More stories

  • in

    An-My Lê: The War in Vietnam Still Holds America’s Attention

    Re-enacting battles from Vietnam demonstrates how war can be mythologized.This personal reflection is part of a series called The Big Ideas, in which writers respond to a single question: What is history? You can read more by visiting The Big Ideas series page.I was born in Saigon in 1960, and I experienced the war in Vietnam firsthand. When the war ended and Saigon fell to the Communists in 1975, the U.S. government evacuated me and my family in a C-130 cargo plane. We ended up in California. Now, 50 years later, I work as a landscape photographer, viewing my medium not only as a tool for witnessing past and present conflicts, but also as a space suited for contending with the paradoxes that define history itself.One particularly pivotal experience shaped my approach.It began in 1999, when I contacted a group of war re-enactors based in North Carolina and Virginia. I worked with and photographed them over several summers, and the images eventually became a series titled “Small Wars.” This small group of young, conservative men was dedicated to recreating key U.S. military operations and battles from the war in Vietnam on one member’s 100-acre wooded property. Among them were a product manager at Thomson Financial, a former National Guard driver, a mortician and a carpenter. Too young to have served in the conflict, none of these men had ever experienced real combat. Yet they were obsessively committed to the authenticity of their “impressions” — meticulous in their attention to equipment, clothing, food and supplies, whether portraying the Vietcong, the North Vietnamese Army or American soldiers. Participation was by invitation only.“Cots,” from the series “Small Wars” (1999-2002).Courtesy of the artist and Marian Goodman GalleryTo engage with multiple perspectives, I alternated between the role of a Vietcong fighter and that of a Kit Carson Scout — an N.V.A. soldier who defected to assist the Americans. Armed with an AK-47 loaded with Hollywood blanks, and clad in either Vietnamese-made black pajamas or an N.V.A. khaki uniform, I walked the trails and immersed myself in the dense bamboo thickets the re-enactors had planted. This vegetation — an obvious signifier for Vietnam and other Asian landscapes — was incongruously situated in an area that once witnessed the U.S. Civil War, on a site densely populated by pines, spruce, horsetails and kudzu. The result was a striking conflation of histories: theirs, shaped by vicarious experiences filtered through news footage, literature and myth; and mine, formed by personal memory, family lore and ambivalent feelings about a devastating war — one perpetrated by a government that ultimately saved my family and me from Communism and granted us a new life.The re-enactors and I spontaneously connected through a shared fluency brought on by the popularization and retelling of the Vietnam War in popular culture. We bantered back and forth, testing one another’s knowledge of classic war films, as well as fiction and nonfiction books. One-time participants from other states occasionally joined us, and the organizers would disclose my participation only at the last minute as a “reveal” for the unsuspecting visitors.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    What Is Crashing Out? The Rise of a Useful Slang Term.

    Adrenaline rising? Patience waning? Gen Z embraces a slang term for familiar feelings.Alejandra Toro was struggling. Everything was going wrong at the same time, she was overwhelmed and she felt as if she was about to have a meltdown. She was crashing out.Ms. Toro, a 30-year-old project manager, documented her “crash out” in a video that has raced to more than 600,000 views, joining the ranks of countless TikTok users who have employed some iteration of the phrase to describe their burst of emotions — and at times, intentional overreactions.“It’s a joking way to explain, like, this could get really bad, really quick,” Ms. Toro said in an interview.There’s no precise definition of the phrase, and both the severity of its meaning and its use cases seem to run the gamut. A fiery confrontation with an ex, an irritated exchange with a parent or a full emotional breakdown can all qualify. But its popularity is undeniable.An entry for the term was recently added to Among the New Words, a dictionary that is part of a quarterly installment of the journal American Speech. It described “crash out” as “a feeling beyond tiredness, a frustration or exhaustion toward something or someone that you throw all care out the window and have a full blown outburst.” (“Crash out” was a runner-up for the publication’s 2024 word of the year — “rawdog” took the title.)Philip Lindsay, a 31-year-old special education teacher and content creator who goes by Mr. Lindsay on social media, said he has heard the phrase used mostly as a signal from students that they’re frustrated.“It’s kind of this forewarning of like, ‘Hey you’re annoying me, I’m going to crash out,’” he said, “or like, ‘This project I’m working on is going to make me crash out.’”

