Everything we experience in life teaches us things that sometimes a classroom can’t, and it’s also like that in the Navy.

It’s tough, yes, but in between the routines, the training, and often the long nights at sea, there is for sure growth that you can take from it. You come out with more than just discipline and skills.

There are a lot of lessons from the Navy 

 — you will walk away with them, and they will stay with you for the rest of your life. Here are a few of the lessons I learned during my time in the Navy.

Lesson 1: Leadership Is Not Just Giving Orders

People often think that leadership in the Navy is all about rank. Having the loudest voice or being the one giving commands. But that is not how it really works.

best leaders are the ones who consistently lead by example

. That is also how it works in the other branches of the military because real leadership is about showing up, especially when it’s inconvenient. It’s stepping forward when things are uncertain, and staying steady when everyone else is looking for direction.

You see it in the small, everyday choices — checking in on someone who’s struggling, giving credit when they deserve it, listening more than you speak, or being willing to admit that sometimes they are also wrong.

True leadership is also about taking care of your people. Not just professionally but also personally. It’s knowing your team’s strengths, understanding their challenges, and making decisions that put the team first before ego.

These habits carry into life, relationships, and careers outside the Navy. The best leaders are the ones who never forget that leadership is not a position but a mindset.

Lesson 2: Teamwork Makes Everything Possible

Nothing happens in the Navy without teamwork. Everything runs on trust and communication. You depend on the person next to you, and they, in turn, depend on you. It’s that simple.

Back home, civilians built this kind of idea that asking for help means you’re weak, and that you have to do everything alone. It’s completely the opposite.

In the Navy, things can go sideways if you don’t speak up or pull your weight. There’s no time for ego. You learn to rely on others, to back them up, and to work like your life depends on it. Because the truth is, sometimes, it does.

That level of support is rare in the civilian world. People often talk past each other, hold back, or just expect too much from themselves at work, in friendships, and even in families.

The beauty of teamwork is that you have someone to rely on, you have someone who has your back. You are not alone. That’s how beautiful life and lessons from the Navy are.

Some of us don’t have patience. We get frustrated easily, rush through things, or try to force results. That doesn’t help when you’re out at sea.

Sometimes, you’re waiting for orders that don’t come for hours. Sometimes, you’re dealing with a teammate who keeps messing up and needs the same thing explained three times. And sometimes, things go wrong for no absolute reason, and there’s nothing you can do except to stay steady and keep going.

It’s easier to lash out, and it’s easier to let all your frustrations out. But the Navy teaches you to hold your ground. You stop reacting to every mistake, and you learn to take a breath, think it through, and figure out what you can control.

Life in the Navy means being smart with your energy. Over time, you stop needing everything to happen in your favor. You became okay with the wait, the mess, the uncertainty, and it’s just the calm that sticks with you.

Lesson 4: Perseverance Comes from Doing the Hard Things

There’s a reason why the Navy training is tough: it is meant to push you, both your body and mind.

You’re cold, tired, and sometimes unsure if you can keep going, but you do. And every time you make it through, you are stronger. Waking up at 0400, finishing drills in the rain, running on no sleep… it does stop being dramatic. It becomes part of your rhythm.

Perseverance isn’t some big motivational thing. It’s quiet. It’s pushing through all of it; you’re still doing your job anyway.

Life outside the Navy throws us curveballs. Plans fall apart. People let you down. So, having perseverance is gold. You’ve trained yourself hard to keep going when it’s tough. And because of it, you can get through almost anything.

Anyone can look strong when life is smooth, 

. These lessons from the Navy don’t fade, but they stick with you. The thing is, you don’t need to serve to live by these lessons. You just have to decide what kind of person you want to be.

