US Prepares for Massive Missile and Drone Attacks Like Ukraine
Left 50%
Center 0%
Right 50%
1 left · 0 center · 1 right
What happened
At the Association of the United States Army convention in Washington, D.C., last month, Brig. Gen. Steven Carpenter, head of Multi-Domain Command Europe, said U.S. forces in Europe needed to be prepared to process more than 1,500 potential targets a day and defend against as many as 1,200 incoming missiles and drones, figures he said reflect "what we think Ukraine's worst day is" in Russia's war. Army officials said they are developing artificial-intelligence tools to help soldiers sort sensor and network data and recommend responses while keeping humans in the final targeting decision, and earlier this year a joint U.S. Army and NATO exercise in Europe used a homegrown AI system then in beta-testing. Separately, the European Commission opened a second funding round under its Security Action for Europe (SAFE) program, inviting all 27 EU member states to request loans from €21.3 billion (about $23.7 billion) in unused capacity within a €150 billion defense-loan facility adopted in May 2025. The loans go to member governments, which must repay them; Brussels urged participants to prioritize air defenses, drones, ammunition, and missiles for their own forces and for Ukraine and to pursue cooperative purchases, though Ukrainian participation is not mandatory. Nineteen member states joined the original SAFE round and requested more than €130 billion; the Commission said it has approved loan agreements for all 19, signed agreements with 16, and distributed nearly €13.5 billion in advance payments to 11 governments.
Sourcing check · Fully on the record · 2 articles
2 of 2 articles cite a named source for the story. It was on the record from the first report.
What these terms mean and how they're counted
- On the record · names a source 2 of 2
- On the record means the article cites a source by name for the story's main claim: a person, or an institution speaking officially, such as a company statement or a named agency's spokesperson. The opposite is an unnamed source. The count is how many of the counted articles cite at least one such source; the names are everyone named across them, each once however the articles spell it. Here: Brig. Gen. Steven Carpenter and European Commission
- Primary evidence · cites a document or data 0 of 2
- Primary evidence means the article cites a record you could check yourself: a court filing or ruling, a dataset or report, a recording or transcript, an official statement or press release, market data. A quote is not a document. The count is how many articles cite one. Here: None cited.
- Credits another outlet 0 of 2
- The article says the story comes from another outlet's reporting (“first reported by Reuters”). Those articles relay the story; they are not independent confirmation. Here: Each article presents its own reporting.
- Unnamed sources 0 of 2
- The main claim is attributed to people who are not identified: “people familiar with the matter”, “officials said”. The count is how many articles do this.
- How it developed
- When the first report landed and whether it named anyone; when the first named source and the first document appeared. Here: First report Oct 30, 18:40 UTC by Daily Caller, naming its source.
- Not counted 0
- Opinion, analysis and video pieces, and articles too short to assess. Every count above is out of the counted articles. An article republished under a new headline is one article.
This is about who is cited, not whether the story is true. Each source below says what it names. How we count
Omitted — what each side leaves out
Unpacked
US Army preparations in Europe for a Ukraine-style missile and drone barrage are present in left-leaning coverage and absent from right-leaning coverage. Left-leaning coverage reports that commanders want AI to sort sensor data so soldiers can keep up without removing humans from targeting decisions. Right-leaning coverage never mentions American troops in Europe, incoming missiles, drones, or battlefield software, and follows an EU program of defense loans to member states instead.
Left-leaning coverage names the incoming fight as "Ukraine's worst day," a wartime volume problem for troops. Right-leaning coverage names a "Massive New Weapons Buying Spree," a procurement story with no US units in it.
Neither side says whether the Army AI now in beta testing can actually handle the missile and drone volume commanders are planning against.
Bottom line
Business Insider reports US Army leaders in Europe planning to face as many as 1,200 incoming missiles and drones in a day. That planning figure, and the AI meant to absorb it, never appears in right-leaning coverage.
The receipts — 5 facts one side's coverage lacks
- US Army soldiers in Europe are readying for large-scale combat and the kind of overwhelming missile and drone attacks Ukraine is facing, and are looking to AI software to process the data
- US forces in Europe needed to be prepared to defend against as many as 1,200 incoming missiles and drones
- US forces in Europe needed to be prepared to process more than 1,500 potential targets a day
- Brig. Gen. Steven Carpenter said the intent is not to replace analysts but to unburden them so they focus on really tough targets such as dual-use facilities
- A joint US Army and NATO exercise in Europe used a homegrown AI system that was in beta-testing, with officials aiming to test it on a larger scale later
The Left View
Business Insider presents U.S. European forces as bracing for an "overwhelming flood of missiles and drones" on the scale of "Ukraine's worst day," arguing that the "speed and scale" of such attacks can exceed what human analysts can handle unaided. The piece foregrounds Carpenter's case that "super intelligence" should be used for tasks humans are "not necessarily good at" while "we shouldn't take humans completely out of the loop," and quotes him that the human still makes "the final call" to prosecute a valid target "within the Law of Armed Conflict." It frames AI as a way to "unburden" analysts so they focus on "the really tough targets," such as dual-use facilities, and situates the work within a fast-moving integration of AI into targeting, autonomous systems, and the Army's Next Generation Command and Control warfighting system.
The Right View
The Daily Caller frames the Commission's second SAFE round as Brussels pushing a "massive new weapons buying spree with Ukraine" while it "expands its military buildup," stressing that the newly offered sum is unused borrowing capacity rather than a fresh commitment to Kyiv and that governments—not Ukraine—borrow and must repay. It highlights that Ukrainian firms may supply equipment but participation is "not mandatory," that eligible buys generally cannot have more than 35% of component costs from outside the EU, Ukraine, or designated partners, and that the round "remains an invitation to submit financing requests, not a final weapons order or direct delivery commitment to Ukrainian forces." Related items the outlet flags on NATO fights over Ukraine funding and reported money-laundering charges involving a former Zelenskyy deputy place the loans in a skeptical frame of European militarization and Ukraine-linked spending.
Our Take (balanced)
Left-leaning coverage's strongest argument is operational: the attack volumes Carpenter described, and a NATO exercise already running beta AI, support the claim that unaided human analysts cannot keep up with Ukraine-style strike packages of ballistic and cruise missiles plus one-way drones. Right-leaning coverage's strongest argument is fiscal and procedural: the new SAFE money is leftover loan capacity that members must repay, Ukrainian involvement is optional, and no recipients or final orders have been named, so the episode is an open application window rather than arms flowing to Kyiv. The central unresolved tension is whether activity on NATO's eastern flank is primarily a race to match saturation missile-and-drone warfare, or an EU-directed lending and industrial program whose scale, beneficiaries, and necessity are still in dispute.
2 sources
More stories
The week's bottom lines, in your inbox
One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.