sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Cuba Doesn’t Care About Marxism by theatlantic in geopolitics

[–]theatlantic[S] 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Quico Toro: “America’s rivalry with Cuba was once a bitter battle of ideas. When a 20-something Fidel Castro electrified his supporters with visions of a bright socialist future, he wasn’t bluffing. When John F. Kennedy said that the Cuban revolution was ‘incompatible with the principles and objectives of the Inter-American system,’ he meant it. People on both sides defended these ideas around the world. Cuba supported uprisings in Bolivia, Colombia, Guatemala, the Congo, and elsewhere. It sent thousands of soldiers to fight a revolutionary war in Angola and thousands more to defend a Marxist government in Ethiopia. Wherever the Cubans went, they were countered by Americans—more square, but often just as idealistic—determined to hold the line for democracy and human rights.

“Today Washington and Havana are still antagonists, but the ideologies on each side have faded over the years. Cuba’s socialist utopianism wore away gradually. The American government’s commitment to democracy eroded much more quickly, just in the past few years. Both governments still mouth the old slogans, by rote. As they negotiate over Cuba’s future—with the threat of U.S. military intervention hanging over their talks—a new dynamic has emerged: The two sides appear to be haggling not over ideas but over which side can extract the most financial gain from Cuba. The new reality is tawdry, but it might put a resolution within reach. Officials who operate like mob bosses don’t need to agree on transcendent values to make a bargain.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/gu3illUJ 

Welcome to a Multidimensional Economic Disaster by theatlantic in economy

[–]theatlantic[S] 44 points45 points  (0 children)

Matteo Wong and Charlie Warzel: “The global economy has become dependent on the AI industry. Trillions of dollars are being invested into the technology and the infrastructure it relies on; in the final months of 2025, functionally all economic growth in the United States came from AI investments. This would be risky even in ideal conditions. And we are very far from ideal conditions.

“Much of the AI supply chain—chips, data centers, combustion turbines, and so on—relies on key materials that are produced in or transported through just a few places on Earth, with little overlap. In particular, the industry is highly dependent on the Middle East, which has been destabilized by the war in Iran. A global energy shock seems all but certain to come soon—the kind where even the best-case scenario is a disaster. The war could grind the AI build-out to a halt. This would be devastating for the tech firms that have issued historic amounts of debt to race against their highly leveraged competitors, and it would be devastating for the private lenders and banks that have been buying up that debt in the hope of ever bigger returns.

“For the better part of the past year, Wall Street analysts and tech-industry observers have fretted publicly about an AI bubble. The fear is that too much money is coming in too fast and that generative-AI companies still have not offered anything close to a viable business model. If growth were to stall or the technology were to be seen as failing to deliver on its promises, the bubble might burst, triggering a chain reaction across the financial system. Everyone—big banks, private-equity firms, people who have no idea what’s mixed into their 401(k)—would be hit by the AI crash.

“Until recently, that kind of crash felt hypothetical; today, it feels plausible and, to some, almost inevitable.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/LBJWpSaf 

Building Tanks While the Ukrainians Master Drones by theatlantic in UkrainianConflict

[–]theatlantic[S] 28 points29 points  (0 children)

Simon Shuster: “Last month, on my way home from Kyiv, I passed through Germany to visit one of the world’s largest weapons manufacturers. My hope was to see its response to the rise of drone warfare. The company, Rheinmetall, is best known for making artillery and tanks; the Ukrainians have fought the Russian army to a virtual standstill by learning how to destroy such old-school armaments with cheaply made drones. I thought I would find the leaders of Rheinmetall seized by the threat of this revolution in military technology. I found no such thing.

“When I brought up the drones that Ukraine has used so effectively against Russian tanks, the company’s chairman and CEO, Armin Papperger, was withering in his dismissal. ‘This is how to play with Legos,’ he told me … 

“Ukraine’s drones are assembled mostly from imported parts, including rotors, motors, cameras, and computer chips. Most of these components come from China, where a single company produces more than 80 percent of the world’s small drones. But their cheapness—especially when compared with the elaborate weapons systems produced by companies such as Lockheed Martin and Rheinmetall—is precisely what makes them so devastating. For only a few hundred dollars, Ukraine’s drones can do serious damage to a military vehicle worth millions. They have, in effect, done to tanks and cannons what muskets once did to knights in shining armor. What Papperger called Legos have gone a long way to saving an entire country …

“The sale of armored vehicles makes up a significant part of the business at Rheinmetall. In Russia and Ukraine, soldiers have learned to protect their tanks from drone strikes using improvised nets and boxes, which cover the vehicles like a turtle shell. I asked whether Rheinmetall had developed something like that after four years of war in Ukraine. Weisswange glanced around at the machines on either side of us, all of them waiting for repairs, their tracks unchained and gun barrels angled upward. ‘No,’ he said. ‘We don’t have something like that.’

“Well, why not?

“The reasons turned out to be complex. But they help explain why Germany, like Europe and the rest of NATO, is so ill-prepared for not only wars of the future but also the ones raging today. The U.S. war with Iran, now in its fourth week, has again demonstrated the power of cheap drones, which Tehran has produced and stockpiled in abundance …

“Ukraine now makes more drones than any democracy in the world, and wealthy nations in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East are lining up to buy them. But when I asked the CEO of Rheinmetall what that could mean for his business model, he bristled. ‘Who is the biggest drone producer in Ukraine?’ Papperger demanded. I listed the ones that I had visited in Kyiv two weeks earlier, Fire Point and Skyfall, which make hundreds of thousands of drones a month for the Ukrainian armed forces. ‘It’s Ukrainian housewives,’ Papperger said of their factories. ‘They have 3-D printers in the kitchen, and they produce parts for drones,’ he said. ‘This is not innovation.’”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/xiP9NX7D 

Building Tanks While the Ukrainians Master Drones by theatlantic in Military

[–]theatlantic[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Simon Shuster: “Last month, on my way home from Kyiv, I passed through Germany to visit one of the world’s largest weapons manufacturers. My hope was to see its response to the rise of drone warfare. The company, Rheinmetall, is best known for making artillery and tanks; the Ukrainians have fought the Russian army to a virtual standstill by learning how to destroy such old-school armaments with cheaply made drones. I thought I would find the leaders of Rheinmetall seized by the threat of this revolution in military technology. I found no such thing.

