Illustrations by Hrisanthi Pickett of The War Horse

This article first appeared on The War Horse,[1] an award-winning nonprofit news organization educating the public on military service. Subscribe to their newsletter[2].

Some of the U.S. military’s most defining technologies have nothing to do with missiles, tanks, guns, and other deadly weaponry.  While important in war, these innovations—from duct tape and blood banks to GPS[3]— ultimately play a far larger role on the home front, improving everyday lives.

But now scientists are worried the Trump administration’s budget cuts threaten the long and historic funding growth for Department of Defense-supported breakthrough science, risking America’s global dominance in a tech-driven economy and undermining future payoffs.

“Every single day, people engage with DOD-funded research,” said Jeff Decker, a former 2nd Ranger Battalion light infantry squad leader in the U.S. Army, deployed four times to Iraq and Afghanistan. He now serves in Stanford University’s Technology Transfer for Defense Program, which transitions new technologies from the laboratory to the market.

“The core goal is knowledge,” Decker said. “If we lose that, not only does it hollow out the ability for campuses to do research … it also hollows out the specter of what we’ll have 30 years from now.”

In a world roiled by geopolitical tensions, new pandemics, climate change, and weakening democracies, researchers point to the importance of a crucial array of DOD-funded inventions, from night vision to stealth technology, from sensor networks to vaccines for deadly diseases[4] and treatment for traumatic brain injury.

But the stopgap budget measure[5] that Congress passed in March reduces funding for research, development,[6] and evaluation programs at the Defense Department by almost 5% to $141 billion for the remainder of the fiscal year—about $7 billion less than the department received for those activities in fiscal 2024.

Jeff Decker went from Army Ranger to Stanford’s Technology Transfer for Defense Program, which transitions new technologies from the laboratory to the market. (Photo courtesy of Jeff Decker)

Operation Timeline: The Trump Administration’s Impact on Veterans and the Military[7]

To be sure, U.S. government and businesses remain the world’s top investor [8]in basic research and development, with China close behind. And the DOD is the largest beneficiary of taxpayer-supported research[9], receiving about half of total funds.

But the cuts illustrate a growing shift in the nation’s landscape of research and development. In recent years, a larger share of America’s overall[10] scientific spending is coming from businesses,[11] especially in the fields of applied research, according to a 2021 Congressional Research Service report.

To maintain technical superiority, the U.S. military increasingly relies [12]on commercially developed technologies, such as pilot simulation training, rapid detection of virus exposure, and Elon Musk’s Starlink satellite internet technology.

American dominance of innovation dates back[13] less than a century. Prior to World War II, the U.S. provided almost no federal funding for research. Europe was the leader. That changed with Vannevar Bush, a former dean of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology[14], who predicted that the devastating war would be won or lost based on advanced technology.

Almost overnight, government research funding skyrocketed—resulting in a myriad of civilian spinoffs that remain an essential part of our everyday lives.[15]

From Weapons Guidance to Directions to Dinner

One of the most famous examples was the creation of the Global Positioning System.[16] On Labor Day weekend in 1973, U.S. Air Force Col. Bradford Parkinson and his top engineers shuttered themselves in the dark and deserted Pentagon to hammer out the concept of a navigation system, using atomic clocks and signals transmitted by satellites that would change the world.

The goal was to design a system to help guide weapons to their targets and keep track of personnel and materials. But from the start, the GPS was designed to have an open signal that anyone could use, Parkinson said.

“Before we put up the first satellite, I promised to make available the complete specifications that would allow people to build receivers,” said Parkinson, professor emeritus of aeronautics and astronautics at Stanford University. “[It was] a signal that was going to be freely available to the civilians to use.”

By hand, he drew diagrams of eight to 10 potential nonmilitary uses for GPS, such as air traffic control, land grading, and commuter travel, saving time and money.

It took two tragedies to spur the widespread adoption of GPS in commercial aviation: the 1978 shooting of a South Korean airliner by a Soviet fighter plane and the 1996 crash of a plane carrying U.S. Commerce Secretary Ron Brown and 34 others, said John Langer of the Enterprise Design department of The Aerospace Corporation, which advances GPS development. [17] Both events were caused by pilot navigational errors.

The widespread public use of GPS began in the early 2000s, with the release of the second iPhone and the “blue dot” on app maps that shows a precise location, said Langer. “Now everyone expects to know where they are at all times.”

GPS—with smaller, cheaper, and less powerful receivers than military-grade equipment—brings military precision to routine tasks, like finding the best route to a new restaurant.

