Bombs for Billionaires: The $2.8 Billion Betrayal of the American People
The Trump administration is preparing the largest single transfer of 2,000-pound bombs in modern American history — 40,000 of them — bound for a government led by an internationally indicted war criminal, purchased with the tax dollars of Americans who cannot afford their groceries, and destined for a strip of land the President’s own family has proposed to redevelop as beachfront real estate.
There are moments in the life of a republic when the arithmetic of a single policy decision reveals the moral condition of its leadership with such clarity that no evasion is possible. This is one of them. On September 16, 2026, ABC News, The Washington Post, and Reuters reported that the Trump administration is preparing a $2.8 billion arms package for the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — a package built around 40,000 two-thousand-pound bombs. It is, by any honest accounting, the single largest transfer of conventional heavy ordnance from the United States to any foreign government in the modern era. And it is being financed by the American taxpayer.
The package is composed of 20,000 MK-84 general-purpose bombs — nicknamed “the hammer” by American pilots in the Gulf War — and 20,000 BLU-117s, a thermally coated variant designed for shipboard storage. It also includes 20,000 I-2000 penetrator warheads engineered to punch through concrete and detonate inside hardened underground structures. The mechanism is Foreign Military Financing: the United States government hands Israel American tax dollars, and Israel turns around and uses those dollars to buy American bombs. It is not, in the ordinary sense of the word, a sale. It is a gift, paid for by the citizens of a country in the grip of an affordability crisis, delivered to a foreign leader wanted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes and crimes against humanity.
This is not a partisan grievance. It is a statement of documented fact. And the facts, taken together, describe a presidency whose priorities have severed from any recognizable conception of the national interest, of constitutional duty, or of the moral obligations a government owes to its own people.
I. The Weapons Themselves
The two-thousand-pound bomb is not a defensive weapon. It cannot be. There is no scenario in which a munition of that size — capable of leveling a city block, carving a crater fifty feet across and sixteen feet deep, hurling lethal metal fragments hundreds of meters in every direction — serves any function other than the destruction of large fixed targets. According to the Project on Defense Alternatives, a 2,000-pound blast will severely damage, injure, or kill anyone within 115 feet of detonation, with fragmentation extending far beyond that. A Harvard FXB Center study published in PLOS Global Public Health documented that these bombs have a lethal blast radius of 360 meters and can cause severe injury and structural damage 800 meters from the point of impact.
To put that in scale: eight football fields. The Biden administration paused delivery of these very munitions in 2024 out of stated concern that they could not be used in the densely populated Gaza Strip without producing mass civilian casualties. That pause was lifted by President Trump within weeks of taking office in early 2025. The largest bombs the United States and its allies used in the entire battle for Mosul against the Islamic State were 500-pound bombs. The Trump administration is now proposing to send Israel forty thousand munitions four times that size.
Lethal radius of a single MK-84 detonation. The damage-and-injury range extends to 800 meters.
Two-thousand-pound bombs, split evenly between MK-84s and BLU-117s, plus 20,000 I-2000 penetrator warheads.
Financed through Foreign Military Financing — American dollars given to Israel to buy American weapons.
Of structures in Gaza have been damaged or destroyed, per UN Development Programme assessments.
These are the weapons a New York Times investigation identified as “responsible for some of the worst attacks on Palestinian civilians” since the war in Gaza began. CNN’s own geospatial analysis, published in December 2023 and never meaningfully rebutted, matched 12- and 15-meter craters — the signature of 2,000-pound bombs — to hospital sites, refugee camps, and schools. The Statute of the International Criminal Court lists as a war crime intentionally launching an attack when it is known that civilian death will be clearly excessive relative to any direct military advantage. These bombs, used in this territory, cannot avoid meeting that threshold. That is not an editorial position. That is physics.
“The American people are sick and tired of funding Israel’s genocide in Gaza. Now Trump is doubling down and using OUR taxpayer dollars to give the extremist Netanyahu government $2.8 billion in bombs. Not acceptable. Congress must reject these agreements.”
— Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), September 16, 2026
II. An Arsenal at Its Lowest Point in Generations
Set the moral question aside for a moment. Consider only the strategic one. The United States military is, at this moment, operating with munitions stockpiles that senior commanders have themselves described as “dangerously low”. The 39-day war with Iran earlier this year burned through nearly 80 percent of the Pentagon’s THAAD interceptor inventory and roughly half of its Patriot stocks. The Center for Strategic and International Studies has published detailed analysis concluding that it will take until 2029 to return Patriot and THAAD stocks to their pre-war levels, and until 2030 for Tomahawks.
