united states

Saudi civil aviation authorities say Houthi attacks on Abha and King Khalid International airports have killed three civilians, including two women, and injured 36 others.

A Gallup survey highlights a deep – and historic – partisan divide over confidence in the country’s elections.

With less than a month to go before the United States’ pivotal midterms, a new survey found that most independent voters and supporters of President Donald Trump’s Republican Party do not believe the elections will be honest.

Polling from Gallup, released on Wednesday, found 37 percent of Republicans and 35 percent of independents have confidence in the country’s electoral system, significantly lower than US Democrats (63 percent).

Overall, 49 percent of Americans said they were confident in the honesty of elections, while 51 percent said they were not. Those figures are unchanged from the country’s last midterm election in 2022.

This “marks a change from 2025, the first year of Trump’s second term, when confidence was nominally higher among approvers (51 percent) than disapprovers (45 percent)”, Gallup wrote in a statement highlighting the results of the survey.

The numbers highlight a deep, historic partisan divide over confidence in US elections.

“Since 2025 and Trump’s return to the White House, the relationship between leadership approval and confidence in elections has disappeared,” Gallup wrote.

Gallup said that the US is the only country out of more than 100 polled annually over the past 15 years to show this pattern – trust in US election integrity is markedly higher among those who disapprove of the country’s leadership under Trump (52 percent) than those who approve (41 percent).

In more than 100 countries where the polling organisation tracks views of national leadership and confidence in elections, people who approve of their governments have generally been more likely to trust their country’s elections.

In 2025, 70 percent of people globally who approved of their national leadership expressed confidence in the honesty of their elections, compared with 30 percent among those who disapproved.

“The current US pattern is highly unusual compared with the rest of the world,” Gallup wrote.

Under former US President Joe Biden, 81 percent of Americans who approved of the government expressed confidence in elections, compared with just 30 percent of those who disapproved, according to Gallup.

Gallup said the unusual divide could have implications for the November elections, raising questions about whether some voters will view the results as legitimate.

The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

Rising borrowing costs have pushed mortgage applications to lowest level since February 2025.

Mortgage rates in the United States have hit their highest level in nearly three years, as cost-of-living concerns weigh on Americans less than a month before the midterm elections.

The average cost for a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage jumped 19 basis points to 7.49 percent for the week ending October 2 , according to the Mortgage Bankers Association’s weekly report released on Wednesday.

Meanwhile, applications for mortgages tumbled 4.2 percent from the previous week, according to the report. Applications are at their lowest level since February 2025 and have fallen by almost half since the beginning of the year.

“Very few homeowners have an incentive to refinance at these rates, and the jump in borrowing costs has caused many potential borrowers to step back from the purchase market,” Joel Kan, vice president and deputy chief economist at the Mortgage Bankers Association, said in a press release.

Mortgage rates are closely tied to US 10-year Treasury notes. Earlier this week, those hit a 24-year high of 5.3 percent amid surging oil prices tied to ongoing tensions with Iran.

Meanwhile, the yield on 30-year Treasury bonds rose to its highest level since 2002, at 5.7 percent on Wednesday.

Mortgage rates have jumped since late February, when the US and Israel first struck Iran. Since the strikes, mortgage rates have climbed 1.4 percent. Inflation, which has risen by 3.4 percent from a year ago, is also putting pressure on mortgage rates.

It comes as the cost of living is top of mind for voters as they approach the congressional midterm elections that could decide the balance of power in Washington, DC. According to a Reuters/Ipsos poll in late August, 47 percent of voters said that the cost of living was the single most important issue ahead of the midterms.

In a separate Reuters/Ipsos poll in September, 17 percent of voters said they approved of US President Donald Trump’s handling of cost of living-related issues.

European football leaders meet on Wednesday with the aim of shaping strategy to oust Gianni Infantino as FIFA president.

European football leaders were gathering Wednesday with time pressing to find a candidate and shape their strategy for trying to oust Gianni Infantino as president of FIFA.

UEFA has called its 55 member federations to a previously scheduled summit on Thursday in Berlin that arrives in the midst of European efforts to get a new leader for football’s world body.

Infantino’s divisive World Cup private investment plan – that failed within days of being revealed in July – pushed UEFA to act on longstanding mistrust of its former employee’s increasingly executive presidency at FIFA.

UEFA’s longer-term plans include preparing a criminal complaint against Infantino in Switzerland for possible financial mismanagement in the World Cup sell-off deal. It has asked courts in the United States to authorise discovery of evidence.

