Wednesday, October 31, 2018

UGANDA: NTVUganda has added TAKE NOTE: Understanding the Top 100 gala dinner video

TAKE NOTE: Understanding the Top 100 gala dinner

#NTVNews #MorningAtNTV Subscribe to Our Channel For more news visit Follow us on Twitter Like our Facebook page

UGANDA: NTVUganda has added KICK STARTER: South Sudan peace process video

KICK STARTER: South Sudan peace process

#NTVNews #MorningAtNTV Subscribe to Our Channel For more news visit Follow us on Twitter Like our Facebook page

UGANDA: NTVUganda has added SOLUTIONS: Refugee management in Uganda video

SOLUTIONS: Refugee management in Uganda

#NTVNews #MorningAtNTV Subscribe to Our Channel For more news visit Follow us on Twitter Like our Facebook page

UGANDA: NTVUganda has added ON THE GROUND: What can be done to solve the issue of Ghost refugees in Uganda? video

ON THE GROUND: What can be done to solve the issue of Ghost refugees in Uganda?

#NTVNews #MorningAtNTV #GhostRefugees Subscribe to Our Channel For more news visit Follow us on Twitter Like our Facebook page

UGANDA: NTVUganda has added NTV MEN: Promoting Agribusiness among the youth video

NTV MEN: Promoting Agribusiness among the youth

#NTVNews #NTVMen Subscribe to Our Channel For more news visit Follow us on Twitter Like our Facebook page

TRAVEL: United States Numbered Highway System

Design changes of U.S. Highway shield
United States Numbered Highway System
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is about a set of roads typically called U.S. Routes or U.S. Highways. For other numbered highways in the United States, see Numbered highways in the United States.
United States Numbered Highway System

The United States Numbered Highway System (often called U.S. Routes or U.S. Highways) is an integrated network of roadsand highways numbered within a nationwide grid in the contiguous United States. As the designation and numbering of these highways were coordinated among the states, they are sometimes called Federal Highways, but the roadways were built and have always been maintained by state or local governments since their initial designation in 1926.

The route numbers and locations are coordinated by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials(AASHTO).[4] The only federal involvement in AASHTO is a nonvoting seat for the United States Department of Transportation. Generally, north-to-south highways are odd-numbered, with lowest numbers in the east, the area of the founding thirteen states of the United States, and highest in the west. Similarly, east-to-west highways are typically even-numbered, with the lowest numbers in the north, where roads were first improved most intensively, and highest in the south. Major north–south routes have numbers ending in "1" while major east–west routes have numbers ending in "0". Three-digit numbered highways are spur routes of parent highways but are not necessarily connected to their parents. Some divided routes exist to provide two alignments for one route, even though many splits have been eliminated. Special routes, usually posted with a banner, can provide various routes, such as an alternate, bypass or business route, for a U.S. Highway.

Before the U.S. Routes were designated, auto trails designated by auto trail associations were the main means of marking roads through the United States. In 1925, the Joint Board on Interstate Highways, recommended by the American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHO), worked to form a national numbering system to rationalize the roads. After several meetings, a final report was approved by the U.S. Department of Agriculture in November 1925. They received complaints from across the country about the assignment of routes, so the Board made several modifications; the U.S. Highway System was approved in November 1926. As a result of compromises made to get the U.S. Highway System approved, many routes were divided, with alignments to serve different towns. In subsequent years, AASHTO called for such splits in U.S. Routes to be eliminated.

Expansion of the system continued until 1956, when the Interstate Highway System was formed. After construction was completed, many U.S. Routes were replaced by Interstate Highways for through traffic. Despite the Interstate system, U.S. Highways still form many important regional connections, and new routes are still being added.

The U.S. Route shield is printed on a square blank with a black background. California is the only state to use an older cut-out design.

In general, U.S. Routes do not have a minimum design standard, unlike the later Interstate Highways, and are not usually built to freewaystandards. Some stretches of U.S. Routes do meet those standards. Many are designated using the main streets of the cities and towns through which they run. New additions to the system, however, must "substantially meet the current AASHTO design standards".[4] As of 1989, the United States Numbered Highways system has a total length of 157,724 miles (253,832 km).[3]

Except for toll bridges and tunnels, very few U.S. Routes are toll roads. AASHTO policy says that a toll road may only be included as a special route, and that "a toll-free routing between the same termini shall continue to be retained and marked as a part of the U.S. Numbered System."[4] U.S. Route 3 (US 3) meets this obligation; in New Hampshire, it does not follow tolled portions of the Everett Turnpike. But US Routes in the system do use parts of four toll roads:[5]
US 51 uses part of the Jane Addams Memorial Tollway in Illinois; the old road is Illinois Route 251.
US 278 uses the tolled Cross Island Parkway in South Carolina; the old road is US 278 Business.
US 412 uses the Cimarron Turnpike in Oklahoma; the old road is US 64.
US 412 also uses the Cherokee Turnpike in Oklahoma; the old road is Alternate US 412.

The two-digit U.S. Routes follow a simple grid in the contiguous United States, in which odd-numbered routes run generally north to south and even-numbered routes run generally east to west. (US 101 is considered a two-digit route, its "first digit" being 10.) The numbering pattern for U.S. Routes was established first: U.S. Routes proceed from low even numbers in the north to high even numbers in the south, and from low odd numbers in the east to high odd numbers in the west. Numbers ending in 0 or 1 (and US 2[6]), and to a lesser extent in 5, were considered main routes in the early numbering, but extensions and truncations have made this distinction largely meaningless. For example, US 6 was the longest route until 1964 (that distinction now belongs to US 20).[7]

In the 1950s, the numbering grid for the new Interstate Highway System was established as intentionally opposite from the US grid insofar as the direction the route numbers increase. Interstate Highway numbers increase from west-to-east and south-to-north, to keep identically numbered routes geographically apart in order to keep them from being confused with one another,[7] and it omits 50 and 60 which would potentially collide with US 50 and US 60.[c] Both highway systems still number the routes ending in odd numbers north–south and the even-numbered highways run east–west, although the Interstate System labels its main north–south highways with numbers ending in 5, rather than 1.

