Latest news with #U.S.DefenseDepartment
Time of India
5 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
Donald Trump's Air Force One deal with Qatar isn't final as gift may turn into legal liability
The U.S. Defense Department said the deal with Qatar for a luxury jet is done, but actually, legal teams from the U.S. and Qatar haven't finished the paperwork yet. Qatar wants the agreement to clearly say it was the Trump administration that asked for the plane, and Qatar won't be blamed for future transfers of the aircraft, as per reports. The deal is stuck because there's a debate over turning a plane sale into a 'gift', which could bring legal problems. Trump told reporters, 'I got a beautiful big magnificent free airplane for the United States Air Force.' Even though the legal issues might not kill the deal, they could make people question how the deal really started, according to The Washington Post. Trump claimed Qatar offered the jet first, but actually, his team asked Qatar this winter after Trump got mad about delays in two Boeing jets he ordered earlier. The original plan was to buy the plane, but later Qatar agreed to give it as a gift, as reported by CNN and New York Times by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Tủ lạnh 2025: Nhiều lựa chọn hiện đại với giá hợp lý LocalPlan Tìm hiểu thêm Undo A White House official confirmed that the deal is still being worked on, not complete yet. White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said there's no doubt it'll be a free gift to the U.S. Air Force, as per The Washington Post report. Qatar is getting heat from both Democrats and some Republicans over giving the luxury jet. Senator Chris Murphy and others tried to block $1.9 billion in U.S. arms sales to Qatar unless the jet offer was canceled. Murphy called the gift 'an illegal bribe' and said it's unconstitutional. Live Events House Democrats led by Rep. Gregory Meeks made a law proposal to stop federal money from being used to transfer such a jet to the U.S. or Trump's library. Trump said critics are wrong, and the jet is way too big for personal use, 'It's too big. Much too big', according to the report by The Washington Post. White House lawyer David Warrington wrote in March that the U.S. can take the plane in two steps, first to the U.S., then later to Trump's presidential library foundation. Last week, it seemed the deal was done after Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said the jet was accepted legally. But actually, legal teams haven't talked since May 9, and things are still incomplete, as per reports. Trump really wants the jet, he saw it on Feb. 15 at Palm Beach Airport and said, 'They're giving it to me.' Trump 'loved' the jet's modern design, more space, and workstations compared to old Air Force One planes. Despite the controversy, Trump's team isn't backing down. One official said, 'We're not cowardly, the press is going to love it.' Trump's team picked L3Harris, a defense company, to upgrade the plane in Texas to meet Air Force One's safety standards, as stated in the reports. But Air Force officials found the jet was 'very poorly maintained' and would need millions of dollars in repairs just to be usable. To make the jet safe for presidential use, it could cost $1.5 billion. To convert it later to civilian use might cost another $500 million, as mentioned by The Washington Post report. A former Air Force Secretary, Frank Kendall, said Trump can skip some safety rules if he wants it done fast, 'He's the commander in chief.' FAQs: Q1. Did Qatar really gift Trump a plane? Not yet, legal talks are still going on, and nothing is final. Q2. Why is the Air Force One deal with Qatar controversial? Because turning a plane sale into a gift may break rules and raise legal and political issues.