“Somewhere along the way things went too far with FIFA, and we’re looking to put things back where they belong,” UEFA general-secretary Theodore Theodoridis said last month.

Europe’s 55 count for more than a quarter of FIFA’s 211 member federations that can vote in the election on March 18 in Rabat, Morocco. Research by The Associated Press news agency suggests Infantino already has about 90 votes pledged – albeit before any potential opponent is known.

Still, UEFA is not a united bloc. Infantino has support promised from Azerbaijan, the home country of a close aide, and Latvia. On Wednesday he met with football and government officials in the Czech capital Prague.

First, UEFA and its allies worldwide need to agree on at least one candidate to challenge Infantino by the November 18 deadline to enter the race.

UEFA President Aleksander Ceferin was joined in August by his fellow FIFA vice presidents from Asia and North America in denouncing Infantino for deception and breach of trust over the World Cup sell-off plan.

Still, neither Ceferin nor his counterparts at the AFC and CONCACAF, Sheikh Salman bin Ebrahim Al Khalifa of Bahrain and Victor Montagliani of Canada, currently look set to be on the FIFA ballot.

Ceferin has long dismissed any talk of himself running to lead FIFA, though he said last month at UEFA meetings in Greece there were “many, many” potential candidates.

Montagliani is expected to focus on his own re-election at CONCACAF in February.

Sheikh Salman has been Infantino’s FIFA election opponent before. He had been favourite in a five-man campaign that Infantino eventually won in February 2016.

Speculation has often pointed to Paris Saint-Germain president Nasser Al-Khelaifi, a close ally of Ceferin. The Qatari member of UEFA’s executive committee ruled himself out last week at a meeting of the influential European Football Clubs group he leads.

Infantino is part of UEFA’s focus in Berlin for the biennial business meeting of top executives from its member federations, which can debate policy, strategy and international football competitions.

The meeting is expected to discuss proposals for a more transparent FIFA and a presidential candidate willing to commit to those reforms.

Paramount Skydance has completed its takeover of Warner Bros Discovery, bringing CNN and CBS News under the same corporate ownership, in a deal that has raised concerns about editorial independence and freedom of speech.

The acquisition, worth about $110bn including debt, combines two of Hollywood’s biggest studios after months of legal challenges lodged by state attorneys general and unions.

The new company, Skydance Corporation, brings together HBO, CBS, Nickelodeon, Showtime, Comedy Central, DC Studios and Food Network, alongside streaming services Paramount plus and HBO Max.

But its control of two major US news organisations has drawn particular scrutiny. David Ellison, Skydance’s chairman and chief executive, has promised to preserve their editorial independence, but his father, Oracle cofounder Larry Ellison is a major financial backer of the deal, and has previously donated funds to US President Donald Trump and Israel.

Asked about the takeover on Tuesday, Trump welcomed it. “They’re terrific people, and it’s going to be a great company,” he said.

Why was the merger challenged?

The takeover faced initial opposition from Hollywood workers, politicians and state prosecutors concerned about the mounting concentration of power in an industry already dominated by a handful of companies.

Netflix initially reached an agreement to buy part of Warner Bros Discovery. Paramount then launched a competing bid, prompting a bidding war before Netflix walked away.

A California-led coalition of 12 state attorneys general sued to block the deal, saying that it would reduce competition and raise prices. The Writers Guild of America brought a separate challenge.

Both cases were settled in September when Paramount agreed to commitments relating to film production, support for displaced workers and protections for the news networks, including the creation of a new editorial independence board.

But the settlement did not end opposition to the deal. “This merger will stifle creativity, weaken free speech and cost people their jobs,” actor and activist Mark Ruffalo has said.

Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren linked the takeover to Trump’s efforts to restrict media access. “As Trump tries to ban CNN from the White House, it would be a massive mistake to cave on the Paramount merger,” she said, referring to the US president’s so-far thwarted attempt last month to bar reporters from several news organisations, including CNN, from accessing the White House.

Can an editorial independence board protect CNN and CBS?

One condition of the settlement requires Skydance to establish a “News Editorial Independence Board” within 180 days of completing the takeover.

The five-member body is to include active or retired journalists with at least 10 years of experience. It is intended to establish editorial principles and address disputes involving the news networks and corporate management.

However, its members will be appointed by, and will report to, Skydance’s board of directors, which Ellison chairs. Two members can belong to the same political party, and there is no requirement to publish its findings.