In the US Highway system, three-digit numbers are assigned to spurs of one or two-digit routes. US 201, for example, splits from US 1 at Brunswick, Maine, and runs north to Canada.[8] Not all spurs travel in the same direction as their "parents"; some are connected to their parents only by other spurs, or not at all, instead only traveling near their parents. As originally assigned, the first digit of the spurs increased from north to south and east to west along the parent; for example, US 60 had spurs, running from east to west, designated as US 160 in Missouri, US 260 in Oklahoma, US 360 in Texas, and US 460 and US 560 in New Mexico.[9] As with the two-digit routes, three-digit routes have been added, removed, extended and shortened; the "parent-child" relationship is not always present. For example, several spurs of the decommissioned US 66 still exist. US 138 exists as a spur of the former US 38 that US 6 supplanted in Nebraska and Colorado in the 1930s. US 191 travels from border to border although its parent, US 91, has been largely replaced by Interstate 15 (I-15).[8][10]

In addition, US 163, designated in 1970, is nowhere near US 63.[8][11] The short US 57, approved c. 1970, connects to Federal Highway 57 in Mexico, and lies west of former US 81.[8]

Several routes approved since 1980 do not follow the numbering pattern:
US 400, approved in 1994, has no "parent" since there is no US 0 or US 100.[8]
US 412, approved c. 1982, is nowhere near US 12.[8]
US 425, approved in 1989, is nowhere near US 25.[8]

While AASHTO guidelines specifically prohibit Interstate Highways and U.S. Routes from sharing a number within the same state[12] (which is why there are no Interstates 50 or 60), the initial Interstate numbering approved in 1958 violated this with I-24 and US 24 in Illinois and I-40, I-80, US 40 and US 80 in California (US 40 and US 80 were removed from California in its 1964 renumbering).[10]

Some recent and proposed Interstates, some of them out of place in the grid, also violate this: I-41 and US 41 in Wisconsin (which run concurrently),[13] I-49 and US 49 in Arkansas,[8][14] I-69 and US 69 in Texas,[8][15] and I-74 and US 74 in North Carolina (which run concurrently).[16]

Some two-digit numbers have never been applied to any U.S. Route, including 39, 47, 86 and 88.
Divided and special routes[edit]
Main articles: List of divided U.S. Routes and List of special routes of the United States Numbered Highway System

Since 1926, some divided routes were designated to serve related areas, and designate roughly-equivalent splits of routes. For instance, US 11 splits into US 11E (east) and US 11W(west) in Bristol, Virginia, and the routes rejoin in Knoxville, Tennessee. Occasionally only one of the two routes is suffixed; US 6N in Pennsylvania does not rejoin US 6 at its west end. AASHTO has been trying to eliminate these since 1934;[17] its current policy is to deny approval of new split routes and to eliminate existing ones "as rapidly as the State Highway Department and the Standing Committee on Highways can reach agreement with reference thereto".[4]

Special routes—those with a banner such as alternate or bypass—are also managed by AASHTO.[4] These are sometimes designated with lettered suffixes, like A for alternate or B for business.[18]

The official route log, last published by AASHTO in 1989, has been named United States Numbered Highways since its initial publication in 1926. Within the route log, "U.S. Route" is used in the table of contents, while "United States Highway" appears as the heading for each route. All reports of the Special Committee on Route Numbering since 1989 use "U.S. Route", and federal laws relating to highways use "United States Route" or "U.S. Route" more often than the "Highway" variants.[19] The use of U.S. Route or U.S. Highway on a local level depends on the state, with some states such as Delaware using "route" and others such as Colorado using "highway".[20][21]
Early auto trails[edit]
Main article: Auto trail

In 1903, Horatio Nelson Jackson became the first documented person to drive an automobile from San Francisco to New York using only a connection of dirt roads, cow paths, and railroad beds. His journey, covered by the press, became a national sensation and called for a system of long distance roads.[22]

In the early 1910s, auto trail organizations—most prominently the Lincoln Highway—began to spring up, marking and promoting routes for the new recreation of long-distance automobile travel. While many of these organizations worked with towns and states along the route to improve the roadways, others simply chose a route based on towns that were willing to pay dues, put up signs, and did little else.[1]
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Report of Joint Board on Interstate Highways October 30, 1925

Wisconsin was the first state in the U.S. to number its highways, erecting signs in May 1918.[1] Other states soon followed. In 1922 the New England states got together to establish the six-state New England Interstate Routes.[23]

Behind the scenes, the federal aid program had begun with the passage of the Federal Aid Road Act of 1916, providing 50% monetary support from the federal government for improvement of major roads. The Federal Aid Highway Act of 1921 limited the routes to 7% of each state's roads, while 3 in every 7 roads had to be "interstate in character". Identification of these main roads was completed in 1923.[1]

The American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHO), formed in 1914 to help establish roadway standards, began to plan a system of marked and numbered "interstate highways" at its 1924 meeting.[24] AASHO recommended that the Secretary of Agriculture work with the states to designate these routes.[1]

Secretary Howard M. Gore appointed the Joint Board on Interstate Highways, as recommended by AASHO, on March 2, 1925. The Board was composed of 21 state highway officials and three federal Bureau of Public Roads officials. At the first meeting, on April 20 and 21, the group chose the name "U.S. Highway" as the designation for the routes. They decided that the system would not be limited to the federal-aid network; if the best route did not receive federal funds, it would still be included. The tentative design for the U.S. Highway shield was also chosen,[25] based on the shield found on the Great Seal of the United States.[1]

The auto trail associations rejected the elimination of the highway names. Six regional meetings were held to hammer out the details—May 15 for the West, May 27 for the Mississippi Valley, June 3 for the Great Lakes, June 8 for the South, June 15 for the North Atlantic, and June 15 for New England. Representatives of the auto trail associations were not able to formally address the meetings. However, as a compromise, they talked with the Joint Board members. The associations finally settled on a general agreement with the numbering plans, as named trails would still be included. The tentative system added up to 81,000 miles (130,000 km), 2.8% of the public road mileage at the time.[1]

1926 and 1948 versions of the U.S. Route shield

The second full meeting was held August 3 and 4, 1925. At that meeting, discussion was held over the appropriate density of routes. William F. Williams of Massachusetts and Frederick S. Greene of New York favored a system of only major transcontinental highways, while many states recommended a large number of roads of only regional importance. Greene in particular intended New York's system to have four major through routes as an example to the other states. Many states agreed in general with the scope of the system, but believed the Midwest to have added too many routes to the system. The group adopted the shield, with few modifications from the original sketch, at that meeting, as well as the decision to number rather than name the routes. A preliminary numbering system, with eight major east–west and ten major north–south routes, was deferred to a numbering committee "without instructions".[1]