Miami Herald
23-05-2025
- Health
- Miami Herald
For 1 Georgia soldier, transgender ban prompts painful decision
ATLANTA – Aven Thomas began medically transitioning from female to male in 2021, just months after then-President Joe Biden signed an executive order allowing transgender people to serve openly in the U.S. military. The result was so gratifying for the U.S. Army specialist that he compared it to turning on a light in pitch darkness. "When you feel at your best,"he added, "you are able to perform your best." Stationed at Fort Eisenhower in Augusta, Thomas is now quitting the military under pressure from the Trump administration, which has reversed Biden's policy. About 1,000 service members who have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria like Thomas are voluntarily leaving the military under President Donald Trump's policy, the U.S. Defense Department announced this month. The Trump administration also announced this month that it is preparing to begin the next phase of its ban by "involuntarily separating" transgender service members who have not stepped forward like Thomas. The Pentagon has estimated about 4,000 - or less than 1% of the roughly 2 million people in uniform - have a diagnosis for gender dysphoria. "I am really glad that I got to serve. I love all the people that I have met," said Thomas, 25, a seven-year Army veteran who reenlisted for another five years in February. "It is going to be hard to let go, especially not on my own terms." A history of controversy Americans are sharply divided over allowing openly transgender people to serve in the U.S. military. Fifty-eight percent favor it, while 35% oppose it and 7% have no opinion, according to a telephone poll of 1,001 adults Gallup conducted nationwide in late January. Support is higher among Democrats at 84%, compared to Republicans at 23%. Trump reignited the debate in 2017 during his first presidential administration, when he moved to ban transgender people from the U.S. military. "Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail," Trump announced then on Twitter, the social media platform now known as X. Federal judges blocked Trump's policy. After he defeated Trump and took office in January 2021, Biden overturned Trump's ban. Soon after Trump moved back into the White House this year, he signed an executive order revoking Biden's policy. Trump's order says in part: "adoption of a gender identity inconsistent with an individual's sex conflicts with a soldier's commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, even in one's personal life." Seven transgender service members joined a transgender person who wanted to enlist and the Gender Justice League in suing in federal court, arguing Trump's latest ban is unconstitutional. In March, a federal district court judge in Tacoma, Washington, blocked Trump's order. But on May 6, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Trump could proceed with his ban. On the same day of the high court's ruling, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth championed the Trump administration's policies while speaking at an annual conference for Special Operations Forces. "We are leaving wokeness and weakness behind," Hegseth said. "No more pronouns. No more climate change obsession. No more emergency vaccine mandates. No more dudes in dresses, we're done with that [expletive]." 'We are losing a good one' The son of a high school band director and a property manager, Thomas was born and raised in Douglas, the Coffee County government seat. While attending elementary school in rural Georgia, he knew he was "different." "Being from a small country town, I felt weird," he said. As Thomas grew older and traveled outside of rural Georgia, he learned more about people like him. When he reached 17, he decided he wanted to undergo gender transition. Meanwhile, Thomas was inspired by relatives who served in the military. He joined the Army after he graduated from high school and now serves as a training equipment manager with a detachment of the 73rd Ordnance Battalion. He has participated in training exercises in Germany and Poland. And he received Army Achievement Medals in 2021 and 2024 for "exceptionally meritorious service" and for "outstanding achievement," respectively, his service records show. Staff Sgt. Mariytzah Gillis, who serves in the same Army battalion at Fort Eisenhower with Thomas, has been impressed with his work ethic and resilience. Thomas has performed, Gillis said, above his rank and has taken on extra responsibilities. "Thomas is an amazing soldier," Gillis said. "We are losing a good one because people don't like them? It doesn't make sense to me. It doesn't make sense to Thomas. It doesn't make sense to anybody but Trump." Fort Eisenhower and the Defense Department referred questions about Thomas' case to the U.S. Army, which did not respond to requests for comment. The Defense Department also said it would not provide information about how many other military service members like Thomas who are voluntarily leaving the military are stationed in each state, including Georgia. Thomas received his gender dysphoria diagnosis from the military in September 2021 before proceeding with his medical transition the following month. He decided to voluntarily resign this year, partly because he knew it was possible the Trump administration could access his military medical records and force him out. "If they were to continue with involuntary separations, you wouldn't have to do a whole lot of digging to find that. That is definitely the reason why I self-identified," he said. "I just don't want to be forced out under someone else's terms," he added. "If it were up to me, I would like to stay in." Service members with a gender dysphoria diagnosis who leave voluntarily like Thomas will be honorably discharged and be eligible for separation pay that is twice as high as those who are involuntarily forced out, according to the Defense Department. Thomas hasn't decided how he will support himself after he leaves the Army, though he wonders if he could do a similar job as a civilian at Fort Eisenhower. "I was someone who wanted to continue serving my country for 20 years," he said. "That was my plan. It has always been my plan to continue my service for as long as possible because I really do enjoy what I do. I always have." Thomas emphasized that he rejects the Trump administration's ban, saying he and other transgender people have served successfully in the military for many years. "We can perform our duties just like any other soldier," he said. "We are more than capable. We are more than qualified." Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