The condition has left critics with a multitude of questions, including: How can a member of an independent editorial board be a member of a political party? How can there be scrutiny if its findings are not public? How can it be independent if it is appointed by a board of directors, themselves appointed by the CEO of the company?

Seth Stern, chief of advocacy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation, said, “A Paramount-appointed editorial independence board for CNN and CBS is worthless. The fish rots from the head, and this particular fish is headed by a compromised oligarch with a history of throwing journalists under the bus to advance his business interests.”

Stern also questioned whether government enforcement of the settlement could itself threaten press freedom. “The editorial board creates the same First Amendment problems it’s supposed to solve – the government meddling in the news.”

The First Amendment provides constitutional protection for freedom of speech and the press.

Ellison argues that the two networks will continue to operate independently. “We’re going to make sure that CNN and CBS News are completely editorially independent,” he said on Tuesday.

On Monday, Skydance announced that Mark Thompson would remain CNN’s chairman and editor-in-chief, while Bari Weiss will continue as CBS News’s editor-in-chief, easing previous fears that Weiss would immediately take charge of both networks.

Why are there fears for editorial independence?

The takeover gives the Ellison family control of CNN less than a month before the November 3 US midterm elections, and follows Trump’s repeated attacks on the network as it seeks to hold the US president to account.

Shortly after Paramount launched its bid in December, Trump accused CNN of spreading “poison and lies” and said it was “imperative” that it be sold, while the Trump administration has moved to bar CNN from reporting in certain areas of the White House.

Ellison donated roughly $45m to a political nonprofit group supporting Trump’s election efforts in 2024, while he donated $16.6m to Friends of the Israel Defense Forces, a charity supporting Israeli soldiers – its largest single donation at the time.

Earlier this year, the White House criticised CNN’s coverage of the US-Israeli war on Iran, while Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth told reporters that “the sooner David Ellison takes over that network, the better.”

Sovereign wealth funds from Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates also hold indirect financial interests in the combined company. They have no voting stakes, although their involvement adds another layer of scrutiny over its funding.

Concerns about the future for editorial integrity, however, intensified after Skydance acquired Paramount in 2025, and layoffs followed, alongside the closure of CBS News Radio and changes to CBS News flagship investigative programme 60 Minutes.

High-profile firings enacted under CBS News Editor-in-Chief Bari Weiss and Skydance Media CEO David Ellison included correspondents Sharyn Alfonsi and Cecilia Vega, as well as 60 Minutes executive producer Tanya Simon.

The programme’s September season premiere attracted about 21 percent fewer viewers than a year earlier.

In 2025, Paramount also agreed to pay Trump $16m to settle a lawsuit over the editing of a 60 Minutes interview with then-presidential candidate Kamala Harris.

In a June 2 letter, nine advocacy groups, including Reporters Without Borders, the Freedom of the Press Foundation and the Committee for the First Amendment, warned that CNN could face similar upheaval and firings.

“Bari Weiss’ shameless actions fulfil the Ellisons’ commitment to President Trump to remake CBS to his liking,” they alleged, referring to the firings and changes at 60 Minutes.

“Larry Ellison has reportedly promised to do the same at CNN if allowed to take control through the pending Paramount-Warner Bros. Discovery merger. Not because it makes any business sense, but because they seek to control the public discourse.”

The groups described the proposed takeover as an “existential threat to the free press, independent media, and free speech in this country and beyond”.

The best big city in the US has been crowned for the tenth consecutive year – and it’s not where you might think

The finest major city in the US has been crowned for the tenth year in a row – and it might surprise you. When considering American cities, New York typically comes to mind first.

However, according to a Condé Nast Traveler’s survey of over 800,000 respondents, Chicago takes the top spot. It’s the first and only city to claim the accolade for 10 consecutive years, initially securing the honour in 2017.

Since then, the city has experienced a decade of evolution that has seen it triumph time and time again.

Kristen Reynolds, President and CEO of Choose Chicago said: “This historic recognition belongs to the entire city of Chicago.

“From the hospitality professionals who welcome guests each day to the chefs, artists, musicians, entrepreneurs, and cultural leaders who create remarkable, only-in-Chicago experiences, it takes an entire city to sustain this standard for a decade.

“We do not stay at the top by standing still. Chicago is always evolving, always creating, and always giving visitors new reasons to come back”.

According to Condé Nast Traveler it’s “no wonder” the city has triumphed once more.