The US Joins Israel’s Attack on Iran, Striking Key Nuclear Sites

Hegseth Hints That US Has 'Contingency Plans' to Invade Greenland: Here's What Could Happen

Master Your Life: 10 Lessons from a Navy SEAL

 4 Life Lessons from the Navy That Will Change How You Think

In the hours following the US strikes on Iran’s nuclear capability as part of Operation Midnight Hammer, the Trump administration appears to be sending mixed signals on what may come next. Some within Trump’s inner circle – Vice President JD Vance, SecDef Pete Hegseth, and SecState Marco Rubio – have stated that the official US policy is not to seek regime change in Iran, and that the attacks were focused on ending Iran’s nuclear program and broader security concerns. Trump himself offered a slightly different spin when he posted on Truth Social:

“It’s not politically correct to use the term, ‘Regime Change,’ but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn’t there be a Regime change???”

The Iranian government’s initial response to the US attack indicated that regime change is not coming anytime soon. Abdolrahim Mousavi, the new 

, said on Monday morning that the US violated Iran’s sovereignty when it attacked the Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan nuclear sites on Sunday and had, “entered the war clearly and directly.” Mousavi added:

“The criminal US must know that in addition to punishing its illegitimate and aggressive offspring, the hands of Islam’s fighters within the armed forces have been freed to take any action against its interests and military and we will never back down in this regard.”

On Monday evening, the Iranian military quickly responded to the US attack by launching ballistic missiles at the largest and most important US military installation in the region – Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar.

Al Udeid is the host to a forward headquarters of 

 forces, and over 100 operational aircraft.

Initial reports from the Qatari government Qatar’s Defense Ministry said its air defense had successfully intercepted the missile attack on Al-Udeid, and that there were no reported deaths or injuries. According to Qatari officials, Iran gave Qatar advanced warning of the missile attack enabling Qatar to close its airspace to commercial traffic before the attack ensued.

Trump later confirmed that there were no casualties on Truth Social stating, “Iran has officially responded to our Obliteration of their Nuclear Facilities with a very weak response. I am pleased to report that NO Americans were harmed, and hardly any damage was done.”

NBC News reported that US forces were braced for an imminent attack from Iran on other US military sites in Iraq and Bahrain. CNN also reported that US bases in Iraq have also come under attack by Iranian short and long range ballistic missiles.

So, what else might Iran do? Taking a look at the history of this decades-long confrontation may provide some answers.

On Sunday, the Iranian Parliament voted to close the Straits of Hormuz in an attempt to hurt the US economically by forcing a rise in the price of US oil imports and, subsequently, gas prices. The decision to take action to close the straits now rests with Iran’s National Security Council.

Some experts say that Iran’s closing of the straits would be a case of Iran cutting off its nose to spite its face. This move, they say, could end up hurting Iran more than it hurts its intended American target.

If Iran blocks the strait, the country risks turning its neighboring oil producing countries into enemies, and risks hostilities with them. For the moment, Saudi Arabia and the other oil-producing Arab states have been sympathetic to and spoken out in support of Iran. Closing the straits could change their position.

Furthermore, a closure would also provoke Iran’s market in Asia, particularly China, which 

accounts for a majority of Iranian oil exports.

 Iran will likely not want to antagonize China. The US has even asked China to dissuade Iran from closing the straits.

Andrew Bishop, senior partner and global head of policy research at advisory firm Signum Global Advisors, summed up his assessment by saying, “The best strategy [for Iran] would be to rattle Hormuz oil flows just enough to hurt the U.S. via moderate upward price movement, but not enough to provoke a major U.S. response against Iran’s oil production and export capacity.”

The biggest threat posed by Iran closing the Straits of Hormuz is that it sets the stage for a possible engagement between the US and Iranian Navies.

Will the US simply allow Iran to close the straits without a fight? Could an engagement happen “unintentionally?”

 has seized or harassed several commercial ships in the Strait of Hormuz and surrounding waters. Large scale engagements between military vessels have not occurred.

Prior to today’s attack on Al Udeid Air Base, the largest missile attack by Iran on US forces in the region occurred on January 8, 2020 in what Iran called “Operation Martyr Soleimani.”

