Latest news with #LloydAustin
New York Times
14 hours ago
- General
- New York Times
Hegseth, at Security Forum, Vows to Strengthen America's Asian Alliances
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told Asia's security leaders on Saturday that as Europe takes on more of its own defense, the United States would work more closely with Indo-Pacific allies. Together, he said, they would jointly build more weapons, expand training, and deter China from trying to seize disputed territory, including Taiwan. 'No one should doubt America's commitment to our Indo-Pacific allies and partners,' Mr. Hegseth said, speaking at the Shangri-La Dialogue, an annual security forum in Singapore. 'We will continue to wrap our arms around our friends and find new ways to work together.' Stronger bonds were needed, he added, saying: 'The threat China poses is real, and it could be imminent. We hope not, but it certainly could be.' His comments outlined a familiar strategy. In a world rattled by President Trump's tariffs and his scorn for Western allies, Mr. Hegseth confirmed that the Indo-Pacific remains a rare exception — a region where the United States favors continuity in security alliances more than disruption. In terms of actual defense policy, the approach Mr. Hegseth described largely echoed what his predecessor, Lloyd J. Austin III, laid out last year at the same forum. Mr. Hegseth spoke about efforts to disperse U.S. forces and capabilities more widely through the region, citing the recent move of uncrewed anti-ship missile batteries to the outer islands of the Philippines close to Taiwan, the self-governed island that China claims as its own territory. He also described plans to deepen training with partners from India to Australia, and to do more shared production of weapons, like artillery shells and drones. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Forbes
3 days ago
- Business
- Forbes
Congress is Marching to the Wrong Tune on Pentagon Spending
WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 11: Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS) speaks to the press on the transparency from ... More the Department of Defense regarding the health of Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin on January 11, 2024 in Washington, DC. Secretary Austin was hospitalized for surgery relating to prostate cancer, which was not reported for several days. (Photo by Anna) Critics of Trump administration policy have zeroed in on the President's plan to hold a military parade on his birthday, purportedly to honor the U.S. Army, at the same time that the administration and its allies in Congress are seeking deep cuts in veterans benefits and services. If the administration truly wants to honor our men and women in uniform, it should spend whatever is needed to take care of them, and it should elevate stories of individual bravery and effort in defense of the nation and the Constitution. Instead, it has chosen to mount a costly spectacle that nods at our military personnel, past and present, while coming up empty when it comes to providing them with genuine support. Many veterans have rejected the idea that the parade is even in their honor. As Naveed Shah, political director of the veteran-led organization Common Defnse has noted, 'As an Army veteran myself, I'm proud of the Army's birthday. But this parade seems like it's all about the president's ego rather than the troops who sacrifice everything in order to serve our country.' But even as criticism of the parade grows, it is important that we don't take our eyes off of the Pentagon budget debate in Congress, which will be much more consequential in its impacts on veterans and non-veterans alike. As time winds down for Congress to finalize the budget for this year – nine months past the beginning of Fiscal Year 2025, which officially started on October 1st of last year – it appears to be marching towards a massive spending plan which is more likely to make America and its allies less safe than it is to bolster our security for the nextd generation, as Sen. Wicker and his colleagues seem to believe. The House has already signed off on a $150 billion increase beyond what the Pentagon is likely to ask for over the next several years, a sum Senate Armed Services Committee chair Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) has called a 'generational investment' in defending America. But if any budget lines deserve a generational investment, they should be measures to combat climate change, prevent disease, curb inequality, and fund smart diplomacy and foreign economic assistance. The drive to increase Pentagon spending is also questionable because of the way it is being promoted, via reconciliation. Reconciliation is a process for rushing a bill through Congress on an expedited basis, a process which undermines that notion of bipartisan debate and input that had been a model for handling Pentagon budget requests in past years. Spending to address the major non-military challenges outlined above is not only insufficient relative to what is needed, but the House plan would seriously cut back existing, inadequate funding in these areas. If the House plan is adopted by the Senate, the result would be domestic and foreign policies that fund weapons and preparation for war while underinvesting in the pursuit of domestic strength and the maintenance of non-military tools of statecraft. The United States would be akin to a weight lifter who can lift prodigious amounts but is so bulked up they can't lift their hands above their heads or engage in routine physical activities. A successful foreign policy requires a range of tools, not just a large Pentagon budget and a global military footprint. An overmilitarized budget is not the royal road to a more effective defense – it is a recipe for diminishing U.S. global influence while making conflict more likely. Hopefully criticism of the military parade and the parallel reductions in support for veterans will prompt the public to look at a larger question as well: does America really need a $1 trillion Pentagon budget to defend ourselves? And is there a solid plan on how to spend these huge sums? After the president's parade has come and gone, these questions will remain. How we answer them will have a generational impact, as Sen. Wicker has suggested, but it may not be he positive impact he envisions, but rather a weaker, more divided country that is undermining its strength at home in service of a misguided conception of how to address challenges abroad.