The article reads: “A world-class destination known for its impressive architecture, first-rate museums, brilliant chefs, and massive brewing scene, it’ll take several repeat visits to get through your list of must-dos.”

Mayor Brandon Johnson added: “This historic recognition reflects the creativity of our residents, the strength of our neighborhoods, and the excellence of the local institutions and businesses that welcome visitors from around the world.

For 10 consecutive years, travellers have recognised what Chicagoans already know: there is no place quite like our city.

“This remarkable milestone is a testament to everything Chicago has to offer and one our entire city can celebrate with pride.”

While Chicago claimed the top spot, New York failed to even crack the top three.

The Big Apple landed in fourth place, trailing behind Boston in third and San Francisco in second.

The United States stock market has hit an all-time high as excitement around artificial intelligence continues to fuel a buying frenzy on Wall Street.

The S&P 500, the benchmark stock index, closed 0.58 percent higher on Tuesday, topping the previous peak reached in mid-August.

The Nasdaq Composite, which is more heavily weighted towards tech stocks, also hit a record high, finishing up 0.45 percent.

Tech stocks were among the top performers, with each of the “Magnificent Seven” apart from Meta closing higher.

Amazon led the pack with a 1.95 percent gain, followed by Microsoft and Tesla, which rose 0.78 percent and 0.51 percent, respectively.

Apple and Alphabet both rose 0.22 percent, while Nvidia gained 0.14 percent.

Meta, which has risen more than 20 percent since the launch last month of its new AI assistant, Muse, fell 0.41 percent.

Other big movers in tech included Marvell Technology, which rose 5.81 percent, and Cisco, which gained 4.54 percent.

Technology, AI

Keith Lerner, chief investment officer and chief market strategist at Truist Advisory Services in Atlanta, Georgia, said the market rally should be seen as a “technology and AI surge”.

“Every bull market has a dominant theme, and technology and AI remain this market’s dominant theme,” Lerner told Al Jazeera.

“Technology and communication services were the only two S&P 500 sectors to rise last month, while the other nine declined.”

Wall Street has shrugged off a host of challenges facing the US economy amid hyperscalers’ multibillion-dollar investments in AI.

Despite the energy crunch caused by the US-Israeli war on Iran and a sell-off of US government bonds partly driven by ballooning government debt, the market is well on track to record its fourth consecutive year of double-digit returns.

The S&P 500 has risen 14 percent so far in 2026, while the Nasdaq Composite is up 18.78 percent.

Lerner at Truist Advisory said the market rally had the potential to continue through the end of 2026 given historical trends and expectations for strong corporate earnings.

“We do not expect a straight line higher for markets,” Lerner said.

“Still, the fourth quarter of midterm-election years has produced an average gain of 7 percent and has been positive 84 percent of the time since 1950.”

Lerner said that rising interest rates posed the biggest risk to the upward trend.

“Still, on balance, the weight of the evidence suggests this bull market still has more upside potential,” he said.

Asian stock markets fell on Wednesday, with key indexes in Japan, South Korea and Hong Kong slumping in morning trading.

The Nikkei 225 in Tokyo, Kospi in Seoul and Hang Seng Index in Hong Kong were down 0.79 percent, 1.36 percent and 0.71 percent, respectively, as of 02:30 GMT.

Oil prices, which have been elevated since the start of the war on Iran, rose on Wednesday as traders weighed the fallout of fighting between forces aligned with Yemen’s internationally recognised government and the Iran-aligned Houthis.

Brent crude futures for December delivery stood at $101.45 a barrel as of 02:30 GMT, up 0.87 percent.

Members of the Republican Party have joined Democrats in questioning remarks made by United States President Donald Trump about the California cities of Los Angeles and San Diego.

Much of the backlash came on Tuesday, a day after Trump told a midterm rally in Nebraska that Americans should be willing to make sacrifices to gain victory in the US-Israeli war against Iran.

Those sacrifices, he implied, could include the destruction of American cities, in case of an Iranian attack.

“It’s a small price to pay for keeping the world safe, keeping our country safe,” Trump said, seemingly in reference to the knock-on effects of the war, including rising fuel and fertiliser prices.

“They can take out a city. Let them take out Los Angeles. Let them take out San Diego. This is a very small price to pay, and it’s going to be over with very soon.”

Trump has downplayed the impact of the war – now in its eighth month – despite polling that shows the conflict is widely unpopular in the US. He has also repeatedly promised the war would end soon, though no lasting ceasefire has been reached so far.