The Council on Foreign Relations, hardly a bastion of progressive alarmism, has warned that this depletion has created a “window of vulnerability” that a peer adversary like China could exploit in the Indo-Pacific. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has himself conceded it will take “months and years” to rebuild the inventory. And into this hollowed arsenal, the President proposes to reach and hand another forty thousand of the largest conventional bombs in America’s inventory to a foreign government, so that they may continue a campaign that a UN Commission of Inquiry, staffed by former ICC judges, has formally determined to constitute genocide.
There is no strategic doctrine — no realist framework, no liberal internationalist framework, no populist “America First” framework — under which this decision is defensible. It weakens American deterrence. It exhausts American stocks. It commits American taxpayer dollars to an obligation the American people were never consulted on. And it does all of this while Congress is being denied its constitutional role in declaring where and how those weapons will be used.
III. Paying for Bombs While Americans Cannot Pay Their Rent
The most damning arithmetic in this story is the domestic one. As of April 2026, the Center for American Progress documented that inflation had outpaced wage growth over the prior twelve months, meaning American workers’ wages are no longer keeping up with the rising cost of living. The Brookings Institution’s landmark 2026 affordability report found that 45.5 percent of American households do not earn enough to cover their necessities. Home prices are up 45 percent since 2020. Child care has surged 39 percent since 2019. Seven in ten Americans in a 2025 poll said raising a child in this country is now unaffordable. The Urban Institute’s American Affordability Tracker documents that 49 percent of American families lack the resources to cover the true cost of economic security.
Against that backdrop, the President is preparing to hand $2.8 billion to a foreign government. That figure would fund the entire annual budget of the federal WIC nutrition program with money to spare. It would pay for roughly 28,000 new affordable housing units at current federal cost estimates. It would cover the annual salaries of nearly 40,000 public school teachers. Instead, it will buy bombs.
Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland put the point with unusual bluntness on the morning the story broke. Trump, he wrote, is “sending bombs paid for by American taxpayers to a government led by a wanted war criminal”. His question — “How is this America First?” — is the question every American who cannot afford their groceries, their insulin, or their utility bill deserves an answer to.
Get Involved Today
Contribute to our mission and turn your concerns into action.
IV. The Destination: A Territory 80% Destroyed
These bombs are not going into storage. They are going, by every credible account, to be dropped on the Gaza Strip and on southern Lebanon. The UN Development Programme has assessed that “over 80 percent of buildings” in Gaza “have been damaged or destroyed”. Gaza City itself, according to a January 2026 UN assessment, has seen 83 percent of its structures damaged. The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs reports that 81 percent of all structures across the entire Strip were damaged as of October 2025. The Gaza health ministry, whose figures the UN treats as reliable, records more than 73,000 direct deaths, with an estimated additional 10,000 buried under rubble.
Even the October 2025 ceasefire has not stopped the killing. UNICEF reported in August 2026 that at least 300 children have been killed in Gaza in the 300 days since the ceasefire was announced — one child, on average, every day. The UN Satellite Centre found that the destruction of buildings in Gaza has climbed by nearly 10 percent since October’s ceasefire, even with the guns supposedly silent.
V. The Real Estate Motive
To understand the shape of this policy, one must understand the property interest behind it. Jared Kushner, the President’s son-in-law and now a formally appointed U.S. envoy for the region, has for years described the Gaza Strip in the terminology of an investor sizing up a beachfront acquisition. In a February 2024 appearance at Harvard, he called Gaza’s “waterfront property” potentially “very valuable” and once memorably described the entire Arab-Israeli conflict as “nothing more than a real-estate dispute.” Trump himself, in October 2024, mused on Hugh Hewitt’s radio show that Gaza could be “better than Monaco” if rebuilt “in the right way.”
In February 2025, the President made the aspiration policy. In a joint press conference with Netanyahu, he proposed a U.S. takeover of Gaza, the removal of its Palestinian population, and its redevelopment as an American-owned “Riviera of the Middle East.” In January 2026, at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Kushner unveiled the “master plan” — renderings of 100,000 housing units, 200 education centers, a “special economic zone” with preferred tariffs, and, unmistakably, luxury waterfront developments modeled on other Gulf-state real estate ventures. Kushner’s Affinity Partners fund has taken $3.5 billion in combined investment from Saudi, Emirati, and Qatari sources, and the Kushner family is already building a €1.4 billion resort complex on the Albanian coast, on land declared a “strategic investment” by that country’s prime minister — a template, one suspects, for what is envisioned in Gaza once the population has been removed.
