Say His Name: Neocon Don

America's enemies keep dropping like flies. Joe Kent, a close friend of anti-American agitator Tucker Carlson, resigned as head of the National Counterterrorism Center on Tuesday in protest of the ongoing military operation against Iran. In an explosive letter to Donald Trump, Kent accused the president of being a dimwitted patsy duped into betraying his country. Duped by whom? By the Jews, obviously.

The post Say His Name: Neocon Don appeared first on .

America First — or American Empire? Trump’s aggressive global moves signal a new doctrine



President Donald Trump spent years campaigning against the failures of American foreign policy — but not necessarily against American power itself.

Which is why Trump’s bold global moves suggest a doctrine that rejects nation-building and ideological crusades in favor of something far simpler: an America First approach to global dominance.

“It’s only March, but already it’s proven to be a pretty remarkably action-packed year. You know, just three days in, Trump successfully plucks up Nicolas Maduro from his bed in Venezuela, extradites him back to the United States, where he’s facing numerous felony charges stemming from involvement in narco-terrorism,” John Doyle explains.

“Then, the end of February, Trump launches Operation Epic Fury, of course, a military campaign to destroy Iran’s offensive capabilities,” he continues.


“On Tuesday, though, the U.S. and Ecuador launched a joint military operation against narcoterrorists in the South American country,” he adds.

But it appears that Trump is only getting started.

“A lot of analysts, I’ve been seeing this, are saying that Trump is perhaps planning an intervention in Cuba. ... In his second term, he’s floated the idea of, you know, a friendly takeover. We can guess how friendly such a takeover would actually be. But Trump’s clearly trying to frame Cuba as a failing state, which it is,” Doyle says.

And while many Americans are skeptical of Trump’s recent actions, particularly Operation Epic Fury, Doyle points out that Trump is “doing what he thinks is best for America, not what’s best for abstractions like liberal democracy, not what’s best for transgender people in Timbuktu, what is best for America.”

“He does think in terms of empire. All of his criticism about American Empire has not been so much on the empire itself, but more on the people managing it. What does he say? ‘Our leaders are stupid,’” Doyle explains.

“His problem with us going into Iraq was not that we went into Iraq necessarily, but that we went in to pursue a nation-building project, and we didn’t even take the oil. He said this as it was going on. He said this on the debate stage in 2016. This is pretty consistent for Donald Trump,” he says.

“And, of course, it’s true that Trump won the election in 2016 by denouncing, again, certain aspects of the American Empire — you know, our involvement in Iraq, Afghanistan. But it is incorrect ultimately to characterize Trump as opposed to empire itself,” he continues.

“In fact, if anything, the American Empire is actually doing a lot better with Trump at the helm,” he adds.

Want more from John Doyle?

To enjoy more of the truth about America and join the fight to restore a country that has been betrayed by its own leaders, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

America First can’t survive an Iran quagmire



The Iran war risks becoming the classic Washington trap: Trade concrete domestic wins for an open-ended foreign project, then discover the home front slipped away while everyone watched the fireworks.

Over the weekend, the United States joined Israel in the opening salvo of what looked like an increasingly inevitable fight with Iran. Plenty of ink has already spilled over whether Donald Trump should pursue regime change abroad. The larger stakes sit at home. Trump began his second term with an all-out assault on the left and the permanent bureaucracy. Agencies were closed, and budgets were slashed. The border was secured, and deportations began. The early blitz of executive orders stunned progressives, but activist judges soon started tying the administration down. That reality demanded legislative victories

A successful Iran campaign could reshape the region. A failed or prolonged one could reshape American politics by handing Democrats a narrative of chaos and betrayal.

Congress has not delivered. Rather than spend months trying to whip spineless Republicans into motion, the White House shifted toward what it could do without them. Foreign policy offers that outlet. The result includes some impressive operations, including the capture of Nicolás Maduro in Venezuela. Iran, however, threatens to consume time, attention, and political capital that the domestic fight cannot spare.

Curtis Yarvin argues that the most valuable political win makes the next win easier. Power has momentum. Winning in the right order matters more than checking items off an ideological list. Trump’s best early moves fit that logic. They did not merely satisfy the base. They changed the battlefield.