The fallout from his Nebraska remarks was swift. Gavin Newsom, an outspoken critic of Trump and the Democratic governor of California, said the president was “deranged”.

“This is not only madness. This is dangerous,” Newsom said in a video on the social media platform X, in which he called for Congress to rein in Trump’s behaviour.

Newsom, a possible contender in the 2028 presidential race, has clashed repeatedly with Trump.

Last year, the two faced off over Trump’s decision to deploy federal troops to California, as part of an effort to support a crackdown on undocumented immigration in the Los Angeles area.

In December, a federal judge ruled that the deployment had been illegal and ordered its end. Newsom, who opposed the deployment, cited that conflict in his remarks about Trump’s Nebraska rally.

“The president of the United States – the same one who sent in the National Guard into Los Angeles, sent 700 active duty Marines to the second largest city in the United States of America – just invited Iran to take out Los Angeles and San Diego,” Newsom said.

He added that Trump’s remarks should convince those who “didn’t think the November election mattered” to vote in the upcoming midterms.

Some from Trump’s own party have also expressed shock at his remarks.

Jim Desmond, a Republican running in a competitive race for the House of Representatives near San Diego, was among those who distanced themselves from Trump’s statement.

“I vehemently disagree with President Trump’s comments. America must stand up to Iran and defend our interests, but the first responsibility of our Commander in Chief is to protect the American people and our homeland,” Desmond wrote on X.

“No American city is expendable, and no American family should ever be treated as collateral damage.”

US Representative Kevin Kiley, an independent who caucuses with Republicans and is running for re-election in northern California, also called Trump’s comments “unhelpful”.

But the White House has dismissed criticism of the remarks, calling it part of a “media freakout” that “is not rooted in reality”.

“He was clearly stating U.S. cities would have been threatened if a nuclear Iran hadn’t been stopped,” White House Director of Communications Steven Cheung wrote on social media.

“America is safer because of the President. Iran has no nuclear, no navy, no air force, and no money.”

California has the largest population and economy of any state in the US. Because of its population, it also has the most seats in the House of Representatives, at 52.

All 435 seats in the House of Representatives are up for grabs in November’s midterms, along with a third of the Senate. Also on the ballot are key state and local races.

With Republicans’ control of Congress on the line, the results of the midterms are expected to weigh heavily on the final two years of Trump’s second term.

Houthi military spokesperson Yahya Saree says the group has thwarted attempts by Yemeni government forces to advance toward the Bab al-Mandeb Strait.

Letter from progressive US representatives brings attention to Israeli abuse and detention of Palestinian medical workers.

A group of six progressive Congress members in the United States have released a statement condemning Israel’s abuse of Palestinian healthcare workers, including the Gaza doctor Hussam Abu Safia, who has been held in Israeli detention since 2024.

The Tuesday statement draws attention to Israeli attacks on Palestinian medical workers, who have been targeted and detained during the country’s genocidal war on Gaza.

It was signed by Representatives Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, Jesus “Chuy” Garcia, Summer Lee, Pramila Jayapal and Delia Ramirez.

“Over the last three years, the Israeli government has systematically destroyed the health system in Palestine, murdering at least 1,700 Palestinian doctors, nurses, paramedics, and other healthcare workers and destroying dozens of hospitals,” the statement reads.

“It has arrested and arbitrarily detained hundreds of Palestinian healthcare workers, including at least 16 physicians who continue to be held in inhumane conditions.”

Among those detained is Abu Safia, who lawyers say was subjected to abuses such as torture, sleep deprivation and beatings during his detention.

Israeli soldiers arrested Abu Safia in December 2024, after he and other medical workers reportedly refused to evacuate from Kamal Adwan Hospital, where they worked.

No charges have been filed against Abu Safia, and he has not had a trial.

Israeli attacks on health infrastructure in Gaza, including the destruction of nearly all of the strip’s hospitals and medical centres, are one component of what rights groups have depicted as an effort to deprive Palestinians of essential services such as food, water and medical treatment.

Tuesday’s statement argues that such efforts are part of an “intentional policy designed to further occupation, apartheid, and genocide against the Palestinian people”.

That assessment is shared by a growing number of rights organisations, scholars and United Nations officials, who have denounced Israeli actions in the Palestinian strip.

Israeli officials have stated that they target hospitals and medical facilities as part of an effort to attack the Palestinian armed groups that allegedly use such facilities to carry out and coordinate operations.

