U.S. moves Patriot defenses to Middle East with dozens of C-17 flights
The U.S. military shifted a Patriot battalion from the Indo-Pacific to the Middle East, requiring at least 73 flights, according to one commander.
Why it matters: The air defenses are a high-profile resource, capable of intercepting missiles and aircraft. They arrive at a volatile moment.
Further, the number of C-17 flights conducted underscores just how stressful materiel moves can be. The Boeing-made aircraft can transport hefty equipment, like tanks.
Context: Indo-Pacific Command boss Adm. Samuel Paparo disclosed the details in a congressional hearing Thursday. He was accompanied by Gen. Xavier Brunson, the commander of U.S. Forces Korea.
Paparo told senators U.S. "lift requirements must be paid attention to." Sustainment, he added, "won World War II."
What they're saying: "The airlift is essential to protect key U.S. bases and partners in the Middle East, which otherwise are much more vulnerable than Israel to Iran's shorter-range missiles," Jonathan Ruhe, director of foreign policy at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, told Axios.
Zoom out: The move comes amid a buildup across U.S. Central Command.
The Carl Vinson aircraft carrier joined the Harry S. Truman in the region. The command on Thursday shared footage of aircraft launching from the decks.
Satellite images show a handful of B-2 bombers dispatched to Diego Garcia, an island in the Indian Ocean. Hans Kristensen at the Federation of American Scientists described the grouping as "unusually large."
Meanwhile, airstrikes in Yemen have killed dozens of people, including Houthi drone experts. An initial wave in March hit 30-plus targets, according to the Pentagon.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Maddow: Ukraine's drone attack just exposed a huge vulnerability in the world's nuclear arsenal
This is an adapted excerpt from the June 2 episode of 'The Rachel Maddow Show.' They nicknamed it the 'Bear.' It's a military aircraft first designed in Russia in the 1950s and built to compete with the American B-52 bomber. The Tupolev Tu-95 can fly across continents before it has to stop and refuel, and it can carry eight long-range missiles. For decades, Russia has had dozens of Tu-95 bombers and other planes like it. On Sunday, Ukrainian drones struck several Russian air bases, destroying a fleet of planes, including several Tu-95 bombers. Russia has been hammering Ukraine with these bombers for years, and this weekend, Kyiv decided that rather than just trying to intercept the missiles that these planes keep firing from the sky, it would instead try to take out the planes. According to NBC News, Ukraine's Security Service smuggled more than a hundred drones into Russia. They hid them under the roofs of mobile wooden cabins in a process that took months. Then all at once, simultaneously, with no warning, the cabin roofs were opened via remote control, and then the drones flew off to do their thing, packed with explosives. Ukraine says they destroyed planes across four different military sites in Russia, including in Siberia at a site almost 3,000 miles away from Ukraine. Of Russia's entire fleet of military bombers, Ukraine says they were able to destroy or severely damage about a third of them. Now, was Russia aware that this was going to happen? Clearly no. Did they have defenses in place to protect their planes? Well, that's a funny story. In a video of Sunday's drone attack, put out by Ukraine's Security Service, you can see round objects on the wings of Russia's bomber planes. Those circles are actually tires — like the tires you put on your car. Apparently, this is a thing Russia has been doing for a while now. One NATO military official told CNN in 2023, 'We believe it's meant to protect against drones. ... We don't know if this will have any effect.' Well, now we know. As Sunday's strike shows, tires do not prevent drones from destroying your attack planes. This whole thing is just astonishing, not just in a foreign policy way, but also in an action movie kind of way. It also has really serious implications beyond Russia and Ukraine. Those bomber planes Ukraine just torched are not only equipped to carry regular missiles, they also can carry nuclear warheads. If you are Russia, the United States or any country with nuclear weapons, your national security policies are based around the fact that you have an impenetrable nuclear deterrent. Why would anyone attack you if you could then retaliate by blowing them off the map with your nuclear stockpile? But Ukraine just disabled a primary piece of Russia's nuclear arsenal with devices that look like they came from RadioShack, which means it has to contend with the fact that its impenetrable nuclear arsenal is not so impenetrable after all. Sunday's strike also has really important strategic consequences for every country that thinks of itself as having a nuclear deterrent. For our country, wouldn't this be a good time to have a robust, competent national security apparatus thinking about those kinds of implications and making smart, well-informed strategic decisions on how to react to them? This article was originally published on
New York Times
