Showing posts sorted by date for query PAIN. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query PAIN. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Friday, March 27, 2026

Sanders-Casar Proposal Takes On Billionaires Relocating Sports Teams for Corporate Welfare

“Professional sports teams should be owned and controlled by the fans who love them, not by the multibillionaire oligarchs,” Sanders said.


US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) speaks during a press conference with Congressman Greg Casar (D-Texas) during the introduction of the Home Team Act at the US Capitol in Washington, DC on March 26, 2026.
(Photo by Heather Diehl/Getty Images)


Brett Wilkins
Mar 26, 2026
COMMON DREAM

US Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Greg Casar on Tuesday introduced a bill that would require owners of professional sports franchises who are considering relocating to give the communities in which they are located a chance to buy the teams first.

“The American people are sick and tired of billionaires threatening to move the sports teams they own to different states unless they get hundreds of millions in corporate welfare to build new stadiums,” Sanders (I-Vt.) said in a statement announcing the Home Team Act.




‘Enough Is Enough’: Sanders, Khanna Propose Billionaires Tax to Raise $4.4 Trillion



‘Poor Jeff’: Sanders Ridicules Bezos-Owned Washington Post for Attacking Billionaire Tax Plan

“In my view, professional sports teams should be owned and controlled by the fans who love them, not by the multibillionaire oligarchs who are getting even richer by charging outrageous prices and getting taxpayers to pick up their extravagant costs,” he continued.

“You shouldn’t have to be wealthy to take your family to a football game,” Sanders added. “You shouldn’t have to fear that a multibillionaire will move your favorite team to a different city if taxpayers refuse to subsidize it. The Home Team Act is a very modest piece of legislation that begins to address this problem. I am proud to support it.”

The Home Team Act is cosponsored by Democratic Sens. Chris Murphy and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut—which lost the National Hockey League’s Hartford Whalers to North Carolina in the 1990s—and five House Democrats.

If passed as written, the bill would:Require sports franchise owners to provide notice a year before moving the team to a new community, defined by crossing state lines or moving to a new Metropolitan Statistical Area;
Give communities a chance to purchase a franchise during that year, including through the sort of successful community ownership model used by the National Football League’s (NFL) Green Bay Packers; and

Penalize noncompliant franchise owners.



“Sports in America should be about more than just making billionaire owners even richer,” Casar said Thursday.

“Far too many Americans know the pain of losing a team, and far too many communities have had to fork over billions in subsidies just to keep an already profitable team home,” he added. “Our bill is about creating a level playing field so leagues work for fans and taxpayers, not just owners.”

Sanders’ office acknowledged that “team relocation has plagued communities across America for decades,” from the Brooklyn Dodgers and New York Giants moving respectively to Los Angeles and San Francisco in 1958 to the Oakland Athletics—who previously called Philadelphia and Kansas City home—relocating to Sacramento and, eventually, Las Vegas.

Oaklanders have arguably felt the heartbreak of losing their beloved pro sports franchises more than any other US city, having lost the As, the NFL’s Raiders, and the Warriors of the National Basketball Association in a five-year span.

“Currently, the Chicago Bears are threatening to leave the city after more than 100 years in response to the state of Indiana offering massive subsidies,” Sanders’ office said of the storied NFL franchise known for its passionately loyal fan base. “The bill would prevent the Bears from being moved across state lines without being offered for sale.”

In his youth, Sanders—who grew up during a time when Jewish players dominated racially segregated professional basketball—was known for his killer mid-range jump shot. As a senator, he has championed professional athletes, especially baseball players, during their collective bargaining struggles against oligarch owners.

Sanders still holds a grudge against the former owner of the beloved Brooklyn Dodgers of his youth who relocated the team to Los Angeles in 1958, when he was a teenager. In 2018, he posted an old Brooklyn adage that “the three worst people in modern history were Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, and Dodgers owner Walter O’Malley—but not necessarily in that order.”

Serving in the House of Representatives at the time, Sanders even had a bit part in the 1999 comedy “My X-Girlfriend’s Wedding Reception,” in which he played Manny Shevitz, a rabbi who argues that the Dodgers leaving Brooklyn was the “worst thing that ever happened.”
Disabled Organizers Are Facing Down Trump’s Immigration Crackdown


Disability justice organizers are turning to immigrant rights groups to guide their interventions and support work.
March 25, 2026

A demonstrator holds a sign that says “Abolish ICE” during a protest in Houston, Texas, on January 10, 2026.Mark Felix / AFP via Getty Images

Since Donald Trump returned to the Oval Office last year, the number of people in immigration detention has almost doubled from 40,000 to about 75,000. Disabled people face an increased threat of violence and detention from law enforcement, including the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents who have been deployed to terrorize communities and detain neighbors in Los Angeles, Chicago, Minneapolis, and elsewhere as part of Trump’s crackdown over the last year.

