One day after vehemently denying speculation that India plans to raise duties on gold and silver imports following Prime Minister Narendra Modi's urging people to avoid buying gold for a year due to the impact of the Iran war, India did in fact raise import tariffs on gold and silver in an attempt to defend its currency, a surprise move as the country races to limit the damage from the Middle East war and to shore up foreign-exchange reserves.
The government has more than doubled import taxes on gold and silver to about 15% from 6%, according to two official orders, imposing a 10% basic customs duty alongside a 5% agriculture infrastructure and development levy.
The hikes, aiming to dampen demand in the world’s second-largest bullion market, followed a rare weekend appeal from Prime Minister Narendra Modi in which he urged citizens to forgo gold purchases as well as unnecessary foreign travel in order to help hold up the currency. The Indian rupee has plunged more than 6% in 2026 with most of the losses occurring after the Iran war started; the currency is on pace to drop to 100 vs the US dollar in the coming weeks.
New Delhi is also weighing other emergency steps, including raising fuel prices and curbing non-essential imports like electronic goods.
India, the world’s third-largest oil importer, has been hit hard by the inflationary shock caused by energy disruptions in the Persian Gulf.
Higher import bills have driven sharp foreign-exchange outflows, pushing the rupee down to a record low and prompting the Reserve Bank of India to step in and sell dollars. And the fact that gold is the country’s largest import item after crude oil does not help, which is why India is doing everything in its power to limit capital outflows.
Gold is deeply ingrained in Indian culture and plays a vital role in savings, weddings and religious festivals. India meets almost of all its demand through imports, with 710 tons of gold coming in last year.
Of course, attempts by the government to limit capital outflows via precious metals will only encourage the population to find alternative mechanisms to preserve purchasing power, and it is only a matter of time before India joins the rest of the financially suppressed developing world in actively pursuing such non-fiat alternatives as tether and bitcoin if the traditional gold and silver pathways are limited.
Tyler Durden Wed, 05/13/2026 - 01:03OpenAI CEO Sam Altman spent roughly four hours on the witness stand Tuesday defending the company’s shift from a nonprofit to a for-profit model, directly rebutting Elon Musk’s claims that he and co-founder Greg Brockman “stole a charity” when they restructured the artificial intelligence lab.
"I think it’s wonderful that through the hard work of thousands of people … we’ve been able to create one of largest nonprofits in the world, [and] that it has this role to protect the technology and the impact on the world," Altman told the court.
The testimony came during the third week of Musk’s federal lawsuit against Altman, Brockman, and OpenAI in U.S. District Court in Oakland, California. Musk, who helped found OpenAI in 2015 but left its board in 2018, accuses the pair of betraying the original mission to develop safe AI for humanity after he provided tens of millions in early funding. He is seeking Altman’s and Brockman’s removal from leadership, more than $150 billion in damages, and the unwinding of OpenAI’s 2019 conversion to a for-profit structure now backed heavily by Microsoft. Musk has accused the pair of bilking him out of $38 million in donations, then restructuring the nonprofit lab they coufounded by exclusively licensing their flagship product to Microsoft. This, Musk's team argues, betrayed OpenAI's founding mission to operate an open-source charity that would counter the existential risks of profit-driven AI.
Altman told the jury that Musk had pushed for significant personal control from the outset, including an early proposal that he receive 90 percent equity in the company - an idea Altman said made him “extremely uncomfortable.” He also rejected Musk’s suggestion of a merger with Tesla, saying it would have compromised OpenAI’s independence because “Tesla needs to serve its customers and sell cars.”
On the central issue of the for-profit conversion, Altman testified that Musk either supported the move or did not oppose it. “Quite the opposite,” he said when asked whether Musk had resisted the change. Altman portrayed Musk’s current lawsuit as driven by “sour grapes” after Musk launched the rival xAI lab, attempted to poach OpenAI researchers, and engaged in what Altman described as “business interference.”
Musk, meanwhile, told the court "You can’t just steal a charity."
Altman shot back when his turn came: "No, you can’t steal it, but Mr. Musk did try to kill it."
As the Epoch Times notes further, Altman said Musk abandoned the company in 2018 to start his own for-profit competitor, xAI, when other founders rejected his bid to take full control of the operation.
