The withdrawal of the remaining US troops from Iraq is a victory for the Iraqi nation and the resistance force in the region, Iran claimed on Thursday, October 1, also calling for greater cooperation between both the countries to achieve complete sovereignty for Iraq.
“The US, despite possessing vast resources and equipment, has been expelled from Iraq, and the Iraqi people are celebrating this victory,” head of Iran’s Quds’ forces Esmail Qaani said during a program held in Tehran to mark the second anniversary of the Israeli assassination of Hezbollah leader Hasan Nasrallah.
He thanked the “resistance of the Iraqi nation and the heroes of the Resistance Front” for making the end of the US occupation a reality.
The US withdrew all its remaining forces from Iraq on September 30, as per the 2024 understanding between both the countries marking the conclusion of over a decade-long military presence in the country.
The news of the withdrawal led to widespread celebrations in Baghdad and other parts of the country on Wednesday.
The US occupied Iraq during the 2003 war which lasted until 2011 when it publicly stated that it withdrew all its forces. They were then re-deployed in 2014 as part of the international coalition fighting against the Islamic State or ISIS.
Iraqi people, as well as the resistance groups in the country, have been demanding the withdrawal of all foreign troops from the country for years now. Their presence is seen as undermining the country’s sovereignty.
Due to popular resistance, most of the foreign troops left the country by 2019 after a victory was declared over ISIS. Remaining US troops were redeployed to some bases in Baghdad and Erbil.
In 2020, the Iraqi parliament adopted a resolution demanding the withdrawal of all remaining foreign troops from the country following popular protests over the US assassination of Qassem Solemani during a visit to Baghdad. Soleimani was the head of Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corp (IRGC) and key military strategist.
Qaani claimed that the US withdrawal from Iraq is also a victory for Iran which has been in support of the call on the ground that the presence of foreign troops in the region undermines regional security and stability.
Qaani also linked the withdrawal to the setbacks the US faced in its war with Iran in the last seven months. Contrary to its expressed wish to force Iranians to surrender within days of the war launched on February 28, “they encountered a reality vastly different from their calculations,” he said.
The US had used its military presence and the bases in Iraq to launch attacks across the border in Iran in the past and also during the ongoing war. This has prompted Iranian retaliations causing destruction and death of some of its servicemen.
Iran has also accused that the US military’s presence in Iraq has been used by Israel for its clandestine operations inside the country.
Reacting to US withdrawal from Iraq, IRGC said on Thursday that it is the beginning of its withdrawal from the entire region.
Qaani expressed hope that in the aftermath of US troop withdrawal there will be increased coordination between the governments in Iraq and Iran for purging the remaining US influences on the country and creating a secure and sovereign Iraq.
Though the US has withdrawn militarily, the legacy of its occupation still remains in Iraq. It continues to control Iraq’s economy by controlling the payments to its oil exports which are routed through the American Central Bank.
Oil revenues made up 90% of the Iraqi government’s total budget and over 40% of its national GDP.
Qaani accused that banning the Iranian airlines to Iraq and other countries in the region is a distraction used by the US to undermine the significance of its military defeat.
Iraq and several other countries in the region complied with the US sanctions on Iranian airlines last month following Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s threats of secondary sanctions.
En casa se acumulan olores que no siempre desaparecen con una limpieza rápida. Armarios cerrados, zapateros, cubos de basura o determinados rincones del baño pueden concentrar aromas desagradables, especialmente cuando existe poca ventilación. Ante estas situaciones, los remedios caseros suelen ganar protagonismo porque requieren ingredientes habituales y apenas ocupan espacio.
Entre ellos aparece una combinación llamativa: bicarbonato de sodio y orégano seco. Cada ingrediente cumple una función diferente y, aunque la mezcla puede resultar útil en determinadas circunstancias, conviene conocer qué puede hacer realmente y qué afirmaciones no cuentan con suficiente respaldo.
El bicarbonato de sodio es una sustancia ligeramente alcalina que puede intervenir en la neutralización de algunos compuestos responsables de los malos olores. No funciona como un ambientador que simplemente sustituye un olor por otro.
La química tiene una explicación sencilla: determinados olores proceden de compuestos ácidos volátiles y el bicarbonato puede reaccionar con algunos de ellos, transformándolos en sustancias menos volátiles. La Universidad McGill utiliza precisamente este mecanismo para explicar por qué puede resultar eficaz frente a ciertos olores de origen alimentario.