As the Trump administration’s assault on migrant communities escalates, members of the disability community are showing up for their neighbors on all fronts — in Congress and the courts, at protests, and as nodes in mutual aid and ICE watch networks. Disabled organizers who spoke to Truthout said the attacks feel all too familiar, and it’s a fight they cannot imagine sitting out.

“Fascism is not new to this group, the idea of being disposable, not being of value to this capitalist society, aggressive institutionalization, state-sanctioned violence, lack of resources — we have been screaming from our lungs that there was something severely wrong,” Ramiro Alvarez, communications director at Detroit Disability Power (DDP), told Truthout. “It’s not a ‘We told you so’ moment. It’s a ‘We are glad more people are waking up and there are more in this fight’ moment.”

Research has repeatedly shown that disabled people are overrepresented at every stage of the criminal legal system. They account for upwards of two-thirds of the U.S. prisoner population. However, no similar demographic data exists for the population in immigration jails.

Members of the disability community are showing up for their neighbors on all fronts — in Congress and the courts, at protests, and as nodes in mutual aid and ICE watch networks.

The risks are even greater for disabled people of color, who are likewise overrepresented in the criminal legal system. Of those incarcerated in the U.S., 1 in 3 are Black men, and 1 in 6 are Latino men, compared to only 1 in 17 white men. People of color are also more likely to be disabled and less likely to have access to needed health care.

“Anybody who’s not white and is disabled is at such a huge risk of being profiled by ICE and CBP,” CT Tyson, government affairs liaison at the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF), told Truthout.


Disability Justice Organizers Are Creating the Liberatory Future We All Deserve
Organizers share where they find hope in the struggle for disability justice as we go into the second year of Trump 2.0. By Marianne Dhenin , Truthout January 6, 2026


Laura Murchie, a staff attorney focused on immigration law at Disability Law United, told Truthout that even if a person is not disabled when agents arrest them, many will develop illnesses or disabilities as they are moved through the immigration detention system. The scale and speed of Trump’s crackdown make matters worse.

“The harm is disproportionate to folks who are disabled,” Murchie told Truthout. “This has always been true, but I think because of the extra violence with which the administration is quote-unquote ‘executing the laws,’ it is a disabling event, as well.”

Several high-profile cases of federal agents harming disabled people have already made headlines. Last August, agents handcuffed a 15-year old disabled teen outside a Los Angeles high school. In January, agents dragged Aliya Rahman, a disabled woman with autism and a traumatic brain injury, from her car in Minneapolis, detained her, and denied her emergency medical care. Last month, agents abandoned Nurul Amin Shah Alam, a low-vision Rohingya refugee from Myanmar, alone and in freezing weather outside a closed shop near Buffalo, New York. He was later found dead.


“Anybody who’s not white and is disabled is at such a huge risk of being profiled by ICE and CBP.”

Abuse of sick and disabled people and medical neglect within ICE detention are well-documented issues that predate Trump 2.0, and advocates fear conditions could worsen further under the current administration. One U.S. Senate report released last October uncovered more than 80 instances of medical neglect in immigration jails nationwide. The following month, seven people sued the Trump administration over inhumane conditions at a California ICE jail. The plaintiffs report being denied treatment for a likely case of prostate cancer, having insulin and heart medications withheld, and being denied proper access to hygiene facilities.

Murchie told Truthout that many of her deaf clients are not being provided interpreters. Other clients who communicate using sign language are also having their hands shackled.

But the involvement of disability rights and justice advocates in the fight against Trump’s anti-immigrant crackdown runs deeper than concerns for the disabled people swept up in it. “We are upset and concerned and panicked about what this means for our entire community,” Tyson told Truthout. “You don’t have to be disabled for us to care; we’re speaking up for everybody.”

Speaking up looks a little different for each organization, as organizers turn to immigrant rights groups to guide their interventions and respond to the needs of their local communities. DREDF is collaborating with human rights, emergency management, and other organizations to demand that Congress adopt meaningful measures to stop the violence. The organization also spearheaded a March 1 letter urging lawmakers to return funds taken from Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to arm the Department of Homeland Security. DREDF has also compiled a suite of resources on how immigrant rights and disability rights are intertwined, in the hopes of helping disabled immigrants, their community members, and the organizations that serve them navigate Trump’s crackdown.

“We have heard from some of the immigrant rights groups we follow how important it is for there to be allied organizations that Congress doesn’t expect to hear from,” Tyson told Truthout. “We are going to use whatever platform we have to call this out [and] demand the funding and the prioritization of care and not violence.”