“I thought incredibly highly of Elon, and felt like he had abandoned us, not come through on his promises,” Altman said, suggesting Elon’s withdrawal of support jeopardized the mission. “We were left for dead.”
He acknowledged Musk was a critical contributor but added, “I also wish he would stop doing what he is doing here, which in my opinion is jealousy as we get more and more successful.”
In the bitter feud between the former friends and cofounders, which in recent years has unfurled on social media, both volley accusations of betrayal, double-dealing and hypocrisy.
Altman on Tuesday described his tumultuous tenure at OpenAI’s helm as painful and difficult, its successes unimaginable just a decade prior.
The once-embattled and underfunded nonprofit startup, founded in 2015, was recently valued at $852 billion following a 2025 restructuring as a public benefit corporation, in which the nonprofit arm received a 26 percent stake in the for-profit, based on a transfer of intellectual property. Microsoft, following $13 billion in investments since 2019, currently owns a 27 percent stake in the company.
‘Hurt and Angry’Of the circumstances surrounding his chaotic 2023 ouster by former nonprofit board members, who at the time cited his “consistent pattern of lying” and concerns over safety protocol issues, Altman said it was one of the most painful moments in his life.
“I had poured the last years of my life into this. I was watching it about to be destroyed. … I was very angry and hurt and upset. It felt like an incredible betrayal,” he said, noting he could have made a lot of money and had a “much easier life” if he had gone to work for Microsoft.
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella testified Monday that at the time, he offered to create an AI project for Altman, Brockman and any potentially departing employees, in an effort to prevent the wholesale implosion of OpenAI—and along with it his company’s formidable investments.
Musk alleges Microsoft “methodically entrenched itself” into OpenAI, helping to engineer the 2023 “coup” and seize the company’s board of directors.
Altman returned to OpenAI just days later, at the board’s invitation, he said, because he “cared about the mission and the people,” and thought it would be the last chance to create an AI lab with OpenAI’s unique mission and structure.
“I was not trying to deceive the board,” Altman said. “I was certainly not trying to do anything other than make safe AI and distribute it to humanity. I feel badly for the misunderstandings … but that was never my intent.”
In court Tuesday, Steven Molo, an attorney for Musk, pressed Altman about his conditions for return, which included firing the original board—and vetting a new one with Nadella’s approval.
Musk is suing Microsoft for aiding and abetting OpenAI’s breach of a charitable trust, allegations Nadella disputed when he testified May 11 about his involvement in the messy 2023 shakeup and a landmark financial agreement between the two companies the same year.
Power StruggleFollowing a 2017 milestone demonstration of OpenAI technology at a gaming event, the founders realized they had a chance at becoming competitive but would need significantly more capital and computing power to take on Google, at the time an undisputed leader in the field.
Each floated various ideas for profit and nonprofit configurations; Musk at one point suggested rolling OpenAI into Tesla. Throughout late 2017 and early 2018, discussions became more contentious as the power struggle between Musk and Altman intensified.
At one point, Altman said, Musk suggested giving himself a 90 percent equity stake in a for-profit entity; Musk meanwhile, pointed out that he proposed taking an initial majority stake that would be diluted with additional investment over time.
Altman said Tuesday that Musk contributed only 28 percent of the nonprofit’s funding from 2015 to 2020, and failed to come through on a $1 billion pledge, leaving the startup with few options.
Molo pressed Altman, suggesting he had a “fixation” with being CEO. The attorney referenced an email from Brockman and fellow cofounder Ilya Sutskever during the period of intense negotiations over the future funding and structure of OpenAI.
“We don’t understand why the CEO title is so important to you. Your stated reasons have changed, and it’s hard to really understand what’s driving it,” the two wrote. “Is AGI your primary motivation? How does it connect to your political goals?”
Artificial General Intelligence refers (AGI) generally refers to the theoretical point at which machine “intelligence” meets or surpasses human cognitive abilities and can operate autonomously, which many experts view as an existential threat to humanity. Musk cites the risks of runaway AGI as the express motivation for founding OpenAI.
Altman on Tuesday said, by way of explanation, “I was thinking about running for governor at the time.”