This is the context in which the $2.8 billion bomb package must be read. Gaza is being cleared. The bombs to clear it are being paid for by American workers. The land that emerges from the rubble is intended, on the President’s own son-in-law’s slides, for luxury development by an inner circle whose foreign business partners are the same Gulf state investors underwriting the President’s family. To describe this as a foreign policy is to abuse the word. It is a private real estate acquisition financed with public blood.
“The Trump administration has not provided sufficient assurances that these weapons will be used by the Netanyahu government in accordance with law and with appropriate protections for civilians. I therefore will not clear this sale at this time.”
— Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), Ranking Member, House Foreign Affairs Committee, September 17, 2026
VI. Who Is Fighting Back
The resistance to this sale, thus far, has come almost entirely from Democrats and independents in Congress and from the international human rights community. Representative Gregory Meeks of New York, ranking Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, has formally placed a hold on the sale, invoking a rarely used committee prerogative to withhold clearance. Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland has promised to “work to stop it.” Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who has now forced multiple Senate floor votes on similar arms transfers, called the package “not acceptable” and demanded that Congress reject it. Senators Jeff Merkley of Oregon and Peter Welch of Vermont have joined earlier joint resolutions of disapproval aimed at halting the pipeline.
The international picture is starker still. The International Criminal Court’s arrest warrants for Netanyahu remain active. The UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry, in its September 2025 report, made an explicit legal determination — using the four-of-five test set out in the 1948 Genocide Convention — that Israel is responsible for the commission of genocide in Gaza. The Commission stated that “all States are under a legal obligation to use all means that are reasonably available to them to stop the genocide in Gaza.” The Trump administration is doing the opposite: it is providing the means by which the killing continues.
When Judgment Fails, the Constitution Provides a Remedy
The 25th Amendment, ratified in 1967 in the aftermath of the Kennedy assassination, was designed for precisely the kind of crisis in which a president is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Section 4 provides that the Vice President, together with a majority of the Cabinet — or of “such other body as Congress may by law provide” — may transmit to the leaders of Congress a written declaration that the President is so incapacitated, at which point the Vice President assumes the powers of the presidency as Acting President.
The mechanism has never been formally invoked. But the discussion of it has moved, in 2026, from the political margins to the mainstream. On April 10, 2026, House Judiciary Ranking Member Jamie Raskin of Maryland wrote to the White House physician demanding an immediate comprehensive cognitive and neurological evaluation of the President. Four days later, Raskin introduced legislation, with fifty co-sponsors, to establish the very “other body” the 25th Amendment contemplates — an independent Commission on Presidential Capacity. On April 30, 2026, Senators Sheldon Whitehouse and Jack Reed entered into the Congressional Record a statement from 36 physicians — neurologists, psychiatrists, and specialists in cognitive disorders from Harvard, Tufts, Columbia, and George Washington — concluding that the President is “mentally unfit” and citing his “grandiose and delusional beliefs,” “reckless threats of violence,” and “fixation on perceived enemies.”
The Constitutional Case
The argument for constitutional accountability in the specific case of the $2.8 billion bomb sale rests on four grounds. First, the decision commits enormous American resources to a policy that materially advances a private financial interest of the President and his family — a textbook conflict that a sound executive would recognize and refuse. Second, it disregards the settled findings of the ICC, the UN Commission of Inquiry, and 36 senior American medical professionals that the government being armed is engaged in international crimes. Third, it depletes an American arsenal already at its lowest state in a generation, in the middle of what the Council on Foreign Relations calls a “window of vulnerability” to a peer adversary. Fourth, it takes $2.8 billion from a citizenry in the grip of a documented affordability crisis, and hands it to a foreign leader wanted for war crimes. A president capable of weighing these considerations against one another would not make this decision. A president who makes it anyway has, in the plain meaning of the amendment, failed the test of capacity.
The Practical Barriers
The barriers are real and must be named honestly. Section 4 of the 25th Amendment requires the Vice President and a majority of the Cabinet — appointees of the President himself — to act against him. That has never happened, and it will not happen in this Cabinet, which has been selected precisely for its loyalty. Raskin’s proposed independent commission would require a majority of both houses of Congress, and the current majorities are Republican. The President can veto the bill establishing it. These are not trivial obstacles.
Why the Case Is Still Necessary
But the difficulty of a constitutional remedy does not diminish the constitutional case. The 25th Amendment exists as a formal declaration of principle: that no man is entitled to the powers of the presidency if he cannot exercise them in the interest of the nation he was elected to serve. To lay out the case for invocation is not to predict its success in this Congress. It is to preserve, for the historical record and for the next Congress, the constitutional standard against which this presidency will be judged. That standard is not being met. The bombs are the evidence.