The point is not isolation. America has enemies, and presidents sometimes must use force. The point is sequencing. Domestic consolidation makes foreign action cheaper and safer. A secure border, a disciplined bureaucracy, and election rules that prevent the left from gaming turnout strengthen deterrence.

They also insulate a president from war-party sabotage: leaks, lawsuits, and hearings meant to break public support. The same activists who file injunctions against deportations will file injunctions again against anything that smells like emergency authority. The same media class that demanded escalation yesterday will demand trials and timelines tomorrow. A president who has not locked down the home front fights with one hand tied, then gets blamed when the knot tightens.

Cutting the staff and budget of outfits like USAID and the Department of Education did more than signal hostility to the progressive project. It reduced the flow of money to Democratic patronage networks and throttled the institutions that launder liberal ideology into “expertise.” Closing the border and restarting deportations did more than satisfy a campaign promise. It slowed the importation of new dependents and future Democratic Party supporters. Even the executive order on birthright citizenship, whatever the courts decide, aims at the same long-term terrain: electoral math.

RELATED: The West’s forbidden truth: Ethnic cleansing is now official policy

Blaze Media Illustration

Those moves carried moral clarity and tactical advantage. Each win reduced the opposition’s resources and increased the odds of winning the next fight.

That strategy always faced a limit. Flooding the zone with executive action could only last until the legal system and the administrative state regrouped. Trump is not a dictator, no matter what progressive media claims. He needs laws. Without legislation, judges can block him, bureaucrats can slow-walk him, and the next president can reverse him with a pen.

Once the domestic agenda hit those constraints, the administration pivoted abroad to keep momentum. The question becomes whether momentum abroad strengthens the home front or drains it.

War burns political capital. Trump already took hits from the Epstein files mess and sloppy messaging around deportations. Governing by polls is foolish, but political victories still require public attention and pressure. A president can spend capital only if he has it. People love a winner. They also sour on leaders who appear distracted, trapped, or inconsistent.

Iran poses a special risk because it collides with Trump’s signature advantage: his break with Republican foreign adventurism. He rose by mocking George W. Bush’s regime-change fantasies as disaster. That stance enraged conservative orthodoxies, then remade them. Many pundits who cheered the Iraq War now treat regime change as a punchline largely because Trump made it respectable to say so.

Now Trump bets that the problem was not regime change itself, only its execution. Maybe he wins that bet. He deserves credit for successful strikes and bold operations. Yet the odds do not favor quick, clean wars, and Iran has a long history of swallowing neat plans.

Meanwhile, the domestic agenda needs hard wins that only Congress can supply. The SAVE Act offers the perfect example of a victory that makes the next victory easier. Voter ID is moral and common sense. It enjoys broad support. It constrains the fraud Democrats exploit. It makes every future election easier for Republicans to win. Yet GOP legislators cannot push it across the finish line. The Senate wastes time on performative votes and pageant nonsense. Caligula’s horse starts to look like a personnel upgrade.

RELATED: The commonsense case for nationalizing US elections

Photo by SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images

This imbalance matters because foreign policy creates durable facts, while executive-only domestic wins remain reversible. A successful Iran campaign could reshape the region. A failed or prolonged one could reshape American politics by handing Democrats a narrative of chaos and betrayal. Either way, the clock keeps ticking at home.

If Democrats win the midterms, impeachment and investigations begin immediately. If progressives win the next presidential election, the border reopens, amnesty returns, and the Department of Education fills up again with ideological enforcers. Iran is a brutal regime, but its nuclear program took a major blow last summer. Breathing room existed. The administration should have used it to lock in domestic gains.

Now Trump is committed. That makes speed decisive. A timely victory abroad could preserve the president’s image as a winner while he pressures Congress to codify the domestic agenda. A drawn-out war will do the opposite: sap attention, fracture the coalition, and leave the home front legally vulnerable.

America First cannot survive as a permanent posture if domestic reforms remain temporary. The administration must stop letting foreign battles substitute for unfinished work at home. Win fast abroad if you must. Then come back, and finish the job in Washington.

Iran, China, and Trump’s ‘art of the squeal’



The combined bombing campaign that began in Iran Saturday morning, decapitating senior leadership and hammering military targets across the map, may look like a massive undertaking.

And it is — for Israel.