Molo challenged OpenAI’s contention that its nonprofit board has control of OpenAI’s for-profit ventures and governance.
In a poignant moment, the plaintiff’s attorney played a brief clip of Altman’s 2024 appearance on a popular podcast, in which he appears to acknowledge former board members’ contentions that he maintained de-facto control over the nonprofit’s board of directors, and impeded their ability to carry out their duties.
Asked on the podcast if he trusted himself with the kind of power that will come with being first to develop AGI, Altman paused and said he was going to offer a standard response about how no one person should have total control over AGI.
“I think you want a robust governance system,” he said, noting a number of issues related to “our board drama.”
“But as many people have observed, although the board had the legal ability to fire me, in practice it didn’t quite work. And that is its own kind of governance failure,” he said.
Under re-direct by OpenAI attorney William Savitt, Altman clarified the outgoing board technically fired him, rehired him, and appointed a new board.
Toxic Management StyleAltman said he was “annoyed” when Musk resigned from the OpenAI board in 2018 to pursue his own AI venture.
“He really had lost confidence in the organization and did not believe we were going to be successful. … And he didn’t want to be associated with something he couldn’t control,” Altman said.
That left questions about funding gaps, competition and, Altman said, whether Musk would “take revenge” on his former cofounders.
“I don’t think Mr. Musk understood how to fund a good research lab,” Altman said, noting he had “demoralized” some of the company’s most key researchers, including by suggesting they be ranked by accomplishments.
Musk’s management style, he said, may work in other industries, but upset the culture in a fledgling, frontier lab where people needed “psychological safety” and long periods of time to develop their work.
Reaction to his departure, Altman said, was mixed. It introduced instability but also provided a “morale boost.”
Challenging Altman's CredibilityMusk’s lawyer, Steven Molo, hammered Altman - citing prior testimony that described a “toxic culture of lying” at OpenAI and statements from former executives who questioned Altman’s trustworthiness. He repeatedly asked whether Altman had misled people in business dealings. Altman responded that he believed he was “an honest and trustworthy business person,” while acknowledging there had been times he had not told the full truth and that he had heard others describe him as a liar.
Molo also highlighted Altman’s personal financial interests, including a roughly $1.7 billion stake in Helion Energy, suggesting potential conflicts during OpenAI’s negotiations. Altman’s own lawyer, William Savitt, focused on Altman’s commitment to the company, including his decision during the 2023 board crisis to return rather than leave for Microsoft. Altman described that choice as being willing to “run back into a burning building to save it.”
Musk did not remain in the courtroom for Altman’s testimony - while closing arguments are expected on Thursday. An advisory jury may begin deliberations shortly afterward, though the judge will ultimately decide any remedies.
The case centers on whether OpenAI’s leaders violated a charitable trust when they created a for-profit subsidiary in 2019 to attract talent and capital. OpenAI maintains that Musk was aware of and supported the restructuring at the time. Musk argues the conversion enriched Altman and Brockman at the expense of the original nonprofit mission.
Brockman’s private journal - awkward...One bit of awkwardness; During Brockman’s testimony last week, hundreds of pages from his personal journal - kept since 2010 - were introduced as evidence. The entries, written in 2017, captured Brockman’s internal debate over balancing financial pressures with OpenAI’s founding mission and his uncertainty about Musk’s role and intentions. One entry from November 2017, labeled Exhibit 161, was written before and after a key meeting with Musk and has been frequently cited by both sides.
The journal first surfaced in January during the discovery phase of the case. Musk’s legal team obtained the full document and began questioning Brockman about specific passages during his deposition. OpenAI tried to keep large portions sealed, arguing they were cherry-picked and taken out of context, but the judge allowed several entries to be entered as exhibits and even quoted from them in her ruling that let the trial proceed.
The entries that have drawn the most attention were written in 2017, during a particularly turbulent period as OpenAI was wrestling with its future direction and Musk’s role in the company.
One August 2017 entry showed Brockman grappling with the tension between financial realities and the original mission to benefit humanity. A September entry captured his stream-of-consciousness reasoning about the complicated Musk situation - written in the same “chain of thought” style that would later become famous in AI models. The most cited entry, labeled Exhibit 161, was written in November 2017, both before and after a pivotal meeting with Musk. It revealed a founder full of uncertainty, ambition, self-doubt, and a clear desire to do the right thing for the company’s long-term mission.
