Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Please Don't Feed the Warmongers

Opinion

​A Lebanese girl returns with her family to live amid the ruins of an apartment wrecked by Israeli strikes.

A Lebanese girl returns with her family to live amid the ruins of an apartment wrecked by Israeli strikes in the Houch neighborhood, after being displaced for weeks by war between Israel and the Iran-backed Hezbollah militia that has displaced 1.2 million Lebanese, on April 28, 2026, in Tyre, Lebanon.

Scott Peterson / Getty Images

I was recently catching up with an old friend from my Navy Reserve Officer Training Corps days who told me about some young sailors he knew in Bahrain tasked with intercepting hostile drones. Critically, as highly disciplined professionals, they have become extraordinarily good at it. My friend and I, with over twenty years of active duty service as military officers between us, discussed the extent to which their competence and vigilance are keeping them, and other Americans deployed in the area, alive, all while their leadership in Washington treats war with an increasingly terrifying callousness.

As brave servicemembers risk their lives on the front lines, Trump brags about how much money he’s making as president. It is true that for those invested in the types of industries that thrive during armed conflict, this war in Iran is a windfall. Trump himself invested between $9.7 million and $24.3 million in arms manufacturers and Pentagon contractors in 2025. Why would he end the war?


War and the defense industry go hand-in-hand, and Trump wants a cut of the action. Consider the military’s recent contract with Powerus, a defense startup that pivoted to military production earlier this year just as hostilities with Iran escalated. The Air Force just agreed to purchase an undisclosed number of interceptor drones from Powerus: their first-ever military contract. Just prior, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump had joined the team, acquiring significant equity stakes just as it prepared to go public via corporate merger. Those sailors in Bahrain may use Powerus interceptor drones one day without realizing the Trump family is selling them. And though interceptors may act like fire extinguishers against Iranian fire, it is important to understand the Trump family has a clear financial incentive in stoking the fire.

Trump’s renewed bombing campaign against Iran may have been an elaborate effort to get Europe to join in his grift, too. Trump wanted European members of NATO to contribute 5% of their GDP to defense, likely because American defense companies would get more business. He may have crumbled a ceasefire and provoked a country into pledging a “crushing response” just to intimidate our allies into buying more from his buddies. American national security interests are not advanced, and servicemembers will be the first to pay the price.

Trump has created and sustained geopolitical crises because, for a network of defense contractors, connected insiders, and crypto-billionaires, it’s profitable. Meanwhile, thousands of innocent civilians are dead while American servicemembers are left holding the line. It is almost unconscionable to consider, but the president may just not care. The human cost of war may simply be lost on a commander-in-chief so blasé about war crimes that after the U.S. torpedoed the IRIS Dena, he admitted they sank it instead of capturing it because it would be “more fun.” On Feb. 28, 2026, the U.S. struck a girls’ school in Minab, Iran, killing at least 168 children. When questioned at a G7 press conference about this indiscriminate tragedy, the worst civilian casualty incident caused by the U.S. military since 1991, the president shrugged it off, stating, “Mistakes are made. War is nasty.”

This disregard for human life abroad is mirrored by a disregard for human life at home. A foreign war is treated as a bottomless line item while human suffering is treated as the unavoidable cost of doing business. This April, Trump said at an Easter luncheon, “It’s not possible for us to take care of day care, Medicaid, Medicare, all these individual things…We have to take care of one thing: military protection. We have to guard the country.” In other words: no money for kids, families, healthcare here at home. That money is for weapons to bomb other kids, apparently. War is nasty.

If we can’t take care of day care because we’re fighting wars, then blame Trump’s war in Iran for why America's children are in crisis. For years now, the United States has suffered from the highest child poverty rate of any wealthy nation. Now, Trump has dismantled the Department of Education, ignored the epidemic of school gun violence, left youth mental health to plummet, and his "One Big Beautiful Bill Act” slashed funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), stripping food benefits from vulnerable households across the nation. While we spend billions bombing foreign nations “back to the Stone Age” and deplete our domestic arsenals, our own foundation is rotting.

We are told we cannot afford to feed, educate, or protect our children because we must maintain our global military dominance. We let children go hungry to pay for wars in which the price of war has included the additional deaths of hundreds of children. Not to mention the deaths of American service members, each of whom is also someone’s child. What kind of a nation starves its children to feed its war machine? A hollow one.

Unfortunately, this goes way beyond Trump. An entire system has normalized putting the military-industrial complex above our domestic interests, and we have been complicit. It is time to demand more from our government. This country, and the service members who defend it, deserve leaders who prioritize the public good over their bank accounts. We need to stop letting war-hungry hawks treat our kids as disposable while they fortify their own ballrooms. But if we don’t want our tax dollars to be a venture capital fund for the elites, we need to have some hard conversations.