From Blood Banks to Frozen Platelets

The carnage of combat has led to significant advances in understanding hematology[18], wound care, and infection control.

In World War II, massive blood loss from gaping wounds caused by shrapnel, shells, fragments, and other debris required new techniques and tools to collect and preserve blood. Combat injuries also spurred our understanding of compatible blood typing and transfusion science.

The Department of Defense ushered in the modern age of blood banking by introducing plastic bags—rather than glass bottles—for storage, said hematologist Dr. Claudia Cohn, medical director of the Association for the Advancement of Blood and Biotherapies and director of the University of Minnesota Blood Bank Laboratory. If blood is kept in glass, it is difficult to store and separate into its essential components.

Current research using databases from the Department of Defense Trauma Registry and Armed Services Blood Program is testing the potential use of cold-stored or frozen blood platelets,[19] which last longer, are less prone to bacterial contamination, and are more practical for rural hospitals with limited supplies, Cohn said.

It is also advancing the field of transfusions administered in ambulances on the way to the hospital, pumping blood into patients as quickly as possible. “Early studies are showing that the faster you get blood into the patient, the better they do,” she said.

“Military research has a long history of creating or developing technology that is then transferred to the civilian setting and has helped humankind,” said Cohn. “These are many of the things that we just take for granted.”

From Penicillin to Cancer Treatments

Our modern understanding of antibiotics, especially penicillin, has surged due to military research funding. Seeking to protect and recover manpower during World War II combat, War Production Board scientists collaborated on penicillin mold sampling, chemical synthesis, clinical trials, and large-scale penicillin production by fermentation. While a precise number is difficult to determine, it’s estimated that penicillin has saved 200 million lives globally, including countless Americans, according to Philadelphia’s Science History Institute.[20]

Private industry has been slow to create new vaccines because profit margins are so thin for single-use medications. It took the Department of Defense, in partnership with the Department of Health and Human Services, to support the development of mRNA technologies that produced Covid vaccines.

Radiation treatment for cancer traces its roots to World War II’s famed Manhattan Project and the development of the atomic bomb. After the war, the federal government produced radioisotopes in the same nuclear reactors that had been built to produce material for nuclear weapons—and sold them at a discount to laboratories, hospitals, and companies, where they proved their role as medical therapies and diagnostics, according to Princeton University historian Angela Creager.[21]

The U.S. Army worked with the RCA Corp. to develop night-vision technology after the German military introduced early versions during World War II. (U.S. Air National Guard photo by Tech. Sgt. Matt Hecht)

From Duct Tape to Superglue

World War II also inspired something more mundane, but now ubiquitous: duct tape. Vesta Stoudt, the mother of two enlisted sons, was working at the Green River Ordnance Plant in Illinois, sealing boxes of ammunition cartridges with paper tape and dipping them wax to make them waterproof.

“But the paper tape was very thin, and the tabs often tore off, leaving soldiers frantically trying to open the box while under fire,” said Margaret Gurowitz, chief historian for Johnson & Johnson[22], which helped bring the tape to market.

On Feb. 10, 1943, Stoudt wrote a letter to President Franklin D. Roosevelt describing the problem and her solution, complete with diagrams: strong, waterproof tape made from thin “duck cloth,” coated in plastic, that could be ripped by hand reliably, every time. Hundreds of thousands of miles of this tape were used on tanks, planes, and ammunition destined for overseas—and now duct tape is the go-to solution for patching holes and sealing gaps in pipes, ductwork, and other household items that need a quick, temporary fix.

The remarkable adhesive known as superglue was also invented during World War II, when Harry Coover and his military-funded team [23]at Eastman-Kodak sought to make a clear plastic lens for precision gunsights, called prisms, for soldiers.

A new substance, called cyanoacrylate, was quickly abandoned because it was too sticky. But Coover realized the adhesive had a unique ability to bond without heat or pressure, permanently gluing together anything. He later put it to work to make jet airplane canopies. Now superglue is used to repair shoes, dishes, broken garden hoses, or torn car upholstery. It even extends the life of frayed phone charger cords.

From Nomex and Kevlar to a New Frontier

More recently, DOD-funded scientists have designed, improved or tested[24] fabric[25] and textiles to counter heat, cold, chemicals, flames, lasers and other harsh military environments[26]

The Natick Soldier Research, Development and Engineering Center laboratories developed a new flame-resistant fabric[27]—a blend of wool, Nomex and Kevlar—that chars, rather than melting or dripping, when exposed to intense heat.

The laboratories also helped to improve the design of[28] uniforms with Gore-Tex[29], the water-resistant material used in tents, backpacks, and other camping materials.