The Herald Scotland
19-05-2025
- Health
- The Herald Scotland
What is prostate cancer? What to know after Joe Biden's diagnosis
"The President and his family are reviewing treatment options with his physicians," the statement said. Prostate cancer is the second most common cancer in men, affecting 1 in 8 men in the U.S., according to the American Cancer Society. Here's what you need to know about the disease. How common is prostate cancer? The National Cancer Institute says that prostate cancer makes up about 15.4% of all cancer cases and estimates that there will be 313,780 cases in 2025. "I find that it's something that a lot of men don't talk about," Dr. Samuel Haywood, a urologist specializing in prostate cancer, told USA TODAY when former Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin disclosed that he underwent prostate cancer surgery in 2024. "Men can be very stoic, and they don't like to talk about their health issues." Approximately 12.9% of men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer at some point during their lifetime, according to the National Cancer Institute. The Institute also says that there were an estimated 3,518,978 men living with prostate cancer in the United States in 2022. What are the symptoms of prostate cancer? The announcement said that Biden had been experiencing "increasing urinary symptoms," prior to the diagnosis, which is consistent with the symptoms the Cleveland Clinic lists for prostate cancer. Those symptoms include: Frequent, sometimes urgent, need to pee, especially at night Weak urine flow or flow that starts and stops Pain or burning during urination Loss of bladder control Loss of bowel control Painful ejaculation and erectile dysfunction Blood in semen or urination Pain in lower back, hip or chest What is a Gleason score? A Gleason score and grade indicates how aggressive the cancer is, according to the Mayo Clinic. The Mayo Clinic says that Gleason scores can range from two to 10, with any score below five not considered cancer and a score of 10 meaning that the cancer is growing quickly. Pathologists determine the score by examining and grading biopsied cells on a one to five scale, with one being the least cancerous and five being the most cancerous. They then add the numbers of the two most common grades to produce a Gleason score. Prostate cancer prognosis and treatment While non-metastasized prostate cancer has a 97.9% 5-year relative survival rate, according to the National Cancer Institute, prostate cancer that has metastasized and spread to other parts of the body has a survival rate of about 37%, according to the Mayo Clinic. Management of the disease may include surgery, radiation therapies, hormone therapy, chemotherapy and immunotherapy among other treatment options, according to the Cleveland Clinic. Men with earlier stages of prostate cancer can opt for "active surveillance." A 2023 study found that people who chose watchful waiting were no more likely to die than those who opted for surgery or radiation and they suffered no side effects, other than perhaps some anxiety. Contributing: Joey Garrison, Charles Trepany, Karen Weintraub, USA TODAY.
