By Kailyn Rhone and Arriana McLymore NEW YORK It is Barbie’s world, and U.S. small businesses hope their

Ruby Card had written to Maine lawmakers opposing the idea of lowering the voting age

Some of the 40 construction workers trapped in a collapsed road tunnel for a fourth day were sick as falling debris and technical glitches delayed the work to free them

The Tigers are preparing for the worst with Eduardo Rodriguez.

Elizabeth Holmes lost her final request to remain free on bail while she appeals her fraud conviction. The

RB Leipzig are seeking a world record transfer fee for a defender in order to sel Josko Gvardiol to Manchester City.

Ukrainian special forces reported on Tuesday that they had struck two Russian military airfields, following the first-time deployment of long-range ballistic missiles supplied by the US. The details of the weapons’ delivery has been shrouded in secrecy – unlike previous aid provided to Ukraine from the Biden Administration. The missiles – which Ukraine has reportedly been petitioning the US to deliver for months – may prove key to helping Ukrainian forces in the months of conflict ahead. Here’s what we know. What are ATACMS and why does Ukraine need them? The Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) is a long-range guided missile that gives operational commanders the “immediate firepower to win the deep battle”. Produced by US global security and aerospace company Lockheed Martin, the missiles carry a 500lb (227kg) class blast fragmentation warhead. The weapons are fitted with a specialised GPS system and have a maximum range of 300km (around 190 miles) – though the ones supplied to Ukraine have a shorter range and carry cluster munitions. When fired, the clusters open in the air, releasing hundreds of bomblets rather than a single warhead. Ukraine says the missiles will help fuel their counteroffensive as it heads into the muddy and colder winter months, enabling troops to strike behind Russian lines while staying out of firing range. The ATACMS have been key in Ukraine’s ability to hit an airfield in Berdyansk since it is within striking distance of the shorter-range version of the missile, and the cluster munitions would be effective in hitting multiple targets. The closest Ukrainian troop positions on the western bank of the Dnieper River are just about 100 miles (160 kilometers) from Berdyansk. What have they been used for? On Tuesday, president Zelensky confirmed the ATACMS had been used on the battlefield against Russia and "executed very accurately” during an offensive known as “Operation Dragonfly”. Ukraine’s Special Operations Forces claimed that a nighttime attack on targets in eastern and southern Ukraine destroyed nine Russian helicopters and other military equipment and personnel at two airfields in Russia-occupied regions – including the one at Berdyansk. The missiles also struck an airfield in Luhansk, an occupied city in eastern Ukraine. The special forces also managed to successfully damage airfield runways, Ukraine said. “The ammunition depot in Berdyansk detonated until 4am. The detonation in Luhansk continued until 11am,” Ukrainian Special Operations Forces said in a statement. “Losses in the enemy’s manpower amount to dozens of dead and wounded. Bodies are still being pulled from the rubble.” How many ATACMS has the US provided? After many months of dragging its feet, the Biden administration greenlit the delivery of a “small number” of the missiles last month, following continued pressure from Ukraine. The delivery of the missiles was made quietly and US officials have refused to discuss it publicly. The expectation was that the first public acknowledgment would come when the missiles were used on the battlefield. An official who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity said the missiles got into Ukraine within the last few days. The US has refused to provide any details on how many missiles have been delivered, although officials had suggested that the plan was indeed to send a small number – roughly two dozen. During his Tuesday address, Mr Zelensky said: "Today I express special gratitude to the United States," adding that the missiles "have proven themselves." Why the secrecy? That intense secrecy is a marked change from previous US weapons sent by the Biden administration. In nearly all other cases, the US has publicly announced its decision prior to the weapons and equipment being shipped overseas. The hesitancy may be, in part, to do with the range of the missiles, with concerns that Kyiv could use the weapons to hit deep into Russian territory, enraging Moscow and escalating the conflict. Lingering US concerns about escalating tensions with Russia are reportedly the reason that the ATACMS version that went to Ukraine has a shorter range than the maximum distance the missiles can have. The small number of missiles sent also underscores the US reluctance to send the powerful weapons. Sending the cluster munition version will mark the second time the Democratic administration has moved to send that type of weapon. Read More Ukraine-Russia war – live: Putin’s forces suffer blow as helicopters destroyed by missile strikes, says Kyiv Experts reveal what the winter will bring for the Ukraine war – and why Putin will be banking on Trump

