‘We will use force’: Pentagon chiefs describe naval blockade of Iran, say ships are making wise choice not to try to run it

‘We will use force’: Pentagon chiefs describe naval blockade of Iran, say ships are making wise choice not to try to run it

 Times of Israel is liveblogging Thursday

Speaking at the Pentagon, Joint Chiefs chair Gen. Dan Caine says US forces “will actively pursue any Iranian flagged vessel or any vessel attempting to provide material support to Iran” — anywhere in the world.

He issues a clear warning to any targeted vessel attempting to circumvent a US blockade: “Turn around or prepare to be boarded… We will use force.”

Caine describes the effort as a “blockade of Iran’s ports and coastline” with enforcement “inside Iran’s territorial seas and in international waters.” He notes that US forces in other areas of the world, including the Pacific, also will pursue vessels tied to Iran.

The blockade “applies to all ships, regardless of nationality, heading into or from Iranian ports” and includes “dark fleet vessels carrying Iranian oil.” He defines these as “vessels or those illicit or illegal ships evading international regulations, sanctions or insurance requirements.”

Caine says more than 10,000 sailors, marines and airmen using ships, planes and helicopters are working to enforce the blockade.

Any vessel that approaches the blockade is first warned to turn around or be boarded. Warning shots and other escalatory tactics could also be used, Caine says.

Caine says that so far no ships have had to be boarded. “Thirteen ships have made the wise choice of turning around,” he says.

Hegseth: Iran practicing ‘piracy’ in Strait of Hormuz, US ‘maximally postured’ to restart war

Report: Lebanon’s president tells Rubio he won’t speak with Netanyahu

Over 130 Hezbollah weapons found in southern Lebanon school, IDF says

Lebanon road linking Beirut to Damascus reported closed following Israeli strike

Turkey urges ‘constructive’ US-Iran talks to end war

MORE...

Global Tensions Surge as War Becomes a Permanent Engine of Profit Power and Control in 2026

Global Tensions Surge as War Becomes a Permanent Engine of Profit Power and Control in 2026

Milan Adams

In early 2026, the tone of global reporting has shifted in a way that is difficult to ignore, even for those who have long followed geopolitical developments with a critical eye. What once appeared as isolated conflicts, regional escalations, or temporary crises has gradually converged into something far more continuous and structurally embedded. The language used by officials remains familiar—security, deterrence, stability—but the environment in which those words operate has changed. The world is no longer moving between peace and war in recognizable cycles. Instead, it appears to be settling into a prolonged state where tension is not an interruption, but a constant variable shaping economic, political, and social systems simultaneously.

Recent data emerging throughout the first quarter of 2026 indicates that global military expenditure has not only maintained its upward trajectory but has accelerated in response to overlapping crises across multiple regions. Defense budgets in major economies have expanded again this year, often with broad bipartisan or cross-party support, framed as necessary responses to an increasingly unpredictable international landscape. However, what stands out is not simply the scale of this spending, but its permanence. Unlike previous decades, where military surges were often followed by periods of contraction, current projections suggest sustained high-level investment extending well into the next decade, with long-term procurement programs already locked into place.

This continuity has had a direct and measurable impact on the private sector. Defense contractors have reported record backlogs in 2026, with production schedules extending years into the future. Rather than reacting to immediate demand, these companies are now operating within a framework of anticipated, ongoing need. Manufacturing capacity is being expanded not as a precaution, but as a strategic alignment with what industry leaders describe as a “new baseline” for global security requirements. The implications of such a shift are significant, as it suggests that instability is no longer viewed as a temporary disruption, but as an enduring condition around which business models can be reliably constructed.

Financial institutions have also adapted to this environment with notable efficiency. The scale of funding required to sustain prolonged geopolitical tension is immense, and the mechanisms facilitating this flow of capital have become increasingly sophisticated. Governments continue to rely on a combination of direct spending, borrowing, and complex financial instruments to support defense initiatives, while banks and investment entities play a critical role in structuring and maintaining these systems. The result is a financial architecture that not only absorbs the economic shock of conflict but, in many cases, stabilizes and even benefits from it over time.