Access Living, a Chicago-based disability services and support organization, is among the 70 groups that signed DREDF’s March 1 letter. The organization has also been hard at work coordinating “know your rights” trainings in several languages, as well as other educational events and resources focused on protecting disabled migrants. That work helped the city overcome ICE’s “Operation Midway Blitz,” an onslaught launched in September.

“We have been highlighting the fear that our immigrants with disabilities have [when they] go into hospitals and get treatments that they need,” Michelle Garcia, manager of organizing and community development at Access Living, told Truthout. “They fear ICE going into the clinics and taking them away, or not getting the proper care because if they say they’re not documented, that means they won’t receive care because they don’t have insurance.”

Garcia told Truthout that many immigrants with disabilities are also scared of being removed: “If they go back to their countries of origin, they’re more likely to end up in a worse condition than they are now here without any supports.”

To help community members navigate these concerns and organize to protect one another, Access Living has also expanded its Cambiando Vidas (Changing Lives) group. Cambiando Vidas functions as a support group and lobbies for legislative changes to support immigrants in Illinois. It was launched to serve Latinx people with disabilities and now welcomes disabled immigrants from other communities.

Meanwhile, Alvarez told Truthout his organization understands its role as one of building bridges between “all these badass disabled Detroiters” who want to get involved in fighting Trump’s anti-immigrant agenda and local grassroots campaigns that might not have the resources or the know-how to make their efforts more inclusive.

Among its interventions, DDP has advised on making outreach and recruitment materials more accessible, recommended adding questions about access needs to sign-up forms, trained organizations to use plain language, and encouraged masking and other access considerations at events. These efforts have helped a growing number of disabled people get involved in neighborhood ICE watch and other efforts, such as grocery delivery and student pick-up and drop-offs, to support families forced to reduce outings or shelter in place.

“What spurred this whole idea is this desire that we see in our community of a bunch of disabled people ready to plug in, and then this movement that’s not ready to have them plug in because there are so many access barriers,” Alvarez told Truthout. “We’re trying to create something that meets both of those needs.”

Wherever disability rights and justice organizers contribute, they bring a unique perspective to those organizing spaces. Alvarez told Truthout that this includes helping organizers understand how improving access and thinking about disability justice benefits everyone, not only disabled people.

“A lot of the organizers are realizing they’re experiencing an access need at their own job, that they are near burnout, that they’re experiencing fatigue, that they’re having pain flare-ups, that they’re getting sick more often,” Alvarez told Truthout. “Part of our disability wisdom is reminding movements that being unhealthy, tired, and burnt out is exactly where they want us, and our movements only succeed if we treat this as a marathon relay and not a single-man sprint.”

Looking forward, Alvarez said he hopes the movement will continue to learn from and lean on its disabled organizers and their ideas for building a more just and caring future. “At the end of this — because there will be an end to this, and we will win — there’s going to need to be a grand effort of care,” he told Truthout. “Disabled people are saying, ‘This time we’re going to center the most vulnerable instead of centering an individual … we’re going to center a community,’ and that community being our children, our elderly, and our disabled — those that need us the most.”

 


US Sanctions on Venezuela Continue: Corporate Beneficiaries and a Targeted Society

by  | Mar 26, 2026 | 

In the wake of Washington’s January 3 military attack and then problematic détente with Caracas, corporate media suggest a meaningful shift in Venezuela policy, implying relief for a country long subjected to economic coercion. However, far from dismantling the sanctions regime, the US has merely adjusted its application through licensing mechanisms, leaving the core structure of coercive measures fully intact.

Reuters reported “US lifts some Venezuela sanctions,” followed by news of sanctions being further “eased.” Both NBC News and ABC News likewise reported sanctions “eased,” while the Financial Times wrote that Washington “relaxes sanctions.” Reuters later found that “US waives many of the sanctions,” and the Los Angeles Times noted “targeted relief from sanctions” The Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA) described a “huge easing of sanctions.”

Not a single sanction has been rescinded 

In fact, there is no evidence of any revocation of executive orders, removal of Venezuela-related sanctions authorities, and certainly no formal termination or suspension of Washington’s sanctions regime.

At a February 21 meeting I attended in Venezuela, Anti-Blockade Vice Minister William Castillo described sanctions as a “policy of extermination.” These measures, “the most cruel aggression against our people,” had been renewed the day before by Trump. To do so, he had to certify the original mistruth first fabricated by Barack Obama in 2015: that Venezuela poses an “extraordinary threat” to US national security.

Castillo cited 1,087 measures imposed by the US and another 916 by its echo, the European Union. These unilateral coercive measures have a corrosive effect on popular support for the government, which is precisely the purpose of this form of collective punishment, illegal under international law.

