Pentagon halts some weapons shipments to Ukraine over concerns about US stockpiles
According to U.S. military officials tracking the shipments, the weapons were already staged in Poland before the order came down.
The halt was driven by Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Elbridge Colby after a review of U.S. munitions stockpiles that showed dangerously low reserves, Politico first reported.
"This was made to put America's interests first," White House deputy press secretary Anna Kelly said n a statement also shared with Fox News Digital. "The strength of the United States Armed Forces remains unquestioned — just ask Iran."
Colby, a principal Trump defense official and architect of the 2018 National Defense Strategy, has long pushed for a hard shift toward countering China over continued involvement in Ukraine. Before rejoining the Pentagon, he led The Marathon Initiative and authored The Strategy of Denial, a widely cited blueprint for great power competition.
According to Politico, the withheld arms include air defense munitions, precision-guided shells and Hellfire missiles used by Ukrainian F-16s.
A senior defense official told Politico the Pentagon's review revealed that stockpiles of Patriot interceptors, precision-guided 155 mm shells and other critical munitions had dropped to levels deemed insufficient to meet U.S. contingency plans.
The Army has already quietly quadrupled its procurement targets for Patriot interceptors, but defense analysts say replenishment will take time.
Over the weekend, Russia launched its largest aerial attack of the war, nearly 500 drones and 60 missiles. Ukraine's air defenses, many U.S.-made, remain strained.
After meeting with Ukrainian President Zelenskyy at the NATO summit, Trump said, "They do want to have the anti-missile missiles. … We're going to see if we can make some available."
Remaining funds from the Biden administration are expected to run out in the coming months.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
You Can't Look Away From Lisa Murkowski's 'Creepy' Death Stare At NBC Reporter
If looks could kill, NBC News' Ryan Nobles wouldn't be standing right now. (Watch the video below.) The network's chief Capitol Hill correspondent was on the receiving end of what's been described as a prolonged death stare from Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska). He recounted the confrontation in a viral X post with the video. 'Sen. Lisa Murkowski stares me down for more than 10 secs after I ask her to respond to Sen. Rand Paul's critique of the deal she struck to get her to a YES and pass the OBBB,' Nobles wrote. Murkowski voted Tuesday to approve the so-called 'big beautiful bill,' paving the way for Vice President JD Vance to cast the tiebreaking tally for its passage. The senator received concessions to make the bill's cuts to Medicaid and SNAP less severe in her state, prompting Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) to call out his colleagues for choosing 'to add more pork and subsidies for Alaska to secure [the vote].' Nobles caught up with Murkowski and told her: 'Sen. Paul said that your vote was a bailout for Alaska at the expense of the rest of the country.' Murkowski locked into his eyes like a prize fighter at a weigh-in. 'I'm just asking for your response,' Nobles said. 'My response is I have an obligation to the people in the state of Alaska. And I live up to that every single day,' she said. 'Do I like this bill? No. But I tried to take care of Alaska's interest,' she added. NEW: Sen. Lisa Murkowski stares me down for more than 10 secs after I ask her to respond to Sen. Rand Paul's critique of the deal she struck to get her to a YES and pass the OBBB.'Do I like this bill? No. But I tried to take care of Alaska's interests.'w/ @ — Ryan Nobles (@ryanobles) July 1, 2025 Some observers on X were not impressed.'Does she think that stare down makes her look tough?' one observer wrote . Another called it 'creepy' while a critic mused, 'That stare is all this muppet is capable of.' Whatever it was, it was no match for this guy. How Republicans Got Lisa Murkowski To Vote For The Tax Cut Bill GOP Senator Says 'We Are All Afraid' Of Retaliation By Donald Trump Lisa Murkowski Rips GOP For Being 'Afraid' Of Criticizing Trump, Elon Musk
Associated Press
10 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Analysis shows Trump's tariffs would cost US employers $82.3 billion
WASHINGTON (AP) — An analysis finds that a critical group of U.S. employers would face a direct cost of $82.3 billion from President Donald Trump's current tariff plans, a sum that could be potentially managed through price hikes, layoffs, hiring freezes or lower profit margins. The analysis by the JPMorganChase Institute is among the first to measure the direct costs created by the import taxes on businesses with $10 million to $1 billion in revenue, a category that includes roughly a third of private-sector U.S. workers. These companies are more dependent than other businesses on imports from China, India and Thailand — and the retail and wholesale sectors would be especially vulnerable to the import taxes being levied by the Republican president. The findings show clear trade-offs from Trump's import taxes, contradicting his claims that foreign manufacturers would absorb the costs of the tariffs instead of U.S. companies that rely on imports. While the tariffs launched under Trump have yet to boost overall inflation, large companies such as Amazon, Costco, Walmart and Williams-Sonoma delayed the potential reckoning by building up their inventories before the taxes could be imposed. The analysis comes just ahead of the July 9 deadline by Trump to formally set the tariff rates on goods from dozens of countries. Trump imposed that deadline after the financial markets panicked in response to his April tariff announcements, prompting him to instead schedule a 90-day negotiating period when most imports faced a 10% baseline tariff. China, Mexico and Canada face higher rates, and there are separate 50% tariffs on steel and aluminum. Had the initial April 2 tariffs stayed in place, the companies in the JPMorganChase Institute analysis would have faced additional direct costs of $187.6 