Iran looks like an existential threat.

It is — for Israel.

An invasion does not run on slogans. It runs on fuel.

For the United States, the existential threat sits elsewhere. Iran has financed and fueled anti-American violence for 47 years — from the 1979 hostage crisis to the Beirut barracks bombing in 1983, from Hezbollah and the Houthis to the IED pipeline that chewed up Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan. President Trump on Saturday morning laid out a clean rationale for turning the mullahs’ war machine into mulch and ending, once and for all, Tehran’s nuclear obsession.

Still, the bigger strategic picture points east — to China.

Beijing’s global ambitions rise and fall on one commodity that keeps modern economies alive and modern militaries moving: oil. If you want to understand why pressure on Iran matters beyond the Middle East, start with the tankers.

Xi Jinping has ordered the People’s Liberation Army to be ready for Taiwan by 2027. Call it an invasion timeline or call it a readiness deadline — the intent reads the same.

China has spent years preparing the battlefield: artificial islands to extend maritime control, relentless air and naval exercises that rehearse the encirclement of Taiwan, and a missile force built to hunt U.S. ships and push America back behind the horizon.

That missile layer — DF-21s and DF-26s — supports the bigger concept: anti-access/area denial. China wants to make U.S. intervention costly, slow, and uncertain. It wants American commanders staring at a clock they cannot beat.

Washington answered with its own doctrine and its own race against time. The U.S. built concepts like AirSea Battle doctrine and pushed Agile Combat Employment — a dispersed, resilient approach designed to survive missile salvos and keep aircraft flying. The Air Force started rehabilitating old Pacific airfields and expanding access across Guam, Saipan, and especially Tinian, because the next war in the Pacific will punish concentration.

Then Orange Man Bad made two moves in two months that hit Xi exactly where he lives. Not more nasty rhetoric on Truth Social or posturing. Logistics.

First, the United States seized Nicolás Maduro and dumped him in a Brooklyn jail. That operation did more than embarrass a dictator. It jolted the real-world flow of Venezuelan crude — and with it, a slice of China’s import stream that Beijing prefers to keep quiet, rebranded, and discounted. Analysts peg Venezuela’s contribution to China’s seaborne crude imports in the low single digits, roughly 3% to 5% depending on the year and the counting method. In Beijing’s world, even “small” percentages matter when the margin for error narrows.

Second, the joint strike campaign against Iran instantly put a hand on another lever: Iranian exports.

RELATED: Israeli officials say Khamenei is dead. Update: Trump confirms.

Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images

China buys the bulk of Iran’s shipped oil. Various trackers place Iranian barrels at roughly 10% to 15% of China’s seaborne crude imports in recent years. Tehran sells because it needs the cash. Beijing buys because it wants the discount. Trump’s move did not need to “block” every barrel to land the message. It only needed to introduce uncertainty, disruption, rerouting, insurance spikes, interdiction risk, and political friction. Oil markets react to fear faster than to facts.

Put the two together, and the math starts to hurt: a meaningful share of China’s oil — not symbolic, not academic — now sits under pressure from U.S. action in Venezuela and Iran.

That creates a Taiwan problem.

An invasion does not run on slogans. It runs on fuel. It runs on shipping. It runs on industrial output. It runs on a domestic economy that stays stable while the military gambles. Xi can build missiles all day long, but he cannot launch an island war on an economy gasping for discounted crude.

So yes, the current Iran campaign matters for the obvious reasons: international terrorism, Hezbollah, the Houthis, the nuclear program. Those are legitimate reasons for “Epic Fury.

Trump’s larger play hits the supply lines that make China’s invasion timetable plausible.

In only two months, Trump has put Xi in the position of a man getting a testicular palpation from a recalcitrant physician in a hurry.

Do not distract him. He might clench.

I think Trump wrote a book about it, or he should. Call it “The Art of the Squeal.”

Every attendee who was awarded by Trump during the State of the Union



President Donald Trump awarded several honors and medals during his historic State of the Union Tuesday night. Here is every honor Trump awarded during the joint address.

'He was a legend long before this evening.'

1. Connor Hellebuyck, Presidential Medal of Freedom

Photo by ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS / AFP via Getty Images

As goalie, Connor Hellebuyck played an integral role on the USA men's hockey team that brought home the gold for the first time in 46 years. Trump hosted the team at the White House on Tuesday, just days after their historic victory, later inviting them to attend the State of the Union.