After the US assassinated Iranian Major General Qasem Soleimani during a diplomatic trip to Iraq on January 3, 2020, the Iranian government sought revenge.

Despite President Trump’s warnings that an Iranian military response would be answered by a US attack on 52 significant Iranian sites, the Iranians retaliated.

On January 8, 2020, the Iranian military launched 16 short range surface-to-surface missiles at US targets in Iraq.

According to a CENTCOM spokesman, 11 missiles hit Al-Asad Air Base in western Iraq, one hit a US base in Erbil. and four missed their targets.

The attack caused extensive damage to the base and 110 US service members suffered Traumatic Brain Injury from concussions due to the blasts. Fortunately, no one was killed in the attacks.

In his first public comments after the Iranian attack, President Trump tweeted, "All is well!," and said that damage assessments were ongoing.

Trump sought to reduce tensions by downplaying the impact of the missile attacks, observing that Iran appeared to be "standing down," and ruled out a direct military response. Furthermore, Trump said he was willing to "embrace peace" and urged greater international cooperation in the region.

Ultimately, the US elected not to respond militarily, instead choosing to place additional economic sanctions on Iran and deploy more air defense systems to US bases in Iraq. Iran also chose to not launch follow-on attacks on US bases in the region.

Trump Announces That Israel & Iran Have Agreed to a Ceasefire

On Monday evening, Trump made an announcement, claiming that Israel and Iran have negotiated a ceasefire. According to Trump, the ceasefire is set to begin with Iran halting its attacks first, and then Israel is set to cease offensive operations in the upcoming hours. 

 to write, "CONGRATULATIONS TO EVERYONE! It has been fully agreed by and between Israel and Iran that there will be a Complete and Total CEASEFIRE." 

In another post Trump said, "This is a War that could have gone on for years, and destroyed the entire Middle East, but it didn't, and never will!"

At this time, there has been no immediate official response from Iran or Israel confirming that they have agreed to ceasefire.

Earlier, it was reported that three Israeli officials had signaled that Israel was looking to stop its strikes on Iran soon, and had communicated this message on Sunday. On Sunday evening, Prime Minister Benjamin Netenyahu said that Israel was, "very, very close to completing" its goals.

This is a developing story. Check back for updates.

DoD Terminates Contract With HomeSafe Alliance After Ongoing Military Household Goods Shipment Shortfalls

 Iran Retaliates After US Attack. What Comes Next?

How to Make $50,000 as an Air Force Pilot by Sept. 15, 2023

At the end of WWII, the US helped Japan draft its new constitution, a constitution that was intended to prevent Japan from ever again becoming a military power. In the years that followed, Japan built one of the world’s most technologically advanced ground, air, and maritime military forces all in the name of self defense. To this day, that pacifist principle, expressed in 

, is deeply embedded in Japanese culture and its foreign policy.

In 2022, Russia’s attack on Ukraine, followed by increased cooperation between Russia and China, led Japan to adopt a new security strategy that named China as its biggest strategic challenge. This opened the door to the development and procurement of weapons that some have considered to be offensive versus defensive. In a significant move toward addressing this new strategy, on June 24, 2025, Japan for the first time conducted the test of a domestic surface-to-ship missile on its own territory.

The Japan Ground Self Defense Force’s 1st Artillery Brigade test-fired a Type 88 surface-to-ship, short-range missile at the Shizunai Anti-Air Firing Range on Japan’s northernmost main island of Hokkaido.

JGSDF officials said about 300 soldiers participated in the test using a training missile that targeted an unmanned boat about 24 miles off the southern coast of Hokkaido. Analysts were still examining the results of the test.

Due to space limitations and safety concerns, Japan previously conducted missile tests in the territories of 

, a top Japanese defense partner where vast training grounds are available.

The military said that the test was successful, and there are plans for another test through Sunday. Tuesday’s first domestic missile test demonstrates Japan’s push toward a more self-sufficient military, and its acquisition of a counterstrike capability that can serve as a deterrence to China’s increasingly assertive naval activity near Japanese territorial waters.

