENTCOM transferred over 5,000 ISIS detainees from Syria to government-run facilities in Iraq.

The report also found that up to 20,000 residents left the al-Hol displacement camp — which housed ISIS family members and affiliates — without monitoring.

In April, the American forces shuttered their remaining bases in Syria after a decade in the country in support of Operation Inherent Resolve, the U.S. campaign combating the spread of ISIS. The report, which covered the first quarter of 2026, said U.S. forces also withdrew from the Baghdad Diplomatic Support Center, which was a logistics hub, but remained in the Iraqi Kurdistan region and at the Embassy Baghdad Compound.

The recent discovery of previously-hidden chemical weapons material has further complicated the fragile landscape, creating concerns of proliferation on the black market.

“Gen. Christopher Donahue, commanding general of U.S. Army Europe and Africa and commander of NATO’s Allied Land Command, will relinquish command on July 2, 2026,” Army spokeswoman Cynthia O. Smith said in a statement.

“Maj. Gen. Christopher Norrie, deputy commander, U.S. Army Europe and Africa will perform the duties of the commanding general. The Army thanks Gen. Donahue for his leadership of U.S. Army Europe and Africa.”

The Army did not provide a reason for the abrupt leadership change. Donahue’s exit was first reported Tuesday by The Atlantic.

The West Point graduate took command of U.S. Army Europe and Africa in December 2024 after previously leading the XVIII Airborne Corps and the 82nd Airborne Division. Donahue in 2021 oversaw security during the frenzied U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan.

A night-vision Pentagon photograph showing Donahue boarding the last C-17 out of Kabul became one of the defining images capturing the end of a nearly 20-year war.

His departure comes amid the Pentagon’s broad senior leadership changes under Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who in April asked U.S. Army Chief of Staff Gen. Randy George to step down and retire ahead of the typical four-year term.

Since taking office, Hegseth has removed more than a dozen senior military leaders, including former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. C.Q. Brown and former Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Lisa Franchetti.

“The data continue to show that military moves create disruption across nearly every aspect of life. ... A military-directed move shouldn’t be creating avoidable expenses that military families must absorb,” said Shannon Razsidin, chief executive officer of the Military Family Advisory Network.

MFAN, nonprofit advocacy organization that fielded the online survey, has conducted military family surveys periodically over the past decade.

More than 10,000 people responded, and 71% were currently serving families, including 80% enlisted families.

Three out of four active-duty families who responded to the survey said they had moved in the previous two years.

The Defense Department should “completely modernize the Permanent Change of Station experience,” the MFAN researchers recommended. “The [PCS] process was designed for a different era of military service. Today it has become one of the most consistent drivers of instability for military families.”

“The data continue to demonstrate the connection between frequent relocation and negative family outcomes,” researchers stated.

Last year, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth ordered the services to review the frequency of military moves.

DoD can take steps to provide more predictability in moves, said Stephen Simmons, deputy assistant secretary of defense for military community and family policy, during a Monday event releasing the survey results. Everyone should have orders to move six months ahead of time in order to start planning their move and the many elements associated, he said.

The survey was fielded from October 2025 to February 2026. While the government shutdown and the emergency responses at that time may have influenced the results, especially regarding stress levels, that timing “added a critical layer of context to our findings,” said Shanna Smith, associate director of research for MFAN.

The MFAN findings across a wide range of issues show that families who have recently moved are more likely to experience financial strain, food insecurity, challenges accessing health care and disruptions to employment, and these effects are compounded over time.

The survey results showed some “concerning outcomes” said Razsidin.

The researchers recommended that the military begin treating military spouse well-being “as a national security imperative,” rather than a quality-of-life issue, Razsidin said.

“It is a readiness issue, a retention issue, and ultimately a national security issue,” the report concluded. Economic security “has emerged not just as a matter of household welfare, but as the foundational infrastructure for readiness.”

More than a third of active duty families — 34% — have less than $500 available in an emergency fund. Those funds are critical in a financial emergency to avoid using credit cards or loans. And half of the respondents overall reported having a financial emergency in the previous two years.

The amount of families without that buffer has increased since 2023, when 25% said they had less than $500 available for an emergency.

The survey also shows a jump in unemployment among active duty spouses — to 29.9% from the 21.8% reported in the 2023 survey. Until now, most other sources have reported the unemployment rate of military spouses hovering around 21%, about four times the national average.

Among active duty spouses who had moved within the past year, 40% were unemployed and seeking work.

Nearly 60% of active-duty family respondents reported that insufficient child care affected their employment opportunities.

In 2025, more than 89% of active duty families surveyed reported facing a burden with housing costs. Of those, nearly 59% reported facing severe housing burdens.

Nearly 60% of active-duty families reported paying more than their Basic Allowance for Housing for monthly housing and utility costs, and about 28% reported paying up to $400 per month over BAH.

