Soldiers excited (and nerve wracked) to drive tanks in DC military parade
Soldiers excited (and nerve wracked) to drive tanks in DC military parade Bradley and Stryker armored vehicles await the parade on June 14 in a park by the Potomac River.
Show Caption
Hide Caption
Armored tanks arrive in DC for Trump's military birthday parade
As Washington, D.C. prepares for the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army, armored tanks have begun to arrive ahead of Saturday's celebration.
WASHINGTON – On blistering summer days, the sprawling, tree-shaded park on the banks of the Potomac River is usually populated by tourists and picnickers.On June 11, the park was fenced off to civilians, and soldiers in fatigues roamed the area. Dozens of tanks and armored vehicles lined its streets in preparation to roll through the capital this weekend in the Army's 250th anniversary parade.
Lt. Kaessey Thompson looked on in anticipation at the tanks.
"I'm super excited," said Thompson, who volunteered to ride one of the tanks in the June 14 parade. "It's going to be a great experience."
"It's definitely a once-in-a-lifetime event," said Sgt. Timothy Reid, who was standing beside a nearby Bradley armored vehicle.
Amid the sweltering summer heat, the soldiers kept busy. Several in helmets climbed on the top of a tank, one wielding a wrench to make adjustments. Another opened the top hatch of a Stryker and deftly climbed inside.
Specialist Jonas Chu, a Stryker driver, said the experience means facing "new places, a lot of new crowds, and some pressure, because you're here with the Army."
"It's really fun, and honestly nerve-wracking, but I'm excited to be here," he added.
Chu said the Strykers are already mission capable – getting them ready for the parade is just a matter of a little shining and polishing.
Reid has operated Bradley fighting vehicles for nearly a decade, but never on the streets of a U.S. city.
"I've done different trips throughout Germany... but nothing on the level of what's going to be happening in D.C.," he said.
The tanks and armored vehicles arrived in Jessup, Maryland, on June 9 after a cross-country journey by train from Fort Cavazos in Texas. They were then strapped onto trucks and hauled to the park less than a mile from the Lincoln Memorial, where they will remain in place until the day of the parade.
City officials have voiced concern about the toll the tanks' tracks could take on Washington's roads. In preparation, the Army Corps of Engineers has anchored steel plates along the parade route at spots where the tanks will make a turn. Most of those points are on the traffic circle surrounding the Lincoln Memorial, according to an Army map shared with reporters.
Although the Army has said it would pay for any damage to the roads, Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser said in late May she was still "concerned."
Soldiers said they were aware of the controversy surrounding the parade and concerns that it doubled as a birthday celebration for the president but said their work in Washington was focused on their duty as members of the military.
"It's a coincidence that it happens on the same day," said Reid, the Bradley operator.
Chu, a Stryker driver, said his "main mission" is celebrating the Army's birthday. "Any other ones, that's just an added bonus."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
15 hours ago
- Yahoo
Fuel firms can challenge California's emission limits, supreme court rules
Fossil fuel companies are able to challenge California's ability to set stricter standards reducing the amount of polluting coming from cars, the US supreme court has ruled in a case that is set to unravel one of the key tools used to curb planet-heating emissions in recent years. The conservative-dominated supreme court voted by seven to two to back a challenge by oil and gas companies, along with 17 Republican-led states, to a waiver that California has received periodically from the federal government since 1967 that allows it to set tougher standards than national rules limiting pollution from cars. The state has separately stipulated that only zero-emission cars will be able to sold there by 2035. Although states are typically not allowed to set their own standards aside from the federal Clean Air Act, California has been given unique authority to do so via a waiver that has seen it become a pioneer in pushing for cleaner cars. Other states are allowed to copy California's stricter standard, too. But oil and gas companies, as well as Republican politicians, have complained about the waiver, arguing that it caused financial harm. The waiver was removed during Donald Trump's first term but then reinstated by Joe Biden's administration. Last week, Trump again moved to end the waiver, signing a congressional disapproval of California's move to cut pollution and shift new cars and trucks to become electric over the next decade. Gavin Newsom, California's governor and a Democrat, who is in a huge head-to-head battle with the White House over the Los Angeles protests and state power, amid Trump's immigration crackdown, has called this move illegal and has said the state will sue. The justices' ruling overturned a lower court's decision to dismiss the lawsuit by a Valero Energy subsidiary and fuel industry groups. The lower court had concluded that the plaintiffs lacked the required legal standing to challenge a 2022 EPA decision to let California set its own regulations. 'The government generally may not target a business or industry through stringent and allegedly unlawful regulation, and then evade the resulting lawsuits by claiming that the targets of its regulation should be locked out of court as unaffected bystanders,' conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote for the majority. Liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented from the decision. The lower court had previously ruled that the oil and gas industry didn't have legal standing to attempt to topple the California waiver but a challenge to this reached the supreme court, which appeared sympathetic to the claim when the case was heard in April. 'It's not that high a burden,' Amy Coney Barrett, one of the justices, said about proof of the alleged harm. California and the federal government have been allowed to 'stretch and abuse' the Clean Air Act, the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, one of the groups challenging the waiver, has complained. But environmentalists and California's Democratic leadership have defended the waiver, arguing that it has helped push forward vehicle innovation and help cut greenhouse gases. Transportation is responsible for more planet-heating pollution in the US than any other sector. 'California and other clean car states cannot achieve federal clean air standards and protect communities without reducing harmful transportation pollution,' said Andrea Issod, senior attorney at the Sierra Club. 'We stand with these states to defend their well-established authority to set standards for clean cars.' The supreme court's ruling on Friday does not in itself end California's standards to cut pollution from vehicles, said Vickie Patton, general counsel of the Environmental Defense Fund. 'The standards have saved hundreds of lives, have provided enormous health benefits, and have saved families money,' Patton said. 'While the supreme court has now clarified who has grounds to bring a challenge to court, the decision does not affect California's bedrock legal authority to adopt pollution safeguards, nor does it alter the life-saving, affordable, clean cars program itself.'