Japan is also developing a Type 12 surface-to-ship missile that has a range of about 620 miles, ten times further than the 62 mile range of the Type 88.

To expand its testing capabilities, Japan is preparing to build a missile-firing range on uninhabited Minamitorishima, the country’s easternmost island in the western Pacific. In early June, two Chinese aircraft carriers were seen operating together for the first time in the vicinity of the island.

One of the more surprising developments, given Japan’s pacifist leanings, is the planned procurement of US-made Tomahawk cruise missiles. Japan is on contract to buy 400 of the missiles that have a range of around 1,000 miles. 

The missiles would be deployed on Japanese destroyers, and would provide a significant counterstrike capability against North Korea and China.

In December 2022, Japan released its new National Security Strategy and a new National Defense Strategy.

The strategy calls for Japan to increase its defense spending from about 1.1% of its GDP to 2% by 2027. In addition, it highlights strengthening the US-Japanese military alliance and the procurement of long range standoff missiles.

The strategy reflects Japan's concern over China's rapid military expansion and assertive actions in the region as well as North Korea's continued development of ballistic and cruise missiles.

Given Japan’s strong pacifist convictions, many analysts have been surprised by the response of the Japanese people about the new defense strategy, and the planned weapons procurements. A 2024 poll conducted by the Yomiuri Shinbun, a Japanese newspaper, yielded some surprising results.

Seventy-one percent of the respondents were in favor of Japan strengthening its defense capabilities, while twenty-six percent were against the idea. Regarding the government’s revision to its defense strategy in December 2022, 50% of respondents were highly or somewhat supportive of measures to drastically strengthen defense capabilities.

The possession of “counterstrike capabilities” for defense purposes, like the Type 88, Type 12 and Tomahawks, to facilitate the targeting of enemy missile-launching sites was highly or somewhat supported by 57% of respondents.

Iran Retaliates After US Attack. What Comes Next?

U.S. Navy Achieves Recruitment Goals Months Ahead of Schedule

Japan Conducts First Ever Missile Test Within Its Territory

Malmstrom AFB Cancer Concerns Grow with New Information Released

In an unprecedented pivot, The Army has directly commissioned four senior executives from elite tech giants—OpenAI, Meta, Palantir, and more—into the Army Reserve at the rank of Lieutenant Colonel

, and it could mark one of the most important cultural and operational shifts in the modern military: a fusion of commercial innovation with national defense readiness. These aren’t just advisors—they are now Lieutenant Colonels in the Army with a 

These newly minted Lieutenant Colonels aren’t going through boot camp. 

They’re going straight into the strategy room—advising the Pentagon on how to evaluate, adopt, and deploy commercial tech at scale.

From battlefield AI to predictive logistics and digital twins of combat zones, the goal is clear: modernize faster than adversaries can adapt.

This move comes at a pivotal time. Peer adversaries like China and Russia are investing heavily in AI, quantum computing, and cyber warfare.

In today’s global threat landscape, dominance on the battlefield is no longer about who has the most tanks—but who has the smartest tech.

Detachment 201 is the Army’s answer to that challenge: bring in the experts who are already shaping the future in the private sector and give them the rank, access, and influence to shape the future of the U.S. Army.

As Lieutenant Colonels, Detachment 201 leaders will:

 across the Army’s key priorities (AI, robotics, data analytics, cloud infrastructure).

 on how to adopt commercial solutions in real-world combat and support environments.

 between Silicon Valley innovation and battlefield application.

This isn’t hypothetical or symbolic. It’s tactical, operational, and already happening.

For decades, the Department of Defense has lagged behind the private sector in technological innovation—hamstrung by outdated acquisition processes, risk-averse culture, and slow-moving bureaucracy.