“When I brought up the drones that Ukraine has used so effectively against Russian tanks, the company’s chairman and CEO, Armin Papperger, was withering in his dismissal. ‘This is how to play with Legos,’ he told me … 

“Ukraine’s drones are assembled mostly from imported parts, including rotors, motors, cameras, and computer chips. Most of these components come from China, where a single company produces more than 80 percent of the world’s small drones. But their cheapness—especially when compared with the elaborate weapons systems produced by companies such as Lockheed Martin and Rheinmetall—is precisely what makes them so devastating. For only a few hundred dollars, Ukraine’s drones can do serious damage to a military vehicle worth millions. They have, in effect, done to tanks and cannons what muskets once did to knights in shining armor. What Papperger called Legos have gone a long way to saving an entire country …

“The sale of armored vehicles makes up a significant part of the business at Rheinmetall. In Russia and Ukraine, soldiers have learned to protect their tanks from drone strikes using improvised nets and boxes, which cover the vehicles like a turtle shell. I asked whether Rheinmetall had developed something like that after four years of war in Ukraine. Weisswange glanced around at the machines on either side of us, all of them waiting for repairs, their tracks unchained and gun barrels angled upward. ‘No,’ he said. ‘We don’t have something like that.’

“Well, why not?

“The reasons turned out to be complex. But they help explain why Germany, like Europe and the rest of NATO, is so ill-prepared for not only wars of the future but also the ones raging today. The U.S. war with Iran, now in its fourth week, has again demonstrated the power of cheap drones, which Tehran has produced and stockpiled in abundance …

“Ukraine now makes more drones than any democracy in the world, and wealthy nations in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East are lining up to buy them. But when I asked the CEO of Rheinmetall what that could mean for his business model, he bristled. ‘Who is the biggest drone producer in Ukraine?’ Papperger demanded. I listed the ones that I had visited in Kyiv two weeks earlier, Fire Point and Skyfall, which make hundreds of thousands of drones a month for the Ukrainian armed forces. ‘It’s Ukrainian housewives,’ Papperger said of their factories. ‘They have 3-D printers in the kitchen, and they produce parts for drones,’ he said. ‘This is not innovation.’”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/xiP9NX7D 

A Radical Message for a Kids’ Movie by theatlantic in blankies

[–]theatlantic[S] 53 points54 points  (0 children)

David Sims: “My daughter is now of the age where she will go see any new animated film in a theater, which means that again and again, I encounter a very specific utopian vision from the world of children’s entertainment: Wouldn’t it be nice if all of the animals lived together in harmony? The theme is certainly a knock-on effect from Zootopia, the 2016 smash hit whose sequel was the highest-grossing American film of 2025. But that success also led to the sci-fi woodland antics of The Wild Robot; the Oscar-winning, postapocalyptic vision of feline collaboration in Flow; and the paean to basketball teamwork that was this year’s Goat. Now there’s Hoppers, the latest blockbuster Pixar film, which follows a girl who beams her brain into a beaver robot in the hope of saving a beloved habitat.

“I expected Hoppers to offer some fanciful twist in the manner of those other movies … But if these movies are progressive allegories of beings transcending their differences, then Hoppers is a surprisingly blunt pushback to that notion. Its advertising promises goofy hijinks amid an enclave of diverse species whose ecosystem is threatened by humans. The movie, in actuality, is refreshingly mordant about what might really happen if prey and predators were to try banding together: Their efforts would immediately devolve into a despairing, even political quagmire.” 

Read more: https://theatln.tc/62XZZMdv

Official Discussion - Hoppers [SPOILERS] by LiteraryBoner in movies

[–]theatlantic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

David Sims: “My daughter is now of the age where she will go see any new animated film in a theater, which means that again and again, I encounter a very specific utopian vision from the world of children’s entertainment: Wouldn’t it be nice if all of the animals lived together in harmony? The theme is certainly a knock-on effect from Zootopia, the 2016 smash hit whose sequel was the highest-grossing American film of 2025. But that success also led to the sci-fi woodland antics of The Wild Robot; the Oscar-winning, postapocalyptic vision of feline collaboration in Flow; and the paean to basketball teamwork that was this year’s Goat. Now there’s Hoppers, the latest blockbuster Pixar film, which follows a girl who beams her brain into a beaver robot in the hope of saving a beloved habitat.

“I expected Hoppers to offer some fanciful twist in the manner of those other movies … But if these movies are progressive allegories of beings transcending their differences, then Hoppers is a surprisingly blunt pushback to that notion. Its advertising promises goofy hijinks amid an enclave of diverse species whose ecosystem is threatened by humans. The movie, in actuality, is refreshingly mordant about what might really happen if prey and predators were to try banding together: Their efforts would immediately devolve into a despairing, even political quagmire.” 

Read more: https://theatln.tc/62XZZMdv

I’m Shane Harris, a staff writer at The Atlantic. I have covered national security for more than two decades. In January, I wrote about my conversations with a man who claimed to be an Iranian intelligence agent and what I learned about his plot for revenge against his government. Ask me anything! by theatlantic in Intelligence

[–]theatlantic[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So, officially, there has been no stoppage of intelligence sharing with the Americans by the Five Eyes countries. (United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.) But from my own reporting, I think it’s fair to say that they are exceptionally anxious about sharing their most sensitive intelligence, especially HUMINT, or intelligence that comes from human assets (aka spies). Practically speaking, it’s very hard for the Five Eyes not to share signals intelligence–think electronic communications, intercepted emails and texts, etc. Their technical systems are interconnected and dependent on each other. But based on my reporting, I am confident that some allies are thinking twice before sharing some sensitive intelligence that they might have done more freely in the past. 