In 2023, Castillo described Washington’s economic aggression as a means to destroy Venezuela without having to invade. The Bolivarian Revolution’s successful resistance, including positive GDP growth while under siege, suggests why the US felt compelled to escalate with a military incursion on January 3, killing over 100 and kidnapping the country’s lawful head of state and his wife.

In Castillo’s words, the US escalated from “a war without gunpowder…against the civilian population” to an actual one. As grave as the direct US military aggression has been – including 157 fatalities since last September in alleged drug interdictions of small craft in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific – the body count from the coercive economic measures has been far higher. Former UN Special Rapporteur Alfred de Zayas estimated that sanctions have caused over 100,000 excess deaths.

There is even a literal playbook on how to apply sanctions to inflict “pain” on civilians for “maximum effectiveness.” The author of The Art of Sanctions is Richard Nephew, a former US State Department senior official in the Biden administration who was responsible for implementing such policies.

Licenses vs. sanctions 

What has happened in practice is a much more limited form of relief under the sanctions regime. The Treasury’s Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) has issued broad licenses allowing certain dealings primarily with Venezuela’s state oil (PDVSA) and gold (Minerven) sectors.

OFAC licenses carve out limited exceptions principally benefitting US and other foreign corporations, not necessarily the Venezuelan people. Activities are authorized that would otherwise be illegal under US law, even though such activities are lawful under international law. They come with conditions, limits, and reporting requirements and can be revoked at any time.

In practical terms, sanctions remain in place, although certain transactions are temporarily allowed under strict licensing rules. “The result is a hybrid scheme in which formal sanctions and operational licenses coexist, enabling limited flows of economic activity,” according to Misión Verdad.  

This flexible arrangement of sanctions combined with licenses allows US and other foreign corporations to make a profit off of the coercive system. Under sanctions alone, the targeted people overwhelmingly suffer but, secondarily, US and other corporations are shut out. Under this hybrid system, control is maintained and money is made.

However, most foreign investors are reluctant to make important investment decisions when there is uncertainty, especially given Mr. Trump’s mercurial reputation. A temporary license does not provide the security that corporations normally require. Recuperating the Venezuelan oil industry would necessitate “a gigantic investment.” Such investments will be unlikely if Venezuela is sanctioned, the licenses notwithstanding.

Media framing and blaming 

Meanwhile, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and “First Combatant” Cilia Flores remain in a New York City jail, reportedly in solitary confinement.

Regarding what happened on January 3, corporate media sources overwhelmingly use relatively anodyne terms such as “downfall,” “removal,” or “ouster,” rather than the more pointed “kidnapping” or “abduction.” When the legality of this clearly illegal act of war is questioned by either the media or by the Democrats, it is mainly confined to whether President Trump required congressional approval.

Likewise, application of international law regarding the illegality of unilateral coercive measures is largely absent from media coverage. Where legal issues appear, they tend to address mechanics (e.g., the US-controlled fund arrangement), rather than whether sanctions themselves violate international law.

When media outlets express concern about Washington’s restrictions, it is often that easing them would “reward Maduro loyalists.” While the plight of the Venezuelan people may be acknowledged, the blame is mainly attributed to corruption and economic mismanagement, with little if any opprobrium for sanctions.

As former political science professor at the Universidad de Oriente Steve Ellner (pers. comm.), notes, corruption and mismanagement do exist. But the overwhelming factor has been the sanctions regime. The blockade targeted Venezuela’s oil industry – at one point accounting for 99% of foreign-exchange earnings – forcing the country out of normal dollar-denominated markets and into black markets to survive.

What Alfred de Zayas dubs the “human rights industry” similarly exhibits a convenient blind spot regarding sanctions. WOLA, for example, advocates “addressing the complex humanitarian emergency.” Yet the NGO strongly opposes sanctions relief for the people, because the coercive measures are such an effective “pressure” tool on the leadership.

Former WOLA staffer David Smilde is preoccupied with “restoring” American-style democracy by imposing pressure on the “regime.” He argues: “The democratic transition in Venezuela…requires the support of international organizations.”

In contrast, acting President Delcy Rodríguez views ending interference by foreign actors in Venezuela’s internal affairs as a precondition for credible elections. In particular, she calls for the US “blockade and sanctions against Venezuela [to] cease.” With sanctions still in place, the US remains the biggest obstacle to free and fair elections in Venezuela.

Roger D. Harris is with the Venezuela Solidarity NetworkTask Force on the Americas, and the US Peace Council. He recently visited Venezuela.

 

Column: Iran war fuel crisis gives electric cars a long-term boost


EV charging station in Sanya, China. Stock image.

US President Donald Trump is a renowned champion of fossil fuels, but the lasting legacy of the war against Iran is likely to be an acceleration of the energy transition, especially in Asia.