El Departamento de Agricultura de Estados Unidos también contempla el bicarbonato como una opción para ayudar a eliminar olores en frigoríficos y congeladores, aunque siempre dentro de una limpieza adecuada del aparato. Esto implica una precisión importante: no todos los malos olores responden de la misma manera al bicarbonato. Su eficacia depende de las sustancias que los producen.
La segunda parte de la mezcla tiene una función mucho más sencilla: proporcionar un olor característico. El orégano seco libera compuestos aromáticos que pueden contribuir a que un espacio pequeño huela de una manera más agradable.
La idea de que el orégano puede ayudar además a mantener alejados determinados insectos tiene algo de respaldo científico, pero debe matizarse. Las investigaciones disponibles se han centrado principalmente en aceites esenciales o extractos de orégano, no simplemente en colocar hojas secas en un armario.
Por ejemplo, diferentes estudios han observado efectos repelentes del aceite esencial de orégano frente a chinches, algunos insectos de productos almacenados y otras especies concretas. Un trabajo publicado en 2026 también encontró actividad repelente del aceite esencial frente a la mosca oriental de la fruta. Por tanto, no sería correcto presentar un recipiente de bicarbonato y orégano como un insecticida doméstico probado contra hormigas o polillas.
Para utilizarlo como ambientador casero, puede colocarse bicarbonato en un pequeño recipiente abierto y añadir una cantidad moderada de orégano seco. No es necesario humedecer el orégano: mantener la mezcla seca facilita su conservación y evita introducir humedad en espacios cerrados. Puede situarse en un zapatero, un armario o una zona pequeña donde se concentren olores, siempre fuera del alcance de niños y mascotas y evitando que el polvo entre en contacto con alimentos.
Conviene sustituir la mezcla cuando se haya apelmazado o haya perdido su utilidad. Y, sobre todo, no debe utilizarse para ocultar el origen de un olor persistente: si existe humedad, moho, basura acumulada o alimentos deteriorados, la solución pasa por eliminar la causa, no por perfumarla.
Hay otra precaución especialmente importante. Esta combinación está pensada para uso ambiental y doméstico, no para preparar bebidas, jarabes o remedios caseros.
Ingerir cantidades elevadas de bicarbonato puede resultar peligroso. Poison Control advierte de que una sobredosis de bicarbonato de sodio puede provocar una elevada carga de sodio, alteraciones del equilibrio ácido-base y otros problemas graves.
Así que la utilidad de esta mezcla debe entenderse en su justa medida: puede servir como pequeño recurso para combatir determinados olores en espacios reducidos, mientras el orégano aporta fragancia. No sustituye una limpieza adecuada ni constituye un tratamiento contra plagas.
Since Sunday, September 27, residents of Garvaghy Road in Portadown have prevented the Orange Order’s Drumcree march from passing through their community. Linking arms, locals and supporters warned that the parade could undo years of progress against sectarian violence in the north of Ireland.
More than 4,000 people signed petitions opposing the march, yet authorities formally allowed it to move ahead. First, the Parades Commission approved a limited procession. Then, the Court of Appeal lifted an injunction imposed by the High Court, paving the way for the march attempt on Sunday.
Negotiations to end the stand-off continued Thursday evening. According to local media, an earlier proposal suggested residents would accept the Orange Order’s legal right to walk down the road in return for the Order choosing not to march. The organization rejected the deal, insisting on passing through the neighborhood.
Recent events carry particular weight because of Drumcree’s history. During the Troubles, loyalist stand-offs in the area became a notable flash point of violence, with effects rippling out beyond Portadown. Following the Good Friday Agreement, the march had been rerouted for almost 30 years.
“The Orange Order organized stand-offs at Drumcree (particularly in 1995, 1996, 1997 and 1998) were regularly used by unionist death squads as a rallying cry and pretext to launch attacks, block roads, and intimidate Catholic families,” Garvaghy Road Residents Coalition spokesperson Breandán Mac Cionnaith wrote in August. “At least ten murders were carried out in Portadown and other areas during this period by those same death squads.”
Speaking to the People Before Profit party, Mac Cionnaith emphasized that the march had been rerouted because of the devastation it unleashed. “I always make a point that people need to remember that between 1996 and 1999, 21 people lost their lives across the north because of killings and murders carried out by loyalists acting in support of Drumcree,” he said. “Several of those victims were our neighbors, they were our friends, they lived in this community.”
Past decades gave the Garvaghy Road community a chance to rebuild, yet the memory of the violence was passed on through generations. “My family moved to England to escape the viciously sectarian climate around the marches,” one resident said. “My aunt went to school with Robert Hamill, a young man kicked to death by loyalists in the midst of the marches.”