Yahoo
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Polish FM: Europe's existential choice
POZNAN — For years, I have taken every opportunity to urge the European Union and its member states to invest more in defense. When Russian President Vladimir Putin launched his full-scale invasion of Ukraine, I repeatedly asked (as a member of the European Parliament) what further proof we would need to recognize the threats facing all of Europe. What would we – as Europeans – do if our security was threatened while our closest ally, the United States, was otherwise engaged? Today, we confront that very situation. U.S. officials are openly stating that they do not intend to devote most of their time or resources to dealing with what they deem European issues. According to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the U.S. has 'other priorities to focus on.' I agree. The global superpower has global responsibilities, and the number of flash points that might demand the U.S. government's attention seems only to be growing. In addition to challenges in the Western hemisphere, instability in the Middle East, and severe tensions between two nuclear powers — India and Pakistan — there is also the paramount goal of redefining relations with China. Moreover, according to the official U.S. Defense Department planning doctrine, the U.S. can no longer fight more than one major war at a time. The new U.S. administration has been communicating its position plainly. 'We're here today to directly and unambiguously express that stark strategic realities prevent the United States of America from being primarily focused on the security of Europe,' Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced in Brussels this February. Read also: EU approves 17th package of Russia sanctions, targets shadow fleet And U.S. Vice President JD Vance was even more direct, stating that 'Europe's entire security infrastructure … has been subsidized by the United States of America,' even though it is neither in Europe's nor America's interest 'for Europe to be a permanent security vassal of the United States.' President Donald Trump himself has repeatedly accused Europe of 'freeloading' and 'taking advantage' of the U.S. Europeans may not like what we hear, but we cannot pretend not to hear it. We must be prepared for the U.S. to wash its hands not only of Ukraine, but even of Europe. Le Monde's Sylvie Kauffmann recently argued, 'Preparing for the worst is a safer bet than hoping for the best.' We can and should do both — hope and prepare. Trust but verify. Ever since Trump announced his presidential candidacy back in 2015, there have been two schools of thought on interpreting his words. Some argue that we should take him seriously but not literally, whereas others urge us to do the opposite: treat him literally but not always seriously. I believe that the most reasonable and respectable approach is to treat whatever the U.S. president says both literally and seriously. Read also: Trump says he trusts Putin, won't sanction Russia, prepared to 'back away' from Ukraine peace talks Given the current state of the world, this implies that Europe faces an existential choice. We can enter the global game united, as a heavyweight competitor, or we can condemn ourselves to marginalization. Much has been done already to become a heavyweight contender. Since 2016 — just before Trump's first term — NATO members, excluding the U.S., have increased their annual defense spending by 98%, from $255 billion to $506 billion. Moreover, after three years of Putin waging all-out war on Ukraine, the EU and its member states have proven willing to spend even more and to embrace a more cooperative, rational, and effective approach to defense planning and procurement. The new joint defense agreement between the EU and the United Kingdom is another step demonstrating this new strategic solidarity. Deterring Russia is not beyond our means. We don't need to match U.S. military capabilities; rather, we just need enough to force Putin to reconsider his chances of winning in a confrontation with a united European community of democratic nation-states. The people of Europe are clearly demanding that we develop a revitalized European defense posture. According to the European Commission, 71% of EU citizens believe that the bloc must strengthen its ability to produce military equipment, while 77% support a common defense and security policy. This gives European leaders a mandate to think and act boldly. But how long will it take to restore peace to Ukraine and stability to Europe? I believe we must act on the basis of three assumptions. First, we should view this as a war of a former imperial metropole against what it regards as a mutinous colony. History suggests that colonial wars usually take about a decade to end. Anything less than that should be considered a bonus. Second, we should accept that for the invading country to start negotiating in good faith, it must conclude that the invasion was a mistake. It must acknowledge that the costs of war, and of keeping the former colony subjugated, are greater than whatever benefits the colony can possibly yield. Third, given the above, we should remember that colonial wars are usually finished by a different group of leaders than those who started the fighting. Yes, boosting European defense capabilities while supporting Ukraine will cost money. Since the start of Russia's war of aggression, the EU and its member states have provided more than $165 billion in support for Ukraine and its people. That is a significant amount, but it is still less than 1% of the combined GDP of the EU's member countries (some $19 trillion). We can certainly do more. And as we reinvigorate Europe's defenses, we must not lose sight of why we are doing it: we are acting for our own safety, not to undermine transatlantic relations but to improve them. To avoid a strategic dilemma, we Europeans must be able to help the U.S. defend its allies by taking on our fair share of the security burden. Read also: As Russia's fiber optic drones flood the battlefield, Ukraine is racing to catch up Editor's Note: Copyright, Project Syndicate / ImpactCEE. This article has been republished by the Kyiv Independent with permission. The opinions expressed in the op-ed section are those of the authors and do not purport to reflect the views of the Kyiv Independent. We've been working hard to bring you independent, locally-sourced news from Ukraine. Consider supporting the Kyiv Independent.