The world’s most populous and fastest-growing region is being hit hard by the fallout from the US and Israeli aerial campaign against Iran, ​which has seen rapid increases in retail fuel prices since the conflict began on February 28.

For example, the price of a litre of diesel in Australia has hit ‌record highs around A$3 ($2.09), having risen around 36% since the war started, while in Japan gasoline has jumped by 18%.

Countries that control prices are starting to struggle with fuel availability as the conflict has effectively shut the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow waterway that normally transports around 20 million barrels per day (bpd) of crude and refined products from the Persian Gulf to mainly Asian countries.

While global benchmark Brent crude futures have gained about 42% since the start of the conflict ​to trade around $103.78 a barrel in Asia on Tuesday, the increase in physical prices for refined products such as diesel and gasoline has been far higher.

Singapore gasoil, the building block for ​diesel, has jumped by 104% since February 27 to end at $186.43 a barrel on Monday, while gasoline has risen 91% to a record high of $151.60.

These ⁠sharp increases make it likely that further pain will be experienced by consumers across Asia in coming weeks and months, with the added risk of supply shortages as refineries in the region struggle to ​source crude.

The huge price spikes and the fear of shortages are likely to boost the appeal of electric vehicles (EVs) and plug-in hybrid-electric vehicles (PHEVs), as well as electric motorbikes in Asia.

Already EVs and PHEVs are making ​inroads in many countries, driven by the increasing cost-competitiveness of Chinese cars and some government incentives that boost affordability.

China is the leader in the adoption of EVs, which isn’t surprising given the massive investment in battery technology the country has made in recent years.

Sales of EVs and PHEVs were around 12 million units in China last year, taking a more than 50% share of new vehicle sales for the first time.

While this may rise toward 60% this year, ​it’s outside of China that the biggest opportunity for growth lies.

Australia growth

Australia’s sales of EVs and PHEVs hit a record high in 2025 and accounted for about 12.7% of total light vehicle purchases.

PHEVs saw ​faster growth as consumers still worry about battery range and availability of electric charging facilities.

Cheaper EVs and PHEVs, as well as government tax incentives for leases, are helping boost sales in Australia, but the bigger question is how ‌deeply will ⁠the current fuel crisis scar consumers, and how many will try to insulate themselves from future shocks by turning to battery power.

Australia already has more than one-third of households with rooftop solar, which is a further incentive to switch to EVs and PHEVs as they can use their own electricity to charge the vehicles, further lowering costs.

Japan is another market that could see far faster growth in EVs and PHEVs, especially since their major car manufacturers are starting to catch up by offering more models, especially PHEVs.

Strong growth in EVs and PHEVs has also been seen in several Southeast Asian countries, but it’s worth noting ​that electric motorbikes are starting to make more of ​an impact.

In India, almost 1.3 million electric ⁠two-wheelers were sold in 2025, an increase of more than 10% on the prior year and expanding the market share to more than 6% of total sales.

While that is a strong growth rate, it shows the scope for even faster growth in coming years, especially if retail fuel prices remain elevated.

Overall, the ​impact from the Middle East conflict may extend long after the eventual resolution and reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.

Asian countries have just received ​a massive incentive to switch ⁠to EVs and PHEVs, as well as to renewable energies like wind and solar.

While not a direct comparison, the experience of Europe after the dieselgate scandal of 2015 – in which Volkswagen was caught manipulating emissions tests – is instructive.

Diesel passenger car sales dived from 52% in 2015 to just 8% in 2025. The main immediate beneficiary was gasoline-powered cars, but more recently, EVs and PHEVs have overtaken diesel vehicles.

The lesson is that once a trend ⁠takes hold ​it becomes hard to reverse it. The risk for exporters of crude oil and refined products is that the war will ​change the mindset of consumers and governments, and reorientate demand and policies to EVs, PHEVs and renewable-energy generation.

(The views expressed here are those of the author, Clyde Russell, a columnist for Reuters.)

(Editing by Kevin Buckland)

 

Why Donald Trump Just Can’t Stop Going to War



When Imperial America Offers Help, It Just Might Get You Killed


by  and  | Mar 26, 2026 |

After protests across Iran turned deadly in January, President Donald Trump promised Iranians that “help is on the way.” On February 28th, the U.S. and Israel launched what immediately became a devastating war on Iran. American and Israeli warplanes began dropping bombs on a country of some 93 million people. Trump soon put out a video address, telling Iranians that “the hour of your freedom is at hand.” Around the time that video appeared, Iranians in the city of Minab were sorting through the corpses of more than 165 people killed in an airstrike on an elementary school for girls.