Brockman testified that he used the journal to process important decisions and that he wrote only for himself. He described the public disclosure as “very painful” but said there was “nothing in there that I’m ashamed of.” He stopped documenting OpenAI matters in the journal in 2023. Musk’s attorneys have referred to the document as a “diary,” while OpenAI’s lawyers have called it a “journal.”
Tyler Durden Tue, 05/12/2026 - 23:53Authored by Allen Stein via The Epoch Times,
They are the dinosaurs of the modern age—hulking retired aircraft baking in the Arizona sun, stretching in rows across the desert.
Once America’s defenders of the sky—B-52 Stratofortress and B-1B Lancer bombers, F-16 Fighting Falcon fighters, C-130 Hercules and C-5 Galaxy cargo planes—they now sit idle, preserved for parts or history.
Maintaining and reclaiming these aircraft is no small task at the nation’s only military aircraft “boneyard.”
At Davis–Monthan Air Force Base, the 309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group (AMARG) oversees that work.
“Most of these planes have been decommissioned, but the parts are still very useful. The parts are all viable,” public relations manager Robert Raine said during an April 21 tour of the 2,600-acre (4-square-mile) AMARG facility in Tucson.
Each aircraft is secured for long-term storage, drained of fluids, stripped of explosive components, and preserved against the slow wear of the desert.
Depending on the aircraft, some could be brought back into service, Raine said.
Since 1964, the maintenance group has served as the sole designated storage, salvage, and disposal center for U.S. military and government organization aircraft.
(Top) A row of military helicopters in storage at the 309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group in Tucson, Ariz., on April 21, 2026. (Bottom) A C-5 Galaxy cargo plane with a 223-foot wingspan overshadows other military aircraft in storage at the “Boneyard” at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson, Ariz., on April 21, 2026. Allan Stein/The Epoch Times
The facility employs more than 700 workers and encompasses more than half a million square feet of industrial space.
Here, aircraft come to die, hibernate, or be reborn, their components cleaned, repaired, and repurposed for use in other machines—for conflicts now and those yet to come.
The facility opened shortly after World War II, on April 1, 1946. The site was chosen for its dry desert climate and its ability to store vast quantities of surplus aircraft and military equipment.
Hard caliche soil, along with the absence of earthquakes and extreme weather such as tornadoes and hurricanes, made it an ideal place for long-term storage.
USGS orthophoto of Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson, Ariz., on May 16, 1992. United States Geological Survey/Public Domain, CC0
The sprawling boneyard is home to 3,488 aircraft, ranging from supersonic fighter jets to massive refueling and cargo planes to strategic bombers—75 aircraft types and 6,700 engines in all.
“AMARG is the last stop for parts” for legacy aircraft, Raine told The Epoch Times. However, it is “not an infinite source.”
When a component is needed, the request typically begins in the global supply system, he said.
If it is not available there, the request moves up the chain to Air Force weapon system program offices, Navy and Marine Corps program management authorities, or Navy Supply Weapon Systems Support.
The 309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson, Ariz. Since 1964, the maintenance group has served as the sole designated storage, salvage, and disposal center for U.S. military and government organization aircraft. Overviews created with Apple Maps, satellite imagery courtesy of Digital Globe
Those agencies can then draw from the maintenance group’s vast inventory.
In that system, the boneyard functions as a deep reserve—an industrial fallback where retired aircraft continue to serve, one part at a time.
Raine noted that AMARG does not own any of the aircraft or other assets stored at the facility.
Ownership remains with the original service branches or organizations that delivered them, including U.S. government agencies such as the Coast Guard and Forest Service, allied governments, and private institutions such as the Smithsonian Institution.
The group has roughly 80 customers. But when it comes to procuring and delivering parts, its crews often work on short notice and tight timelines.
A B-1 bomber at the 309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group “boneyard” in Tucson, Ariz., on April 21, 2026. Each aircraft at the boneyard is secured for long-term storage, drained of fluids, stripped of explosive components, and preserved against the slow wear of the desert. Allan Stein/The Epoch Times
Each year, AMARG receives an average of 250 to 300 aircraft. Its five core missions are storage, reclamation, regeneration, modification, depot-level maintenance, and disposal.
