Follow us on social

google cta
Shutterstock_1029015052-scaled

Lawmakers ask Pentagon for answers on military equipment theft

A media investigation earlier this year found a proliferation of stolen arms and the military so far hasn’t been very forthcoming.

Analysis | Reporting | Military Industrial Complex
google cta
google cta

Three Democratic House members sent a letter to Pentagon officials this week asking what is being done to prevent theft of military equipment. At least 1,900 military firearms were reportedly stolen from 2010 to 2019, with some having been used in violent crimes. 

The report by the Associated Press back in June details how U.S. military equipment, ranging from pistols to machine guns, is stolen or lost across the world. For example,  one Navy SEAL lost his pistol in a bar fight in Lebanon. But there is plenty of deadly equipment that is surfacing here in the United States — a box of armor-piercing grenades was recovered in an Atlanta backyard after it was stolen from an Army training in Philadelphia. Stolen guns have also wound up in robberies and the homes of gang members. 

Democrats Jamie Raskin (Md.), Stephen Lynch (Mass.), and Robin Kelly (Ill.) want answers. “Given the epidemic of gun violence spreading across the United States, which has claimed more than 35,000 lives so far this year, we appreciate that Pentagon leadership is committed to addressing this challenge,” they say In their letter. But, they add,  “we are concerned that DOD has seemingly not yet developed a coherent strategy to improve its ability to account for military weapons and equipment.”

The Pentagon has so far resisted providing explanations on how military equipment gets stolen. 

In February, ten pounds of C4 plastic explosives vanished at Twentynine Palms Marine Corps Base in Southern California. Even though the explosives were recovered in June, the military offered no explanation. The equipment may have just been lost, but other cases show servicemembers are  profiting on gun trafficking. Indeed two years ago,a soldier at Fort Bragg stole over $2 million in equipment. The former Special Forces soldier was sentenced for 25 months in jail and a $250,000 fine.  

Seeing that the military is reluctant to acknowledge the amount of equipment stolen, the AP built its own database which found that the number of weapons disappeared has been undercounted. While talking to AP, Brig. Gen. Duane Miller (one of the top Army law enforcement officials) initially understated the number of missing guns by several hundreds. Guns also often vanish without a paper trail, making it impossible to register and investigate such disappearances. 

Aside from the possible impact on gun violence on American streets, the AP report is indicative of a larger trend of the Pentagon’s reluctance to be held accountable. Indeed, Congress had to force a financial audit on the Defense Department and it has never passed, largely because auditors couldn’t get enough records to make an assessment. 

Audits found mishaps like accidentally sending nuclear nose cones to Taiwan. They also found money laundering tactics aimed at keeping unspent money within the Pentagon instead of returning them to the Treasury Department — a move that veteran Pentagon staffers say is unconstitutional. 


Image: Grzegorz Pedzinski via shutterstock.com
google cta
Analysis | Reporting | Military Industrial Complex
nuclear weapons
Top image credit: rawf8 via shutterstock.com

What will happen when there are no guardrails on nuclear weapons?

Global Crises

The New START Treaty — the last arms control agreement between the U.S. and Russia — is set to expire next week, unless President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin make a last minute decision to renew it. Letting the treaty expire would increase the risk of nuclear conflict and open the door to an accelerated nuclear arms race. A coalition of arms control and disarmament groups is pushing Congress and the president to pledge to continue to observe the New START limits on deployed, strategic nuclear weapons by the US and Russia.

New START matters. The treaty, which entered into force on February 5, 2011 after a successful effort by the Obama administration to win over enough Republican senators to achieve the required two-thirds majority to ratify the deal, capped deployed warheads to 1,550 for each side, and established verification procedures to ensure that both sides abided by the pact. New START was far from perfect, but it did put much needed guardrails on nuclear development that reduced the prospect of an all-out arms race.

keep readingShow less
Trump Hegseth Rubio
Top image credit: President Donald Trump, joined by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Secretary of the Navy John Phelan, announces plans for a “Golden Fleet” of new U.S. Navy battleships, Monday, December 22, 2025, at the Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

Trump's realist defense strategy with interventionist asterisks

Washington Politics

The Trump administration has released its National Defense Strategy, a document that in many ways marks a sharp break from the interventionist orthodoxies of the past 35 years, but possesses clear militaristic impulses in its own right.

Rhetorically quite compatible with realism and restraint, the report envisages a more focused U.S. grand strategy, shedding force posture dominance in all major theaters for a more concentrated role in the Western Hemisphere and Indo-Pacific. At the same time however, it retains a rather status quo Republican view of the Middle East, painting Iran as an intransigent aggressor and Israel as a model ally. Its muscular approach to the Western Hemisphere also may lend itself to the very interventionism that the report ostensibly opposes.

keep readingShow less
Alternative vs. legacy media
Top photo credit: Gemini AI

Ding dong the legacy media and its slavish war reporting is dead

Media

In a major development that must be frustrating to an establishment trying to sell their policies to an increasingly skeptical public, the rising popularity of independent media has made it impossible to create broad consensus for corporate-compliant narratives, and to casually denigrate, or even censor, those who disagree.

It’s been a long road.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.