Yahoo
16-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
How our clean-tech startup stumbled into a Pentagon partnership by following the demand
My love for our planet began as a child growing up in rural Canada. I'm a lifelong hiker, fisherman, animal lover, and mineral collector. These interests deepened my appreciation for the value of a healthy planet. When I moved to San Francisco, I set out to transform my passion for nature into clean-tech action. Over the next decade, I launched startups addressing major environmental challenges and worked as an advisor helping global blue-chip clients make their technologies more resilient, cost-effective, and profitable, all while being greener. After working in natural resources, I set out on my next big venture, founding Magrathea in 2022 right here in San Francisco to develop electrolytic technology capable of creating magnesium metal from seawater—metal that could be used to manufacture electric vehicles while emitting zero CO2 emissions and reducing humanity's need for terrestrial mining. But world events would soon reshape our trajectory in ways I never anticipated. Our first fundraise for Magrathea, in March 2022, coincided with a turning point I never expected: the start of Putin's full-scale invasion of the rest of Ukraine. I'm not proud to admit it—and want to be clear about that—but this horrific development, to our surprise, created momentum for Magrathea in an unexpected area: the defense industry. With the onset of the Ukraine war, the U.S. and other NATO countries immediately focused on shoring up their defenses and military spending. Almost all military products—Black Hawk helicopters, AI-powered drones, next-generation fighter jets—require magnesium. It's a critical component in making aluminum alloys stronger and is irreplaceable in a number of defense industry applications. Naturally, the U.S. and other NATO allies suddenly required more magnesium—and they turned to Magrathea. About a year later, we found ourselves in partnership with the U.S. Defense Department via a Defense Production Act Title III grant to further develop our technology to secure the U.S.'s defense industrial base. Magrathea's strategic pivot amidst the Ukraine war served as a valuable lesson. It illuminated a critical aspect of being successful with technological development: You have to make something the market wants. To deliver successful technology, helping the environment simply isn't enough. You need a viable technology solution in the short term with a proven end market and robust economics. Safeguarding the environment becomes a valuable byproduct, but for that benefit to be realized, the economics must work. In the case of magnesium, our end market is expansive—magnesium metal is perhaps the most important critical material, and it's the only structural metal you can make from seawater. You can't manufacture planes or cars without it. In addition to steel and aluminum, magnesium is also essential for titanium (aerospace applications), beryllium (electronics), and amorphous boron (defense)—as well as hafnium and zirconium (nuclear). Our confidence in meeting this demand stems from historical precedent: A legacy variation of our process was used by Dow Chemical in Freeport, Texas. Using this process, Dow helped the U.S. become the world's largest producer of magnesium metal, running the smelter for over 70 years until the late 1990s. We're building on this proven foundation with modern innovations including a major upgrade to the way magnesium chloride salt is processed before electrolysis. Where we really differ from our predecessors is that we believe we have cracked the code when it comes to producing magnesium in a cost-effective manner by developing a less-capital-intensive, more durable salt processing and electrolysis system. We have five patent applications and mountains of trade secrets protecting the innovations we've imbued on the electrolytic magnesium metal production process. We're a team of less than 20, but we've done more than a team of 50 could do in five years at a big company. As powerful and large as the market opportunity for magnesium is, having great technology is only the first step. What is most urgently needed is investment. To ensure America becomes a leader in critical minerals and other emerging industries, billions of dollars to fund large capital projects is what will truly move the needle. This is something I have been communicating to the U.S. federal government every time I talk to them. For us, while we can produce magnesium at a small scale and sell it to customers, we