Forbes
26-04-2025
- Health
- Forbes
Adding $150 Billion to the Pentagon Budget Will Waste Funds Without Improving Our Defenses
WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 11: Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS) speaks to the press on the transparency from ... More the Department of Defense regarding the health of Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin on January 11, 2024 in Washington, DC. Secretary Austin was hospitalized for surgery relating to prostate cancer, which was not reported for several days. (Photo by Anna) Even as President Trump and secretary of defense Pete Hegseth talk of a post-World War II record $1 trillion Pentagon budget request for fiscal year 2026, majorities in both houses of Congress are seeking a multi-year, $150 billion plus up to the department's resources via a separate route known as reconciliation – a procedure that allows the majority to push through legislation without fear of a filibuster. Critics of the plus up question the need to throw more money at a defense industrial base that is currently maxed out, especially as benefits for veterans and military families could be subject to reductions. An effective military ultimately depends on well-trained, well-motivated people. Preferencing hardware over the needs of current and former members of the military would be both misguided and potentially harmful to the morale of the force going forward. While contractors are poised to get a multi-billion dollar pay day, veterans and military personnel will be neglected, or worse. Only about 6 percent of the $150 billion proposed plus up in Pentagon spending will go to help military personnel. As for veterans, even before the reconciliation bill began to be debated the administration had announced plans to cut 80,000 jobs at the Veteran's administration, a body that is already struggling to get benefits to former service members in a timely fashion. And since the vast majority of VA personnel are involved with providing health care, those services are likely to be harder to come by. Other blows do veterans services include moves that would reduce staffing at suicide hotlines for veterans and defund basic research relevant to veterans health and safety. Meanwhile, a source close to the negotiations told Congressional Quarterly that the biggest increases in the proposed reconciliation bill will go to shipbuilding ($29 billion), the president's Golden Dome missile defense initiative ($27 billion), munitions ($20 billion), nuclear weapons ($14 billion), emerging military technology ($14 billion), and 'air superiority' ($11 billion). In short, something for everyone, if you happen to be a weapons contractor. Perhaps not coincidentally, the two biggest categories of proposed new spending will disproportionately funnel revenue to companies in the home states of the two main proponents of the bill, Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) and House Armed Services Committee Chair Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.). Ingalls Shipbuilding employs 11,000 workers at its Pascagoula, Mississippi facility, and Huntsville, Alabama is known as 'Rocket City' because of the large cluster of companies that build missiles and missile defense systems there. The main winners from increased shipbuilding funds will be Virginia (HII corporation's Newport News Facility that builds aircraft carriers and attack submarines), Connecticut (General Dynamics' Electric Boat ballistic missile submarine plant), and Maine (General Dynamics Bath Shipyards plant). Golden Dome funds will help both old guard contractors like Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Boeing that already make interceptors, satellites, and communications systems relevant to missile defense, and emerging military tech firms like Anduril, which has won contracts for anti-drone technology. As Congress considers showering the Golden Dome project with taxpayer funds, members should consider that the vast majority of independent scientific experts believe that a foolproof defense system against all forms of missile attack - especially high speed ICBMs – may be physically impossible, not to mention exorbitantly expensive. As Laura Grego of the Union of Concerned Scientists has noted, '[i] t has been long understood that defending against a sophisticated nuclear arsenal is technically and economically unfeasible.' And allocating more money for nuclear weapons when systems like the Northrop Grumman's Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile system are 81% over its original cost estimate will be throwing good money after bad. Meanwhile, given Boeing's dismal record of performance problems and cost overruns on both civilian airliners and defense systems like the Osprey aircraft and the KC-46 refueling tanker, accelerating spending on the company's new F-47 combat aircraft program is not prudent. The Pentagon and its contractor network are having a hard time spending existing funds well. Congress should think twice before sending more taxpayer money their way. We need a smarter, more realistic defense plan grounded in a well-compensated, well-trained defense force far more than we need to give additional billions to weapons makers that are already struggling to produce affordable, effective defense systems.
Yahoo
15-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Russia continues to throw troops into a meat grinder in Ukraine
As the Russian invasion of Ukraine grinds on into its third year, Russia's military has suffered staggering losses. Yet, even as tanks burn and casualty counts reach the hundreds of thousands, Russia continues to pour troops into the meatgrinder. 'Since 2022, Russia has suffered more than 700,000 casualties in Ukraine,' former Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said in January. 'Now, that's more than Moscow has endured in all of its conflicts since World War II — combined. Russian casualties in Ukraine now surpass two-thirds of the total strength of the Russian military at the start of Putin's war of choice. In November 2024 alone, Russia lost nearly 1,500 troops a day.' In this week's video, Thom Tran, an Army veteran and stand-up comedian, walks viewers through the story behind those numbers, whether Russia's military is truly crippled, or if its 'quantity over quality' approach to manning and equipment suggests that it can keep going. Each week, on Tuesdays and Fridays, Task & Purpose will be bringing in military veterans to host segments on different topics. These videos will range from breakdowns of tactics and doctrine to explainers on new tech and weapons systems from a rank-and-file perspective. If you enjoyed this week's video, please hop on over to our YouTube channel and follow the team there. And if you have suggestions for future topics our video team can cover, please hop in the comments and let us know. Navy fires commanding officer, command master chief of expeditionary security squadron The Marine Corps has settled the debate over the size of a rifle squad Leg day: Army cuts down on number of paid parachutists Navy commissions its newest submarine, the USS Iowa Why veterans are the real target audience for 'Helldivers 2'