After working with states to get their approval, the committee expanded the highway system to 75,800 miles (122,000 km), or 2.6% of total mileage, over 50% more than the plan approved August 4. The skeleton of the numbering plan was suggested on August 27 by Edwin Warley James of the BPR, who matched parityto direction, and laid out a rough grid. Major routes from the earlier map were assigned numbers ending in 0, 1 or 5 (5 was soon relegated to less-major status), and short connections received three-digit numbers based on the main highway from which they spurred. The five-man committee met September 25, and submitted the final report to the Joint Board secretary on October 26.[1] The board sent the report to the Secretary of Agriculture of October 30, and he approved it November 18, 1925.[9]
Disagreement and refinement, 1925–26[edit]

The "final" U.S. Highway plan as approved November 11, 1926

The new system was both praised and criticized by local newspapers, often depending on whether that city was connected to a major route. While the Lincoln Highway Association understood and supported the plan, partly because they were assured of getting the US 30designation as much as possible, most other trail associations lamented their obsolescence. At their January 14–15, 1926 meeting, AASHO was flooded with complaints.[1]

In the Northeast, New York held out for fewer routes designated as US highways. The Pennsylvania representative, who had not attended the local meetings, convinced AASHO to add a dense network of routes, which had the effect of giving six routes termini along the state line. (Only US 220 still ends near the state line, and now it ends at an intersection with future I-86.) Because US 20 seemed indirect, passing through Yellowstone National Park, Idaho and Oregon requested that US 30 be swapped with US 20 to the Pacific coast.[1]

Many local disputes arose related to the committee's choices between designation of two roughly equal parallel routes, which were often competing auto trails. At their January meeting, AASHO approved the first two of many split routes (specifically US 40 between Manhattan, Kansas and Limon, Colorado and US 50between Baldwin City, Kansas and Garden City, Kansas). In effect, each of the two routes received the same number, with a directional suffix indicating its relation to the other. These splits were initially shown in the log as—for instance—US 40 North and US 40 South, but were always posted as simply US 40N and US 40S.[1]

The most heated argument, however, was the issue of US 60. The Joint Board had assigned that number to the Chicago-Los Angeles route, which ran more north–south than west–east in Illinois, and then angled sharply to the southwest to Oklahoma City, from where it ran west to Los Angeles. Kentucky strongly objected to this designated route, as it had been left off any of the major east-west routes, instead receiving the US 62 designation. In January 1926, the committee designated this, along with the part of US 52 east of Ashland, Kentucky, as US 60. They assigned US 62 to the Chicago-Los Angeles route, contingent on the approval of the states along the former US 60. But Missouri and Oklahoma did object—Missouri had already printed maps, and Oklahoma had prepared signs. A compromise was proposed, in which US 60 would split at Springfield, Missouri, into US 60E and US 60N, but both sides objected. The final solution resulted in the assignment of US 66 to the Chicago-Los Angeles portion of the US highway, which did not end in zero, but was still seen as a satisfyingly round number.[1] Route 66 came to have a prominent place in popular culture, being featured in song and films.

With 32 states already marking their routes, the plan was approved by AASHO on November 11, 1926.[1] This plan included a number of directionally split routes, several discontinuous routes (including US 6, US 19 and US 50), and some termini at state lines.[26] By the time the first route log was published in April 1927, major numbering changes had been made in Pennsylvania in order to align the routes to the existing auto trails.[27] In addition, U.S. Route 15 had been extended across Virginia.[28]

Much of the early criticism of the U.S. Highway System focused on the choice of numbers to designate the highways, rather than names. Some thought a numbered highway system to be cold compared to the more colorful names and historic value of the auto trail systems. The New York Times wrote, "The traveler may shed tears as he drives the Lincoln Highway or dream dreams as he speeds over the Jefferson Highway, but how can he get a 'kick' out of 46, 55 or 33 or 21?"[29] (A popular song later promised, "Get your kicks on Route 66!") The writer Ernest McGaffey was quoted as saying, "Logarithms will take the place of legends, and 'hokum' for history."[1]
Expansion and adjustment, 1926–56[edit]

This sign, photographed in 1941 on US 99 between Seattle, Washington, and Portland, Oregon, illustrates one rationale for a federal highway system: national defense.

When the U.S. numbered system was started in 1925, a few optional routings were established which were designated with a suffixed letter after the number indicating "north", "south", "east", or "west". While a few roads in the system are still numbered in this manner, AASHO believes that they should be eliminated wherever possible, by the absorption of one of the optional routes into another route.

In 1934, AASHO tried to eliminate many of the split routes by removing them from the log, and designating one of each pair as a three-digit or alternate route, or in one case US 37. AASHO described its renumbering concept in the October 1934 issue of American Highways:[17]

"Wherever an alternate route is not suitable for its own unique two-digit designation, standard procedure assigns the unqualified number to the older or shorter route, while the other route uses the same number marked by a standard strip above its shield carrying the word 'Alternate'."

Most states adhere to this approach. However, some maintain legacy routes that violate the rules in various ways. Examples can be found in California, Mississippi, Nebraska, Oregon, and Tennessee. In 1952, AASHO permanently recognized the splits in US 11,[17] US 19, US 25, US 31, US 45, US 49, US 73, and US 99.[17]

For the most part, the U.S. Routes were the primary means of inter-city vehicle travel; the main exceptions were toll roads such as the Pennsylvania Turnpike and parkway routes such as the Merritt Parkway. Many of the first high-speed roads were U.S. Highways: the Gulf Freeway carried US 75,[30] the Pasadena Freeway carried US 66,[31] and the Pulaski Skyway carried US 1 and US 9.[32]
Interstate era, 1956–present[edit]

1961 version of the U.S. Route shield

The Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956 appropriated funding for the Interstate Highway System, to construct a vast network of freeways across the country. By 1957, AASHO had decided to assign a new grid to the new routes, to be numbered in the opposite directions as the U.S. Highway grid. Though the Interstate numbers were to supplement, rather than replace, the U.S. Route numbers, in many cases (especially in the west) the US highways were rerouted along the new Interstates.[10] Major decommissioning of former routes began with California's highway renumbering in 1964. The 1985 removal of US 66 is often seen as the end of an era of US highways.[33]

A few major connections not served by Interstate Highways include US 6 from Hartford, Connecticut, to Providence, Rhode Island and US 93 from Phoenix, Arizona to Las Vegas, Nevada. Three state capitals in the contiguous U.S. are served only by U.S. Routes: Dover, Delaware; Jefferson City, Missouri; and Pierre, South Dakota.