need more capital to build large-scale facilities to produce the amount of metal that our customers really need. To date, we have raised $12 million in private funding and have a $28 million partnership with the DOD, but this is only enough for us to develop our technology to pilot scale and improve processes. To take Magrathea to the next level, the government needs to understand that they must make capital available in the form of large grants and loan guarantees. The private investment industry is not going to figure this out on their own. We need the government to be first movers. America has viable, compelling technology solutions available today to address its critical minerals shortage, but they need immense capital to scale. The Chinese understand this, and they made such capital available to build up their crucial industries decades ago. Yet our government has repeatedly missed similar opportunities, allowing promising technologies, especially clean technologies like batteries and solar photovoltaics, to be sent to their graves before being scaled up. Climate solutions, national security, economic growth—these are not separate battles in my mind. They are one and the same. America has the chance to win them all, but that requires more than white papers, essays, and speeches. It requires focus, patience, and—most importantly—investment. There is a path forward to bring primary magnesium metal manufacturing back to the United States to bolster national security, and to drive growth of this important and valuable industry all while bringing climate solutions to market. Now, more than ever, America has a chance to turn innovation—provided we choose to invest in it—into leadership. As Magrathea enters the next stage of its journey—with plans to establish the first commercial electrolytic magnesium facility in the past 50 years—my climate passion is still very much with me. I don't know for certain that the rest of my journey will be without its pivots, but one thing I do know is that I'll never overlook the importance of building solutions that can help our planet. The opinions expressed in commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune. Read more: How our ping pong startup hit a $50M valuation in 5 years by tapping into automation How we built our bootstrapped startup different and sold it for $40M. (Hint: We ignored some myths) In 6 years I've bootstrapped my moving company to $100M in revenue. Avoiding VC funding has been key This story was originally featured on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
13-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump aims for superior Air Force One, critiques current
President Trump said in a new interview that he thinks the U.S. 'should have the most impressive plane' compared to aircraft used by other world leaders and described the existing Air Force One as 'much smaller' and 'much less impressive' than planes other countries have. 'When you land and you see Saudi Arabia and you see UAE and you can see Qatar and you see all these — they have these brand-new Boeing 747s, mostly, ' Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity in an interview aboard Air Force One. 'And you see ours next to it; this is like a totally different plane.' 'It's much smaller, it's much less impressive — as impressive as it is,' he added. Fox News is scheduled to air the full interview at 9 p.m. on Tuesday. It comes as Trump faces backlash for an arrangement to accept a $400 million Boeing 747-8 as a gift from Qatar to use as a replacement for the aging Air Force One while in office. The luxury jet, previously used by the Qatari royal family, will be gifted to the U.S. Defense Department and will be transferred to Trump's eventual presidential library after he leaves the White House. Trump has faced criticism for agreeing to accept the pricey present from a foreign government. He told reporters at the White House on Monday that it would be 'stupid' to reject the offer, and he again defended the arrangement in the interview with Hannity. 'Some people say, 'Oh, you shouldn't accept gifts for the country.' My attitude is, why wouldn't I accept a gift?' We're giving to everybody else, why wouldn't I accept a gift?' Trump said. The Defense Department has been in the process of replacing the two aging 747s that make up the Air Force One fleet, but the contract with Boeing has faced multiple delays. 'It's going to be a couple of years, I think, before the Boeings are finished,' Trump told Hannity. 'And they'll be wonderful when they're finished.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