The planes are inventoried, flushed of fluids, washed, sealed tightly with tape and a special spray material, and stored for years or decades.
“They’ve taken off hazardous materials. They’ve taken off anything that might be classified. They’ve taken off anything that might need to be broken down to demilitarization,” Raine said.
“They’ve drained it to make sure that any residual preservative oil is out of it. They’ve drained the hydraulics out of the landing gear. They’ve depressurized any systems in the aircraft.
(Left, Right) Workers at the 309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group remove the pilot ejection system at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson, Ariz., on April 21, 2026. The facility employs more than 700 workers and encompasses more than half a million square feet of industrial space. Allan Stein/The Epoch Times
“It’s basically clean and ready to go.”
The most recent aircraft to arrive was an F/A-18E Hornet in mid-April. The longest-stored aircraft is a Navy T-1A Sea Star, which arrived on April 6, 1970.
Among the rarest are the XC-99 heavy cargo aircraft, a YC-14 military transport aircraft, and a T-46 light jet trainer aircraft.
The F-16 Fighting Falcon is the boneyard’s most numerous resident, with more than 350 aircraft. Some have been dismantled and sent to Ukraine for use as training platforms.
It is followed by more than 315 C-130 Hercules aircraft, nearly 300 F-15 Eagle fighters, and 235 A-10 Thunderbolt II aircraft.
The second YC-14, one of only two ever built, is stored at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson, Ariz., on Jan. 3, 2012. The aircraft is among the rarest at the boneyard. (w:en:Kitplane01 (talk | contribs), CC-BY-3.0)
In April, the Air Force moved a retired KC-135 Stratotanker out of long-term storage at the base for possible reactivation following losses of aerial refueling aircraft in the Iran conflict, according to FlightGlobal.
In 1948, “when the Soviet Union closed road, rail, and canal traffic into Berlin ... about a quarter of the stored C-47 Skytrain cargo aircraft were withdrawn from storage and returned to flying service in support of the Berlin Airlift,” according to the Department of War.
(Top) An F-16 jet fighter is dismantled for parts at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson, Ariz., on April 21, 2026. (Bottom Left) Reusable fuel tanks from an F-16C jet fighter at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson, Ariz., on April 21, 2026. (Bottom Right) An F-16 jet engine ready for delivery at the 309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group in Tucson, Ariz., on April 21, 2026. Allan Stein/The Epoch Times
Aviation HistorySome equipment hails from the Vietnam era, including the helicopter used in evacuating the last Marines from the U.S. Embassy in Saigon on April 30, 1975.
Another historic fighter jet kept at the site is a modified F-15 Eagle, nicknamed “Celestial Eagle,” which was used in the only successful satellite destruction by an aircraft-launched missile on Sept. 13, 1985.
Air Force Maj. Wilbert Doug Pearson launched an anti-satellite missile that destroyed a Solwind P78-1 satellite at an altitude of 375 miles.
The airplane got up to about 38,000 feet when Pearson fired the missile at Mach 1.22, Raine said. The weapon used a kinetic kill vehicle rather than an explosive warhead.
“So it just hit it, basically—skin to skin,” he said.
Raine said each aircraft in the boneyard is categorized by type based on condition and utility.
The remains of the helicopter used to evacuate Marines from the U.S. Embassy in Saigon, Vietnam, on April 30, 1975, are stored at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson, Ariz., on April 21, 2026. Allan Stein/The Epoch Times
For example, Type 2000 aircraft are used for parts, while Type 3000 aircraft remain flyable but are rarely used.
Reclamation is the process of removing parts from aircraft to support warfighters or replenish supply inventories.
Regeneration involves returning aircraft to a serviceable condition.
Disposal is the final stage, when an aircraft no longer has a use and is ultimately dismantled and sold as scrap metal.
A number of aircraft with historic value have found their way into the Pima County Air and Space Museum in Tucson.
Among the museum’s decommissioned aircraft are F-16s and older jet fighters, including the SR-71 Blackbird, capable of reaching speeds of Mach 3.
A Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird on display at the Pima County Air and Space Museum in Tucson, Ariz., on April 19, 2026. Allan Stein/The Epoch Times
The longest-serving AV-8B Harrier II+ was added to the museum after accumulating 9,671 flight hours.
“There are different levels of decommission for aircraft,” Kaylei, a museum tour guide who asked to use only her first name, told The Epoch Times.
“Some are more just like waiting in the wings. But if needed, they’re kept in good enough repair to put back into service.”
Cost AvoidanceThe Post Block Repair project at the AMARG is one of the Air Force’s major modernization efforts, keeping F-16s operational until they enter service life extension programs, according to the Department of War.
The first aircraft for modification arrived at the boneyard in August 2022.
At AMARG, specialists carry out inspections, repairs, and upgrades to maintain F-16 performance and combat readiness, including avionics improvements to keep pace with evolving air combat.
The Air Force returned two B-1 Lancer bombers to active service after restoring them from the boneyard.
The service also regenerated C-23 Sherpa aircraft for use by the U.S. Forest Service, and transferred B-57 Canberra aircraft to NASA for high-altitude missions, including eclipse observation.
A B-52 Stratofortress is seen in storage at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson, Ariz., on April 21, 2026. In May 2019, a B-52 nicknamed “Wise Guy” became only the second to be returned to service from the boneyard, according to Air Force Times. Allan Stein/The Epoch Times
The Department of War notes that work also continues on A-10 Thunderbolt II components, such as engine cowlings, following the completion of the A-10 wing overhaul program in 2024.
In May 2019, a B-52 nicknamed “Wise Guy” became only the second B-52 Stratofortress to return to service from the boneyard, according to Air Force Times. It had entered storage in 2008.
Raine said AMARG not only provides the vital parts needed to keep fleets airborne, but also generates billions of dollars in “cost avoidance.”
Every dollar not spent on new equipment is a taxpayer dollar saved, he said.
From fiscal years 2016 through 2026, AMARG reclaimed 79,358 parts—86 percent of them priority items—totaling $4.37 billion in value.
Fighter jets sit in storage at the 309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson, Ariz., on April 21, 2026. Allan Stein/The Epoch Times
In fiscal year 2025, the facility reclaimed 8,399 parts, 85.3 percent of them priority, worth nearly $495 million.
So far this fiscal year, group crews have salvaged 6,434 parts, 71.8 percent of them priority, valued at $380.6 million.
For high-priority reclamations, the process can take as little as 24 to 48 hours from the time AMARG receives a request, Raine said.
More involved reclamations can take longer. On average, parts requests take seven to 10 working days from the time AMARG receives the request, he said.
In most cases, storage is long-term and requires extensive preparation.
“They’re going to clean all the bugs and gunk and grime off. Then they'll start the taping process. So cardboard first, then barrier paper,” Raine said.
“The tape holds that in place. This seals up openings. These are the openings that are in the back of the aircraft, and they'll wax the canopy to keep the spray seal from getting too adhered to the canopy.”
Boxes of tools used in aircraft parts manufacturing are stacked at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson, Ariz., on April 21, 2026. More than 271,000 pieces of production equipment are stored on-site. Allan Stein/The Epoch Times
It’s mostly for temperature control, but it completes the seal, Raine said. Then the aircraft is placed in cold storage.
“So the big guys—like these KC-10s—can be put right out in the desert. When the temperature gets too high or too low, we have to move the plane,” he said.
Cost savings are further driven by more than 271,000 pieces of aircraft production equipment kept on site.
These specialized tools include the original mold for the B-2 Spirit cockpit canopies.
“You can see where the windows went out of the cockpit for the B-2. And it looks kind of weirdly speckled because it originally had aluminum—what they call an armor shield aluminum coating—on it,” he said.
The mold used in fabricating the pilot canopy of a B-2 strategic bomber is one of thousands of original tools at the 309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson, Ariz., on April 21, 2026. Allan Stein/The Epoch Times
Driving through the aircraft tooling storage area is like moving through a small city. But the scale of the boneyard becomes clear once one sees the B-52 Stratofortress bombers in various stages of disassembly and the C-5 Galaxy cargo planes with their 223-foot wingspans.
