Cash-strapped cities around the nation are increasingly using heavy fines to fund basic services — in turn, sending residents into debt and bankruptcy.
A New York Times report said the acting Secretary of Defense presented a plan to send as many as 120,000 troops to Iran if it accelerates work on nuclear weapons or if Iran attacks American forces.
Here’s more from their reporting:
There are sharp divisions in the administration over how to respond to Iran at a time when tensions are rising about Iran’s nuclear policy and its intentions in the Middle East.
Some senior American officials said the plans, even at a very preliminary stage, show how dangerous the threat from Iran has become. Others, who are urging a diplomatic resolution to the current tensions, said it amounts to a scare tactic to warn Iran against new aggressions.
This reporting follows months of escalating tensions, which we summarized last week when we talked about the future of the Iran nuclear deal.
The New Yorker’s Robin Wright analyzed the mood in both countries.
The sense of foreboding is tangible, the threats from both sides are no longer rhetorical. Before the nuclear-deal negotiations began, in 2013, Washington was consumed with hyped talk of the United States or its allies bombing Iran. If the nuclear deal formally dies, talk of military confrontation may again fill both capitals—even if neither country wants it.
Will we go to war with Iran? Is the United States provoking the Iranian government? Or is it the other way around? And what might be the consequences?
- Vali Nasr Dean of the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies; former senior Obama administration adviser; @vali_nasr
Most Recent Shows
In theory, Congress and the White House are co-equal branches of government. Is that the reality?
The "Orange Is The New Black" star's new memoir is about her time caring for her parents in Dubuque, Iowa.
Historian Joshua Specht says “hamburgers are the newest front in the culture wars.”