That same day, an airstrike killed Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, an 86-year-old who was supposedly already in poor health. Throughout the ensuing days, American and Israeli attacks struck hospitals, historic sites, and more schools. In response, Iran aimed its drones and missiles at American military bases and allies across the Gulf region.

What kind of help, exactly, did Trump mean?

What Washington calls help is often disastrous and the U.S. has a long history of offering (and refusing) to help Iran. During the Abadan Crisis of 1951 to 1954, Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh nationalized the country’s oil industry, which had been under near-complete British control for decades. The United Kingdom responded with a crushing economic embargo, legal challenges, and a naval buildup off the Iranian coast. Mosaddegh repeatedly appealed to Dwight D. Eisenhower for help, but the American president declined to step in.

Some two weeks later, the CIA toppled Mosaddegh’s government with the backing of the British intelligence agency MI6. In effect, that coup d’état — one of at least 72 the U.S. facilitated or attempted to facilitate globally in the Cold War years — opened the path for Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the Shah of Iran, to reinstall his monarchical autocracy. In his private diary, Eisenhower reflected that “we helped bring about… the restoration of the Shah to power in Iran and the elimination of Mossadegh… The things we did were ‘covert.’ If knowledge of them became public, we would not only be embarrassed in that region, but our chances to do anything of like nature in the future would almost totally disappear.”

The CIA wouldn’t publicly acknowledge its role in the coup until several decades later, but Iranians had little doubt. During his quarter-century reign, the Shah outlawed most political parties, jailed dissidents, and made liberal use of torture. In 1979, a revolution unseated the Shah, but the Islamic Republic that followed only continued his practice of mass repressiontorture, and extrajudicial killings. Later, when Iran and Iraq went to war in 1980, the U.S. clandestinely gave each side enough support to ensure neither could win. Worse yet, at the tail end of that conflict, American intelligence officials provided the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein with the positions of Iranian soldiers, despite Washington’s knowledge that Hussein intended to use chemical weapons on them.

Donald Trump has long styled himself as distinctly anti-war, but both of his administrations have kept Tehran squarely in their crosshairs. An American president, after all, is still an American president. Since returning to office in January 2025, he has relaunched the long, lethal American tradition of military intervention abroad. “We will measure our success not only by the battles we win but also by the wars that we end — and perhaps most importantly, the wars we never get into,” he said during his inaugural speech. Over the next year, though, he proceeded to bomb seven countries, threaten a slate of nations from Latin America to Europe, and even kidnap Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores. All the while, he bragged of supposedly ending eight wars.

One of the wars the president insists he ended was Israel’s two-year assault on the Gaza Strip. By the time a U.S.-brokered ceasefire came into effect there in October 2025, Israeli attacks on the coastal enclave had, according to the Gaza health ministry, killed more than 70,000 people. The truce, however, proved to be distinctly one-sided. As of early March of this year, the United Nations estimated that more than 600 Palestinians had been killed and more than 1,600 wounded in Gaza since the ceasefire was implemented. In Lebanon, where a ceasefire went into effect in November 2024, the U.N. had tallied more than 15,000 Israeli ceasefire violations and hundreds of deaths as of late February.

In the United States, war is, of course, a bipartisan affair. The Biden and Trump administrations would, for instance, send Israel more than $21 billion in military aid during the first two years of the war in Gaza. On the campaign trail in 2024, Trump would lean into anti-interventionist rhetoric, warning that a Kamala Harris presidency would drag the U.S. into World War III. Harris’s silence on Gaza evidently cost her a significant number of votes and Trump returned to the Oval Office.

Many Trump voters hoped he would avoid foreign entanglements. Instead, he has deepened the U.S. involvement in conflicts abroad, while deploying federal troops domestically to fight what he’s called an “invasion from within.

So, the war machine now chugs ahead here and elsewhere, with Trump tightening his authoritarian grip at home, while searching for new conflicts abroad. When Iranians rose up in January, their regime killed thousands of protesters. Trump decried the “killers and abusers” in Tehran even as his masked immigration agents were assaulting protesters and immigrants in Minnesota and beyond. In fact, just a few weeks after an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent fatally opened fire on the poet, protester, and mother Renee Good in Minneapolis, Border Patrol officers shot and killed a protesting nurse, Alex Pretti, in the same city.

That the president doesn’t care about human rights is obvious, but he took that position a step further when, around the time of Pretti’s death, his administration forced about a dozen Iranians onto a deportation flight back to the very country he had criticized for wanton murder in the streets.

Some help.

Arrests, Torture, and Abuse

“Every empire,” the late Palestinian academic and literary critic Edward Said once wrote, “tells itself and the world that it is unlike all other empires, that its mission is not to plunder and control but to educate and liberate.” As someone whose family had been among the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians violently displaced and forced into exile by Israel’s 1948 establishment in what Palestinians called the Nakba, or catastrophe, Said was speaking from personal experience.