During his joint address, Trump announced that he would bestow Hellebuyck with the Presidential Medal of Freedom, America's highest civilian honor. Trump also noted that he took a vote from the team members in the Oval Office as to whether he should award Hellebuyck the medal, and they unanimously supported the idea.

Trump's address was a beacon of patriotism, and this moment was no exception.

"What special champions you are," Trump said.

2. Andrew Wolfe, Purple Heart

Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images

Andrew Wolfe was one of the two National Guardsmen who were ambushed and shot, allegedly by an Afghan national, just feet from the White House in November. Wolfe was not expected to survive, but he miraculously pulled through and appeared at the State of the Union alongside his mother.

To commend his service, Trump awarded Wolfe the Purple Heart.

"It was a solemn and unforgettable moment, one that ensured their courage and sacrifice were honored not only by West Virginia but also before the entire nation," West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey (R) said in a statement.

3. Sarah Beckstrom, Purple Heart

Photo by Demetrius Freeman/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Sarah Beckstrom was the second National Guardsman recognized at the State of the Union and was posthumously awarded the Purple Heart. Beckstrom was serving alongside Wolfe when she was ambushed and fatally shot in November at just 20 years old.

Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images

Beckstrom's parents accepted the award on behalf of their late daughter Tuesday night, marking a solemn moment.

“West Virginia will never forget their service, their bravery, or their sacrifice," Morrisey said.

4. Scott Ruskan, Legion of Merit

Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images

Scott Ruskan, an aviation survival technician and rescue swimmer for the United States Coast Guard, was recognized for saving nearly 170 people during the floods that devastated central Texas back in July. Those rescued included children attending Camp Mystic.

Trump awarded Ruskan the Legion of Merit for his "extraordinary heroism."

Ruskan accepted the award alongside 11-year-old Milly Cate McClymond, one of the girls he rescued from Camp Mystic.

"As the waters threatened to sweep her away, 11-year-old Milly Cate McClymond closed her eyes and prayed to God," Trump said. "She thought she was going to die. Those prayers were answered when Coast Guard rescue swimmer Scott Ruskan descended from a helicopter above ... and he lifted not just Milly Cate but 164 others to safety."

5. Eric Slover, Medal of Honor

Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Chief Warrant Officer Eric Slover was recognized for his role in capturing Venezuelan ex-dictator Nicolas Maduro in January, successfully piloting the Chinook mission despite being shot several times and sustaining severe injuries to his legs.

Despite being severely wounded, Slover stood up in a walker to accept the highest military decoration, the Medal of Honor.

"Chief Warrant Officer Slover is still recovering from his serious wounds," Trump said, "but I'm thrilled to say that he is here tonight with his wife, Amy."

"The success of the entire mission and the lives of his fellow warriors hinged on Eric's ability to take the searing pain. It was unbelievable, what's happened to his legs," he continued.

6. Royce Williams, Medal of Honor

Photo by Mandel NGAN / AFP via Getty Images

Retired Navy Captain Royce Williams was also awarded the Medal of Honor Tuesday night, commending the 100-year-old veteran's service in World War II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War. First lady Melania Trump, who sat beside Williams, bestowed the award on the war hero during the address.

In 1952, Williams found himself in a 35-minute dogfight against the Soviets, where he downed four enemy aircraft, survived a 37mm cannon, and still returned to the deck of the USS Oriskany just off the coast of North Korea. His fellow servicemen later counted 263 holes in the frame of his F9F-5 Panther.

"Tonight, at 100 years old, this brave Navy captain is finally getting the recognition he deserves. He was a legend long before this evening," Trump said.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Everything Is Coming Up Marco Rubio

Everything Is Coming Up Marco Rubio

The fastest way to stop Iran’s killers ... without firing a single shot



The mullahs of Iran have resumed the familiar work of slaughtering their own people. (Again!) The United States can respond without firing a shot — and without waiting months for a traditional embargo to bite.

It can impose an electronic embargo.

An electro-embargo could do something sanctions often cannot: break the regime’s control quickly enough to matter while the killing is still underway.