Wall Street Journal
15 hours ago
- Wall Street Journal
Senate Weighs Effectively Killing Rule That Drove Rise of Fuel-Efficient Cars
The Senate is weighing a major change to federal fuel-economy rules that would kneecap the policy that dramatically reduced gas consumption and helped create fuel-efficient cars like the Toyota Prius hybrid. Republican senators are proposing a change to the Corporate Average Fuel Economy, or CAFE, rules as part of President Trump's wide-ranging tax and spending bill. If enacted, the proposal would eliminate fines for violating CAFE, all but nullifying rules that for generations have pushed automakers to churn out ever cleaner and more fuel-efficient vehicles. That technology has saved two trillion gallons of gasoline over the past 50 years, according to the journal Energy Policy.
Forbes
a day ago
- Forbes
250 Million Acre Public Land Sale Would Ruin The Off-Road Industry
Ford Performance at the 2025 King of the Hammers in Southern California's Johnson Valley. Since President Trump took office in January, the amount of threats to anything considered public—from a large slice of our nation's workforce to the media—have been unrelenting. Earlier this month, these threats took on a new form: potentially robbing the American people of millions of acres of public land. Unveiled on June 11th and revised on the 14th, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee's budget reconciliation bill outlines over 250 million acres, to be slightly more exact, that could be offered up for sale to private business. As reported on by Jonathon Klein of Ride Apart, this could have a tremendous negative impact on not just our natural resources, but every corner of the outdoor industry as well. For those amongst us who enjoy off-road driving (or hiking, camping, fishing, hunting, cycling, climbing, etc.), the possibility of being cut-off from lands where we savor such activity is very real. Klein points out one particular swath of land in Southern California, Johnson Valley—home to one of the world's top off-road racing events, King of the Hammers—is on the chopping block, which would not only be detrimental to this event, but every single industry that's involved in it. Automakers, the aftermarket performance and racing industries, tourism, general outdoor equipment industries; the list goes on. Take that same scenario and multiply it by every other parcel of land that outdoor enthusiasts could lose access to, and the damage would be extensive. For a good overall picture of what's on the chopping block, The Wilderness Society has created a handy map. Competitors at the 2020 King of the Hammers in Johnson Valley, California. But why is all of this land potentially for sale? As stated in the bill itself, as much as $15 billion in revenue could come from expanded oil, gas, coal, and geothermal leasing. Other aims include increased housing production, domestic energy security and timber production, as well as, in the bill's summarized words, 'ensuring states and counties benefit from energy projects on federal lands.' The Wilderness Society has also outlined a handful of counter arguments. In its words, 'research suggests that very little of the land managed by the BLM (Bureau of Land Management) and USFS (US Forest Service) is actually suitable for housing.' It also explains that the federal government can revoke national monument status and that certain changes would negatively impact sovereign Tribal Nations. We can't forget the fact that increased energy production carries its own environmental hazards, too. It's all bad and very unnecessary. One thing that truly makes America great is its beautiful natural land that's here for all of us to savor, and this bill could cut off a very significant portion of it. And again, there's the immense adverse effect on every single outdoor industry, especially off-road driving and racing, and the massive amount of American companies that feed it. Contact your US senator and let them know how you feel. Especially if you live in Utah, which is Senator Mike Lee's turf. He's Chairman of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and the creator of this bill—ironically, as many as 18 million acres of his state's land could potentially be up for sale. That's a lot of territory for off-road driving, hunting, shooting, fishing, climbing, camping, hiking, mountain biking, and so on.