By bringing top-tier private-sector minds 

 the military ecosystem (rather than keeping them on the outside as contractors or consultants), the Army gains:

Agility in adopting and deploying commercial solutions

A leadership culture that understands both command structure and cloud architecture

In short, this initiative embeds 21st-century thinking at the command level.

It’s not just about technology—it’s about

Detachment 201 represents a new model of service that reflects the complexity of today’s threat environment. It says: you don’t need to be on the battlefield to be a warrior. If you can code, analyze, build, or secure networks—you are essential to the mission.

This has huge implications for recruiting, especially for Veterans and transitioning service members who have moved into tech roles post-service. Imagine being called back to serve not with a rifle, but with your resume and your GitHub repo.

What This Means for Veterans and Tech Professionals

, Detachment 201 is more than a news story—it’s a career-defining opportunity. (Follow the link to apply by July 31st)!

You already know the military. You understand mission, command, structure, and service. Now, you can bring your civilian skill set back into the fight—on your terms. This is not deployment—it’s strategy. It’s not boots on the ground—it’s innovation at the command table.

Ready to answer the call? The Army has launched a dedicated 

 to express interest in joining Detachment 201 as a Lieutenant Colonel. Whether you’re a software engineer, AI researcher, cyber expert, cloud architect, or data scientist—this is your 

invitation to shape the future of defense

If you’ve ever wondered how your skills could make a national impact, this is the moment. Detachment 201 could be remembered as the turning point where the U.S. military didn’t just catch up to the future—it began defining it.

Because in the next fight, it won’t just be who has more weapons. It’ll be who has better algorithms. And thanks to Detachment 201, the Army is officially in that fight.

Hegseth Orders a US Army Transformation: Merging Commands, Cutting Programs

The Army Just Commissioned Execs from OpenAI, Meta & Palantir—Here’s Why It Could Change Everything

The U.S. military is once again on the move—but this time, it's not in a war zone overseas. It’s at home, along the southern border. Thousands of active-duty service members have been deployed to assist federal agencies in managing the surge in migrant crossings, and in a rare step, the Pentagon has implemented

to separate those troops from direct contact with civilians. In this announcement, the Pentagon explained that the new military buffer zone in Texas is aimed at bolstering border security. This comes as illegal crossings continue to decrease.

As border crossings spike in places like Arizona and Texas, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has leaned on the Department of Defense for support. But instead of placing troops directly into law enforcement operations, they’re confined to support-only zones, several miles behind the actual border.

The buffer zone, also known as a National Defense Area (NDA), spans 250 miles along the Rio Grande River through Cameron and Hidalgo counties. Temporary barriers and signage are securing the area.

These buffer zones are a tactical and legal barrier—physically separating active-duty forces from migrant groups, civilians, and potential confrontations. It's a clear message: the U.S. military is here to assist, not enforce. Troops are not authorized to detain or confront migrants.

Logistics and transportation for Customs and Border Protection (CBP)

Infrastructure improvements (barriers, roads, etc.)

The use of buffer zones suggests this deployment isn’t business as usual. It’s a response to growing concerns within the Pentagon about the blurring of military and civilian roles.

While CBP remains the lead agency, the military’s presence—even in a limited capacity—raises constitutional, operational, and ethical questions:

How do we define the boundaries of military involvement in domestic affairs?

What happens if these zones are breached—by civilians or orders?

Is this a temporary measure, or the foundation of something more permanent?

Members of the Joint Task Force-Southern Border, under the direction of NORTHCOM will be in charge of operating the zone. They will also be responsible for monitoring and carrying out patrols.

The zone is on land transferred from the International Boundary and Water Commission. It will fall under the administration of Joint Base San Antonio, according to the Air Force. The Air Force went on to explain that this is the latest designation of NDAs that were established to strengthen interagency coordination and bolster security operations along the southern border.

“These efforts reflect USNORTHCOM’s ongoing mission as the DoD’s operational lead for homeland defense, ensuring territorial integrity of the United States’ southern border.”