For nearly eight decades, Palestinians living under Israeli military occupation have paid the price of American “help.” Since 1948, the U.S. has sent an estimated $300 billion (when adjusted for inflation) in foreign aid to Israel, much of it in the form of weaponry to the Israeli military. At the same time, the U.S. Agency for International Development gave the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority more than $5.2 billion between 1994 and 2018, and the CIA worked closely with Palestinian security agents.

While living in Palestine from 2011 until 2015, I often thought about the constant flow of American financial and military aid into the region. I worked then as a journalist and, for part of the time, taught at a Palestinian high school in Ramallah. Wherever you looked, the human fallout of what Washington calls “help” was plain to see. For Palestinians in the West Bank, threats came from every direction. Israeli soldiers shot and killed Palestinians on the streets, at protests, or at checkpoints like the ones many of my students had to pass through every day to reach school. More than 730,000 Israeli settlers live in colonies across the territory, and the most hardline among them routinely attack Palestinians, vandalizing their homes and burning down their olive fields. (In one case in 2014, a group of settlers kidnapped and burned to death a Palestinian teenager named Mohammed Abu Khdeir.) Even the Palestinian Authority, ostensibly meant to represent Palestinians, arrests and tortures political opponents, even in some cases carrying out extrajudicial killings.

When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appealed to Iranians in late February, it brought my mind back to my time in Palestine. Netanyahu urged them to “cast off the yoke of [their] murderous regime,” denouncing that country’s security forces for killing “thousands of children, adults, and elderly people in cold blood.” Then he added: “Tens of thousands [of Iranians] were arrested, tortured, and abused. And why? Simply because they sought lives of freedom and dignity.”

I thought, freedom and dignity? What about arrests, torture, abuse, and cold-blooded killing?

From the time he first became prime minister in 1996, Netanyahu has served a combined total of more than 18 years in office, while presiding over four of the five wars in Gaza since Israel launched Operation Cast Lead in late 2008. The first four of those wars alone killed more than 4,000 Palestinians in the Strip.

Netanyahu was serving his second term as prime minister in 2014, when the nonprofit rights watchdog Defense for Children International – Palestine hired me to research and write a report about the situation of Arab children living near Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank. For several months, when school let out each day, I rushed off to travel around the territory, interviewing children and their families and listening to their experiences of arrest, torture, abuse, and cold-blooded killings.

In East Jerusalem, a 14-year-old boy filled me in on how Israeli intelligence had arrested him a year earlier. They accused him of throwing stones, a charge he denied, and set about interrogating him. While trying to coerce a confession, the boy told me, one interrogator grabbed a broomstick and threatened him. “You want me to shove this stick up your ass, so you’ll feel pain and tell me the truth?” the interrogator said (according to the child). The boy finally confessed when the interrogator vowed to have his family’s home demolished.

About 20 miles south of East Jerusalem, I visited a family who lived in Hebron’s Old City. The area is home to several Israeli settlements and a large military presence that severely restricts Palestinian movement there. One of the children, a young girl, recalled a day when she was seven. As she made her way home from school, a group of settlers snatched her off the street. They held her down and set her hair on fire. A year passed before she could sleep through a full night, her parents told me. Two years after the attack, she still wore a hat wherever she went. Her brother, who was then 12, had similarly disturbing stories. A year earlier, an Israeli soldier had stopped him at a checkpoint and accused him of throwing stones. The soldier then slapped him, the boy said, and threatened to kill him. Noticing that I was shaken, his father put his palms up. “Everyone in this house has been attacked before,” he said.

Such stories piled up by the dozens: Molotov cocktails and stones crashing through the windows of Palestinian schools; soldiers firing tear gas and rubber-coated bullets at children; families rushing their young kids from their burning homes in the middle of the night. Then, one day in May 2014, not long after I finished the report, several of my students showed up to class wearing T-shirts emblazoned with the face of a Palestinian teenager who had been shot and killed the week before. His name was Nadim Nuwara, and he had been 17 when a bullet hit him at a protest near Israel’s wall on the West Bank. (Another teenager, 16-year-old Muhammad Abu al-Thahir, was shot and killed in nearly the same spot around an hour later.)

The Israeli military initially denied involvement in the boys’ slayings. Spokespeople told reporters that Israeli forces had not used live ammunition in the area on the day the killings took place. Some suggested that a Palestinian sniper might have shot the kids. When video footage later emerged, the military claimed it was likely “forged.” I drove over to the Nuwara family’s home one day that week and met his parents. They were grieving, but they wanted to correct the record. They had found the bullet that killed their son. After passing through his body, it had been stopped by a textbook in his backpack. We measured the bullet and took photos, and I sent them to a ballistics expert. Unsurprisingly, he confirmed that the bullet appeared to have been made by Israeli Military Industries and was of a kind in active use by Israeli forces.