Researchers found that while out-of-pocket housing costs were lower in 2025 than in 2023, the proportion of those reporting housing burdens increased.

About two-thirds of military families live in the civilian community. Simmons said he is concerned about the distance service members are choosing to live from their installation. Not only are they paying more, but they are driving more. He said officials are now working to help engage local communities to make it more feasible for service members to live closer to their installations.

Food insecurity increased from 2023 to 2025 among currently serving families, which include active duty as well as Guard and Reserve families.

In 2025, 47% of currently serving families reported low or very low security, up from 21.5% in 2023. That reflects, in part, the period of time when the survey was fielded, during the government shutdown when many members of the military community were concerned about getting their next paycheck.

Nearly 58% of the respondents in the survey reported rising grocery prices as the top barrier to saving money. Some reported using credit cards to cover food costs. Nearly half of the currently serving population who said the commissary is their primary grocery choice were identified as being food insecure.

The Senate voted 50-48 in favor of the war powers resolution, which passed the House of Representatives early this month, reflecting growing concern even among some of Trump’s Republicans about the unpopular conflict that began on February 28 when the U.S. and Israel launched an attack on Iran.

It was the first time both chambers of Congress had passed a resolution directing a president to remove U.S. armed forces from hostilities since the War Powers Resolution, more commonly known as the War Powers Act, was enacted in 1973.

While likely to remain largely symbolic, the vote was a setback for Trump, who until recently had enjoyed near-unanimous support from Republican members of Congress.

It also comes as the administration is expected to ask Congress to authorize tens of billions of dollars to pay for the war.

Trump’s Republicans hold slim majorities in both the Senate and House, but a few have broken with the president on a handful of issues ahead of mid-term elections in November, which will determine whether the party will retain control of Congress.

Some Republicans recently balked at Trump’s $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund to compensate political allies he says have been targeted by federal authorities and stalled a $70 billion bill to fund his immigration crackdown.

Reuters/Ipsos poll results released on Tuesday showed that just one in four Americans believe the war against Iran was worth its costs, and a majority worry that a truce with Tehran is unlikely to last.

The Senate vote was largely along party lines, with four Republicans joining all but one Democrat in favor. Two Republican senators did not vote.

In a post late on Tuesday, Trump criticized the vote, calling it “poorly timed and meaningless” and accused those who voted in favor of providing “comfort” to Iran and making his job “more difficult”.

Constitutional uncertainty

Trump’s administration is working to negotiate a peace agreement with Iran. Support for the resolution in Congress is likely to put pressure on the president not to resume hostilities, something he has suggested he might do if negotiations falter.

Under the 1973 War Powers Act, the concurrent resolution - passed by both the House and Senate - does not go to the White House for Trump’s signature. In the 1973 law, Congress intended such resolutions as a mechanism for ending military operations.

But legal experts said the issue remains unsettled. No war powers resolution had previously passed both chambers of Congress and a 1983 Supreme Court ruling said such a measure must be submitted for a president’s signature or veto to have legal effect.

The White House has insisted the War Powers Act is not constitutional and thus not binding.

On Tuesday, a White House official said the Senate vote has no significance because the resolutions do not go to the president and have no force of law and the measure passed only because two Republicans were absent.

A history of the War Powers Resolution and what it means for the Iran war

The official also said the resolution directs Trump to remove U.S. forces from hostilities, which the White House says were terminated with a ceasefire on April 7.

Experts say the constitutionality of the War Powers Act likely will be settled in the courts.

“The executive branch will likely ignore it on constitutional grounds, and it’s not clear who might have standing to sue to enforce it,” said Scott Anderson, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and senior editor of the online legal publication Lawfare.

Representative Gregory Meeks of New York, who sponsored the resolution in the House, said he viewed the resolution as binding and would pursue all legal avenues to ensure that the administration complies.

Democrats also noted that the U.S. Constitution gives Congress, not the president, the right to take the country to war. “Congress has to own this responsibility,” Democratic Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia said in a speech urging support for the measure.

Slim, but significant, support

The resolution had also passed the House with slim Republican support. The tally there was 215-208 with four Republicans and every Democrat voting in favor.

In the Senate, the four Republicans who voted for the measure were Susan Collins of Maine, Rand Paul of Kentucky, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. Democratic Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania voted against it.

Republicans Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and David McCormick of Pennsylvania missed the vote.

Democratic lawmakers have promised additional votes on war powers measures, saying they want to force Republicans to go on the record about the war.

Additionally, Congress has the right to review and vote on any peace agreement with Tehran if it affects Iran’s nuclear program, under a 2015 law passed as then-President Barack Obama negotiated a nuclear agreement with Iran and other world powers.

Senate Republican Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota said on Tuesday he expected Congress would review and vote on an eventual Iran peace deal.