billion. Under the current rates, the $82.3 billion would be equivalent on average to $2,080 per employee, or 3.1% of the average annual payroll. Those averages include firms that don't import goods and those that do. Asked Tuesday how trade talks are faring, Trump said simply: 'Everything's going well.' The president has indicated that he will set tariff rates given the logistical challenge of negotiating with so many nations. As the 90-day period comes to a close, only the United Kingdom has signed a trade framework with the Trump administration. India and Vietnam have signaled that they're close to a trade framework. There is a growing body of evidence suggesting that more inflation could surface. The investment bank Goldman Sachs said in a report that it expects companies to pass along 60% of their tariff costs onto consumers. The Atlanta Federal Reserve has used its survey of businesses' inflation expectations to say that companies could on average pass along roughly half their costs from a 10% tariff or a 25% tariff without reducing consumer demand. The JPMorganChase Institute findings suggest that the tariffs could cause some domestic manufacturers to strengthen their roles as suppliers of goods. But it noted that companies need to plan for a range of possible outcomes and that wholesalers and retailers already operate on such low profit margins that they might need to spread the tariffs costs to their customers. The outlook for tariffs remains highly uncertain. Trump had stopped negotiations with Canada, only to restart them after the country dropped its plan to tax digital services. He similarly on Monday threatened more tariffs on Japan unless it buys more rice from the U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a Tuesday interview that the concessions from the trade talks have impressed career officials at the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and other agencies. 'People who have been at Treasury, at Commerce, at USTR for 20 years are saying that these are deals like they've never seen before,' Bessent said on Fox News Channel's 'Fox & Friends.' The treasury secretary said the Trump administration plans to discuss the contours of trade deals next week, prioritizing the tax cuts package passed on Tuesday by the Republican majority in the Senate. Trump has set a Friday deadline for passage of the multitrillion-dollar package, the costs of which the president hopes to offset with tariff revenues. ___ Follow the AP's coverage of President Donald Trump at
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Report: Liverpool set £50m price as Newcastle eye winger
Harvey Elliott to Newcastle? Ornstein Reveals Magpies Lead the Chase Newcastle United have emerged as front-runners in the pursuit of Harvey Elliott, with David Ornstein of The Athletic reporting that the Magpies are ahead of European challengers RB Leipzig in the race for the Liverpool winger. After a frustrating 2024/25 season in which Elliott managed just two Premier League starts—both coming after Liverpool had already secured the title—his Anfield future looks increasingly uncertain. Advertisement Despite limited club action this season, Elliott's star rose on the international stage this summer. The 22-year-old was named Player of the Tournament at the Under-21 European Championship, netting five goals and playing a pivotal role in England's triumph. His performances reignited interest across Europe, but it's Newcastle's Champions League qualification that places them firmly in pole position. Newcastle's Advantage Over Leipzig According to Ornstein, Elliott's desire to compete at an elite level is central to his decision-making. 'Elliott wants to operate at an elite level if leaving Liverpool,' Ornstein wrote, with Champions League football cited as a key motivator. While RB Leipzig, backed by Jurgen Klopp in his new role as head of global soccer for Red Bull, have shown interest, their absence from European football next season leaves them trailing. Photo: IMAGO Advertisement Eddie Howe, a known admirer of Elliott has a big advantage to offer over RB Leipzig, their ability to offer top-tier European football, combined with Howe's vision, makes Tyneside an attractive destination for the versatile left-footer. Liverpool's Price Tag and Buy-Back Clause The transfer fee could prove decisive. Ornstein reports: 'Liverpool would want any deal for Elliott to produce a fee in excess of £40m plus a buy-back option, or above £50m without one.' Given Howe's long-term plans, he may push for a clean deal without a buy-back clause, potentially stretching to the £50m mark. Selling Elliott at such a price would represent 'pure profit' for Liverpool due to his homegrown status. These deals significantly boost a club's financial muscle within FFP constraints—something that could fund further reinforcements for Arne Slot's Reds. Our View – EPL Index Analysis From a Newcastle United supporter's perspective, the idea of bringing in Harvey Elliott is both exciting and pragmatic. At just 22, Elliott already boasts European tournament honours, top-tier Premier League experience, and a playing style that aligns well with Eddie Howe's system. Advertisement The need for creativity and control in wide areas has become evident over the past season, especially with injuries to key players and an over-reliance on Isak and Gordon. Elliott's ability to operate between the lines, coupled with his eye for goal—as demonstrated in the Under-21 Euros—could add a new dimension to the squad. The reported £50m fee is significant, but considering Elliott's age, homegrown status, and resale potential, it's an investment with long-term benefits. More importantly, fans would back a deal without a buy-back clause; if Newcastle are building for the future, it makes sense to retain full control over rising talents. Some supporters may be concerned about the Isak angle—rightly so. If his sale becomes a consequence of funding Elliott's arrival, it could spark unrest. Isak has been central to Newcastle's return to Europe and would be tough to replace. However, if it's part of a broader restructuring strategy to comply with financial rules while deepening the squad, it may be a necessary sacrifice.