Such claims have often failed to withstand scrutiny. Israel admitted that its soldiers killed a group of 15 emergency workers in southern Gaza in March 2025, after initially stating that the ambulance convoy had approached soldiers “suspiciously” and claiming, without evidence, that several of those killed were linked to Hamas.

A report by the group Forensic Architecture and Earshot found that Israeli soldiers fired more than 900 bullets as they opened fire on a clearly marked ambulance convoy and killed some of the medics “execution-style” before burying their bodies and their vehicles.

Donald Trump still decides who gets to call themselves MAGA – but what happens when that power has to pass to someone else?

Josh Rushing is joined by Rina Shah, a Republican strategist and one of the original Never Trumpers, and Emma Doyle, former deputy chief of staff in Trump’s first administration, to ask whether MAGA can outgrow its frontman, or whether, as both guests agree, MAGA simply is Donald Trump.

Contributors:
Rina Shah – Republican strategist and political commentator
Emma Doyle – Former White House deputy chief of staff

Over the course of Sunday, a dozen B-1B bombers took off from Royal Air Force (RAF) Fairford in western England and flew home to the United States. Their departure abruptly ended the base’s role as a launchpad for US strikes on Iran, which began on February 28.

The base, roughly 160km (100 miles) west of London, is the US Air Force’s only European airfield for heavy bombers and a key forward operating location for deployed bombers.

Over the past two weeks, six people were arrested on suspicion of “terrorism”. They were all released on bail.

US President Donald Trump said on Monday the bombers were moved because “there were some threats”, which he believed were linked to Iran. “So we moved them around a little bit, not very far,” he told reporters at the White House.

Hours earlier, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio played down any link to the alleged plot, saying it was “not unusual to see rotations happen” and that he had confidence in the security of US bases.

What happened at RAF Fairford?

On September 27, police arrested five men on suspicion of plotting to plant explosives near Fairford in the United Kingdom. They were released on bail a day later.

Investigators found petrol but no explosive devices in their vans, though UK officials say the men remain under investigation. On Thursday, police arrested a 25-year-old UK-Iranian dual national in London on suspicion of plotting an attack on the airbase. He was also released on bail on October 3.

UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham suggested that “Iran played a part” in the alleged plot but declined to give details. Iran has denied any such scheme and summoned the UK ambassador in Tehran in protest at the arrests.

What bombers does the US have?

The US Air Force flies three types of bombers, with a fourth on the way.

The B-52 Stratofortress is the oldest. The B-52H model currently in service was built in the early 1960s. With a wingspan of 56 metres (185 feet), it is the largest US bomber and can carry about 31 tonnes of weapons, including nuclear bombs and cruise missiles.

The B-1B Lancer, which entered service in the mid-1980s, is the fastest of the three. It can reach 1.2 times the speed of sound and has a swing-wing that sweeps back for high-speed flight. It carries the largest conventional payload, about 34 tonnes, but no longer carries nuclear weapons. These were the aircraft that left Fairford.

The B-2 Spirit is a flying-wing stealth bomber designed to slip past air defences. Only 20 were built, of which 19 remain in service. It can carry both nuclear and conventional weapons, including the 13,600kg (30,000lb) “bunker buster” bomb used in US strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites in June 2025.

The B-21 Raider, a smaller stealth bomber, is still in flight testing, and it remains on track for delivery in 2027. Over the next decade and a half, the air force plans to replace the B-1B and B-2, leaving a future fleet of B-21s and upgraded B-52s.

Where do these bombers fly from?

All US bombers are permanently based in the US, at five main airbases:

• B-52H: Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana and Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota
• B-1B: Dyess Air Force Base in Texas and Ellsworth Air Force Base in South Dakota
• B-2: Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri
• B-21: Due to arrive at Ellsworth in South Dakota in 2027

All of these bases have long, wide runways, typically exceeding 10,000 feet (3,048 metres).

That makes bomber runways about as long as those at a big international airport. What limits where bombers can operate is not tarmac but security, weapons storage and support.

For missions abroad, the US rotates bombers through a handful of forward bases. Other important overseas operating locations include Andersen Air Force Base in Guam and Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean.

Beyond these, the air force sends small groups of bombers to allied airbases for a few weeks at a time, in what it calls Bomber Task Force deployments. Recent rotations have included B-52s at Moron in Spain, B-1Bs at Orland in Norway and Misawa in Japan, and B-52s at Tindal in northern Australia, which arrived in September.