Washington could pursue this approach unilaterally, or it could press the United Nations to authorize it under Article 41 of the U.N. Charter, which empowers the Security Council to order measures “not involving the use of armed force,” including the partial or complete interruption of “postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication.” The text already exists.

The question is whether anyone has the imagination — and the nerve — to use it.

The electronic advantage

In the context of Iran’s continuing humanitarian emergency, the United States, with a bit of diplomatic legerdemain from Ambassador to the U.N. Michael Waltz, could challenge the Security Council to act. China and Russia sit on the council. They will posture. They will threaten vetoes. But even a public debate would force them to explain why the world should tolerate a regime that murders civilian protesters in the streets.

If the Security Council approves an Article 41 action, the United States could then present its combatant commanders with something Iran has never faced at scale: an embargo not on goods but on electrons.

Physical embargoes remain a standard tool of statecraft. They also take time. Iran can evade, reroute, smuggle, barter, and stall. An electronic embargo moves at the speed of light.

Target Iran’s hardline regime — not the Iranian people — by degrading the communications infrastructure that allows the government to command and control its security forces and manage the extraction and export of oil, its primary source of hard currency.

Strike the regime’s hardened telephone and cellular systems, satellite communications, and broadcast television.

Cripple the internal nervous system that keeps the state coordinated, disciplined, and armed.

The effect would be immediate. A regime that cannot communicate cannot coordinate raids, deploy forces efficiently, jam dissident signals, or maintain operational tempo. It cannot manage a modern oil export apparatus without functioning networks. It cannot run a crackdown in real time if it loses the ability to issue orders and track compliance.

The ‘Venezuelan formula’

Just as important, an electronic embargo could reverse the regime’s favorite trick: cutting the Iranian people off from each other and from the outside world. Tehran has already tried to block the internet and throttle social media. A targeted electronic campaign could negate that control and unleash an information tsunami — one the mullahs cannot shape, censor, or contain.

That shift matters. When citizens can communicate, organize, document, and broadcast, repression becomes harder and riskier. The regime loses its monopoly on narrative. Fear starts to spread in the other direction.

RELATED: Memo to Hegseth: Our military’s problem isn’t only fitness. It’s bad education.

erhui1979 via iStock/Getty Images

One can imagine a greatly expanded “Venezuelan formula”: degrade internal communications, then use broadcast means to confuse and complicate the regime’s grip on what is happening — while simultaneously encouraging the population to resist theocratic authority. The goal would not be spectacle. The goal would be collapse: the steady unraveling of the regime’s confidence, coherence, and control.

In this mode, a combatant commander could employ SOFTWAR principles to engage and degrade the mullahs through coordinated, non-kinetic lines of operation. Properly executed, such a campaign would affect nearly every aspect of Iranian society — and it would do so without turning Iranian cities into ruins.

A greater strategic payoff: China

The strategic payoff for the United States extends beyond moral clarity. It comes down to oil — and to China.

The recent decapitation of the Maduro junta in Venezuela proved a point many analysts ignore. The key factor is not the quantity of oil in a given country. It is control of the flow of oil. Energy states matter because they can fuel, fund, and sustain adversaries.

If the mullahs fall, China loses a major energy supplier at a moment when it can least afford disruption. Beijing’s ambitions depend on stable inputs. Xi Jinping’s dream of Chinese communist hegemony runs on energy. Remove an important provider, and you squeeze China’s strategic bandwidth — again.

That result alone justifies exploring an electronic embargo.

This is not a call for war. It is a call to use power creatively, within the bounds of international law when possible, and in defense of a population being beaten, shot, and silenced by its rulers.

The mullahs survive by controlling the physical streets and the electronic space above them. Take away the second, and the first becomes harder to hold.

An electro-embargo would not solve every problem. But it could do something sanctions often cannot: break the regime’s control quickly enough to matter while the killing is still underway.

Venezuelan freedom fighter honors Trump: Machado insists 'he deserves' Nobel Prize after capture of dictator Maduro



While there have been mixed reactions to the January 3 capture of Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro by the U.S., few have shown greater support for the move than opposition leader Maria Corina Machado.

On Thursday, Machado visited President Donald Trump at the White House and presented him with her Nobel Peace Prize, which she won in October.

'María presented me with her Nobel Peace Prize for the work I have done.'