2 hours ago
- New York Times
A New Era of Trade Warfare Has Begun for the U.S. and China
The U.S.-China trade conflict is quickly morphing into a fight over global supply chains, as the two nations limit the sharing of critical technologies that could have lasting consequences for scores of industries. The United States last week suspended some sales to China of components and software used in jet engines and semiconductors, a response to a clampdown by Beijing on the export of minerals used in large sectors of manufacturing. Both sides over the last few days have accused the other of operating in bad faith. The supply chain warfare, which comes on top of tariffs the two countries have inflicted on the other's imports, has alarmed companies that say they cannot make their products without components sourced from both. And it has made officials in Washington increasingly nervous about other choke points where China could squeeze the United States, including pharmaceuticals or shipping. In recent weeks, the airplane industry has emerged as both a weapon, and a victim, in this fight. The jet engine technology that powers airplanes, and the navigation systems that control them, largely come from the United States, developed by companies like General Electric. In China's quest to build a viable competitor to Boeing, for example, it has had to source engine technology from GE Aerospace. But a jet engine also cannot be made without China. Minerals that are processed there are essential for special coatings and components that help the engine operate smoothly at high temperatures, as well as other uses. Beijing restricted exports of those minerals, known as rare earths, in April after President Trump began imposing high tariffs on Chinese imports. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Clint Eastwood Says Hollywood Has Too Many Sequels: Where Is the Next ‘Casablanca'?
UPDATE: In a statement to Deadline on Monday, June 2, Clint Eastwood disputed ever giving the interview with the Austrian newspaper Kurier and called the comments in it 'entirely phony.' 'A couple of items about me have recently shown up in the news,' Eastwood told Deadline. 'I thought I would set the record straight. I can confirm I've turned 95. I can also confirm that I never gave an interview to an Austrian publication called Kurier, or any other writer in recent weeks, and that the interview is entirely phony.' More from IndieWire Luca Guadagnino Attached to Direct AI Business Comedy 'Artificial' for Amazon MGM Austrian Publication That Ran 'Phony' Clint Eastwood Interview Cuts Ties with HFPA Member Author ORIGINAL STORY: Clint Eastwood wants Hollywood to only greenlight original films instead of relying on sequels and franchise installments. The auteur, who yes, did have his own franchise with five 'Dirty Harry' films, clarified that after directing features for decades, he now sees the value in standalone works instead. The 'Juror #2' director told Austrian newspaper Kurier, as translated by Reuters, that Hollywood has to exit the 'era of remakes and franchises' to usher in new classics. 'I long for the good old days when screenwriters wrote movies like 'Casablanca' in small bungalows on the studio lot, when everyone had a new idea,' Eastwood said. 'We live in an era of remakes and franchises. I've shot sequels three times, but I haven't been interested in that for a long while. My philosophy is: do something new or stay at home.' Eastwood credited the studio system for inspiring his directing career, which began in 1971 with 'Play Misty for Me,' in which he also starred. His enduring legacy will continue so long as he can still make movies, the Oscar winner assured. 'As an actor, I was still under contract with a studio, was in the old system, and thus forced to learn something new every year,' Eastwood said, 'and that's why I'll work as long as I can still learn something, or until I'm truly senile.' He added that he has no plans to retire and will still be working 'for a long time yet,' saying, 'There's no reason why a man can't get better with age. And I have much more experience today. Sure, there are directors who lose their touch at a certain age, but I'm not one of them.' Eastwood previously told The Metrograph that he doesn't reflect on past films too much. 'If I'm happy with it, that's it. As far as if anybody else has a different feeling about it, well that's theirs. I'm sure I've had disappointments. If I did, I wouldn't dwell on them,' he said, adding of his film legacy as a whole, 'That would be up to them, to the audiences, to answer. Up to the people on the outside. I just kind of go along. I consider this, again, emotional. It comes upon you. You have a story, you make a movie of it. You have to just go for it. If you think too much about how it happened you might ruin it. I go back and look at films I've made, and I could easily ask, 'Why the heck did I make this?' I don't remember! It might have been a long time ago…' Best of IndieWire Guillermo del Toro's Favorite Movies: 56 Films the Director Wants You to See 'Song of the South': 14 Things to Know About Disney's Most Controversial Movie Nicolas Winding Refn's Favorite Films: 37 Movies the Director Wants You to See
