The claims that the US used a new secret sound weapon in Venezuela are not well sourced. It’s not clear if any actual Venezuelan guards made these claims. If they did, it’s possible they are making it up. Or, if they did, it’s possible they were hit by flashbangs, buzzing drones, and breaching explosions and just thought they were being hit by some new, hightech weapon.
“Internet tracking group NetBlocks reported a loss of internet connectivity in Caracas that occurred around the same time as power cuts in the country. Venezuela’s electric energy ministry said Monday that power cuts in some areas of the country were due to U.S. attacks.
Chinese-made radar systems and Russian-made air defense systems were also reportedly disrupted during the strikes, hampering the Venezuelan government’s ability to effectively respond.
In a statement, a Space Command spokesperson declined to comment on details of its operations, but noted that “space-based capabilities such as Positioning, Navigation and Timing and satellite communications are foundational to all modern military activities,” and that “U.S. Space Command possesses the means and willingness to employ combat-credible capabilities that deter and counter our opponents.”
These efforts point to a more aggressive use of U.S. military technology and cyber expertise in foreign operations — a shift that the administration has repeatedly touted since Trump’s first term. In 2018, a classified national security policy memorandum was signed, expanding the Pentagon’s authorities to conduct offensive cyber strikes. This policy was later refined under the Biden administration.
Joshua Steinman, who served as senior director for cyber on the National Security Council under the first Trump administration, said that the Venezuela strikes demonstrate that the U.S. “is finally in a place where we can use cyber as a tool of national power.””
Anti-drone lasers can help take down drones for much cheaper than missiles, but have limitations, including: needing line of sight, not working as well in certain weather conditions, possibly having trouble with drones made of laser resistance materials, and having trouble targeting maneuvering drones in the real world.
Larger ships are vulnerable to modern weapons. With a larger ship, you have more eggs in one basket. If the enemy takes out that one ship, you’ve lost a lot of firepower. Even with anti-missile and anti-drone defenses, the enemy only needs one good hit.
“In recent months Russia has flown fighter jets into Estonian airspace and sent dozens of drones deep into Polish and Romanian territory. Its ally Belarus has repeatedly brought Lithuanian air traffic to a standstill by allowing giant balloons to cross its borders. And last week, Moscow’s top envoy Sergey Lavrov issued a veiled threat to Finland to exit NATO.”
Pistols have never determined who won a war. In WWI, they were less than .1% of kills and wounded. Modern, more compact rifles are more useful than pistols. Rifles have more range, accuracy, and can better punch through modern armor. For some troops, it may be better to carry more rifle ammo than a pistol. Modern pistols are like modern smartphones, there isn’t a huge difference between brands and the chance that one company’s pistol saves your life when another company’s would not, is low.
The F-35 is vastly superior to the Gripen E. By comparison, the Gripen E is the budget choice. If the goal is to limit dependence on the mercurial United States, the Gripen is dependent on American parts.
Putin doesn’t want to use nuclear weapons. If he did, he risks the destruction of his country. Putin, like the Soviet Union in history, uses nuclear weapons as bluster to threaten countries whose leaders and people believe the likelihood of Russia using nukes is higher than it is. Trump is scared. He’s happy to use or threaten military force against countries without nukes, but Russia invades its neighbor in a war of conquest while committing many atrocities, and Trump is obsessed with peace, even, at times, weakening support to Ukraine to appease Putin. Letting Russia gain things with nuclear threats increases the incentive for other countries to get nukes, and one of those countries may be more willing to actually use them.