The 100-mile NDA will also be set up in Arizona, according to an 

This buffer zone will be considered a part of the Marine Corps Air Station, Yuma. The Marine Corps has not yet formally made an announcement about the establishment of an NDA attached to the Yuma installation.

This is not the first time active-duty troops have supported border operations, but this deployment feels different. Previous missions under Presidents Bush, Obama, and Trump typically involved National Guard units, and were focused on short-term assistance.

” that deployed up to 6,000 National Guard troops at any given time. They could perform duties such as monitoring surveillance, fixing border fences, or helping with vehicle maintenance. During this time, troops remained under control of their state’s respective governors.

President Obama deployed 1,200 National Guard troops during his first term under similar arrangements; however, he was more focused on aerial surveillance.

This time, under Trump, buffer zones and legal distancing protocols suggest a deeper unease about the potential overreach of federal power. At its core, this is a question about mission identity: What is the U.S. military being used for, and who decides?

As the situation continues to evolve, there will be several key things to watch for, as well as many questions that will need to be answered, as the impact this decision will have is currently unknown.

 Will support roles expand into enforcement?

 How long will troops remain deployed, and under what rules of engagement?

 Could this shift norms for future domestic military use?

 Will Americans grow more comfortable with military presence at the border—or more concerned?

The current situation is a quiet, strategic recalibration. The Pentagon has drawn lines—not just on the map, but around the role of the military in a democracy. Whether those lines hold will depend not only on leadership, but on scrutiny.

This is a developing story. Check back in for updates.

Trump Attends NATO Summit: A Closer Look at the Highlights

Troops, Buffer Zones, and the Battle at Home: Inside the Pentagon’s Border Move

Prior to Russia’s invasion of Crimea in 2014, NATO held a summit for heads of state from its member nations irregularly, usually every two years. Since then, Russian aggression toward Ukraine on the fringes of the NATO Area of Responsibility (AOR) has driven annual summits where the ongoing Russian-Ukrainian War has driven important NATO policy decisions. Only the COVID pandemic could force cancellation of the summit in 2020. On June 24-25 2025, The Hague hosted this year’s summit and, once again, the Russia-Ukraine War took center stage leading to at least one significant agreement between the leaders of NATO’s member nations. President Trump, as the leader of the Alliance’s most powerful nation, made his presence felt, and the reaction from other NATO member nations to his comments was mixed.

Perhaps the biggest news to come out of the Summit was a joint declaration by NATO Heads of State and Government to set a new benchmark for defence investment. 

The so-called Hague Defence Investment Plan outlines a commitment by NATO Allies to invest 5% of their GDP in defence – including 3.5% on core defence requirements and 1.5% on defence and security related investments like infrastructure and industry. 

This 5% target marks a 3% increase over the previous investment agreement reached between member nations brokered by President Obama at the 2014 Wales Summit. That agreement called for member nations to reach 2% of their GDP on defence spending by 2025 and came on the heels of Russia’s invasion of Crimea.

Currently, 23 of 32 nations have met the 2% target. Under the new agreement, the nations have until 2035 to meet the 5% goal. The agreement also included specific language underlining the importance of ramping up defence industrial production and affirmed continued support for Ukraine.

“Together, Allies have laid the foundations for a stronger, fairer, more lethal NATO,” Secretary General Mark Rutte stated in a closing press conference. 

“These decisions will have a profound impact on our ability to do what NATO was founded to do – deter and defend.” Highlighting the challenges to Allied security, the Secretary General underscored, “whether from Russia or terrorism, cyberattacks, sabotage or strategic competition – this Alliance is and will remain ready, willing and able to defend every inch of Allied territory,” explaining that the new pledge would “ensure that our one billion people can continue to live in freedom and security.”

While aboard Air Force One on his way to the summit, Trump sent minor shockwaves through his NATO partners when asked if the US was committed to honoring Article V of the North Atlantic Treaty – the cornerstone of the Alliance’s security arrangement. 