In 1995 the National Highway System was defined to include both the Interstate Highway System and other roads designated as important to the nation's economy, defense, and mobility.

AASHTO is in the process of eliminating all intrastate U.S. Highways less than 300 miles (480 km) in length "as rapidly as the State Highway Department and the Standing Committee on Highways of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials can reach agreement with reference thereto". New additions to the system must serve more than one state and "substantially meet the current AASHTO design standards".[4] A version of this policy has been in place since 1937.[34]
The 1925 routes[edit]

The original major transcontinental routes in 1925, along with the auto trails which they roughly replaced, were as follows:[1][9]

US 1, Fort Kent, Maine, to Miami, Florida: Atlantic Highway
US 11, Rouses Point, New York, to New Orleans, Louisiana
US 21, Cleveland, Ohio, to Jacksonville, Florida (where it met US 1)
US 31, Mackinaw City, Michigan, to Mobile, Alabama
US 41, Copper Harbor, Michigan, to Naples, Florida: Dixie Highway
US 51, Hurley, Wisconsin, to New Orleans, Louisiana
US 61, Canadian border north of Grand Marais, Minnesota, to New Orleans, Louisiana
US 71, International Falls, Minnesota, to Baton Rouge, Louisiana (where it met US 61): Jefferson Highway
US 81, Canadian border north of Pembina, North Dakota, to Laredo, Texas: Meridian Highway
US 91, Great Falls, Montana, to south of Las Vegas, Nevada
US 101, Port Angeles, Washington, to San Diego, California: Pacific Highway

US 2, Houlton, Maine, to Bonners Ferry, Idaho
US 10, Detroit, Michigan, to Seattle, Washington: National Parks Highway
US 20, Boston, Massachusetts, to Astoria, Oregon
US 30, Atlantic City, New Jersey, to Salt Lake City, Utah: Lincoln Highway
US 40, Atlantic City, New Jersey, to San Francisco, California: Victory Highway
US 50, Annapolis, Maryland, to Wadsworth, Nevada (where it met US 40)
US 60, Chicago, Illinois, to Los Angeles, California
US 70, Morehead City, North Carolina, to Holbrook, Arizona (where it met US 60)
US 80, Savannah, Georgia, to San Diego, California: Dixie Overland Highway
US 90, Jacksonville, Florida to Van Horn, Texas, (where it met US 80): Old Spanish Trail

US 10, US 60, and US 90 only ran about two thirds of the way across the country, while US 11 and US 60 ran significantly diagonally. US 60's violation of two of the conventions would prove to be one of the major sticking points; US 60 eventually was designated as US 66 in 1926, and later it became popular in the culture. US 101 continues east and then south to end at Olympia, Washington.[26] The western terminus of US 2 is now at Everett, Washington.[8]

Wikipedia article of the day for November 1, 2018

The Wikipedia article of the day for November 1, 2018 is Interstate 75 in Michigan.

Interstate 75 in Michigan is a part of the Interstate Highway System that runs 396 miles (637 km) generally northward from Ohio to the Canadian border in Sault Ste. Marie.

It passes near Lake Erie and through Detroit, Pontiac and Bay City, Michigan, crossing the Mackinac Bridge (pictured) in the Straits of Mackinac between Lake Michigan and Lake Huron.

Within the state, the Interstate shares parts of its route with circle tours around four of the five Great Lakes, and spawns four auxiliary Interstates.

Native American trails spanned the state along the general path of the modern freeway; after statehood, several of these were converted into plank roads that later became some of the first state highways.

Interstate construction in Michigan started in 1957, signs went up in 1959, and the last section was opened on November 1, 1973. South of Michigan, Interstate 75 continues for 1,391 miles (2,239 km), terminating in Miami, Florida.

WW3: Trump says border troops could hit 15K, surprising Pentagon - WAS JUST A MATTER OF TIME ANYWAY!

President Donald Trump talks to reporters about wanting to change the Fourteenth Amendment, before walking to Marine One on the South Lawn of the White House for a short flight to Andrews Air Force Base then on to Fort Myers, Fla., for a campaign rally ahead of the midterm elections, in Washington, Wednesday, Oct. 31, 2018. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
Trump says border troops could hit 15K, surprising Pentagon

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump said Wednesday that the number of military troops deployed to the U.S.-Mexican border could reach 15,000 — roughly double the number the Pentagon said it currently plans for a mission whose dimensions are shifting daily.

The Pentagon said “more than 7,000” troops were being sent to the Southwest border to support the Customs and Border Protection agents. Officials said that number could reach a maximum of about 8,000 under present plans.

The troop numbers have been changing at a dizzying pace, with Trump drawing a hard line on immigration in the lead-up to the midterm elections.

Just last week officials were indicating that about 800 to 1,000 might be sent. On Monday, officials announced that about 5,200 were being deployed. The next day, the Air Force general running the operation said more than the initially announced total were going, and he pointedly rejected a news report that it could reach 14,000, saying that was “not consistent with what’s actually being planned.”

Gen. Terrence O’Shaughnessy, the commander of U.S. Northern Command, told reporters the number would exceed the initial contingent of 5,200, but he offered no estimate of the eventual total.

President Donald Trump says the number of military troops deployed to the U.S.-Mexican border could go as high as 15,000. Trump said that the move would be aimed at preventing the entry of a caravan of migrants traveling from Central America. (Oct. 31)

Just 24 hours later, Trump thrust new uncertainty into the picture, catching the Pentagon by surprise.

With his eyes squarely on next Tuesday’s contests, Trump has rushed a series of immigration declarations, promises and actions as he tries to mobilize supporters to retain Republican control of Congress. His own Republican campaign in 2016 concentrated on border fears, and that’s his focus in the final week of the midterm fight.

“As far as the caravan is concerned, our military is out,” Trump said. “We have about 5,800. We’ll go up to anywhere between 10,000 and 15,000 military personnel on top of Border Patrol, ICE and everybody else at the border.”

His comment was the latest twist in a story that has pushed the Pentagon unhappily into the political space, prompting questions about whether Defense Secretary Jim Mattis was allowing the military to be leveraged as a political stunt.

“We don’t do stunts,” Mattis said Wednesday.

