In our tour of the newspapers today, we read various opinions: starting with an article about the “Gold Dome” and how it became a security necessity in the United States; Before we move to an analysis of the confrontation with Iran, as a battle of “influence”; Leading to an article about a modern technology capable of detecting diabetes by listening to the voice of the affected person.
We begin our tour with the Washington Post and an article entitled “Why America Needs Gold Dome,” by Mike Gitlin, General of the US Space Force.
The writer believed that the time when the United States relied on geography alone for security against any aggression had ended, pointing to two vast oceans that separated the country from its potential enemies.
He pointed to the development recorded in recent global conflicts by the United States’ opponents, hypersonic missiles capable of traveling more than 7,600 miles per hour, and advanced weapons capable of encircling the globe through outer space, as well as self-driving drones capable of penetrating defense systems.
For the first time in generations, according to the author, American cities and vital infrastructure are facing direct threats from adversaries, in a radical change in the strategic landscape, which confirms that “tomorrow cannot be defended based on yesterday’s assumptions.”
These growing threats, according to the author, prompted US President Donald Trump to acknowledge that securing the country requires a “new shield,” so the Golden Dome Initiative was launched in 2025.
General Gitlin, director of the Golden Dome Initiative, said that the enemies of the United States have been investing for decades in developing comprehensive defense systems to fortify themselves, but at the same time they are developing their capabilities to strike the United States on its soil.
The writer said that the US National Defense Strategy is clear that the approach must change from “relying on the hope that our enemies will not use their capabilities against us” to “ensuring that these enemies will not succeed” if they launch any attack.
He believed that the “strongest armor” is the one that enemies do not choose to test because they are certain of failure; In what is called the “prevention-based deterrence” strategy, instead of punishment-based deterrence, the writer stressed that the United States cannot bear the consequences of another attack similar to what happened on September 11, 2001.
Gitlin stressed that the United States, with the support of the President, Congress, and the Department of Defense, is continuing to build an integrated, multi-layered shield capable of defending the country against the threats of today and tomorrow.
The writer described the Golden Dome as a “dynamic shield” that can be developed according to the evolution of threats.
The author of the article monitored questions raised about the cost of building the Golden Dome, pointing to some estimates that reached $1.2 trillion and sometimes exceeded it. The writer confirmed that the current cost of the project is estimated at about 185 billion dollars.
Gitlin added, “The cost of this investment is significant, but the cost of failure is immeasurably greater.” Noting that the success of a single attack on any port or any major American economic center could cost the country trillions of dollars in losses, in addition to the serious escalation of the conflict that failure to defend American territory would entail.
The writer concluded by saying that “preventing such aggression is not just a military mission - it is a national commitment,” as he put it.
"Battle for influence"
And to the Wall Street Journal, where we read an article entitled “How to Win Time in the Conflict with Iran,” written by David Petraeus, the retired American general and researcher in international relations.
The writer monitored three axes in the ongoing confrontation with Iran, considering these axes as “clocks with different timings.” The first axis is the “operational hour” related to the passage of crude oil from the Strait of Hormuz, indicating that the passage of oil and liquefied natural gas through the Strait over the past two weeks recorded “the highest levels in six months.”
Petraeus pointed out the importance of alternative corridors in this regard, noting that the Emirate of Fujairah exported about 2.28 million barrels of crude oil per day in July. Saudi Arabia was also reported to have sold about 60 million barrels of crude oil from the port of Ras Tanura inside the Strait of Hormuz for loading in September and October.
The writer estimated that the Gulf's daily oil exports, in light of this situation, could range between 15 and 16 million barrels, noting that this number is still below pre-war rates, but it is much closer to the requirements of the global market - in light of the decline in demand since last February.
The second axis, regarding the confrontation with Iran, according to the writer, is the “market hour.” Petraeus believed that the world gained more time on this axis than expected, pointing to expectations that global demand for oil will decline by about 2.5 million barrels per day in 2026, and this demand has also witnessed a decline over the past six months compared to pre-war rates.
The writer believed that if the flow of Gulf oil continues to recover, and if oil producers from outside the Gulf continue to pump quantities higher than their rates, and if global demand remains low, the remaining deficit margin could narrow to one or two million barrels per day, or perhaps less than that.
The third and final axis, according to the author, is the “Washington Clock,” considering that the greatest political cost of this conflict can be monitored at American gas stations, where the price of regular gasoline recorded about $4.48 per gallon, while diesel recorded $6.52.
However, according to the author, the decline in crude oil prices and the decline in production prices are sufficient to reduce this burden and give Washington more time and more influence.
On the other hand, the author of the article saw that Iran is under increasing pressure, as its oil exports have virtually stopped thanks to the blockade imposed on Hormuz, amid the International Monetary Fund’s expectations that inflation rates in Iran this year will reach about 69 percent.
The writer believed that Iranian influence is gained from the ability to prevent oil exports to other countries from passing through the Strait of Hormuz, in addition to threatening the alternative routes that these exports could take. American influence, on the other hand, is gained from the ability to pass these exports and reach their destinations, with the exception of Iranian exports.
Therefore, every additional non-Iranian oil tanker that safely transits the Strait of Hormuz, every additional barrel of oil exported by the United Arab Emirates or Saudi Arabia, and every decrease of one barrel of oil in global demand - would reduce Iranian influence.
Although none of this guarantees reaching an agreement, “influence” is important, and the three aforementioned axes strongly indicate it.
Artificial intelligence and diabetes
Concluding our tour from the British Telegraph and an article entitled “Artificial Intelligence can detect diabetes through a patient’s voice,” written by Michael Searles, the newspaper’s health editor.
According to the researchers, modern artificial intelligence technology for detecting type 2 diabetes showed success when tested with many patients of different ages and genders, with the exception of black patients who were not adequately covered by the study sample, in addition to people who suffer from heart disease, high blood pressure, or obesity, whose voices give similar signals.