“For 28 years, the Garvaghy Road community has lived in peace,” wrote Chris Hazzard of Sinn Féin. “That peace didn’t need a solution – it needed protection. Forcing an unwanted, sectarian march through this area defies all logic.”
“Why did the Orange Order want to march down a Catholic community?”, asked Sinn Féin’s Vice President and First Minister of Northern Ireland Michelle O’Neill. “It’s about supremacy, it’s about domination, it’s about ‘we’re in charge,’ and this community deserve better than that.”
“There is no going back, we’re not going back to the days of the past. What I want is to build upon the progress that’s been made over the last 28 years. What I want to do is actually ensure that we continue to let this community to flourish. Right now, what this community is being told by the Orange Order and political unionism is that they’re second class citizens and that their rights can be railroaded over.”
Progressive organizations, parties, musicians and artists across Ireland have voiced support for Garvaghy Road, many joining protesters in Portadown to warn against the standoff’s possible ripple effects. “The Garvaghy Road community is still living with the legacy of traumatic street conflict and state violence stretching back decades,” the Irish Republican Socialist Party wrote. “This latest attempt by the Orange order is merely a continuation of that conflict.”
Messages of solidarity arrived from as far as Palestine, where a Gazan teenager wrote in support of Garvaghy Road residents. “I know what it feels like when basic peace and dignity are stripped away, and how painful it is to fight for safety in your own home,” she emphasized. “The residents of Garvaghy Road deserve to live in peace without fear or intimidation, just as every family in Gaza does.”
A heavy rainstorm has been sweeping across the island of Crete on Thursday with tons of water flooding homes, businesses and agricultural land, damaging roads and bridges, causing the life of one person and putting at risk the lives of thousands. Most affected are the regions of Heraklion, Lasithi and Rethymnon. Thye bad weather is […]
The post Rainstorm sweeps across Crete: One dead, floods, infrastructure damages (videos) appeared first on Keep Talking Greece.
Al Mayadeen | September 30, 2026
The US-Israeli war on Iran has exposed a widening gap between Washington’s promises to protect its allies and its ability to sustain that protection, with expensive missile interceptors being consumed faster than American manufacturers can replace them, The Atlantic reported.
In an investigation titled “The THAAD Delusion,” Christopher Leonard argues that the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system became a cornerstone of US security arrangements in the Middle East despite being developed for a more limited battlefield role.
Iran’s ability to maintain missile attacks has challenged the assumption underpinning that role: that American forces would survive an opening barrage, then rapidly destroy the launchers responsible.
Instead, a prolonged conflict has placed mounting pressure on interceptor supplies, exposing weaknesses in US military planning, weapons procurement, and industrial capacity.
A missile shield built around a short war
According to the report, THAAD was originally intended to protect critical military deployments during the initial phase of a conflict, allowing US aircraft and naval forces time to respond.
Washington subsequently promoted the system as a central component of broader missile shields for regional allies, including the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia.
The distinction has become consequential during the war on Iran. While THAAD has intercepted ballistic missiles effectively, Leonard writes that Washington neither accumulated enough interceptors for sustained operations nor established the manufacturing capacity needed to replace them quickly.
US interceptor stocks depleted by sustained warfare
Drawing on estimates from the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the report says US forces used more than 150 THAAD interceptors during the 12-day war in 2025 and another 190 to 290 during “Operation Epic Fury.”
CSIS estimated that approximately 250 interceptors remained in the US stockpile. The report notes that additional deliveries could affect those calculations, while Washington has not disclosed its remaining inventories.
The depletion extends beyond THAAD. The investigation also described heavy consumption of Patriot interceptors and offensive weapons, including Tomahawk and JASSM missiles, placing pressure on multiple parts of the US arsenal.
Iran’s sustained attacks strain expensive defenses
The investigation identifies Iran’s combination of ballistic missiles and comparatively inexpensive drones as a major challenge to American defensive planning.
THAAD interceptors cost about $12 million each, according to the report. Repeated Iranian missile launches therefore impose substantial financial and logistical costs even when interceptions succeed.
At the same time, Shahed drones, which the article puts at $20,000 to $50,000 apiece, require separate defenses because THAAD cannot intercept them.
This combination forces defending militaries to confront different threats simultaneously while managing limited ammunition. The report describes regional forces using helicopters and costly air-to-air missiles against drones as pressure on their defenses increased.
Leonard’s central argument is that interception accuracy alone cannot deliver the lasting security Washington offered its partners when the attacker can sustain successive waves.
Industrial weaknesses slow replenishment
The article traces the shortage to years of budget decisions that favored major weapons platforms over ammunition reserves, alongside a concentrated defense industry dependent on vulnerable networks of specialized suppliers.