When asked in a Fox interview why she gave her medal to the president of the United States, Machado had a simple answer: "Because he deserves it."

"It was a very emotional moment. I decided to present the Nobel Peace Prize medal on behalf of the people of Venezuela."

RELATED: Venezuelan freedom fighter wins Nobel Peace Prize — and she immediately dedicates it to Trump for his support

Photo by Drew ANGERER/AFP via Getty Images

The medal was presented to Trump in a large golden frame with text that reads: "To President Donald J. Trump in Gratitude for Your Extraordinary Leadership in Promoting Peace Through Strength." The text further calls the award a “Personal Symbol of Gratitude on behalf of the Venezuelan People.”

After the meeting, Trump wrote on Truth Social: "María presented me with her Nobel Peace Prize for the work I have done. Such a wonderful gesture of mutual respect. Thank you María!"

A White House official confirmed to CNBC that Trump intends to keep the medal.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Did Trump use the 'Havana syndrome' weapon on Venezuela?



A Venezuelan security guard, speaking to the New York Post after the January 3 raid that captured Nicolás Maduro, described American forces using some kind of directed-energy weapon that left hundreds of defenders bleeding from their noses, vomiting blood, and unable to stand. According to this account, about 20 U.S. troops from roughly eight helicopters took down hundreds of Venezuelan soldiers without a single American death.

The basic facts are wild enough without the sci-fi angle. Delta Force conducted Operation Absolute Resolve in the predawn hours, capturing Maduro and his wife from Fort Tiuna in Caracas. More than 200 special operations forces participated, supported by about 150 aircraft that disabled Venezuelan air defenses and extracted Maduro to New York to face narco-terrorism charges. Venezuela reported over 100 casualties, with only seven U.S. troops injured.

That's already one of the most audacious military operations since the bin Laden raid.

Trump wants adversaries, particularly in Latin America, to believe the US has these capabilities.

But then comes the guard's testimony, shared publicly by White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt on X. He describes radar systems simultaneously shutting down, swarms of drones, and then this mysterious weapon that made his "head feel like it was exploding from the inside." Mass collapse. Internal bleeding. Complete incapacitation.

To those of us with long memories, it sounded strangely familiar, hearkening back to the "Havana syndrome" attacks on American personnel starting in Havana in 2016. Those attacks were suspected to have been caused by a secret energy weapon. Now, the United States has its own.

Whether we actually used that weapon or the White House just wants you to believe it did, either way, the strategic effect is the same.

The Havana syndrome connection

Starting in late 2016, U.S. diplomats and CIA officers in Cuba began experiencing bizarre symptoms: sudden onset of severe headaches, hearing strange sounds, vertigo, cognitive issues, and what appeared to be actual brain injuries. Over the next several years, hundreds of American personnel reported similar incidents in China, Russia, Austria, and even Washington, D.C.

The National Academies of Sciences concluded in 2020 that "pulsed electromagnetic energy" was the most plausible explanation for at least some cases. Multiple intelligence panels agreed: Directed-energy weapons were the leading theory. In 2024, investigative reporting linked Russia's GRU Unit 29155 to research on "non-lethal acoustic weapons."

For years, American officials have suspected, but couldn't prove, that hostile actors used these weapons against U.S. personnel. The attacks hit diplomats inside embassy compounds, in hotels, and even at home. Invisible, deniable, and devastating.

Now fast-forward to the January 3, 2026, raid and its darkly ironic twist: 32 Cuban military advisers were killed defending Maduro's compound, possibly hit with the same type of weapon that may have been used against Americans in Cuba.

If true, it sends a message: We know what you did to our people in Havana, and now you've experienced it yourselves.

The Pentagon just bought the Havana syndrome weapon

CNN reported on January 13 that Homeland Security Investigations acquired a device through an undercover operation for tens of millions of dollars in the waning days of the Biden administration, using Pentagon funding. The backpack-size device produces pulsed radio waves and contains Russian components.

That portability matters. One of the long-standing questions about Havana syndrome was how you could make a weapon powerful enough to cause brain injuries that's also portable enough to deploy against specific targets in embassy compounds, hotels, and homes.