VII. What Congress Can Still Do
The Arms Export Control Act gives Congress a formal mechanism to block foreign military sales: the Joint Resolution of Disapproval. It requires a majority vote in both chambers and is subject to presidential veto, which then requires a two-thirds override. Senator Sanders has filed and forced votes on multiple such resolutions over the past two years. All have failed, most by lopsided margins — the last vote on a $6.75 billion tranche of arms to Israel drew only 15 senators in favor. The failure is a bipartisan failure. On this issue, the Democratic caucus itself has been fractured, with many of its members continuing to support the Netanyahu government’s military campaign despite the mounting documentary record of atrocity.
Representative Meeks’s hold at the House Foreign Affairs Committee is a start. It is not a stop. The administration has, on prior occasions, simply invoked “emergency” authority under Section 36 of the Arms Export Control Act to bypass congressional review entirely — as it did in early 2025 with the $2.04 billion sale of 35,500 similar bombs. If it does so again, the only remaining mechanisms will be the appropriations process, in which Congress can zero out Foreign Military Financing to Israel, and the political process, in which voters can hold accountable every representative and senator who declined to act. Both mechanisms remain open. Neither is being used with sufficient urgency.
Editorial Conclusion
The question presented by the $2.8 billion bomb sale is not, at bottom, a question about Israel, or about Gaza, or about the balance of power in the Middle East. It is a question about whether the government of the United States still belongs to the people who pay for it.
A president who empties his own country’s arsenal to arm a foreign leader wanted for war crimes, who bills the cost to citizens who cannot afford their rent, who does so in service of a family real estate venture on land his weapons are being used to clear — such a president has, in the most literal constitutional sense, failed the office. The remedies available under our system are difficult. The case for invoking them is not.
Every member of Congress who votes to clear this sale — or who allows it to proceed by silence — will answer for it. History does not forget who signed the requisitions, and neither should the electorate. Stop the sale. Restore the arsenal. Feed the people. And apply, without flinching, the constitutional standard we have to the president we have.
Sources & References
- ABC News · Trump administration plans to send powerful bombs to Israel in $2.8 billion weapons sale
- Al Jazeera · Trump administration plans $2.8bn sale of 2,000-pound bombs to Israel
- Rolling Stone · Trump Is Reportedly Sending Israel $2.8 Billion in Bombs. You’re Paying for Them
- House Foreign Affairs Committee Democrats · Meeks Places Hold on Trump Administration’s $2.8 Billion Bomb Sale to Israel
- Al Jazeera · US set to approve 60,000 heavy bombs for Israel: What that means
- FXB Center, Harvard · Study on 2,000-lb bombs dropped within lethal range of Gaza hospitals
- ABC Australia · US sends Israel 2,000-pound bombs that can ‘pancake’ entire city blocks
- UN Development Programme · Clearing most of the rubble in the Gaza Strip is possible in seven years
- The Conversation · With 83% of its buildings destroyed, Gaza needs more than money to rebuild
- UN OCHA · Humanitarian Situation Update #355 — Gaza Strip
- UN News · Gaza: Destruction of buildings rises by nearly 10% since ceasefire
- UNICEF USA · Children in Gaza Are Still Waiting for an End to the Violence
- OHCHR · Israel has committed genocide in the Gaza Strip, UN Commission finds
- International Criminal Court · ICC issues arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant
- CNN · Nearly 80% of interceptors for a key missile defense system depleted
- CSIS · Rebuilding U.S. Missile Inventory: A Multiyear Project
- Council on Foreign Relations · The U.S. Munitions Crisis
- Center for American Progress · Lowering the Cost of Living for American Families
- NPR · Brookings: Nearly half of U.S. households can’t cover their necessities
- Urban Institute · The American Affordability Tracker
- ABC News · Jared Kushner lays out Trump-backed ‘master plan’ for post-war Gaza
- Washington Post · ‘Riviera of the Middle East’: How Trump sees Gaza as a real estate deal
- Yahoo / Telegraph · Trump’s Gaza Riviera real estate dream is already under way — in Albania
- House Judiciary Democrats · Raskin demands cognitive fitness evaluation, cites 25th Amendment
- The Hill · Concerns Grow Over Trump’s Mental Fitness for Presidency
- Deseret News · Democrats introduce Trump fitness bill under 25th Amendment
- Senator Bernie Sanders · Sanders Files Joint Resolutions of Disapproval to Block Bomb Sales to Israel
- Fox News · Trump plans $2.8B military aid package for Israel with 2,000-lb bombs
Related News