Trump rejected the idea he was “fearmongering” or using the issue for political purposes, but his escalating rhetoric in the waning days of the campaign season calls that denial into question. Trump has railed against illegal immigration, including several caravans of migrants from Central America slowly moving toward the U.S. border. The caravan of an estimated 4,000 people is still nearly 1,000 miles (1,600 kilometers) from the border.

He has also promised to end so-called catch-and-release policies by erecting tent cities to hold those crossing illegally. And this week he is asserting he could act by executive order to unilaterally end birthright citizenship for the children of non-U.S. citizens.

Trump’s comments Wednesday left some in the Pentagon scratching their heads. Officials said they had no plans to deploy as many as 15,000 troops. The number conceivably could reach 10,000, counting the 2,100 National Guard soldiers who have been operating along the border for months as part of a separate but related mission. The number of active-duty troops tapped for deployment stood at 7,000 as of Wednesday but could reach 8,000.

A deployment of 15,000 would bring the military commitment on the border to roughly the same level as in war-torn Afghanistan. And it would more than double the number of people thought to be in the caravans.

Trump did not back down Wednesday from his controversial proposal to upend the very concept of American citizenship. In a morning tweet, he said the right to citizenship for babies born to non-citizens on American soil “will be ended one way or the other.”

He also claimed that what he terms “so-called Birthright Citizenship” is “not covered by the 14th Amendment.”

However, the text of the amendment’s opening Citizenship Cause is this: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” The citizenship proposal would inevitably spark a long-shot legal battle over whether the president can alter the long-accepted understanding that the 14th Amendment grants citizenship to any child born on U.S. soil, regardless of his parents’ immigration status.

Speaker of the House Paul Ryan asserted Tuesday that “obviously” Trump could not upend that policy by executive order, drawing a tweeted rebuke from Trump. He said Wednesday that Ryan “should be focusing on holding the Majority rather than giving his opinions on Birthright Citizenship, something he knows nothing about!”

Speaking to reporters before leaving the White House for a campaign rally in Florida, Trump compared his plan to act by executive order to President Barack Obama’s much-maligned decision to use executive action to provide protections from prosecution and a path to work status for some people brought to the U.S. illegally as children.

“If he can do DACA, we can do this by executive order,” Trump said, using the acronym for the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. Trump and his Justice Department have argued that Obama action was unlawful.

Trump and many top aides have long seen the immigration issue as the most effective rallying cry for his base of supporters. The president had been expected to announce new actions at the border on Tuesday, but that was scrapped so he could travel instead to Pittsburgh, where 11 people were massacred Saturday in a synagogue during Sabbath services.

UGANDA: Video of the young lady who threatened Bosco

UGANDA: Video of the young lady who threatened Bosco

Video circulating on social media. We are all scared to Youtube it. Copyright unknown. Where to even start. No idea. Today, most Uganda media is awash with this angry young lady. She says something like "if we do not get our Kyarenga concert, I will make you eat something". Wait. She is even ruder. "I will hit your teeth with my something". Then proceeds to say "mataako". Oh dear Jesus. This word mataako gets people arrested in Bukanda. Irregardless, she does protest for a reason. Tuli bakoowu. If we ask for our freedom, we die. If we shut up, we die. If we protest, we are kidnapped, tortured, maimed or die. If we criticize impunity, we die. If we protest corruption, we are terrorists. If we complain about bad roads, we get arrested. If we complain about medical care, we are replaced by Cubans. If we complain about delayed pathetically low salaries, we are told to ho farm. If we complain about being evicted off our land at gunpoint. We are sold into slavery. If we embrace opposition, our kids are killed. If we dare tell the world, we are told we will be arrested the minute we land at Entebbe. If we dare to talk as media, the mefia house will be raided and shut down. The editirs will be jailed. Then if we give up and set up groups on social media to debate our future, the Admins face incarceration. How else can we change the status quo? Dying in silence is no longer an option. This young woman had enough. Many of us are there. Please give us breathing room. MLN Never shoot the messenger.

Martha Leah Nangalama

@TumusiimeUG has added a new video on YouTube

Slay queens talk to a financial adviser about having endless money
Tumu Siime is a Ugandan comedian. Subscribe to this channel for more videos.

View on YouTube

UGANDA: Museveni's grand daughter threatens to use her genitals to hit his teeth (VIDEO, PHOTOS)


CHANGEOFGUARDS - Uganda's military dictator is fond of referring to the youth of Uganda as Bazukulu (grandchildren) as he in return also calls himself Jajja (grandfather).
After spending two months in police custody, a 21-year-old woman, who allegedly recorded a video threatening to hit President Museveni with her genitals if he didn’t release Kyadondo East MP Robert Kyagulanyi from prison, has been remanded to Luzira Prison.

Prosecution contends that during the month of August in Kampala and Wakiso District, Namata used a computer to record and transmit videos in which she made suggestions or proposals referring to President Museveni as “buttocks”, “feces” and threatened to use her private parts to hit his teeth.
Prosecution says the suggestions are or proposals are obscene, lewd and indecent. On the count of offensive communication, the state claims that Namata willfully and repeatedly used electronic communication to transmit videos offensive in nature via WhatsApp to disturb or attempted to disturb the peace, quiet or right to privacy of the president.

A couple of other Ugandans have been arraigned before court for "disturbing the peace" of Museveni. Among them is a Makerere University don, Dr. Stella Nyanzi who in April 2017 was arrested, detained and accused of similar charges after she verbally attacked both Museveni and his wife by calling them "a pair of buttocks"

Uganda's leading opposition figure has repeatedly called upon oppressed citizens to use all available means to challenge Museveni's military dictatorship. Following Museveni's life presidency constitutional amendment of late 2016, Dr. Besigye urged citizens thus;
“Defending the constitution is constitutional. And this can be done using all means including taking up guns. Even if Ugandan choose to take guns to restore the force of the constitution, they are within the law. We invite the people of Uganda to do their duty seriously to restore the effect of this constitution so we can have peaceful transition. Every campaign that answers to this call is welcome."

The carnage which Museveni has subjected Ugandans to accounts for the young lady's source of anger and rage. She is representing the position of millions of other Ugandans. Being helpless, she found her private parts as the only weapon at her disposal. Fortunately, Museveni set free Hon. Bobi Wine before this courageous young lady could unleash her weapon. She has played her part and made a contribution in the struggle for freedom from Museveni's dictatorship.

Therefore, let all pro-change forces combine efforts in fighting for her freedom. Abandoning her will be a treasonous betrayal. Already, she has spent months in police custody contrary to the constitutional 48 hours. Let the cries for Namata's freedom and rights be heard far and wide.