An F-16 Fighting Falcon sat in pieces as a crew performed “egress,” removing explosive components such as ejection-seat systems.
The sprawling landscape is dotted with outbuildings, among them a 1,000-by-180-foot covered facility with adjustable docks for work on C-130 Hercules aircraft and Northrop’s T-38 Talon jet trainer.
Three hard-sided hangars house 20 docks configured for regeneration, modification, and structural repair work, along with commodity shops and adaptive workspaces.
The rear stabilizer wings from an F-16C jet fighter at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson, Ariz., on April 21, 2026. Allan Stein/The Epoch Times
The site also includes a dedicated engine test shop, laser systems for paint removal, and two cranes for heavy lifting.
In October, AMARG expects to complete a temporary maintenance shelter with eight docks designed for F-16 aircraft.
Raine said about 70 percent of the boneyard is used for storage, a figure that fluctuates each year as aircraft and parts move in and out.
“By and large, everything flies itself in. As long as stuff goes out, there’s room for aircraft to come in,” he said.
Tyler Durden Tue, 05/12/2026 - 23:25Russian military blogger Mikhail Zvinchuk, the operator behind the Rybar Telegram channel, recently surfaced in an interview with the Chinese outlet Guancha, offering a non-Western assessment of the ten-week U.S.-Iran war.
The interview is notable given that Washington has targeted the private Russian think tank, with the State Department's Rewards for Justice program offering up to $10 million for information related to Rybar-linked foreign election interference operations.
The main topic of the hour-long conversation between Zvinchuk and the host representing Guancha was the Iranian conflict.
"The main goal of Trump is to shake up the market. Because if you monitor all logistics companies, oil companies, and LNG companies, you will find that big players have started to consume mid-tier and small players."
He continued, "For example, Maersk, one of the biggest logistics companies in the world, can wait for just one or two months and suffer financial losses. But some smaller companies from Greece simply can't withstand such pressure."
Zvinchuk noted, "And it helps this conflict monopolize the market. So Iran is just a mere tool to achieve market monopolization. Because you know quite well that Trump's policy relies on profit. He is a businessman or merchant, so he acts in his and his team's financial interests. And if you place your financial interest above political reputation and above your nation, then your actions have to have economic roots."
In other words, Zvinchuk is claiming that the US-Iranian conflict is not just about Iran or the nuclear threat, but about forcing a market shakeout in the energy and logistics space. The war has clearly disrupted shipping, snarled global supply chains, and already begun to rewire energy flows.
The market shakeout Zvinchuk refers to, especially in the energy sector, has affected Gulf countries such as Qatar, which have seen energy flows dramatically reduced or halted by the conflict. The direct result, as we mentioned earlier in the conflict, is that the US has become a direct beneficiary:
US LNG Export Terminals "Running Near Maximum" As MidEast Energy Infra Descends Into Chaos
Qatar Dethroned As 'LNG King' As U.S. Seizes Throne, Reshaping Future Of Gas
Fill 'er Up: Record Armada Of Tankers Bound For US Gulf To Load Oil
In fact, last week's U.S. Department of Energy report showed U.S. fuel exports hitting record highs, with exports from the Gulf of America becoming the world's emergency gas station...
US Crude Oil Exports
US Diesel Exports
Other topics were discussed during the hour-long interview between Zvinchuk and the Guancha host, but what captured our attention was how the U.S.-Iran war was being framed through an economic lens rather than the security aspect of nuclear threats.
Western audiences are saturated with official White House messaging, selective corporate media leaks, and domestic propaganda, but it is occasionally useful to examine foreign propaganda as well to help understand how adversarial and non-aligned actors interpret Washington's goals in the Middle East through an economic lens.
In our view, the conflict is ultimately about empire, control of maritime chokepoints, and securing global energy supply chains ahead of the 2030s.
Zoltan Pozsar of advisory firm Ex Uno Plures recently explained it best: the Trump administration is "methodically building a portfolio of assets" to pressure China, centered on strategic energy supply nodes and maritime chokepoints that have historically supported Beijing's cheap crude imports.
Tyler Durden Tue, 05/12/2026 - 23:00