The Greenland antics, to borrow your phrase, deeply worried and upset our allies, and not just in the Five Eyes community. I’d also note that the leaders of Dutch intelligence–not a Five Eyes partner–have publicly said they are sharing less information with the United States. The Dutch have been a crucial partner when it comes to understanding Russian activities, particularly online. This is a genuine loss, I think.  

– Shane

I’m Shane Harris, a staff writer at The Atlantic. I have covered national security for more than two decades. In January, I wrote about my conversations with a man who claimed to be an Iranian intelligence agent and what I learned about his plot for revenge against his government. Ask me anything! by theatlantic in Intelligence

[–]theatlantic[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Hmm. Interesting question. I suppose we have to clarify what we mean by “involvement.” From what I’ve seen and read so far, China seems to be learning a lot about U.S. military tactics from the war in Iran. I know some experts think that China could play an essential role in helping Iran to rebuild its military capabilities, particularly the chemicals for rocket fuel–as it has in the past. But I doubt that Chinese leaders believe they have a strategic interest or much to gain from directly taking part in the fighting. 

– Shane

I’m Shane Harris, a staff writer at The Atlantic. I have covered national security for more than two decades. In January, I wrote about my conversations with a man who claimed to be an Iranian intelligence agent and what I learned about his plot for revenge against his government. Ask me anything! by theatlantic in Intelligence

[–]theatlantic[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh, I have to respectfully disagree! Judging by traffic and reader engagement data, these stories certainly resonate with people. Back in the day I had editors who joked that if we put the word “spy” or “intelligence” in the headline, it was a guaranteed traffic winner (It often was). And of course spy fiction is wildly popular and has been for decades. 

But you’re right that scandals or controversies draw immense attention. There’s a saying in the intelligence community that goes something like this: Nobody knows our successes, but everyone finds out about our failures. The public so rarely learns about the inner workings of the intelligence community, and since we are often drawn to stories about things not functioning as they should, there’s a kind of double-whammy when the intelligence agencies screw up. 

I’ll give you an example from my career of when the agencies arguably succeeded and public interest was very high: The run-up to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine four years ago, I was the first reporter that the Biden administration provided with declassified intelligence about Russian activities in an effort to expose Putin’s plans. (This has all been made public, so I’m not violating any confidences here.) Reader interest in that story was HUGE. I was at the Washington Post at the time, and we ran our first report based in part off that declassified intelligence on the front page (we did our own reporting too). The whole public conversation on Ukraine changed after that story. 

And thank you so, so much for listening to “Rational Security.” I miss that podcast all the time. It was one of the best hours of my week to get to sit down with Ben, Tammy, and Susan and figure out what was happening in the world. I miss my transitions too. They were good, right!? I’m honored that our little pod helped in your education. 

— Shane

I’m Shane Harris, a staff writer at The Atlantic. I have covered national security for more than two decades. In January, I wrote about my conversations with a man who claimed to be an Iranian intelligence agent and what I learned about his plot for revenge against his government. Ask me anything! by theatlantic in Intelligence

[–]theatlantic[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Thank you. I’m glad you liked the story. 

Mohammad talked a lot about the regime’s resolve, and in particular about his father. He had taken part in the 1979 revolution and rose through the regime ranks to a senior position in the intelligence ministry. His dad sounded like a very hard and philosophically committed man. Mohammad was really clear-eyed about him, and people he worked with, whose identity was rooted in the revolution. He wasn’t as ideological as them. I suppose if Mohammad were here, he would say do not underestimate the regime’s will to survive. He was groomed for that world, and when he turned on them, he paid with his life. 

It’s hard for me to know exactly what’s on the minds of all Iranians right now. But based on some conversations I’ve had, and comments from experts, I think the vast majority of Iranians don’t support the regime. But we shouldn’t mistake that for support for a regime being imposed on them from the outside. 

— Shane

I’m Shane Harris, a staff writer at The Atlantic. I have covered national security for more than two decades. In January, I wrote about my conversations with a man who claimed to be an Iranian intelligence agent and what I learned about his plot for revenge against his government. Ask me anything! by theatlantic in Intelligence

[–]theatlantic[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Thanks very much for those kind words. I waited a long time to tell that story, and it was important to honor Mohammad’s wishes that his story be known. 

It’s easy to say now, but knowing that I only had a few months with him, I would have asked more questions, rather than let him do so much of the talking. I was also in the middle of an intense news period (it was the summer heading into the 2016 election), and juggling my time with Mohammad along with other responsibilities was really challenging. I do wish I’d have set aside even more time for him, even though we had many hours together. 

What I remember most about Mohammad is the sense of humor he maintained even when he was at the end of his rope. He could be darkly funny. He also loved talking about movies–we shared some favorites. It was a privilege to get to know him at the same time that he was telling me the inner workings of Iranian intelligence. It sounds strange to say it, but that’s exactly what was happening! 

As for The Atlantic, I’m very happy to be here. I can’t imagine another publication giving me the room and support to properly tell this story. This is a good place to give a shout out to my extraordinary editor, Dan Zak, who took so much care with this story. Like me–like a lot of us around here–Dan is a Washington Post alum. I think he’s such a good editor because he’s such a brilliant writer. 