Call it a belated birthday present, perhaps. Sir Jim Ratcliffe turned 71 on Wednesday. For those who have amassed such riches, it is less a question of what others buy them and more what they buy for themselves. And in Ratcliffe’s case, at a cost of £1.3bn, the answer may be a quarter of the club he has supported since he was a child in Failsworth. There are details to iron out and no deal will be finalised just yet but the Manchester United board will vote – though probably not on Thursday – whether to accept Ratcliffe’s offer. The petrochemicals billionaire has already seen off his main competitor: if there was a widespread assumption – one that may have been shared by the Glazer family – that Sheikh Jassim bin Hamad al Thani would dramatically raise a bid that many believed was financed by the Qatari state, it never happened. Ratcliffe has been a triumph of persistence and flexibility, amending his own offer from a majority to a minority stake, negotiating with the Glazers. It comes to something when a man of his wealth feels like the underdog but the outsider has prevailed. While Sheikh Jassim also presented himself as a United supporter and while Ratcliffe had attempted to buy Chelsea, the Ineos co-founder has the feel of the local boy made good. And, at points in the past, a place on a football club board would have felt a reward for many who matched that description. Now the sums are so massive that the motivations become most instructive. Thus far, the questions outnumber the definitive answers. Will United be a trophy asset for Ratcliffe? Perhaps not immediately, given that the Glazers will remain the biggest shareholders, at least in the short term. Is it simply an astute business deal? Not on the face of it, given that Ratcliffe has valued United at around double its market price and Sheikh Jassim felt the Glazers’ demands were outlandish. Yet Ratcliffe has proved he can make money: that 25 per cent could yet yield a profit and the Glazers’ reluctance to walk away seemed to stem in part from a belief the club will be worth more again in the future. The most pertinent issue for many supporters, who have long called for the Glazers to go, is whether it leads to a full takeover; and if so, whether the terms of Ratcliffe’s buy-in ensure it, or merely make it optional. Moreover, the new structure, assuming it is improved, does not necessarily promise the investment United require: with other parties holding 75 per cent of the club, Ratcliffe would have less incentive to put his own money in. The presumption at the moment is that the £1.3bn will largely go to the Glazers, not United. The general sense is the club need the money more than their owners. Sheikh Jassim’s promises will now never be tested but he had pledged to invest more than £1bn; with the need to either revamp or rebuild Old Trafford, any plans to improve the infrastructure the Glazers have neglected will not be cheap. So if Ratcliffe pursues such plans, will the debt – currently at £725m – rise over £1bn? United’s current scope for signings is limited more by Financial Fair Play than anything else, but could he bring an improvement in recruitment? The feeling is that Ratcliffe wants control of the football side of the club, where United’s underachievement has been particularly grievous in the last decade. Would that be beneficial? Given United’s record, it may be welcomed. Ratcliffe’s own record in sport is mixed: Nice are currently second in Ligue Un but their fortunes have fluctuated during his ownership and have been pockmarked by transfer-market missteps. Lausanne have been both relegated and promoted under Ratcliffe’s regime. He bought the most successful outfit in world cycling, then known as Team Sky; since rebranded as Ineos, but they have lost their pre-eminence and appear in an identity crisis. But if his initial emphasis is on the pitch – rather than the commercial side of the business the chief executive, Richard Arnold, oversees – there is an obvious focus on the director of football, John Murtough. Inside Old Trafford, there is already a recognition the team has achieved too little and their record in recruitment has been underwhelming since Sir Alex Ferguson retired. Some nevertheless feel that there is more structure and strategy since Ed Woodward handed over the reins: they can point to a new training centre for the women’s and academy teams, the appointment of Erik ten Hag, and a fine season last year. Yet a stumbling, stuttering start to this season, the struggles of several recent signings and the reality that around £400m has been spent in the last two summers feels ill-timed. Accusations United have overpaid are scarcely new but will it prompt Ratcliffe to seek change behind the scenes? The initial noises are that, despite the team’s slump, Ten Hag is seen as far more of a solution than a problem, though it would be instructive to know if that stance were maintained should the next 10 games bring another six defeats. Shifts in ownership do not always bode well for incumbent managers, whereas the Dutchman has enjoyed the backing of Murtough and the Glazers. Ten Hag always projects an air of confidence and decisiveness but many at Old Trafford could be forgiven for wondering what Ratcliffe’s investment means and what comes next. If it has scarcely helped United that they have lingered in limbo for 11 months, since the Glazers put the club up for sale, a boardroom vote could instead bring about a time of uncertainty. Read More The best in the world? Jude Bellingham sparks debate after latest England masterclass Man Utd set timeline to decide on Sir Jim Ratcliffe offer Manchester United Supporters’ Trust calls for ‘clarity’ in takeover process Man Utd manager fumes at Women’s Champions League format after exit Who will make Gareth Southgate’s England squad for Euro 2024? Michael O’Neill wants Shea Charles to learn from dismissal on frustrating night

People in Asia aren't guzzling as much beer as they used to.

Jurors in the sexual assault trial of Kevin Spacey have retired to begin deliberations on allegations by four men dating back two decades

Jake Marlowe and Dan Darlington have not been heard from since the attacks on Saturday morning.

Two Colorado gun control laws taking effect will require that firearm buyers wait three days before receiving their weapon and open up the gun industry to some legal liability