The Pentagon tested it for more than a year and considered it serious enough to brief the House and Senate Intelligence Committees in late 2024. There's still debate within the government about its actual link to Havana syndrome cases, but the acquisition has, according to CNN, "reignited a painful and contentious debate" about whether foreign adversaries have been attacking U.S. officials with directed-energy weapons.

Marc Polymeropoulos, a former CIA officer who went public about injuries he sustained in what he believes was an attack in Moscow in 2017, told CNN: "If the [U.S. government] has indeed uncovered such devices, then the CIA owes all the victims a f**king major and public apology for how we have been treated as pariahs."

This news breaks days after Venezuelan guards described similar symptoms during the Maduro raid. Interesting timing.

RELATED: Polymarket bettors RAGE as the app says Maduro's capture doesn't count as 'invasion'

Michael Nagle/Bloomberg via Getty Images

But did they actually use it?

The Venezuelan guard's account describes mass nosebleeds, vomiting blood, and hundreds incapacitated simultaneously. These are more extreme than documented Havana syndrome cases, which typically involved headaches, vertigo, and cognitive issues rather than acute internal bleeding. Could blast overpressure from conventional explosives cause similar effects? Yes. Could shrapnel, concussive force, and chemical irritants from 150 aircraft's worth of ordnance produce these symptoms? Absolutely.

Here's what makes me skeptical: Both Maduro and his wife claimed injuries, but they survived and appeared in a Manhattan courtroom days later. The injuries reported (Maduro falling while fleeing, his wife struck in the head) sound like conventional combat trauma, not internal organ damage from directed energy.

And the biggest tell: The White House press secretary amplified this story. The Pentagon just spent tens of millions on a device they suspect is behind Havana syndrome attacks, briefed Congress, and now CNN is reporting on it publicly. If U.S. special forces had actually deployed a classified weapons system and some guard blew the secret, the response would be aggressive operational security and plausible deniability. Instead, we're getting transparency.

That's not how you handle a genuine security breach. That's how you handle a psychological operation.

Why ambiguity is the weapon

The Trump administration wants adversaries, particularly in Latin America, to believe the U.S. has these capabilities. And here's the brilliance: The technology is real (we have the receipts), but whether it was used remains ambiguous. Venezuela can't prove it didn't happen. The U.S. won't confirm or deny. Adversaries now have to plan for worst-case scenarios.

This is the modern version of Reagan's Star Wars program. Most scientists knew it couldn't work as advertised, but the Soviets spent billions trying to counter it anyway. Sometimes the belief in a capability is more valuable than the capability itself.

The United States just demonstrated it can reach into a fortified compound in a hostile capital, extract a head of state, and fly him to New York to face trial, all while suffering minimal casualties. That capability needs no embellishment. But the embellishment serves a purpose: forcing every tin-pot dictator and mid-level drug trafficker in the Western Hemisphere to wonder if they're next and whether their security forces can protect them from weapons they can't see or hear.

And for anyone involved in Havana syndrome attacks, whether Cuban, Russian, or anyone else, there's now a very clear message: If you hit our people with invisible weapons, don't be surprised when we return the favor. The 32 dead Cuban advisers make that point unmistakably clear, regardless of what weapon actually killed them.

Power projection isn't just about what you can do; it's about what others believe you can do.

The bottom line

The truth about Venezuela is probably somewhere in the middle. Electronic warfare to knock out radar and communications? Almost certainly. That's standard doctrine. Directed-energy weapons causing mass internal bleeding? The technology exists, but the extreme symptoms described don't match documented effects. Whether they were actually used? Strategically ambiguous.

And that's the point. The ambiguity itself is the weapon. If they used it, adversaries know America will deploy it. If they didn't, adversaries still believe they might next time, and uncertainty is often more powerful than certainty.

Here’s a story: Cuba helps Russia attack American diplomats with invisible weapons starting in 2016. Years later, Cuban advisers die defending a dictator when the U.S. raids his compound with technology that sounds awfully familiar. Whether that's coincidence, retaliation, or just good storytelling doesn't really matter. The message landed.

That's worth understanding because we're going to see more of it in this fifth generation of warfare. The age of warfare where you could independently verify what happened on the battlefield is over. In the era of psychological operations, classified capabilities, and information warfare, the story about the battle matters as much as the battle itself.

Maybe more.