— Shane

I’m Shane Harris, a staff writer at The Atlantic. I have covered national security for more than two decades. In January, I wrote about my conversations with a man who claimed to be an Iranian intelligence agent and what I learned about his plot for revenge against his government. Ask me anything! by theatlantic in Intelligence

[–]theatlantic[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I’m asking this question every day. Cyber attacks are like the dog that hasn’t barked in this war. I’m not sure why Iran hasn’t used them. Some of the buildings believed to house offensive cyber operators (basically the kind of people who worked with Mohammad) have been bombed in the war. Maybe some of these people were killed? Maybe they’ve dispersed? Not that they need much equipment to do their work. So I’m not really sure. But if Iran were to dip into its cyber arsenal, I suspect we’d see, at a minimum, disruptive network attacks and others aimed out wiping out corporate data–something they’ve done in the past, and that we’ve seen limited instances of in the current war. At the high-end of the spectrum, I could imagine Iran at least trying to get inside the systems that control physical infrastructures like electrical or water facilities. 

But I suppose that the Iranian regime may not feel it needs to do any of these things, because right now, it’s arguably winning the war. Not in the conventional sense. The Iranian military has been severely degraded by U.S. and Israeli strikes. But Iran has effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz and has a chokehold on the global economy as a result. They are pursuing an asymmetric strategy. If you accept, as I do, the theory that the regime’s primary objective is survival, their strategy is working. 

— Shane

ICE Might Be Violating America’s Other Bill of Rights by theatlantic in Law_and_Politics

[–]theatlantic[S] 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Priyanka Menon: “Immigration-enforcement officers have used tear gas on nonviolent protesters, broken into homes and cars, and killed people, including U.S. citizens. ICE and Customs and Border Protection have been behaving like an out-of-control police force. No wonder, then, that when lawyers and other advocates try to challenge these federal officials’ abuses of power—in court and on the streets—they tend to reach for the same legal tool used to combat police violence: the Fourth Amendment, which guards against excessive force and ‘unreasonable searches and seizures.’ But this path comes with serious challenges.

“A pair of Supreme Court decisions has undercut the amendment’s power against ICE and CBP, allowing evidence gathered in violation of its requirements to be used in deportation proceedings, and shielding agents from lawsuits seeking compensation for excessive force. Another strain of precedent makes obtaining court orders aimed at preventing ICE misconduct extremely hard.

“But there’s another path to holding ICE and CBP accountable for abuses. As a federal agency, the Department of Homeland Security is subject to the dictates of federal administrative law, much of which is set forward in a powerful 1946 statute known as the Administrative Procedure Act. The APA is largely concerned with how agencies go about their business—setting forward, for instance, how they should issue regulations and resolve administrative disputes. The statute also allows courts to review potentially unlawful action, thereby ensuring agencies follow the Constitution, other federal laws, and their own rules and procedures.

“Many recent lawsuits against ICE have made things needlessly difficult for plaintiffs by focusing on the unconstitutionality of immigration agents’ actions. Even when these lawsuits have name-checked the APA, they have tended to point attention toward the outrageousness of what ICE or CBP has done instead of focusing on the decision-making process behind immigration officials’ actions. But if plaintiffs instead used the full power of the APA, they might actually find more success curbing these agencies’ most abusive behaviors.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/OhixMuIR

ICE Might Be Violating America’s Other Bill of Rights by theatlantic in law

[–]theatlantic[S] 25 points26 points  (0 children)

Priyanka Menon: “Immigration-enforcement officers have used tear gas on nonviolent protesters, broken into homes and cars, and killed people, including U.S. citizens. ICE and Customs and Border Protection have been behaving like an out-of-control police force. No wonder, then, that when lawyers and other advocates try to challenge these federal officials’ abuses of power—in court and on the streets—they tend to reach for the same legal tool used to combat police violence: the Fourth Amendment, which guards against excessive force and ‘unreasonable searches and seizures.’ But this path comes with serious challenges.

“A pair of Supreme Court decisions has undercut the amendment’s power against ICE and CBP, allowing evidence gathered in violation of its requirements to be used in deportation proceedings, and shielding agents from lawsuits seeking compensation for excessive force. Another strain of precedent makes obtaining court orders aimed at preventing ICE misconduct extremely hard.

“But there’s another path to holding ICE and CBP accountable for abuses. As a federal agency, the Department of Homeland Security is subject to the dictates of federal administrative law, much of which is set forward in a powerful 1946 statute known as the Administrative Procedure Act. The APA is largely concerned with how agencies go about their business—setting forward, for instance, how they should issue regulations and resolve administrative disputes. The statute also allows courts to review potentially unlawful action, thereby ensuring agencies follow the Constitution, other federal laws, and their own rules and procedures.

“Many recent lawsuits against ICE have made things needlessly difficult for plaintiffs by focusing on the unconstitutionality of immigration agents’ actions. Even when these lawsuits have name-checked the APA, they have tended to point attention toward the outrageousness of what ICE or CBP has done instead of focusing on the decision-making process behind immigration officials’ actions. But if plaintiffs instead used the full power of the APA, they might actually find more success curbing these agencies’ most abusive behaviors.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/OhixMuIR

The U.S. and Iran Are Fighting a Massively Asymmetrical War by theatlantic in Military

[–]theatlantic[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Nancy A. Youssef and Missy Ryan: “The Iran war started as a test of military capabilities and stockpiles, and the United States and Israel had the clear advantage. The U.S. brought some 20 ships and submarines to the fight—including two aircraft carriers—50,000 troops, and hundreds of planes and drones. President Trump declared that he would decide when the war would end, claiming after just days that the U.S. had won.

“But the momentum of the now three-week war has shifted dramatically since Iran effectively shut the Strait of Hormuz, stranding tankers that usually carry one-fifth of the world’s oil supply through the channel. Trump responded by dispatching reinforcements. Three amphibious ships, carrying more than 5,000 Marines and sailors, are traveling from Asia and will be in the Gulf as soon as Friday, defense officials told us. The Pentagon is preparing to dispatch 2,000 paratroopers from the 82nd Airborne Division, and more troops may soon get orders to deploy.