The bombers can also go on a strike mission from the US with the help of aerial refuelling. Bomber missions during the US-Israel war on Iran lasted more than 30 hours there and back. Each group of three bombers needed six to nine tanker aircraft to refuel them along the way.

United States President Donald Trump has approved the death by firing squad of Nidal Malik Hasan, a former army officer convicted of carrying out a 2009 mass shooting at Fort Hood, an army base in Texas.

The move, if it proceeds, will revive executions in the army, which has not carried one out since 1961.

Death sentences, as well as executions in the US military, are rare and require presidential approval.

Under the army’s code of military justice, premeditated murder does carry the death penalty, but the process is often strict and prolonged.

However, the Trump administration has shown more willingness to seek death penalties for serious crimes, including against civilians.

Here’s what we know about the case:

What is the presidential order?

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had initially recommended an execution order for Hasan, and Trump has now approved it, according to an X statement posted by Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell.

Parnell said the time and date of the execution will be set by Army Secretary Adam Telle, who is serving in an acting capacity.

“Judgement day for Hasan has finally come,” he wrote.

What happened at Fort Hood?

On November 5, 2009, the US-born army major, Hasan, a psychiatrist in the force, walked into an army processing centre in Fort Hood, shouted “Allahu Akbar” (God is great) and opened fire on fellow staff members waiting to get medical attention.

Thirteen people were killed, including a pregnant soldier, and 32 others were wounded during 10 minutes of shooting. Analysts have called it the worst shooting at a US military base targeting members of armed forces.

Hasan was shot several times after two officers engaged him and remains paralysed from the waist down.

What happened during the trial?

Hasan was immediately court-martialled, and military prosecutors, from the start, sought the death penalty against him.

However, the process would play out over the course of several years even after his conviction – largely because the US military is averse to capital punishment.

During the trial, Hasan represented himself and admitted to the attacks, saying he was trying to stop deployments to Afghanistan and the killing of his fellow Muslims. He was due to be deployed weeks later.

Investigations revealed Hasan had exchanged emails with Yemeni-American scholar Anwar al-Awlaki, accused of ties to al-Qaeda, before the shooting. He had also repeatedly voiced opposition to the US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to colleagues and the treatment of Muslims in the army.

Hasan made little effort to defend himself, and his assigned lawyers claimed his testimony aided the opposing side.

He was charged and convicted on 13 counts of premeditated murder in 2013, and jurors recommended the maximum sentence of death. Controversially, Hasan was charged with “workplace violence” because the military justice code does not address the crime of “terrorism”.

The judgement was further delayed by appeals mandated by the military, not because Hasan sought them.

In 2020, the US Army Court of Criminal Appeals upheld the death penalty for Hasan, and in 2023, the US Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces did the same. In March 2025, the US Supreme Court denied a mandatory petition for a judicial review.

In September 2025, Hegseth announced he was seeking presidential approval for Hasan’s execution.

At the time, there was no report of Hegseth specifically seeking death by firing squad.

The president holds the ultimate authority to specify the designated method of execution.

Other forms of execution could have been lethal injection or hanging, which the US military has used in the past.

What next?

While Trump’s approval will begin a series of steps towards preparing for the execution, Hasan can still put the process on hold for years with an appeal in the civilian federal court system.

However, that might be unlikely as Hasan made no effort to defend himself during the trial.

He has been remanded to the US Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth in Kansas, where three other men have also been on the military death row for years.

Among them is Hasan Akbar, convicted of two counts of murder after attacking fellow army members on a Kuwait base in 2003, during the invasion of Iraq.

Another is the convicted serial killer and rapist Ronald Gray, who was found guilty of four counts of murder and eight counts of rape in 2008. He was approved for execution in the same year under President George W Bush, but the process was put on hold by a judge.

Timothy Hennis, a former sergeant, was convicted in 2010 of a triple murder and is also on death row.

The last military execution took place in 1961, when former soldier John Bennett was hanged for the rape of an 11-year-old girl.

People are adopting pets over having babies, making the pet care industry grow. But why are people having fewer babies? Al Jazeera’s Yasmeen ElTahan explains.

Move comes after ethics experts criticised three nationally broadcast ads and called for independent investigations.

United States President Donald Trump has said he will stop using taxpayer funds for television advertisements featuring him after widespread criticism of the campaign-style spots.

In a post on his social media site on Monday, Trump defended the advertisements, which cost at least $1.5m in federal funds and were aired ahead of the US November midterm elections.