    @_alejthegreat LMAO I start tweaking when my makeup doesn’t cooperate 😂 ♬ original sound – Alej ✨ We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Senate Bill Would Make Deep Cuts to Medicaid, Setting Up Fight With House

    The proposal would salvage some clean-energy tax credits and phase out others more slowly, making up some of the cost by imposing deeper cuts to Medicaid than the House-passed bill would.Senate Republicans on Monday released legislation that would cut Medicaid far more aggressively than would the House-passed bill to deliver President Trump’s domestic agenda, while also salvaging or slowing the elimination of some clean-energy tax credits, setting up a fight over their party’s marquee policy package.The measure, released by the Senate Finance Committee, contains the core provisions of that chamber’s version of the legislation that Republicans muscled through the House last month and are hoping to speed through the Senate and deliver to Mr. Trump’s desk by July 4. But its differences with that bill are substantial and are all but certain to complicate the measure’s path to enactment, casting doubt on that timetable.Most notably, the proposal would take a slower and less sweeping approach to phasing out clean-energy tax credits created during the Biden administration, and cover part of the cost of doing so by imposing deeper and more expansive cuts to Medicaid.While the House measure would add a new work requirement to Medicaid for childless adults, the Senate proposal would expand its application to the parents of older children. It also would crack down even harder than the House bill on strategies that many states have developed to tax medical providers and pay them higher prices for Medicaid services.In making the case for the bill, Republicans focused on another, far more politically popular element of the measure: its extension of tax cuts that were enacted in 2017 and are set to expire at the end of the year.A $7,500 tax credit for buyers of electric cars would phase out immediately within 180 days of the bill passing into law.Lauren Justice for The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Senate Proposal Ends Tax Cuts for Clean Energy, Disappointing Climate Advocates

    A Senate tax package softens some blows imposed on renewables by a House version of the bill. But it still terminates many credits for clean power.Climate advocates, Democrats, and even some House Republicans who last month had supported a tax package that gutted federal support for clean energy were hoping the Senate would make fixes to protect energy manufacturing and jobs.But on Monday, Senate Republicans disappointed them, proposing to quickly end most tax breaks for wind and solar power, electric vehicles and other clean energy.Draft legislation released by the Senate Finance Committee would terminate or scale back most of the major tax incentives for clean energy contained in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, the Biden administration’s signature climate law.The plan would eliminate within six months a $7,500 consumer tax credit for purchases of electric vehicles as well as home energy rebates for things like electric heat pumps and induction stoves. A tax credit for homeowners who install solar panels on rooftops would end within 180 days. A subsidy for making hydrogen fuels would expire this year.Federal tax credits for wind and solar power, which have been in place for decades but were made more lucrative under the Inflation Reduction Act, would be rapidly phased out. Wind and solar companies could qualify for the full tax break only if they began construction in the next six months. They would receive 60 percent of the tax break if they began construction in 2026, and 20 percent of the tax credit if they began construction in 2027. Projects built after that would get nothing.That’s a slightly longer runway for renewable energy than is in the House version of the bill, which would have ended those tax breaks almost immediately.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Trump’s Choice on Israel-Iran: Help Destroy Nuclear Facility or Continue to Negotiate

    Iranian officials have warned that U.S. participation in an attack on its facilities will imperil any chance of the nuclear disarmament deal the president insists he is still interested in pursuing.President Trump is weighing a critical decision in the four-day-old war between Israel and Iran: whether to enter the fray by helping Israel destroy the deeply buried nuclear enrichment facility at Fordo, which only America’s biggest “bunker buster,” dropped by American B-2 bombers, can reach.If he decides to go ahead, the United States will become a direct participant in a new conflict in the Middle East, taking on Iran in exactly the kind of war Mr. Trump has sworn, in two campaigns, he would avoid. Iranian officials have already warned that U.S. participation in an attack on its facilities will imperil any remaining chance of the nuclear disarmament deal that Mr. Trump insists he is still interested in pursuing.Mr. Trump had at one point encouraged his Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, and possibly Vice President JD Vance, to offer to meet the Iranians, according to a U.S. official. But on Monday Mr. Trump posted on social media that “everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran,” hardly a sign of diplomatic progress.Mr. Trump also said on Monday that “I think Iran basically is at the negotiating table, they want to make a deal.” The urgency appeared to be rising. The White House announced late on Monday that Mr. Trump was leaving the Group of 7 summit early because of the situation in the Middle East.“As soon as I leave here, we’re going to be doing something,” Mr. Trump said. “But I have to leave here.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Here Are the 2025 James Beard Restaurant Award Winners