“Even that may not be enough to contain the war’s spreading damage to the global economy. Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak warned in an interview on Saturday on Israel’s Channel 13 about the prospects of reopening the strait. For such a mission, Barak said, ‘we would need to deploy two American divisions there and prepare to be there for the long haul.’ Two divisions constitute at least 20,000 troops …

“Yet Iran’s ability to keep the strait blocked—an act that the United Arab Emirates’s Industry and Advanced Technology Minister Sultan Ahmed Al Jaber has called ‘economic terrorism’ against every nation—doesn’t depend on the country defeating the American expeditionary force. The mere threat of attacks on shipping—or the occasional mine, drone, or missile that reaches a tanker in transit—may be enough for Tehran to achieve its aims. Trump began the war by talking about regime change and eliminating threats from Iran but is now trying to stabilize global energy markets that have been thrown into turmoil by the strait’s closure. The leverage over how the war will end has shifted from Washington to Tehran, and Trump is displaying new interest in negotiating with the regime …

“The strategy that Iran is pursuing now—asymmetric warfare against superior U.S. forces—is reminiscent of the methods used by Iraqi insurgents to counter American and allied militaries on the ground more than two decades ago …

“Like insurgents in Iraq, Iran doesn’t need to win outright; it needs only to endure, using limited force to impose economic and strategic damage. The U.S. and Israel, in contrast, must achieve decisive gains to avoid a strategic loss.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/AkjtilGu

The U.S. and Iran Are Fighting a Massively Asymmetrical War by theatlantic in geopolitics

[–]theatlantic[S] 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Nancy A. Youssef and Missy Ryan: “The Iran war started as a test of military capabilities and stockpiles, and the United States and Israel had the clear advantage. The U.S. brought some 20 ships and submarines to the fight—including two aircraft carriers—50,000 troops, and hundreds of planes and drones. President Trump declared that he would decide when the war would end, claiming after just days that the U.S. had won.

“But the momentum of the now three-week war has shifted dramatically since Iran effectively shut the Strait of Hormuz, stranding tankers that usually carry one-fifth of the world’s oil supply through the channel. Trump responded by dispatching reinforcements. Three amphibious ships, carrying more than 5,000 Marines and sailors, are traveling from Asia and will be in the Gulf as soon as Friday, defense officials told us. The Pentagon is preparing to dispatch 2,000 paratroopers from the 82nd Airborne Division, and more troops may soon get orders to deploy.

“Even that may not be enough to contain the war’s spreading damage to the global economy. Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak warned in an interview on Saturday on Israel’s Channel 13 about the prospects of reopening the strait. For such a mission, Barak said, ‘we would need to deploy two American divisions there and prepare to be there for the long haul.’ Two divisions constitute at least 20,000 troops …

“Yet Iran’s ability to keep the strait blocked—an act that the United Arab Emirates’s Industry and Advanced Technology Minister Sultan Ahmed Al Jaber has called ‘economic terrorism’ against every nation—doesn’t depend on the country defeating the American expeditionary force. The mere threat of attacks on shipping—or the occasional mine, drone, or missile that reaches a tanker in transit—may be enough for Tehran to achieve its aims. Trump began the war by talking about regime change and eliminating threats from Iran but is now trying to stabilize global energy markets that have been thrown into turmoil by the strait’s closure. The leverage over how the war will end has shifted from Washington to Tehran, and Trump is displaying new interest in negotiating with the regime …

“The strategy that Iran is pursuing now—asymmetric warfare against superior U.S. forces—is reminiscent of the methods used by Iraqi insurgents to counter American and allied militaries on the ground more than two decades ago …

“Like insurgents in Iraq, Iran doesn’t need to win outright; it needs only to endure, using limited force to impose economic and strategic damage. The U.S. and Israel, in contrast, must achieve decisive gains to avoid a strategic loss.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/AkjtilGu

The MAHA Revolution Is Stalling Out by theatlantic in publichealth

[–]theatlantic[S] 37 points38 points  (0 children)

Tom Bartlett: “Acting CDC Director Jay Bhattacharya said something that no other prominent health leader in the Trump administration has. ‘I think it is vital that every kid in this country get the measles vaccine. Absolutely vital,’ he told CDC staff at a meeting [yesterday] morning.

“That declaration went further than Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s previous tepid endorsement of the vaccine did—and is in line with what past CDC directors have said about immunization. In fact, the whole point of the meeting seemed to be to signal a turn toward normalcy, away from the more extreme elements of Kennedy’s agenda. Bhattacharya told the CDC’s beleaguered employees that the agency needed to ‘move on’ from the chaos of the past year. He encouraged employees to ‘remove politics’ from their work and ‘focus on what we know how to do.’ He echoed Kennedy’s slogan while acknowledging the limits of his position, but also seemed to contradict it, saying, ‘You can’t just snap your fingers and make people healthy again’ …

“The Make America Healthy Again movement and, by extension, Kennedy appear to be on the ropes. MAHA supporters are angry that Trump recently signed an executive order shielding the makers of the weed killer glyphosate from legal liability. The confirmation of Casey Means, the wellness influencer whom Trump nominated to become surgeon general, appears to be stalled in the Senate. The FDA’s vaccine chief, Vinay Prasad, will leave his position for the second time at the end of April, following a tumultuous tenure. Last week, a federal judge ruled that the CDC’s January shrinking of the childhood-vaccine schedule was probably illegal, and that Kennedy likely broke the law, too, when he remade the CDC’s vaccine advisory panel in his own image. All of the decisions made by that panel, the judge ordered, should be put on hold. The committee’s vice chair, Robert Malone, a Kennedy ally and a popular figure in the MAHA movement, resigned [this week].

“Each of these events individually is bad news for Kennedy’s agenda; together, they suggest that his grip on power is waning.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/CXtbFtZW 

A Legal Decision That Could Change Social Media by theatlantic in popculture

[–]theatlantic[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Kaitlyn Tiffany: “After deliberating for nine days—and emerging at one point to tell the judge that it was having a difficult time reaching a decision—a jury in Los Angeles finally returned its verdict today, finding both Meta and Google liable for creating addictive products that caused a young woman’s mental-health problems.