Trump said he considered the advertisements to be “a positive promotion for our Great U.S.A.”, but that they would no longer be funded by taxpayers but by either him or his MAGA PAC,

MAGA Inc. is Trump’s political war chest and had amassed more than $400m by the end of July.

The announcement came as ethics experts and lawmakers from both ⁠parties have criticised the three nationally broadcast advertisements and called for independent investigations.

The advertisements have run during football games as recently as Sunday and during other programming.

One features Trump declaring that “America will never be a communist country”, ⁠while a chorus repeats the words “love me”. Another combines ⁠images of Mount Rushmore with footage of Trump praising a “golden age of America”.

The advertisements end with a disclaimer saying they were paid for by the US government.

Democratic lawmakers said last month that the White House transferred $20m in Homeland Security Department funds to air ⁠the advertisements, including one that closely resembles a 2024 Trump ⁠campaign ad, and sought independent probes.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta on Monday called ‌for an independent investigation, calling it a “staggering misuse of public funding and breach of public trust” after the calls for a probe.

Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr, a ‌Republican ‌named to his position by Trump, last week said the advertisements were appropriate and rejected a request to investigate them.

The United States Department of Justice has filed 40 new cases seeking to strip naturalised Americans of their citizenship over alleged crimes they have committed.

In a statement on Monday, federal prosecutors said they were targeting individuals accused of “serious offenses”, including money laundering, child sexual abuse, visa fraud and tax evasion.

The statement touted the 40 cases as the largest volume of denaturalisation petitions submitted in such a short period under President Donald Trump. The petitions were filed from late August through early October.

“Today’s announcement marks the largest denaturalization effort in modern history,” said Attorney General Todd Blanche.

“Under President Trump’s leadership, the Department of Justice will continue to employ the denaturalization process to maintain our national security and protect the American people.”

The 40 citizens targeted in Monday’s announcement include people from a range of countries, including Mexico, Pakistan, China and Sierra Leone.

They are accused of concealing criminal acts and other facts about themselves as they sought to obtain citizenship. Their criminal convictions largely came after they took their oaths of citizenship.

Two people on the list are also accused of engaging in espionage on behalf of China. Committing these crimes before they became citizens, the Department of Justice alleges, meant these individuals lacked “good moral character” and should have been denied citizenship.

Expanded use of denaturalisation law

The laws to denaturalise US citizens have been used for decades, but historically, they have been reserved for serious crimes.

After World War II, for instance, the US government moved to denaturalise dozens of citizens accused of concealing involvement in the Holocaust or engaging in war crimes.

Notable cases include that of Emma Goldman, a Lithuanian-born anarchist and women’s rights activist who was jailed in 1917 for her antiwar activities, before being denaturalised and deported to the Soviet Union.

But the practice has become much less frequent since the end of the Cold War.

Top officials in the Trump administration, however, have sought to expand denaturalisation as part of a push to conduct the largest deportation operation in US history.

Under US law, prosecutors can ask courts to strip citizenship from those born outside the country if they wilfully concealed a “material fact” during their citizenship application that would have otherwise disqualified them.

But Trump’s efforts to widen denaturalisation proceedings have received pushback from human rights groups, which argue they could leave people stateless.

Critics have also warned that Trump has sought to leverage denaturalisation against specific groups he perceives to be political rivals or enemies.

Last year, for instance, the Trump administration indicated it would seek to denaturalise large numbers of Somali Americans after allegations emerged in Minnesota of daycare fraud involving the Somali diaspora.

“Send them back from where they came, Somalia, perhaps the worst, and most corrupt, country on earth,” Trump wrote at the time.

Members of Trump’s Republican Party, notably Representative Andy Ogles, have also floated the possibility of yanking citizenship from New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who was born in Uganda. Trump himself has falsely suggested Mamdani may be in the country illegally.

At one point, Trump even floated the idea of withdrawing citizenship from tech entrepreneur Elon Musk, a close ally and adviser to his second administration, after the two men had a falling-out in 2025.

Trump has also pushed to do away with birthright citizenship, which is granted to virtually all children born in the US. The few exceptions include the babies of diplomats and foreign military forces.

Birthright citizenship is protected under the US Constitution and cannot be taken away the way naturalised citizenship can.

In June, the US Supreme Court struck down Trump’s efforts to dismantle birthright citizenship, but legal battles continue after the president issued a second executive order also seeking to restrict how birthright citizenship is applied.