Trump replied, “There's numerous definitions of Article 5." "You know that, right? But I’m committed to being their friend."

To Trump’s European NATO partners, the Article V language is very clear.

“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.”

The key phrase is that an attack against one shall be considered an attack against all. Previously, Trump has made similar comments that led the European NATO members to question the President's commitment to the Alliance.

During an Oval Office meeting in March 2025, Trump cast doubt on his willingness to defend America’s NATO allies, saying that he would not do so if they are not paying enough for their own defense. “It’s common sense, right,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. “If they don’t pay, I’m not going to defend them. No, I’m not going to defend them.”

Trump said this has been his view for years and shared it with his NATO allies during his first term. Trump felt that even the 2% of GDP defense spending agreement was inadequate. “Even now, it’s not enough,” he said. “They should be paying more.”

The agreement certainly changed Trump’s tone as the summit came to a close. During his final press interview in The Hague, Trump said the agreement was, “a monumental win for the United States, because we were carrying more than our fair share” and “a big win for Europe and for actually Western civilization” because Europe would now be “stepping up to take more responsibility.”

In addition, the agreement apparently made the President more assured about the USA’s commitment to Article V. 

As he departed the Summit, Trump remarked, “They want to protect their country, and they need the United States, and without the United States, it’s not going to be the same,” Trump said, later adding: “I left here differently. I left here saying, ‘These people really love their countries. It’s not a rip-off.’ And we are here to help them protect their country.”

Of course, as a NATO member, this 5% agreement also applies to the USA. In 2023, US defense spending stood at 3.36% of GDP and, according to a recent Congressional Budget Office estimate, US defense spending is expected to actually decrease to 2.4% by 2035.

However, the finer details of the new 5% agreement reveal only a 3.5% of GDP increase to core military spending by 2035. 

The rest of the 5% will consist of spending on infrastructure, intelligence, cybersecurity, and other defense-related areas that the US and most of its NATO allies can already match.

Unlike the 2024 NATO Summit held in Washington, DC, discussions surrounding continued support for Ukraine were much more subdued.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy spoke during the first day of the summit and made a plea for continued support while delivering a warning: Russian President Vladimir Putin has ambitions beyond Ukraine, and could seek to move a NATO member within five years. 

Afterwards, Zelenskyy faced the press alongside NATO chief Mark Rutte, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President António Costa. Zelenskyy’s colleagues reaffirming their commitment to support Ukraine in its defense against Russia. After promptly exiting the stage, Zelenskyy would rarely be seen for much of the summit.

During the previous summit, Ukraine held a headliner’s spot on the agenda and was mentioned 59 times in then-President Biden’s summit declaration. In addition, NATO officials said last year that Ukraine was on an "irreversible path” to NATO membership. This year, no mention was made of Ukraine’s NATO membership path.

While talk of continued support to Ukraine decreased in volume, and even while previously-agreed US military aid continues to flow to that war-torn nation, Trump surprised some analysts when he suggested the US may resume military aid to Ukraine soon. “As far as money going, we’ll see what happens,” Trump said.

As for giving Ukraine desperately-needed additional Patriot air defense systems, Trump said, “We’re going to see if we can make some available … they’re very hard to get.” In April, NATO Chief Rutte revealed that most Patriots pledged to Ukraine had arrived in country and the remainder would be delivered in the near future, 

All was not a complete loss for Zelenskyy in his relations with Trump. Trump softened his tone on the conflict, something that may help Zelenskyy down the road. “He’s fighting a brave battle. It’s a tough battle,” Trump said of Zelenskyy. Trump added, “Vladimir Putin really has to end that war. People are dying at levels that people haven’t seen before for a long time.”

One of the more humorous comments from the summit came during a joint press conference between Trump and Rutte. The exchange started with Trump expressing his frustration with how the conflict between Israel and Iran was progressing. 