Military funding is now used to advance the newest frontier in science: machine learning, a type of AI, which analyzes large amounts of data, learns from the insights and informs decisions, said Stanford’s Decker.

For instance, each Navy warship produces about 150 terabytes[30] of raw sensor data each day—equivalent to[31] tens of millions[32] of high-quality photos or nearly a decade of videos[33]—and machine learning can help process it.

“It’s decision making,” said Stanford’s Decker. “We live in a world right now where there is no shortage of data. ... How do we as a country respond in situations ... whether it’s a natural disaster or a war zone?”

But the shift in priorities at the Pentagon to focus on lethality is steering funding toward major projects like the next-generation F-47 aircraft and a Golden Dome missile defense system.

The change could be felt by future generations of civilians, far from the battlefield.

Over the decades, “military technologies tend to find a way, sometimes in a surprising manner, into civilian use,” said Parkinson.

“It isn’t the primary reason that the military does that research—but the spin-offs have been substantial,” he said. “They’re spread around, like peanut butter.”


This War Horse story was edited by Mike Frankel, fact-checked by Jess Rohan, and copy-edited by Mitchell Hansen-Dewar. Hrisanthi Pickett wrote the headlines.

Editors Note: This article[34] first appeared on The War Horse,[35] an award-winning nonprofit news organization educating the public on military service. Subscribe to their newsletter[36].

© Copyright 2025 The War Horse. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Read more

Secretary of the Army Dan Driscoll at Fort Bragg, North Carolina

Army[1] Secretary Dan Driscoll is poised to assume temporary leadership of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, a rare dual appointment that places the 38-year-old at the helm of two high-stakes federal institutions, according to three defense officials familiar with the matter.

The move comes at a pivotal moment for both agencies. The ATF continues to draw partisan scrutiny over firearms regulation, while the Army is undergoing a strategic transformation to counter China's growing military influence in the Pacific.

Driscoll is in Europe this week visiting soldiers and meeting with key Army leaders in the region. Both the head of the ATF and Army secretary are full-time positions with enormous responsibilities and long workdays.

Read Next: Troops Booted over COVID-19 Vaccine Are Being Offered Back Pay But Not Huge Payouts[2]

As acting director, Driscoll, who has no background in law enforcement, will oversee nearly 5,000 employees, including more than 2,500 federal agents charged with enforcing firearms laws that have made the agency a frequent target of pro-gun activists and Republican lawmakers.

In recent years, the GOP has made no secret of its intent to slash ATF's authority, pushing to gut the agency's enforcement power -- particularly around gun background checks -- and at times calling for its complete dismantling.

In 2024, Republicans in Congress trimmed $47 million from the ATF's already modest $1.6 billion budget, signaling the latest round of partisan belt-tightening for an agency that's long struggled to secure consistent leadership.

Driscoll will be taking on the role from FBI Director Kash Patel, who was removed from leading the ATF as his second job. It's unclear what led to Patel's dismissal, but he was still running the FBI as of Wednesday afternoon.

Since Congress made the ATF director role a Senate-confirmed position in 2006, just two nominees have made it through the politically fraught confirmation process: Todd Jones in 2013 and Steve Dettelbach in 2022. Most other nominees have stalled amid fierce opposition and lobbying from gun rights groups.

Driscoll oversees the Army, its $185.9 billion budget, and nearly 1 million soldiers across active-duty and reserve components. The Army is in the midst of a radical shift, transitioning from the Global War on Terrorism era to revamping its equipment and doctrine to modernize the force in hopes of deterring China.

"The world is changing rapidly, and we must ensure the Army is prepared to operate in new, complex and contested environments," Driscoll said during his confirmation hearing in January.

Driscoll, who has been a close friend of Vice President JD Vance since the pair met at Yale Law School, has spent most of his professional career in venture capital and other business enterprises. He came into the Army secretary role with a light resume compared to his predecessors, most of whom had robust backgrounds in national security policy.

Driscoll served in the Army from 2007 to 2010 as a cavalry officer with the 10th Mountain Division based out of New York. He deployed to Iraq once during his service, left the Army as a first lieutenant and immediately went on to attend Yale.

Related: Senate Confirms Driscoll, a Veteran and Financier with Little Leadership Experience, to Be Army Secretary[3]

© Copyright 2025 Military.com. All rights reserved. This article may not be republished, rebroadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without written permission. To reprint or license this article or any content from Military.com, please submit your request here[4].