We will never achieve the exceptional outcomes young Americans deserve until we decide as a society that they are worth investing in. That conversation can’t happen honestly without addressing our priorities, which means addressing the way we think about war. The conversation has to happen though, and soon. It is high time we ended the war in Iran. It is high time we ended wars.


Julie Roland was a Naval Officer for ten years, deploying to both the South China Sea and the Persian Gulf as a helicopter pilot before separating in June 2025 as a Lieutenant Commander. She has a law degree from the University of San Diego, a Master of Laws from Columbia University, and is a member of the Truman National Security Project.


Read More

Empty money in wallet.

What does it mean to be the working poor? Explore the gap between poverty and a living wage, why millions of working Americans struggle, and solutions to reduce economic inequality.

photobyphotoboy/Getty Images

The Concept of the “Working Poor” Should Be Unacceptable

What does the phrase "working poor" mean? The first point is that you are working; you have a regular job—you aren't working catch as catch can; you are employed. But despite working, you are poor. What does it mean to be poor? It turns out that "poor” means different things depending on what standard you apply.

Some definitions seem rooted in the old institution of the poorhouse, which was a home for paupers. Thus, dictionary.com defines “poor” as having little or no money or other means of support. To me, that’s the definition of being destitute, not poor.

Keep ReadingShow less
Woman holding out an empty wallet at a table.

Many Americans wrongly associate poverty primarily with Black and Hispanic communities. Explore how this misconception influences public opinion, politics, and anti-poverty policy.

skaman306 / Getty Images

More Whites Live in Poverty than Either Blacks or Hispanics - Correcting the Perception of Poverty

From observing people and politicians over the years—I can find no data on this—I have the impression that liberals as well as conservatives think that the typical person living in poverty is Black or Hispanic. The image most Whites have of people of color is someone who is poor—except for celebrities—with little education; they are not aware of many people of color who are middle class. On the other hand, they are not aware of many Whites who are poor and so they think their number is low.

Why is the perception of poverty important? The perception of who is poor has significant impact on the support for government programs that aid the poor. Given the extent of racism in this country, whether subtle or violent, (see my post, “Whether the Issue is Gun Violence or Inequality, It Always Comes Back to Race/Racism”), it’s not surprising that support for anti-poverty programs is non-existent among MAGA Republicans and for that matter has always been weak among Republicans; 45% of Republicans would even cut food stamp support. Their attitude is "it's your fault;" so government has no responsibility to help. They feel the causes of poverty are personal: bad life choices, drugs, lack of work ethic, and the breakdown of families—all negative perceptions of Black culture.

Keep ReadingShow less
Congress at sunset

America's national debt is projected to reach $45 trillion by 2029. Explore Congress's constitutional "Power of the Purse," federal spending, appropriations, and the policies contributing to rising deficits.

Bill Clark/Getty Images

Congress Must Enforce the Power of the Purse as Debt Soars

“No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law” (Appropriations Clause, Article I, Section 9, Clause 7, U.S. Constitution). Congress’s “Power of the Purse” means the President cannot spend money or authorize expenditures unless Congress has passed a specific law funding it (Congress.gov).

According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the non-partisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, the total federal debt held by Americans is on track to hit $40 trillion by the end of 2026. Currently, every resident in America carries a $122,642 share of this debt.

Keep ReadingShow less
A father voting, with his young son standing by him, watching him.

Citizens cast their vote during the 2026 presidential runoff in Colombia on June 21, 2026 in Barranquilla, Colombia. Ivan Cepeda, candidate for the Pacto Historico party and Abelardo de la Espriella, candidate for the Salvación Nacional, face in a tight runoff to rule Colombia from 2026 to 2030.

Leonardo Castañeda/Getty Images

Colombia’s Election Matters—Especially to Ecuador and the U.S.

In a closely fought election on June 21, conservative outsider Abelardo De La Espriella prevailed over Iván Cepeda, an ally of current leftist president, Gustavo Petro. Central to the electorate’s choice were distinct policy proposals to fight criminality and the drug cartels, who control large swaths of Colombian territory. The policies president-elect De La Espriella will bring to the fight against these issues matter greatly, not only to Colombia, but to neighboring Ecuador and the United States.

Earlier in March, Ecuadorian President Noboa, desperate to gain traction in his own drug war, announced a partnership with the U.S. to conduct joint operations against drug cartels. The partnership quickly went awry. A New York Times investigation of the first strike indicates that what the joint militaries considered a drug camp was in fact a dairy farm, with no drug connection. Then, on March 17, Colombia accused Ecuador of bombing within its territory with U.S. involvement. These incidents resulted in U.S. lawmakers calling for a suspension of joint operations on May 13. Very quickly, the U.S. partnership has reopened the scars of the Plan Colombia era of the early 2000s, where an overly militaristic approach to the drug war funded by the U.S. resulted in human rights abuses and false positives.

Keep ReadingShow less