Trump compared the conflict to two kids fighting in a school yard, saying that you sometimes need to let them fight it out for a few minutes before stepping in to stop them. At this point, Rutte interjected by saying, “Then sometimes daddy has to use strong language” to stop them.

Rutte’s “daddy” remark elicited criticism from some who felt the NATO Chief was referring to Trump as NATO’s daddy. “The daddy thing, I didn’t call him daddy,'” Rutte 

“What I said is that sometimes, in Europe, I hear sometimes countries saying, ‘Hey, Mark, will the U.S. stay with us?’ And I said that sounds a little bit like a small child asking his daddy, ‘Hey, are you still staying with the family?’ So in that sense, I used ‘daddy’ — not that I was calling President Trump daddy.”

The White House embraced the moniker of "daddy" for Donald Trump in a

 on X. The post read, "Daddy’s home… Hey, hey, hey, Daddy. President Donald J. Trump attended the NATO Summit in The Hague, Netherlands." 

The video features a song by Usher, and images of Trump at the NATO summit.

Whether any President can be called NATO’s daddy is a matter of debate; however, one thing is for certain. As the Alliance’s richest and most powerful nation, any US President will wield tremendous influence over NATO policy. 

Just as Obama received credit for driving the 2% of GDP spending agreement in 2014, Trump will receive credit for seeing that agreement bumped up to 5% at this year’s summit. 

Whether or not the NATO members will actually meet that goal within the next ten years is left to be seen. Spain, for one, has said that it will not adhere to the agreement and maintain its defense budget at 2.1% of its GDP. Nine other NATO nations don’t currently meet the 2% goal.

4 Life Lessons From the Navy That Will Change How You Think

On Tuesday, President Trump said that he would approve Florida's plan to expedite deportations by having National Guard members work as immigration judges. Trump made this announcement during his visit to an immigration detention center in South Florida called, “Alligator Alcatraz.”

For months, Gov. DeSantis has been seeking approval of the federal government to deputize Florida National Guard officers to act as immigration judges.

When asked about this decision Trump explained, "He didn't even have to ask me. He has my approval."

When asked about the goal of National Guardsmen working at deportation sites, DeSantis explained that they could help "fast-track" deportations. DeSantis explained that the goal was to cut through "bureaucracy."

Due to the detention center being built on an old airstrip, it could mean that deportations would be faster, as the federal government would be allowed to fly migrants out of the site directly.

During the conference, a DHS official added that a notice to proceed and for construction to begin would be right after July 4th. 

LATEST NEWS

10 things to know before obtaining a VA home loan

ARTICLES

4 LIFE LESSONS FROM THE NAVY THAT WILL CHANGE HOW YOU THINK

By Allison Kirschbaum

IRAN RETALIATES AFTER US ATTACK. WHAT COMES NEXT?

By George Riebling

HOW TO MAKE $50,000 AS AN AIR FORCE PILOT BY SEPT. 15, 2023

By Buddy Blouin

JAPAN CONDUCTS FIRST EVER MISSILE TEST WITHIN ITS TERRITORY

By George Riebling

MALMSTROM AFB CANCER CONCERNS GROW WITH NEW INFORMATION RELEASED

By Buddy Blouin

THE ARMY JUST COMMISSIONED EXECS FROM OPENAI, META & PALANTIR—HERE’S WHY IT COULD CHANGE EVERYTHING

By Natalie Oliverio

TROOPS, BUFFER ZONES, AND THE BATTLE AT HOME: INSIDE THE PENTAGON’S BORDER MOVE

By Natalie Oliverio

TRUMP ATTENDS NATO SUMMIT: A CLOSER LOOK AT THE HIGHLIGHTS

By George Riebling

TRUMP'S NEW PLAN COULD HAVE NATIONAL GUARD SERVING AS IMMIGRATION JUDGES

By Natalie Oliverio

JOIN OUR NEWSLETTER

Email*

JOIN OUR NEWSLETTER

JOIN OUR NEWSLETTER