Read more

A Medical Technician injects a COVID-19 booster into a patient at an undisclosed location, Southwest Asia, Oct. 20, 2022. (U.S. Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Jeffery Foster)

The Pentagon, acting on orders from President Donald Trump, has begun to lay out the details of its plan to woo back thousands of service members who were involuntarily discharged over their refusal to receive the COVID-19 vaccination.

Tim Dill, the Pentagon's current head of Personnel and Readiness, said Tuesday that both Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth have shared their "eagerness to welcome back these former service members to the military."

Troops who were booted over refusing the vaccines have been able to return to service since 2023, though just over 100 out of more than 8,000 did so. But the new policies, which come a few months after an executive order issued by Trump, offer the promise of back pay[1] and an easier medical screening -- though with a caveat of yearslong military commitments and some major administrative hurdles.

Read Next: Toxic Exposure at Domestic Military Bases Is Next Step After PACT Act, Democratic Lawmakers Say[2]

According to Dill, who spoke with reporters, both Trump and Hegseth "have publicly expressed and signed documents welcoming former service members impacted by this policy to return in a way that those former service members were not encouraged in the past."

The highlight of the new policies is mainly an opportunity for a returning service member to receive back pay for the time that they were out of the service. However, Dill noted that the idea behind the policy was not to offer a bonus or benefit but rather make the person "stand financially in the same position they would have stood in had they never been discharged."

Most of the services were quick to push out messages on social media announcing the new policy[3] offering the possibility of back pay, and the Army[4] even bragged that "about 150 soldiers"[5] had taken some step toward rejoining.

However, only the Navy[6] publicly offered insight[7] into how that process would work.

According to Navy documents made public Monday[8], a sailor interested in being reinstated is entitled to back pay but minus anything they've earned while out of the military -- and that is contingent on a four-year commitment[9].

The document explains that what leaders like Trump have called "full back pay" will actually be a "financial benefit" that will consider all the basic pay, food and housing allowances, and bonuses to come up with a sum.

Then, the service will deduct from that figure any wages that were earned by the service member while they were separated, as well as any VA disability payments[10], among other payouts.

All of the information would come from tax documents and pay stubs that would need to be submitted as part of the process, the Navy document said.

The resulting figure -- one that will vary widely from person to person -- would then be offered to the service member ahead of their decision to return or not. It would be paid out in a lump sum or quarterly payments but be subject to federal and state taxes.

Meanwhile, service members interested in returning under the new policy should have an easier time passing the medical screening, which, according to Dill, would hold them to the easier "retention" standard instead of the normal "accession" one.

"Initial accession ... that is the highest medical requirement, because that is the department's first take at assessing whether or not this is someone in whom the department wishes to invest significant time and resources," Dill said.

However, the retention standard acknowledges a previous investment of time and resources and simply looks to determine whether a service member is "suitable to continue in service."

"We've long used two different thresholds for those timings," Dill added.

While the new policy appears to add more incentive for some troops to return, it's not clear how much of an effect it will make on people who have now been out of the military for years and may have been using the vaccine as an opportunity to simply leave the service early.

From 2023 to shortly before Trump signed the executive order, only 113 of the more than 8,000 involuntarily discharged service members had chosen to return to military service. According to data provided by the services, 73 soldiers, 25 Marines, 13 airmen or Guardians, and two sailors have come back.

Since the order, when the possibility of back pay was raised but not caveated by other conditions or administrative burdens, those figures don't appear to have increased significantly.

The Associated Press reported that the Army has reenlisted more than 23 soldiers[11] in that period -- all but three people rejoined either the National Guard[12] or the Army Reserve.

On Tuesday, Capt. Candice Tresch said that the Navy's number of returnees, which includes reservists, had grown to 10 -- just 8 more since Trump took office.

The Marine Corps[13] told Military.com that, while 40 Marines have completed the initial questionnaire -- the first step in the reinstatement or reaccession process, so far none has actually been reinstated.

Meanwhile, Dill said that the first group of just over 100 service members, who returned without any incentive, will not be able to benefit from the new back pay policy.

"The department is also grateful for their decision to return," he said but added that "there is not currently a mechanism that we have provided for them to put in for the same calculations that we're doing for those that would return today."

Anyone interested in returning has until April 1, 2026, to seek reinstatement.

-- Drew F. Lawrence contributed to this report.

Related: Trump Order on Back Pay for Vaccine Refusers Raises Questions, Offers No Clear Path Forward[14]

© Copyright 2025 Military.com. All rights reserved. This article may not be republished, rebroadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without written permission. To reprint or license this article or any content from Military.com, please submit your request here[15].