Israel continued to deny its involvement in the boy’s death, but amid mounting evidence, in November 2014, an Israeli border policeman was finally charged with manslaughter. A subsequent plea deal stipulated that he would serve nine months in prison. By then, I had left my job at the school and was reporting in Gaza. Israel had waged a 51-day war on the Strip over that summer and it lay in ruins. The U.N. had already tallied more than 2,200 Palestinian deaths, 551 of them children. East of Gaza City, I walked with a Palestinian colleague along a residential street in the Shujayeah neighborhood. Both sides of the street were lined with destroyed homes. All that remained standing of one house was a single wall, propped up on rubble. On it, someone had spray-painted: “All This Family Killed by USA Weapons.”

“Help Has Arrived”

This is the second time Israel has gone to war with Iran since Trump, who pulled the U.S. out of the Iran nuclear agreement during his first term, returned to office last year. In June 2025, Israeli warplanes rained down bombs across that country for 12 days. Iran responded with missiles and suicide drones. That bout of fighting killed more than 430 civilians in Iran and at least 28 people in Israel before it ended. The U.S. also joined in, launching a series of strikes on the country, and the president boasted that the attacks had “completely and totally obliterated” the Iranian nuclear program.

Last October, Trump included that war on his list when he took credit for ending “eight wars in eight months.” After Trump and Netanyahu again went to war with Iran this February, the American president offered new justifications. In addition to vowing to help persecuted Iranians, he said that the regime was building missiles that “could soon reach the American homeland,” a claim U.S. intelligence reportedly denied. He also cited a supposedly “imminent” Iranian attack and mentioned the same nuclear program he had previously said was destroyed.

In the United States, few people believe the war is justified. An NPR/PBS News/Marist poll found that more than half of the respondents believed Iran posed at worst a minor threat or no threat at all. Even among pro-MAGA media figures, including several prominent ones like Tucker Carlson and Megyn Kelly, have railed against the president. “It’s hard to say this, but the United States didn’t make the decision here,” Carlson said. “Benjamin Netanyahu did.”

The real reason Trump has shed his former claims to anti-interventionism, though, is history. Since 1776, according to the Military Intervention Project of the Center for Strategic Studies at Tufts University, the United States has intervened militarily in foreign countries nearly 400 times. Since September 11, 2001, U.S.-led counterterrorism operations have reached at least 78 countries. As of 2021, the U.S. had spent more than $8 trillion on its Global War on Terror, a series of conflicts that the Cost of War project at Brown University estimates to have killed at least 900,000 people. Meanwhile, the Pentagon’s budget has reached $1 trillion and defense contractors continue to pump tens of millions of dollars into lawmakers’ pockets each election cycle. With a record like that, what help can an American president really offer Iranians living under a repressive regime?

For my part, each new report of an American or Israeli airstrike hitting a home, a hospital, or a school in Iran brings back another memory from my years living in the West Bank. After a bullet cut Nadim Nuwara’s life short in the late spring of 2014, I was sitting in his family’s living room when his little brother came in. He was 10, small and gentle-voiced, and wore a backward hat. He held up a large photo of his brother. “I thought this summer was going to be very fun with my brother,” he told me. “I thought Nadim and I were going to be able to play together a lot. But he’s gone now and this is going to be a very bad summer.”

During the first 24 hours of this latest war alone, U.S. Central Command’s Brad Cooper announced in a video on X that the scope of the assault on Iran was “nearly double the scale” of the first day of the invasion of Iraq in 2003. On the first day of the war, Benjamin Netanyahu released another video in which he directly addressed Iranians. “Your suffering and sacrifice will not be in vain,” he insisted. “The help you have prayed for, that help has arrived.” And then the slaughter continued.

Copyright 2026 Patrick Strickland

Patrick Strickland, a journalist and the managing editor of Inkstick Media, is the author of three books about migration and the far right, most recently You Can Kill Each Other After I Leave: Refugees, Fascism, and Bloodshed in Greece (Melville House, April 2025).

Follow TomDispatch on Twitter and join us on Facebook. Check out the newest Dispatch Books, John Feffer’s new dystopian novel, Songlands (the final one in his Splinterlands series), Beverly Gologorsky’s novel Every Body Has a Story, and Tom Engelhardt’s A Nation Unmade by War, as well as Alfred McCoy’s In the Shadows of the American Century: The Rise and Decline of U.S. Global Power, John Dower’s The Violent American Century: War and Terror Since World War IIand Ann Jones’s They Were Soldiers: How the Wounded Return from America’s Wars: The Untold Story.