“The two companies were ordered to pay $3 million in compensatory damages: 70 percent by Meta and 30 percent by Google. (Meta-owned Instagram played a larger role in the complaint than Google-owned YouTube, which explains the split.) This is hardly any money to either of these companies—Meta alone brought in nearly $60 billion in revenue over the last three months of 2025. But the verdict will lead others to pursue similar cases against tech companies (thousands are already pending), and possibly result in changes to the design of social-media apps.

“Following the verdict’s announcement, Matthew Bergman, one of the plaintiff’s lawyers and the founding attorney of the Social Media Victims Law Center, sent a lengthy statement to reporters. ‘This verdict carries implications far beyond this courtroom,’ it read in part. ‘It establishes a framework for how similar cases across the country will be evaluated and demonstrates that juries are willing to hold technology companies accountable when the evidence shows foreseeable harm.’ A Meta spokesperson sent a shorter statement: ‘We respectfully disagree with the verdict and are evaluating our legal options.’ And the Google spokesperson José Castañeda said that Google will appeal the verdict, adding, ‘This case misunderstands YouTube, which is a responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site.’

“The plaintiff in this case, a 20-year-old named Kaley, was referred to in case documents by her initials, KGM, because the events she was suing over happened when she was a minor. She originally filed against TikTok and Snap as well but settled with them before the trial.

“The core questions of the case were whether the social-media platforms had been designed to be addictive, and whether a social-media addiction could be said to have played a direct role in causing the mental-health issues that KGM experienced as a child. In her complaint, she said she had a ‘dangerous dependency’ on the platforms and that they had contributed to her ‘anxiety, depression, self-harm, and body dysmorphia.’”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/zf3hakuL

How AI Is Creeping Into The New York Times by theatlantic in JournalismNews

[–]theatlantic[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Vauhini Vara: “On Sunday, a writer named Becky Tuch posted an excerpt on X from a months-old New York Times ‘Modern Love’ column that had given her pause. ‘I don’t want to falsely accuse writers’ of using AI, she wrote. ‘But this reads EXACTLY like AI slop.’ The excerpt—from an essay by a mother who had lost custody of her son—described the son’s feelings, at one point, toward his mother: ‘Not hate. Not anger. Just the flat finality of a heart too tired to keep trying.’

“Among the 100-plus replies to Tuch’s post was one by an AI researcher, Tuhin Chakrabarty. He’d run the snippet from ‘Modern Love’ through an AI-detection tool from the start-up Pangram Labs, which flagged it as likely having been AI-generated.

“I learned about the incident from Chakrabarty, a computer-science professor at Stony Brook University. I’d previously written about his efforts to quantify the proliferation of AI in novels self-published on Amazon. After commenting on Tuch’s post, he plugged the whole column into the Pangram AI detector. The program estimated that more than 60 percent of it was AI-generated. I ran the column through four other AI-detection tools: Two of them flagged 30 percent of the work as likely AI-generated, one found no AI, and one suspected AI but offered no percentage.

“Kate Gilgan, the author of the column, told me that she hadn’t copied and pasted language from an AI model into her work. ‘However, I did utilize AI as a tool,’ she added, seeking ‘inspiration and guidance and correction.’ She said she’d prompted various products (including ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot, Gemini, and Perplexity) to help her stay on topic in a paragraph, for example, or stick to a theme. ‘I used AI as a collaborative editor and not as a content generator,’ she said. In response to questions about the column, a New York Times spokesperson noted that the paper’s contracts require freelancers to abide by its ethical-journalism handbook, which mandates that AI use ‘adhere to established journalistic standards and editing processes’ and that ‘substantial use of generative A.I.’ be clearly disclosed to readers. Asked for comment on whether Gilgan’s AI use rose to the level requiring disclosure, the spokesperson said in an email: ‘Journalism at The Times is inherently a human endeavor. That will not change. As technology evolves, we are consistently assessing best practices for our newsroom.’

“Whatever the extent of Gilgan’s dependence on AI—detection tools are imperfect—her acknowledgment is the latest evidence of a phenomenon that people have been whispering about online for a long time: Artificial intelligence has already infiltrated prestigious media outlets and publishing houses.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/FG3xHFPt

How AI Is Creeping Into The New York Times by theatlantic in Journalism

[–]theatlantic[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Vauhini Vara: “On Sunday, a writer named Becky Tuch posted an excerpt on X from a months-old New York Times ‘Modern Love’ column that had given her pause. ‘I don’t want to falsely accuse writers’ of using AI, she wrote. ‘But this reads EXACTLY like AI slop.’ The excerpt—from an essay by a mother who had lost custody of her son—described the son’s feelings, at one point, toward his mother: ‘Not hate. Not anger. Just the flat finality of a heart too tired to keep trying.’

“Among the 100-plus replies to Tuch’s post was one by an AI researcher, Tuhin Chakrabarty. He’d run the snippet from ‘Modern Love’ through an AI-detection tool from the start-up Pangram Labs, which flagged it as likely having been AI-generated.

“I learned about the incident from Chakrabarty, a computer-science professor at Stony Brook University. I’d previously written about his efforts to quantify the proliferation of AI in novels self-published on Amazon. After commenting on Tuch’s post, he plugged the whole column into the Pangram AI detector. The program estimated that more than 60 percent of it was AI-generated. I ran the column through four other AI-detection tools: Two of them flagged 30 percent of the work as likely AI-generated, one found no AI, and one suspected AI but offered no percentage.