THAAD missiles require intricate assembly and components sourced from hundreds of companies. Expanding production involves increasing capacity throughout that network, rather than simply adding workers at a final assembly plant.
Pentagon assessments cited in the report found that substantial increases in production for several missile systems could require billions of dollars and take years.
The investigation also scrutinizes defense contractors’ spending priorities. Lockheed Martin distributed $6.8 billion through dividends and share buybacks in 2024, while RTX returned $3.7 billion to shareholders, even as industry representatives argued that factory expansion required advance funding or long-term government contracts.
Washington’s protection promises face scrutiny
The implications reach beyond ammunition shortages. US weapons sales helped bind allied militaries to Washington through shared equipment and reliance on American supplies, the report notes.
However, delayed deliveries and competing wartime demands have prompted some partners to seek alternatives, raising questions about the reliability of those arrangements.
In the Middle East, Leonard argues, attacks on infrastructure and military installations have also challenged the perception that hosting US forces guarantees security.
Stephen Wertheim, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, told The Atlantic that the consequences could reshape Washington’s regional position.
“We could be moving away from a Middle East that can be fairly described as being an American-dominated region,” he said.
Europe Minister Benjamin Haddad said proceeds from penalties imposed on the US technology company should be treated as EU revenue and used to lower the sums governments must pay into the common budget.
The proposal comes as negotiations intensify over the 2028–34 Multiannual Financial Framework, for which the European Commission has proposed expenditure of almost €2 trillion.
Haddad referred to about €4.6 billion in revenue associated with Google penalties and interest.
The proposal is less radical in budgetary terms than it first appears because fines that become final already enter the EU budget as “other revenue”.
The Commission’s explanation of EU budget revenue states that gross national income-based contributions act as the balancing element of the budget after customs duties, VAT-based resources and other revenues — including fines on companies — are taken into account.
Higher income from definitive competition fines can therefore reduce the amount required from national governments.
France is pressing for that mechanism to be applied clearly to the Google proceeds at a time when governments are seeking ways to limit increases in their national payments.
Google has accumulated substantial EU penalties through both competition law and the Digital Markets Act.
In July, the European Commission fined Google €890 million under the Digital Markets Act in two separate decisions.
A €460 million penalty concerned the Commission’s finding that Google gave preferential treatment to its own services in search results. A further €430 million fine concerned restrictions affecting developers’ ability to direct users towards alternative purchasing channels outside Google Play.
Google has contested elements of the EU enforcement regime and has continued legal proceedings over Commission decisions.
EU Today has followed the dispute closely. In September, Google began changing European search results following the DMA enforcement action, while earlier Commission measures generated a wider dispute with Washington over European regulation of US technology groups.
The French budget proposal shifts the issue from regulation towards public finance.
EU governments are currently divided over the Commission’s proposed 2028–34 budget, which averages about 1.26 per cent of EU gross national income.
Germany, Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands and Austria are among governments seeking substantial reductions in the proposed spending level.
EU Today reported this month that five large net contributors were demanding cuts of several hundred billion euros from the Commission proposal.
France also faces a sharp increase in its projected contribution.
Against that background, governments are looking at both expenditure reductions and new revenue streams that could limit demands on national treasuries.
The wider negotiations cover possible EU “own resources” — revenue that flows directly or indirectly to the European budget rather than being provided through conventional national contributions.
Existing resources include customs duties, a VAT-based contribution, a plastics contribution and national payments calculated according to gross national income.
The Commission has also proposed additional sources linked to carbon pricing and other EU policies.
EU Today has previously examined how EU leaders are searching for new revenue sources for the €2 trillion budget while attempting to finance defence, competitiveness, migration, agriculture, cohesion programmes and support for Ukraine.
Company fines differ from permanent own resources because their size is unpredictable and depends on enforcement decisions and subsequent legal proceedings.
A large fine can provide a one-off boost to EU revenue, but it cannot readily finance recurring expenditure across a seven-year financial framework.
Definitive fines have nevertheless affected member-state contributions before. Commission budget amendments have explicitly incorporated competition penalties as additional revenue, reducing the amount that must be raised elsewhere.
France is now seeking to ensure that the Google proceeds are reflected directly in the sums demanded from national budgets.
The proposal comes before another round of negotiations over the Multiannual Financial Framework, where the size of the budget remains unresolved.
With agreement requiring unanimity among all 27 governments, even relatively small sources of additional revenue are becoming part of the bargaining over who ultimately pays for the EU’s expanding spending commitments.
Login