    Toni Tipton-Martin, Jungsik Yim and the restaurateurs behind Le Veau d’Or were among the top honorees.The James Beard Foundation gave out its annual culinary awards Monday night in Chicago, with the chefs and co-hosts Andrew Zimmern and Nyesha Arrington handing out gold medals to chefs, restaurateurs, bakers and bartenders from across the United States.To reflect the growing influence of cocktail and bar culture, three new awards were given out this year: best new bar, outstanding professional in beverage service and outstanding professional in cocktail service.New York City restaurants won three of the six major national awards: outstanding chef (Jungsik Yim of Jungsik), outstanding hospitality (Atomix) and outstanding restaurateur (Lee Hanson and Riad Nasr of Frenchette, Le Rock and Le Veau d’Or).It was the 35th edition of the black-tie gala, which has been transformed from a Monday-night-only event (to allow chefs to squeeze in a trip when restaurants are traditionally closed) to a full weekend of panels and pop-ups. (Food media professionals like writers, directors, podcasters and influencers received their awards at a ceremony on Saturday.)The awards program was suspended in 2020 and 2021 as the industry responded to the pandemic, and as the foundation tried to incorporate rapidly evolving ideas about race, gender, privilege and workers’ rights. Since then, priorities have shifted away from the traditional guest experience — food, service and décor — and toward evaluating chefs and restaurants as employers, community members and professional leaders.Toni Tipton-Martin was presented with the lifetime achievement award.Jeff Schear/Getty Images For James Beard FouWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    NYT Crossword Answers for June 17, 2025

    Tarun Krishnamurthy finds a few sweet spots.Jump to: Today’s Theme | Tricky CluesTUESDAY PUZZLE — If not for its appearance in a crossword puzzle, any theme might be dismissed as mere happenstance. Three or four distinct phrases contain a similar letter pattern or word sequence; so what? Crosswords elevate these patterns from happy accidents to linguistic marvels. They make facts seem stranger than fiction.It’s clear, from solving Tarun Krishnamurthy’s puzzle and from reading his constructor notes, that there’s more than coincidence afoot. This theme requires skill to identify, smarts to appreciate and a constructor’s unique eye to execute.Today’s Theme40- and 41-Across combine to reveal the theme of the puzzle, which plays on the name of a [popular candy] by representing it visually in entries at 17-, 26- and 57-Across.The same six letters are circled in sequence in these entries: RE / ES / ES. That gives us REESES (40A). And the letters of the word are split up — i.e., they’re in PIECES (41A).You’ll find the candy scattered in the [Classic Beatles song written and sung by George Harrison] at 17A, HERE COMES THE SUN, and again at 26A in [Mathematician/philosopher who wrote “I think, therefore I am”], RENÉ DESCARTES.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    At G7, Trump Renews Embrace of Putin Amid Rift With Allies

    President Trump opened his remarks at the Group of 7 gathering of industrialized nations by criticizing the decision to expel Russia from the bloc after Moscow’s 2014 “annexation” of Crimea.President Trump could have opened by talking about trade. He could have discussed the wars in the Middle East or the long-running, brutal war in Ukraine.But there was something else that appeared to be top of mind for Mr. Trump during Monday’s meeting in Canada of the leaders of the Group of 7 industrialized nations: President Vladimir Putin of Russia.“The G7 used to be the G8,” Mr. Trump told reporters, referring to the group’s decision to eject Russia in 2014, after it attacked Ukraine and “annexed” Crimea, a prelude to its full-scale invasion.He went on to blame former President Barack Obama and former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada for kicking Russia out, and argued that its inclusion in the group would have averted the war in Ukraine. (Mr. Trump was wrong — it was not Mr. Trudeau, but rather Stephen Harper, who was the Canadian prime minister at the time of Russia’s expulsion.)“I would say that was a mistake,” Mr. Trump said, “because I think you wouldn’t have a war right now.”And with that, Mr. Trump’s troubled history with the alliance repeated itself. When he attended the summit the last time it was held in Canada, in 2018, he called for Russia to be readmitted to alliance. The suggestion angered and appalled allies, setting of a rift that before Mr. Trump left the summit early, telling reporters on his way out: “They should let Russia come back in. Because we should have Russia at the negotiating table.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More