Liked on YouTube: Peabo bryson & Regina Belle - A Whole New World Lyrics

Peabo bryson & Regina Belle - A Whole New World Lyrics

The one song that changed love into a whole new world! ^_^ Peabo Bryson and Regina Belle- A Whole New World I can show you the world Shining, shimmering, splendid Tell me, princess, now when did You last let your heart decide? I can open your eyes Take you wonder by wonder Over, sideways and under On a magic carpet ride A whole new world A new fantastic point of view No one to tell us no Or where to go Or say we're only dreaming A whole new world A dazzling place I never knew But when I'm way up here It's crystal clear That now I'm in a whole new world with you Now I'm in a whole new world with you Unbelievable sights Indescribable feeling Soaring, tumbling, freewheeling Through an endless diamond sky A whole new world Don't you dare close your eyes A hundred thousand things to see Hold your breath - it gets better I'm like a shooting star I've come so far I can't go back to where I used to be A whole new world Every turn a surprise With new horizons to pursue Every moment red-letter I'll chase them anywhere There's time to spare Let me share this whole new world with you A whole new world That's where we'll be A thrilling chase A wondrous place For you and me

UGANDA: NTVUganda has added NTV THE LINK: Labour externalisation video

NTV THE LINK: Labour externalisation

#NTVNews #TheLink Subscribe to Our Channel For more news visit Follow us on Twitter Like our Facebook page

UGANDA: NTVUganda has added Why UPDF allowed Sejusa and other Generals to retire video

Why UPDF allowed Sejusa and other Generals to retire

A former Director-General of External Security Organisation, David Pulkol, says retirement in the army should be streamlined and should not be sanctioned on the whims and fancies of the Commander-in-Chief. Pulkol’s comments come barely after the army retired 18 senior army officers including Gen David Sejusa, a member of the UPDF historical High Command and former deputy army commanders Lt Gen Ivan Koreta and Maj Gen Joram Mugume. #NTVNews Subscribe to Our Channel For more news visit Follow us on Twitter Like our Facebook page

UGANDA: NTVUganda has added Yusuf Kawooya to sue gov't over torture video

Yusuf Kawooya to sue gov't over torture

A week after he was released after being brutally tortured during his arrest, Yusuf Kawooya’s police bond has been extended to 13 November 2018. Kawooya’s bond was due to expire on Wednesday, hence his return to the Special Investigations Unit in Kireka. Kawooya, whose health is yet to improve, is preparing to sue the government over the pain he was subjected to. #NTVNews Subscribe to Our Channel For more news visit Follow us on Twitter Like our Facebook page

UGANDA: NTVUganda has added Government urged to increase investment in physical planning video

Government urged to increase investment in physical planning

The government has been advised increase investment in physical planning to minimize hazards, before elevating 14 municipalities to city status. The call came as Uganda marked World cities’ day. #NTVNews Subscribe to Our Channel For more news visit Follow us on Twitter Like our Facebook page

UGANDA: NTVUganda has added Education Minister Janet Museveni satisfied with Nakivubo progress video

Education Minister Janet Museveni satisfied with Nakivubo progress

#NTVNews Subscribe to Our Channel For more news visit Follow us on Twitter Like our Facebook page

UGANDA: NTVUganda has added KCCA draws with Mbarara City FC in Premier League tie video

KCCA draws with Mbarara City FC in Premier League tie

Express FC run out 2-0 winners over Tooro United at the Muteesa Two Stadium in Wankulukuku. The Red Eagles used first-half goals from Eric Kambale and Ibrahim Kayiwa to move within five points of log leaders Vipers SC. Elsewhere, 10-man KCCA FC played out an eventful goalless draw with Mbarara City at the StarTimes Stadium in Lugogo to remain second on the 16-team log #NTVNews Subscribe to Our Channel For more news visit Follow us on Twitter Like our Facebook page

UGANDA: NTVUganda has added Mother accused of killing her baby subjected to mental health check video

Mother accused of killing her baby subjected to mental health check

Harriet Nakalema, the woman alleged to have murdered her own child has been subjected to a mental check up this evening to ascertain her mental health. The Police tell us they are also working to establish how to further murder charges against her and three other people, who include the father of the deceased child Michael Sseruwagi. #NTVNews Subscribe to Our Channel For more news visit Follow us on Twitter Like our Facebook page

UGANDA: NTVUganda has added Government to capture Refugee's biometric data video

Government to capture Refugee's biometric data

#NTVNews Following a joint government and UN report that has shown the number of refugees in Uganda to have been exaggerated by over 300,000, the government has devised new measures to stop the reoccurrence. From a camp in Kiryandongo, the state minister for disaster preparedness Musa Ecweru, the future registration of refugees will see their biometric data captured to prevent multiple registrations of the same persons. Subscribe to Our Channel For more news visit Follow us on Twitter Like our Facebook page

UGANDA: NTVUganda has added Gov't determined to help small business owners grow - Amelia Kyambadde video

Gov't determined to help small business owners grow - Amelia Kyambadde

Government says it is determined to assist micro small and medium enterprises skip various huddles that are slowing down their competitiveness for growth and profit. Trade and Industry Minister Amelia Kyambadde, has reiterated this during the launch of a Strategy aimed at support implementation of various interventions in support of MSMEs. The strategy is expected to promote innovation, value addition and standards among others. #NTVNews Subscribe to Our Channel For more news visit Follow us on Twitter Like our Facebook page

UGANDA: Opposition needs a saviour or Posiko will rule till hell freezes over

All of us in opposition are diabolical. In fact, we should all read our Bibles or Korans. Or both for safe measure.

We might also wanna learn how to use social media to stop polarizing each other.

When we fight amongst us, only one person laughs all the way to the bank.

S/he is our common enemy. I will not say who but it knows itself.

Why do we lose focus so easily? Do we want an ICC indicted criminal to come negotiate for us peace?

This insanity of Muntu camp, Bobi camp and FDC camp fighting daily is delaying our progress in uniting to fight Dombodore (who shall not be named).

To this effect, let us call for a truce. The energy we expend daily should be spent on strategy.