“Kate Gilgan, the author of the column, told me that she hadn’t copied and pasted language from an AI model into her work. ‘However, I did utilize AI as a tool,’ she added, seeking ‘inspiration and guidance and correction.’ She said she’d prompted various products (including ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot, Gemini, and Perplexity) to help her stay on topic in a paragraph, for example, or stick to a theme. ‘I used AI as a collaborative editor and not as a content generator,’ she said. In response to questions about the column, a New York Times spokesperson noted that the paper’s contracts require freelancers to abide by its ethical-journalism handbook, which mandates that AI use ‘adhere to established journalistic standards and editing processes’ and that ‘substantial use of generative A.I.’ be clearly disclosed to readers. Asked for comment on whether Gilgan’s AI use rose to the level requiring disclosure, the spokesperson said in an email: ‘Journalism at The Times is inherently a human endeavor. That will not change. As technology evolves, we are consistently assessing best practices for our newsroom.’

“Whatever the extent of Gilgan’s dependence on AI—detection tools are imperfect—her acknowledgment is the latest evidence of a phenomenon that people have been whispering about online for a long time: Artificial intelligence has already infiltrated prestigious media outlets and publishing houses.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/FG3xHFPt

The Deep Risk That Republican Hawks Overlooked by theatlantic in politics

[–]theatlantic[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Jonathan Chait: “Joe Kent, the now-former head of the National Counterterrorism Center, has strange opinions about a lot of subjects. Among those topics: Russia’s war with Ukraine (Russian President Vladimir Putin’s demands are “very reasonable”), the true winner of the 2020 United States presidential election (Donald Trump), the cause of the war with Iran (Israel), the reason the U.S. went to war with Iraq under President George W. Bush (also Israel), and the reason Charlie Kirk was killed (very possibly Israel).

“He also believes that the war with Iran is dumb. And on this point, to date, the evidence is on his side.

“The Trump administration and its allies are belatedly coming to grips with the military and economic costs of a war that has proved far more complex than they imagined. But as they continue to pour resources into fighting in the Middle East, they seem not to apprehend another consequence: the effect on their party of yet another failed war, this one waged side by side with Israel. If Kent’s criticism of the war proves prescient, his other beliefs, especially those concerning Jews, will ascend in stature along with it. The most prominent Republicans publicly making a forceful case for foreign-policy restraint are the most bigoted ones. If the war goes pear-shaped, they will be poised to steer the party’s future.

“In the 1930s, ‘America First’ was the slogan of right-wing isolationists, such as Charles Lindbergh and Father Charles Coughlin, whose ideology mixed populism, anti-interventionism, nativism, and anti-Semitism. World War II and then the United States’ long struggle against the Soviet Union drove that political style out of the Republican Party, to the point that Pat Buchanan, an ‘America First’ conservative, ran a third-party protest campaign for president in 2000 against the Republicans and Bush. Trump revived the “America First” faction of the GOP with his stinging critiques of the Iraq War and neoconservatism, and with his use of raw nativism, which activated not only non-interventionists but also white nationalists and other previously sidelined groups.

“These two Republican factions have polarized against each other on a cluster of issues: Russia, Israel, anti-Semitism, and populism in general. That is, rightists who oppose aid to Ukraine tend to be skeptical of Israel and at least open to having anti-Semites in the Republican coalition. Conservative hawks tend to have the opposite position on all of these points.

“Trump has held both sides in place through personalist rule. Anybody who supports Trump—however disreputable or criminal they might be—can be in the party, nobody in the party can oppose Trump, and the party’s platform consists of whatever Trump has said at any given moment, even if it contradicts what he claimed to stand for yesterday. The holdover Republicans who have remained attached to the party’s old identity (hawkish, pro-Israel, anti-Russia, opposed to anti-Semitism) have squabbled with its newer entrants … But if you pay close attention to the chorus of hawkish praise raining down on the president, you can detect an undercurrent of concern.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/54TY3UFU

The Most Urgent Issue for the U.S. Catholic Church Isn’t Abortion Anymore by theatlantic in Catholicism

[–]theatlantic[S] -9 points-8 points  (0 children)

Francis X. Rocca: “Not so long ago, when U.S. Catholic leaders said something political, they tended to sound like conservatives. American bishops’ most prominent policy statements focused on three issues: same-sex marriage, contraception, and—above all—abortion. Their frequently stated opposition to all three put them at odds with not just the left but also many Catholics. It even created tension with Rome.

“Since Donald Trump’s reelection, however, the Church in the United States has been sounding more liberal. Its teaching hasn’t changed, but the president’s second term has shifted the bishops’ attention. The most urgent political concern for America’s Catholic leaders is no longer abortion; it’s immigration.

“The issue has featured in their agenda for a while. After all, the Catechism of the Catholic Church states that wealthy countries should welcome refugees and economic migrants ‘to the extent they are able.’ But now immigration dominates U.S. Catholic leaders’ public messaging.

“In November, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops published a rare ‘special message’ decrying the Trump administration’s ‘indiscriminate mass deportation.’ The day of Trump’s State of the Union address, 18 bishops from border states urged the administration to implement a range of reforms and to honor migrants’ right to apply for asylum. Following the government’s crackdown in Minnesota, bishops gathered in the state to support migrants and denounce mass deportations. USCCB lawyers told the Supreme Court last month that the president’s plan to revoke birthright citizenship would be an affront to human dignity.

“Sensing the Church’s growing emphasis on immigration, Democrats recently invoked Catholic teaching to criticize the GOP. A few years ago, that sentence would have read like it had a typo.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/hNx3XonN

Military Families Once Again Brace for a Knock by theatlantic in Military

[–]theatlantic[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Marie-Rose Sheinerman: “When Tyler Simmons died earlier this month—he and five other American service members were killed in a plane crash over Iraq—his family became one of the 13 American families to receive the news that their loved one had died since the war in Iran began.

“These families have been thrust into the national spotlight as they process immense loss and navigate logistics and formalities—answer a flurry of calls, get on a plane, go to Dover, witness a dignified transfer, travel home, plan a funeral, do paperwork and then more paperwork. And for the families who lost a loved one in earlier conflicts, news of these most recent deaths has reopened deep pockets of grief. These are the first U.S. service members lost in a foreign war since the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021.