At the political level, the alignment with these developments is equally apparent. Leaders across multiple nations have emphasized the necessity of preparedness in the face of evolving threats, often citing intelligence assessments and strategic forecasts that point to a prolonged period of global uncertainty. Legislative bodies have responded by approving funding packages with increasing frequency and scale, frequently under expedited procedures that reflect the urgency conveyed by executive authorities. While debate still occurs, it is often limited in scope, constrained by a broader consensus that prioritizes immediate security concerns over long-term fiscal or structural considerations.

More....

Drought, Diesel, And Fertilizer - Global Food Shock Could Be Coming

Drought, Diesel, And Fertilizer - Global Food Shock Could Be Coming

 PNW STAFF

It's not one crisis--it's two, colliding at the worst possible moment. Across the United States and much of the world, farmers are being squeezed by a brutal combination of worsening drought conditions and surging input costs--especially diesel fuel and nitrogen fertilizer. On their own, either challenge would strain the global food system. Together, they form a "double whammy" that could ripple through grocery stores, economies, and households within months.

And the timing couldn't be worse.

Spring planting season is the most critical window of the year for farmers. It's when decisions are made that determine how much food will be available not just this fall--but well into 2027. But this year, many farmers are being forced to make impossible choices.

In parts of the American Midwest and Plains, persistent dryness has already weakened soil conditions. Crops like corn, soybeans, and wheat depend heavily on early moisture to establish strong roots. Without it, yields decline--even before fertilizer or fuel costs are factored in.

But those costs are now front and center.

Following escalating tensions in the Middle East and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz--a chokepoint for global energy and fertilizer shipments--diesel prices have surged, and fertilizer supplies have tightened dramatically. For farmers like Andy Corriher in North Carolina, nitrogen fertilizer prices have jumped as much as 40 percent, with some key inputs like urea rising even higher at major U.S. ports.

This isn't just a budgeting problem. It's a production problem.

Nitrogen fertilizer is essential for modern agriculture. It is, quite literally, one of the pillars that sustains a global population of 8 billion people. When farmers cut back on fertilizer--as many now are--crop yields almost always fall. Corriher has already reduced his fertilizer use by a third. Others are applying only the "bare minimum," hoping to stretch limited supplies.

At the same time, diesel fuel--the lifeblood of farm equipment and transportation--is becoming more expensive and less certain. Tractors don't run without it. Neither do irrigation systems, harvesters, or the trucks that carry food to market.

The result? A slow-motion squeeze on food production.

Domestically, the U.S. agricultural sector has already been under pressure. Net farm income has been declining for years, while costs continue to rise. Now, with this sudden shock, many farmers are operating on razor-thin margins--or worse. Some are questioning whether they can afford to plant at all.

But the crisis doesn't stop at America's borders.

Half a world away, in Australia, the situation is even more precarious. The country is facing a potential fuel emergency that could bring both transportation and agriculture to a standstill. With only about 38 days of petrol, 31 days of diesel, and 28 days of jet fuel in reserve, officials are warning that rationing may soon be unavoidable if supply lines are not restored.

For a nation that is the world's fifth-largest producer of wheat and second-largest exporter of barley, the implications are enormous.

If Australian farmers cannot access the diesel needed to plant and harvest crops, global grain supplies could take a significant hit. Wheat and barley are staple commodities, feeding millions directly and indirectly through livestock production. A disruption in Australia doesn't stay in Australia--it reverberates through global markets.

And Australia is not alone.

Across Europe, parts of Asia, and Africa, fertilizer shortages linked to disrupted exports from the Middle East are already being felt. In previous years, countries like China restricted fertilizer exports to protect domestic supplies. Now, with geopolitical tensions cutting off key shipping routes, the problem is even more acute--and far less predictable.

The Strait of Hormuz is one of the most critical arteries in the global supply chain. A prolonged closure doesn't just impact oil prices--it chokes off the flow of essential agricultural inputs to farmers around the world.

More....

