The Department of Veterans Affairs is facing renewed scrutiny.

A recent investigative report raised questions about fraud and oversight inside the VA’s disability compensation system. At the same time, a new interim rule has changed how certain disability ratings are evaluated, affecting how benefits may be calculated going forward.

Overlaying these developments is a broader policy blueprint known as Project 2025, authored by conservative policy leaders and contributors, some of whom now serve in senior federal roles.

Is this routine administrative reform?

Or are we witnessing a deeper structural shift in how the federal government approaches veteran care?

In this deep dive, we examine:

• What Project 2025 says in its own words• Its origins and contributor network• The Washington Post investigation into alleged VA fraud• The personnel overlap between the project and current federal appointees• And why this may be shaping into a negative-sum dynamic

This isn’t partisan commentary.

It’s a statesmanship question.

How do you reform an institution built on a national covenant, without weakening the trust that sustains it?

This is Signals Over Noise.

News Theme 1 by Audionautix is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. ⁠⁠https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/⁠⁠

Artist: ⁠⁠http://audionautix.com/

For two decades, the “Golden Hour” defined modern battlefield medicine. Air superiority made rapid evacuation possible. Survival rates improved. Assumptions hardened into doctrine.

But what happens when evacuation is delayed — or denied?

In this episode, I sit down with Army Combat Medic and published author Robert Gaff to examine how unmanned systems, contested airspace, and large-scale combat operations are reshaping the battlefield. From the collapse of the Golden Hour model to prolonged casualty care, drone-enabled transparency, and the vulnerability of medical assets in peer conflict — we unpack what modern war is actually demanding from today’s medics.

If the battlefield is now visible, contested, and saturated with unmanned systems, what assumptions about war have quietly stopped being true?

This is not a conversation about technology hype.

It’s about survivability, doctrine, and whether we’re prepared for the next fight.

Link to Robert's Paper: https://www.militarypsych.org/wp-content/uploads/07-Modern-War-Medical-Gaff.pdf

News Theme 1 by Audionautix is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. ⁠https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/⁠

Artist: ⁠http://audionautix.com/

Figure One Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DseIm4YUW6U

Figure Two: ADP 4-02.4 Figure 1-3

This week’s Signals Over Noise briefing highlights a clear pattern across multiple regions: escalation by posture, not by declaration.

We begin in North America, where congressional friction and institutional scrutiny signal internal alignment stress. From there, we move south to Venezuela and regional access competition in South America. In the Indo-Pacific, sustained pressure around Taiwan continues to shape the pacing challenge under the National Defense Strategy.

In Africa, proxy rivalry in the Horn and the internationalization of Sudan’s war highlight how external actors extend influence through instability. In the Middle East, the deployment of a second U.S. carrier strike group coincides with renewed nuclear diplomacy, a dual-track approach that blends deterrence and negotiation. Finally, at the Munich Security Conference, U.S. and European leaders publicly reaffirm unity while quietly redefining its terms.

Across every theater, the question is the same:

Are we witnessing escalation or controlled leverage designed to prevent it?

Using the Signals Over Noise framework — Kinetics, Message Coherence, Language Game Alignment, and Outcome — we break down what matters, what doesn’t, and what to watch next.