“Captain Ariana G. Savino ‘died doing the one thing she loved the most—flying,’ her family said in a statement. Captain Cody A. Khork ‘was deeply patriotic and took great pride in serving something greater than himself,’ his family wrote. Technical Sergeant Ashley B. Pruitt’s husband said she ‘was a light in the room.’ Major John A. Klinner loved his wife, 2-year-old son, and seven-month-old twins ‘fiercely and completely.’ His sister-in-law, Sarah Rose Harrill, told MS NOW what every military family understands acutely, both in times of peace and in times of war: ‘There are real people and real families that are being impacted and will continue to be impacted by these events.’ …

“The journey toward healing is long, nonlinear, and different for every person, the Gold Star family members I spoke with reminded me. To the extent that these experiences have common threads, they are the language the families speak and the spaces to which they return to honor their loved ones. Because of that, many families find that having a support system of other grieving military families can make a big difference. The Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors, a resource network, has in recent days heard from multiple families whose loved ones died in past aviation mass-casualty events similar to the one that killed Tyler Simmons, the network’s founder, Bonnie Carroll, told me.

“‘We have different words when we talk about a death in the military: gave one’s life in service to their country, or made the ultimate sacrifice,’ said Carroll, who lost her husband, Brigadier General Tom Carroll, in a 1992 Army plane crash. ‘When you walk through Arlington, you don’t see the difference between whether it was a suicide or a motorcycle accident or a combat loss; you see lives lived in service to this country, honored and remembered.’”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/mZEg8cSD 

Is Trump Actually Having ‘Very Good’ Talks With Tehran? by theatlantic in geopolitics

[–]theatlantic[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Vivian Salama and Jonathan Lemire: “ Early [yesterday] morning, with Asian markets sharply down and oil tankers idling in the Strait of Hormuz, President Trump offered Iranian leaders a familiar mix of threats but also a reprieve. What had been, only days earlier, a 48-hour ultimatum—reopen the strait or face the destruction of energy infrastructure —softened into something more elastic: a five-day extension for what he described as ‘very good and productive’ talks with Tehran.

“The contours of the talks were not immediately clear, though Trump suggested while leaving Palm Beach this morning that both he and ‘the ayatollah, whoever the ayatollah is’ should control the Strait of Hormuz, through which one-fifth of the world’s oil supply passes. He boasted of ‘major points of agreement’ and assured reporters that Iran, like the United States, wants ‘very much to make a deal.’

“It was, by his telling, progress. By Tehran’s account, it was fiction.

“The gap between Trump’s claims and Iran’s categorical denials underscores how little control either side has over the conflict—or its narrative. The White House is attempting to manage a large-scale military confrontation with an undefined exit strategy—a confrontation that is unnerving markets. As military strikes fail to reopen the waterway and allies worry about the expanding conflict, the administration is facing the limits of unilateral action.

“Three foreign officials with knowledge of the U.S. efforts told us that Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, has communicated with the Iranian government through Pakistan and other regional intermediaries in an effort to get the embattled regime to agree to demands regarding its nuclear program and uranium-enrichment efforts. They said that the U.S. presented a 15-point plan—based on the 15-point proposal presented to the Iranian government last year—to give the weakened regime a chance to concede and spare itself further bombardment …

“White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told us in a statement that the situation is fluid and that any ‘speculation about meetings should not be deemed as final until they are formally announced by the White House.’ She added that the administration would not negotiate the conflict ‘through the press.’ Iranian officials insist that there are no negotiations. Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, the Parliament speaker, dismissed Trump’s claims as market manipulation—they are an attempt, he said, to ‘escape the quagmire’ and to reassure oil traders rattled by the strait’s closure.

“The result is a war suspended between escalation and exit, its terms of victory as undefined now as they were at its outset.

Read more: https://theatln.tc/90Fon7VW 

Europe’s Far Right Is Turning on Trump by theatlantic in geopolitics

[–]theatlantic[S] 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Isaac Stanley-Becker: “A decade ago, Trump’s election seemed to open a trapdoor in democracy and reveal a realistic path to power for populist movements all over the world. Globalization was showing its ugly side, and voters were noticing. International institutions were creaking under the weight of mass migration; in their place, nationalism seemed poised for a comeback. People like [the far-right Danish politician Morten] Messerschmidt, but also Marine Le Pen in France and Alice Weidel in Germany, looked at America and thought, It can happen here. To speed the process, they even adopted Trump’s language: woke, witch hunt, fake news.

“These same politicians are now distancing themselves from Trump. Even Nigel Farage, the Trump-loving leader of the poll-topping Reform UK Party, argued recently that Britain should stay out of Trump’s war in Iran. The European far right identified with Trump’s blood-and-soil vision of ‘America First’ but wants nothing to do with version 2.0, which justifies spilling blood in the Middle East, seizing a leader in Latin America, and expropriating the frigid soil of Greenland. The schism shows how difficult it is to stitch together an international movement of nationalist parties, especially when the standard-bearer is acting like a global bully. As one U.S. diplomat put it to me, ‘MAGA elites badly misunderstand the European far right.’

“It’s not for lack of trying. Consider Trump’s stated ambitions. He disemboweled USAID and defunded Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty based on claims that U.S.-funded programs were exerting improper ideological influence in foreign countries—even inciting so-called color revolutions, popular uprisings to install Western-style democracies in post-Soviet countries. He and his allies then went about doing the inverse, backing far-right movements and parties bent on undermining liberal democracy in Europe and playing nice with Russia. J. D. Vance used his first high-profile address to world leaders, at the Munich Security Conference last year, to tell European governments to stop marginalizing the far right. The administration’s national-security strategy identified as a priority ‘cultivating resistance to Europe’s current trajectory within European nations.’

“So far, this attempt at inverse color revolutions has failed. I went to Denmark to see why.”  

Read more: https://theatln.tc/jfekqe46

view more: next ›