Minor things like:
1) Why are our people being evicted off their land?
2) Why are we selling our kids into slavery?
3) Why are thieves delaying our progress to middle income status?
4) Why are civil servants paid slave wages and security organs resort to robbing to survive?
5) Why do gunmen arrest our people or kidnap them in broad daylight at gun point? Or shoot them dead?
6) Why do investors, tourists die in our hands?
7) Why do journalists get maimed?
8) Why do our schools produce engineers but we get Chinese to repair our road potholes?
9) Why do activists get labeled enemies when a democracy allows voices of dissent? A democracy needs strong opposition to keep raising issues the govt may not beware of!
10) Why cancel our Kyarenga concert and infuriate us to the point a woman has to threaten to toss her something something in the teeth of Domboredore?

Let us have faith in the Christ or Muhammed knowing if either shows up, we will ask for God / Allah to show up in face. If one or both show up, they will get run over by a convoy or get shot by a sniper. Or both. Following week, we wilm be saying "dude was a mole. Send us a real saviour". Then wait for 2021.

We are a rather pathetic lot. Let all RCC start a novena. We cannot even the world that we are serious about change so no one will help us.

Over the last 5yrs, I watch opposition "we need guns". For what? To shoot each other?

Congratulations President Yoweri Museveni. Only you have the vision. Well done. Well done.

United opposition or else....

UGANDA trains military health workers to fight Ebola

Last Updated: 2018-10-30 13:30 | Xinhua

With support from the World Health Organization (WHO), Uganda's Ministry of Health has started training health workers in the military on surveillance and clinical management of the deadly Ebola hemorrhagic fever.

According to a statement released by the WHO Monday, when Uganda had its first Ebola outbreak in 2000, the armed forces have always been part and parcel of the country's response strategy and activities.

The global health body said that as the Ebola situation continues to worsen in neighboring Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), the military will be part of the response plan if the disease spreads to Uganda.

"The training provides an opportunity to build their capacity to be able to effectively detect, investigate, and report suspected Ebola cases," the statement said.

"They will also be equipped with skills in principles of managing Viral Hemorrhagic Fevers (VHF) including management of suspected or confirmed cases of Ebola patients, and provision of psychological support and infection prevention and control," it added.

The organization said the training comes in the wake of increasing Ebola cases in the DRC where 267 cumulative cases with 170 deaths had been recorded by Oct. 28.

"The epicenter for the current outbreak is close to the very porous Uganda-DRC border which makes importation of cases highly likely," the WHO said. "Additionally, communities at the border are closely linked through kinship, culture, religion and even trade making close interaction a daily occurrence."

The five-day training conducted in the central region district of Mukono follows similar ones that the WHO and the Ministry of Health have conducted in the high-risk districts of Bundibugyo, Bunyangabu, Kampala, Kabarole, Kasese, Hoima, Kikuube, Ntoroko and Wakiso in which over 100 health workers have been trained on Ebola.

The Ebola virus is highly contagious and causes a range of symptoms including fever, vomiting, diarrhea, generalized pain and in many cases internal and external bleeding.

Mortality rates of Ebola fever, according to the WHO, are extremely high, with the human case-fatality rate ranging from 50 percent to 89 percent, depending on viral sub-type.

MIDDLE EAST: Mohammed bin Salman Is the Next Saddam Hussein

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman attends the Future Investment Initiative conference in Riyadh on October 23, 2018. (Fayez Nureldine/AFP/Getty Images) 
Mohammed bin Salman Is the Next Saddam Hussein

In the 1980s, the United States embraced a brutal Middle Eastern tyrant simply because he opposed Iran. Washington should not repeat the same mistake today.


Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is reportedly shocked over the backlash to his government’s killing of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi. In a recent phone call with U.S. President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and advisor Jared Kushner, according to the Wall Street Journal, his confusion over official Washington’s furor “turned into rage,” as he spoke of feeling “betrayed by the West” and threatened to “look elsewhere” for foreign partners.

Saudi Arabia’s indignation at the United States would not be the first time an autocratic U.S. ally in the Middle East has assumed it could act with virtual impunity due to its alignment with Washington in countering Iran. Indeed, the Saudi prince’s meteoric rise to power bears striking similarities to that of a past U.S. ally-turned-nemesis whose brutality was initially overlooked by his Washington patrons: former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.

Years before Saddam became Washington’s chief foe, he enjoyed significant support from the United States and other Western countries.
Years before Saddam became Washington’s chief foe, he enjoyed significant support from the United States and other Western countries.This ended after he decided to invade Kuwait in 1990. However, the lead-up to that conflict and Washington’s earlier patronage of Saddam provide instructive lessons for U.S. regional policy today and the major risks of not responding forcefully to the assassination of Khashoggi.

Mohammed bin Salman’s gradual and brutal consolidation of power, marked by the detention and torture of his domestic rivals, evokes the “nation-changing assault on dissent within Iraq’s ruling party in 1979 by a young President Saddam Hussein,” Toby Dodge, a consulting senior fellow for the Middle East at London’s International Institute for Strategic Studies, told Bloomberg last year. “The concentration of power in one youthful, ambitious and unpredictable pair of hands is worrying now as it was then.” Washington’s steadfast support of Saddam during the 1980s not only enabled his rampage against his own people and neighboring countries, but also eventually threatened U.S. security interests.

The U.S. relationship with Saddam Hussein began in 1963, when, according to the former National Security Council official Roger Morris, the CIA under President John F. Kennedy “carried out in collaboration with Saddam Hussein” a coup to overthrow the government of Gen. Abdel Karim Kassem, who had five years earlier toppled Iraq’s pro-American monarchy.

However, U.S. ties with Saddam truly began to solidify in February 1982, when the Reagan administration removed Iraq from the State Department’s terrorism list, paving the way for providing military assistance to Iraq. This occurred roughly 17 months after Saddam’s invasion of Iran, while Iraqi forces were occupying the oil-rich southwestern Iranian province of Khuzestan that Iraq sought to annex. In December 1983, President Ronald Reagan dispatched Donald Rumsfeld as a presidential envoy to meet Saddam and set the stage for normalizing U.S.-Iraqi relations.
In December 1983, President Ronald Reagan dispatched Donald Rumsfeld as a presidential envoy to meet Saddam and set the stage for normalizing U.S.-Iraqi relations. U.S. support for Saddam during the war would grow to include, according to the Washington Post, “large-scale intelligence sharing, supply of cluster bombs through a Chilean front company, and facilitating Iraq’s acquisition of chemical and biological precursors.”