Pope Leo's Mosque Visit And Doctrinal Confusion

Pope Leo's Mosque Visit Raises Serious Concerns Over Doctrinal Confusion

PNW STAFF

Pope Leo XIV's recent visit to the Mosque of Algiers--where he removed his shoes, stood in silent reflection before the mihrab, and expressed gratitude for being in "a place that represents the space proper to God"--is not a harmless gesture of goodwill. It is a deeply consequential moment that raises serious questions about how the highest office in the Catholic Church is choosing to represent Christian truth in the public square.

Because this is not simply about respect. No one is arguing against basic courtesy toward Muslims or any other religious group. Christians are called to love their neighbors and treat sacred spaces with dignity. But what happened in Algiers went beyond respect and entered the realm of symbolic participation--actions that inevitably communicate theological agreement where none exists.

Standing in silent reflection in a mosque, directly before the mihrab--the directional focal point of Islamic worship--is not a neutral act. It is not the same as visiting a historical site or engaging in dialogue in a conference room. It is entering a space defined by a specific act of worship to God as understood in Islamic theology, and participating in its atmosphere of devotion without any accompanying doctrinal clarification.

When the Pope then describes the mosque as "a space proper to God," the problem intensifies. Proper to which understanding of God? Christianity and Islam do not simply differ in language; they differ in the most foundational claims about who God is, how He is known, and how He has revealed Himself. To speak in generic terms of shared divine space is not bridge-building--it is theological flattening.

This is not an isolated misstep. It sits within a wider pattern of interfaith language emerging from the Vatican over recent years, particularly under Pope Francis, that has repeatedly blurred distinctions between Christianity and other religions in ways that have caused legitimate concern among clergy and theologians.

Pope Francis famously stated that "every religion is a way to arrive at God," and described religions as "different languages" pointing toward the same divine reality. He also declared that "God is God for all," and placed Sikh, Hindu, Muslim, and Christian traditions within a shared framework of spiritual pathways.

Those are not minor semantic choices. They represent a shift in tone that directly challenges the historic Christian claim that salvation is found uniquely in Jesus Christ. When the Pope speaks in this way, confusion is not just possible--it is inevitable.

This is precisely why the Algiers visit matters. It is not an isolated gesture of kindness. It is part of a trajectory in which symbolic actions and ambiguous language increasingly replace doctrinal clarity.

More...

Netanyahu: Israel ‘prepared’ for possible resumption of Iran war, fighting Hezbollah ‘in parallel’ with Lebanon talks

Netanyahu: Israel ‘prepared’ for possible resumption of Iran war, fighting Hezbollah ‘in parallel’ with Lebanon talks

Nava Freiberg

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says Israel is prepared for the possibility that fighting with Iran could resume, as it continues operations against Hezbollah alongside newly launched talks with Lebanon.

“Our American allies are keeping us constantly updated on their contacts with Iran,” Netanyahu says in a video message, released amid continued American efforts to reach a deal with Tehran and reported US pressure for Israel to agree to a ceasefire with Hezbollah.

“Our objectives with the United States are aligned,” Netanyahu continues. “We want to see Iran’s enriched material removed, and we want to see the elimination of its enrichment capability inside Iran. And of course, we want to see the reopening of [key shipping] straits,” he says.

“It is too early to say how this will end, or even how it will progress. In light of the possibility that the war may resume, we are prepared for any scenario,” the premier says.

“In parallel” to fighting Hezbollah, “we are conducting negotiations with Lebanon, talks that…are happening now because we are very strong, and countries are approaching us – not just Lebanon,” Netanyahu says.

“In these negotiations, there are two main goals: first, to push Hezbollah away; and second, to achieve a sustainable peace – a peace through strength,” he adds.

“Our forces continue to strike Hezbollah,” Netanyahu says, saying the fighting is currently focused on dismantling a “major Hezbollah stronghold” in Bint Jbeil, and that he instructed the IDF yesterday “to continue reinforcing the security zone and to extend it eastward, toward the slopes of Mount Hermon,” in support of the Druze population there.