Read more

A Medical Technician injects a COVID-19 booster into a patient at an undisclosed location, Southwest Asia, Oct. 20, 2022. (U.S. Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Jeffery Foster)

The Pentagon, acting on orders from President Donald Trump, has begun to lay out the details of its plan to woo back thousands of service members who were involuntarily discharged over their refusal to receive the COVID-19 vaccination.

Tim Dill, the Pentagon's current head of Personnel and Readiness, said Tuesday that both Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth have shared their "eagerness to welcome back these former service members to the military."

Troops who were booted over refusing the vaccines have been able to return to service since 2023, though just over 100 out of more than 8,000 did so. But the new policies, which come a few months after an executive order issued by Trump, offer the promise of back pay[1] and an easier medical screening -- though with a caveat of yearslong military commitments and some major administrative hurdles.

Read Next: Toxic Exposure at Domestic Military Bases Is Next Step After PACT Act, Democratic Lawmakers Say[2]

According to Dill, who spoke with reporters, both Trump and Hegseth "have publicly expressed and signed documents welcoming former service members impacted by this policy to return in a way that those former service members were not encouraged in the past."

The highlight of the new policies is mainly an opportunity for a returning service member to receive back pay for the time that they were out of the service. However, Dill noted that the idea behind the policy was not to offer a bonus or benefit but rather make the person "stand financially in the same position they would have stood in had they never been discharged."

Most of the services were quick to push out messages on social media announcing the new policy[3] offering the possibility of back pay, and the Army[4] even bragged that "about 150 soldiers"[5] had taken some step toward rejoining.

However, only the Navy[6] publicly offered insight[7] into how that process would work.

According to Navy documents made public Monday[8], a sailor interested in being reinstated is entitled to back pay but minus anything they've earned while out of the military -- and that is contingent on a four-year commitment[9].

The document explains that what leaders like Trump have called "full back pay" will actually be a "financial benefit" that will consider all the basic pay, food and housing allowances, and bonuses to come up with a sum.

Then, the service will deduct from that figure any wages that were earned by the service member while they were separated, as well as any VA disability payments[10], among other payouts.

All of the information would come from tax documents and pay stubs that would need to be submitted as part of the process, the Navy document said.

The resulting figure -- one that will vary widely from person to person -- would then be offered to the service member ahead of their decision to return or not. It would be paid out in a lump sum or quarterly payments but be subject to federal and state taxes.

Meanwhile, service members interested in returning under the new policy should have an easier time passing the medical screening, which, according to Dill, would hold them to the easier "retention" standard instead of the normal "accession" one.

"Initial accession ... that is the highest medical requirement, because that is the department's first take at assessing whether or not this is someone in whom the department wishes to invest significant time and resources," Dill said.

However, the retention standard acknowledges a previous investment of time and resources and simply looks to determine whether a service member is "suitable to continue in service."

"We've long used two different thresholds for those timings," Dill added.

While the new policy appears to add more incentive for some troops to return, it's not clear how much of an effect it will make on people who have now been out of the military for years and may have been using the vaccine as an opportunity to simply leave the service early.

From 2023 to shortly before Trump signed the executive order, only 113 of the more than 8,000 involuntarily discharged service members had chosen to return to military service. According to data provided by the services, 73 soldiers, 25 Marines, 13 airmen or Guardians, and two sailors have come back.

Since the order, when the possibility of back pay was raised but not caveated by other conditions or administrative burdens, those figures don't appear to have increased significantly.

The Associated Press reported that the Army has reenlisted more than 23 soldiers[11] in that period -- all but three people rejoined either the National Guard[12] or the Army Reserve.

On Tuesday, Capt. Candice Tresch said that the Navy's number of returnees, which includes reservists, had grown to 10 -- just 8 more since Trump took office.

The Marine Corps[13] told Military.com that, while 40 Marines have completed the initial questionnaire -- the first step in the reinstatement or reaccession process, so far none has actually been reinstated.

Meanwhile, Dill said that the first group of just over 100 service members, who returned without any incentive, will not be able to benefit from the new back pay policy.

"The department is also grateful for their decision to return," he said but added that "there is not currently a mechanism that we have provided for them to put in for the same calculations that we're doing for those that would return today."

Anyone interested in returning has until April 1, 2026, to seek reinstatement.

-- Drew F. Lawrence contributed to this report.

Related: Trump Order on Back Pay for Vaccine Refusers Raises Questions, Offers No Clear Path Forward[14]

© Copyright 2025 Military.com. All rights reserved. This article may not be republished, rebroadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without written permission. To reprint or license this article or any content from Military.com, please submit your request here[15].

Read more

More Articles …