Saddam’s devastating use of chemical weapons during the Iran-Iraq War, both against Iranian military and civilian targets and on his own people, did not deter U.S. support. Rumsfeld’s meeting with Saddam took place despite Washington possessing firm evidence of Iraqi chemical weapons use beginning in 1983. Prior to Rumsfeld’s trip, on Nov. 1, 1983, senior State Department official Jonathan Howe had told Secretary of State George Shultz of intelligence reports showing that Iraq was resorting to “almost daily use of CW [chemical weapons]” against the Iranians.

While Iran received some weaponry from the United States through the Iran-Contra affair, Washington tipped the scales much further in favor of Saddam. When intelligence showed Iran mounting a major offensive in early 1988 that threatened to break through Iraqi lines, Reagan wrote to his secretary of defense: “An Iranian victory is unacceptable.” Toward the end of the war, “U.S. intelligence was flowing freely to Hussein’s military,” according to a 2013 article in Foreign Policy, despite U.S. officials being “fully aware that Hussein’s military would attack with chemical weapons.”

According to declassified CIA documents, two-thirds of all Iraqi chemical weapons deployed during the war were used in the last 18 months of the conflict, when U.S.-Iraqi cooperation peaked.
According to declassified CIA documents, two-thirds of all Iraqi chemical weapons deployed during the war were used in the last 18 months of the conflict, when U.S.-Iraqi cooperation peaked. This included the March 1988 genocidal chemical weapons attack on the Iraqi Kurdish town of Halabja, which led to the deaths of as many as 5,000 civilians. Ironically, this attack would later be used by the George W. Bush administration in 2003 as part of its pretext for invading Iraq to eliminate the country’s by then nonexistent weapons of mass destruction.

A few months after the Halabja attack, in September 1988, Assistant Secretary of State Richard Murphy wrote in a memo on the chemical weapons question that “the U.S.-Iraqi relationship is … important to our long-term political and economic objectives.” Today, the Trump administration is echoing this language when discussing the U.S.-Saudi relationship, despite Saudi Arabia’s killing of Khashoggi and its devastating assault on Yemen, with U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo recently proclaiming that Saudi Arabia is “an important strategic alliance of the United States” and that “the Saudis have been great partners in working alongside us.”

It was no surprise, then, that on the eve of Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait, Saddam felt he had unconditional backing from the United States. This impression was reinforced by Saddam’s meeting with then-U.S. Ambassador to Iraq April Glaspie on July 25, 1990, a week before his invasion of Kuwait. During their fateful encounter, according to a diplomatic cablesummarizing the meeting, Glaspie stressed “President [George H.W.] Bush’s desire for friendship” and that “the president had instructed her to broaden and deepen our relations with Iraq.” When Saddam raised the issue of Kuwait, which he had been relentlessly threatening, Glaspie stated that the United States took “no position on these Arab affairs.”

Jamal Khashoggi Had Skin in the Game. The Crown Prince’s Cheerleaders Didn’t.

Too often, Westerners treat courageous local experts like pawns in a political game. The journalist’s murder should serve as a reminder that, for some, writing an op-ed is a deadly risk.

Jamal Khashoggi’s Disappearance Is a Slap in the Face to the United States

Washington should explore retaliatory measures that impose real costs on Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

To this day, academic experts such as the Harvard University professor and FP columnist Stephen M. Walt contend that “the United States did unwittingly give a green light to Saddam” to invade Kuwait—much as he invaded Iran—without a strong response from the United States. Walt adds that, contrary to some perceptions, Glaspie was “following the instructions she had been given” and that “she was doing what the Bush administration wanted at this crucial meeting.” U.S. diplomatic cables from Glaspie’s era also reveal, according to Germany’s Der Spiegel, that “Glaspie and her predecessor painted the regime in an extremely favorable light from the very outset, overlooked Saddam’s widely-known crimes, and were so influenced by mutual enmity for Iran as to be negligently uncritical.”

The United States was wrong to back Saddam simply because he opposed Iran, a mistake that has haunted it for decades. Not only were more than 500,000 U.S. troops required to dislodge Saddam from Kuwait, resulting in 382 U.S. military casualties, but it also placed the U.S. government on a warpath that resulted in the 2003 toppling of Saddam, an event that beyond its humanitarian and financial costs for the Iraqi and American people led to the rise of terrorist groups such as the Islamic State and inextricably altered the regional balance of power in favor of Iran—whose largely Shiite allies have assumed power in Baghdad by way of democratic elections.

Today, the Trump administration’s reflexive support of Mohammed bin Salman is heading in the same direction as Washington’s ill-fated support of Saddam Hussein.
Today, the Trump administration’s reflexive support of Mohammed bin Salman is heading in the same direction as Washington’s ill-fated support of Saddam Hussein. Washington’s backing of Riyadh today even has the same justification: countering Iran. Trump has endorsed the crown prince’s purge of his domestic rivals and has given him carte blanche in his botched endeavors to rout Houthi rebels in Yemen while massacring civilians, turn Qatar into a vassal state, unseat the Lebanese prime minister, and punish Canada over a human rights complaint. The apparent order to assassinate Khashoggi is only the latest of Mohammed bin Salman’s reckless and impulsive decisions to which the United States has failed to react forcefully.

In the wake of Khashoggi’s killing, Trump administration officials have shamelessly warned that punishing the kingdom could jeopardize the escalating pressure campaign against Iran. A desire to bleed Iran shouldn’t once again overshadow a growing threat to the region: an unchecked, ambitious Saudi crown prince who has already presided over the decimation of Yemen and the butchering of a prominent journalist in his quest to consolidate absolute power.

Mohammed bin Salman, if allowed to ascend to the throne without facing any consequences from Washington for his outrageous behavior, will likely terrorize the region for decades, just as Saddam did. If Khashoggi’s brazen slaughter, carried out in utter disregard for international norms or the political cost for its allies, is a sign of a new Saudi playbook, the world may be facing an even greater threat than Saddam posed. Not only has the crown prince made clear his willingness to use force against neighboring countries, but his country also still enjoys vast oil wealth—giving him the ability to disrupt the global economy (although not to the extent of the 1973 Arab oil embargo) and threaten the profits of Western defense firms, given that the kingdom is the world’s third-largest military spender after the United States and China.

The Trump administration must act now to make it clear to the Saudi royal family that there will be severe consequences for such transgressions and end the unqualified support provided to Saudi Arabia. At a minimum, this should include an end to U.S. participation in the Yemen war, a halt to arms sales, and Magnitsky Act sanctions against all Saudi officials connected to Khashoggi’s killing.