Category Archives: Around the web

William S. Lind’s Grim Assessment of the US Officer Corps

100212-N-0000K-002

From The American Conservative.   Bill Lind, one of the authors of Fourth Generation Warfare, is often a bit of a scratchy contrarian who is firmly convinced of his own infallibility when it comes to military theory.   Lind has never served in uniform, and often his condescending pontification and admonitions of “You’re doing it all wrong!” to US military thinkers causes his views to be dismissed out of hand.  But Lind is very smart, and often had nuggets of insight that deserve our consideration.  Here are a few from his TAC article:

Even junior officers inhabit a world where they hear only endless, hyperbolic praise of “the world’s greatest military ever.” They feed this swill to each other and expect it from everyone else. If they don’t get it, they become angry. Senior officers’ bubbles, created by vast, sycophantic staffs, rival Xerxes’s court. Woe betide the ignorant courtier who tells the god-king something he doesn’t want to hear.

And:

What defines a professional—historically there were only three professions, law, medicine, and theology—is that he has read, studied, and knows the literature of his field. The vast majority of our officers read no serious military history or theory.

While my personal experience has been that Marine Officers tend to read and discuss military history, it could be that I gravitate toward those who do.  I will admit that I am chagrined at the numbers of Officers of all services who have seemingly no interest in doing so.

Lind also identifies what he calls “structural failings”:

The first, and possibly the worst, is an officer corps vastly too large for its organization—now augmented by an ant-army of contractors, most of whom are retired officers. A German Panzer division in World War II had about 21 officers in its headquarters. Our division headquarters are cities. Every briefing—and there are many, the American military loves briefings because they convey the illusion of content without offering any—is attended by rank-upon-rank of horse-holders and flower-strewers, all officers.

Command tours are too short to accomplish anything, usually about 18 months, because behind each commander is a long line of fellow officers eagerly awaiting their lick at the ice-cream cone… Decisions are committee-consensus, lowest common denominator, which Boyd warned is usually the worst of all possible alternatives. Nothing can be changed or reformed because of the vast number of players defending their “rice bowls.” The only measurable product is entropy.

The second and third structural failings are related because both work to undermine moral courage and character, which the Prussian army defined as “eagerness to make decisions and take responsibility.” They are the “up or out” promotion system and “all or nothing” vesting for retirement at 20 years. “Up or out” means an officer must constantly curry favor for promotion because if he is not steadily promoted he must leave the service. “All or nothing” says that if “up or out” pushes him out before he has served 20 years, he leaves with no pension. (Most American officers are married with children.)

It is not difficult to see how these… structural failings in the officer corps morally emasculate our officers and all too often turn them, as they rise in rank and near the magic 20 years, into ass-kissing conformists.

I cannot help but notice the truth that rings from much of what Lind asserts.  I have made some of those very same assertions myself on more than a few occasions.  Give the article a read.  What does the gang here think?  Is Lind on target?  If so, how do we fix it?  Can it be fixed?

About these ads

23 Comments

Filed under Air Force, army, Around the web, Defense, history, marines, navy, recruiting, Uncategorized, veterans, war

The Liars’ Club and the IRS Scandal

Picture1

Elijah Cummings, D-Md, is a liar.  Quite simply, Cummings made statements last July about the IRS and their targeting of conservative groups that he knew not to be true.  Cummings claimed that somehow evidence was “discovered” that showed that progressive liberal groups had been targeted, as well as conservative groups.  His fib was immediately given wide dissemination by the beholden liberal news media, who trumpeted faithfully yet another chorus of “false scandal” emanating from the White House.   Despite the protestations of the New York Times, Washington Post, et al, none of what they asserted, nor what Cummings said, was true.

Who said so?  Why, IRS agents said so.  In sworn testimony.

IRS agents testified before Congress that the agency’s political targeting did not apply to progressive groups as Democrats and the media have claimed, according to a bombshell new staff report prepared by the House Oversight Committee chairman, Rep. Darrell Issa.

Remember, the original story from Lois Lerner and the IRS was that the targeting of conservative groups was the result of the actions of just a few people in the Cincinnati Office.  Which was a lie.  Untrue, and known to be untrue when it was uttered.  No more true than Cummings’ tall tales about the IRS targeting liberals, too.  Just to be on the safe side, however, the US Attorney General declared in January that he would not pursue criminal prosecution for anyone in the IRS involved in the scandal, claiming that an “investigation” led by Obama campaign contributor and political supporter Barbara Bosserman “found no criminal wrongdoing”.   Despite the provisions of 18 U.S. Code § 245:

(b) Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, by force or threat of force willfully injures, intimidates or interferes with, or attempts to injure, intimidate or interfere with—

(B) participating in or enjoying any benefit, service, privilege, program, facility, or activity provided or administered by the United States;

Barack Obama, when he told America that there wasn’t a “smidgin of corruption” in the IRS scandal, was also knowingly stating a falsehood.  He is a liar of the inveterate type.  The IRS Agents’ testimony under oath today directly contradicts his assertions.  His “angry” act at the scandal was a rather pathetic attempt to sell outrage at the idea of treating his political opponents as national enemies.  It is something he, and his Attorney General, have employed as a tactic since inauguration.  See: Alinsky, Saul, Rules for Radicals.

Elijah Cummings, he of the wildly unprofessional conduct at the House Oversight Panel, shares several things with both Obama and Holder.  He shares skin color, and an obsession with that skin color.  In short, he is, like Holder and Obama, a race-hustler who would be roundly condemned if his skin color was white and he spoke of race as he does.  Cummings, like Obama and Holder, is also a far-left collectivist.  He is also an inveterate fibber.  His whopper that the Democrats and the NAACP “never called the Tea Party racists” was undone by video of that very thing being said.   His conduct on the Oversight Panel on the IRS investigation is similar to what it was during the Benghazi hearings.  He wished to disrupt, obfuscate, grandstand, do ANYTHING to distract from the proceedings in order to keep the Obama Administration from having to answer for the highly questionable and possibly criminal things it has done.   And so, with IRS agents’ testimony in the IRS scandal directly refuting his claims, Cummings joins the IRS Scandal Liars’ Club.  With Holder, and Obama, and Lois Lerner already belonging, at least the club has enough minority members to suit him.

 

 

4 Comments

Filed under Around the web, history, obama, Politics, Uncategorized

IPCC Warns on Global Warming, after the Coldest Winter in US in a Century

Burlington-81-20-07694-453x300

Well, we have reached the last day of March in 2014.  Just in time for the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to send out another alarmist shill about Global Warming/Climate Change.   Anthropogenic Climate Change, to be exact.  Requiring “action”.   Which is a code-word for “money”.    Otherwise, disaster, death, murder, rape, starvation is sure to ensue.  You get the idea.  Seems like we have heard it all before, dunnit?

Of course, Socialist-Communist American President Barack Obama is solidly behind such “action”.  Especially since that action has the desirable side-effect of destroying our capitalist economy and providing further excuse for even more crushing environmental regulation, exponentially expanding the statist command economy he desires so much.   Vice President Biden, he of the “perfect skin”, is in full agreement.  Which means, it seems, that the inside of his head is not quite as well-kept as the outside.

1990_ipcc_graph

We are to believe, of course, that the natural cycle of changes in the Earth’s climate which we have proof occurred hundreds of millions of years before man came to be, is now entirely our fault.  And that the massive and growing number of skeptics in the scientific community remain “just a few deniers”.

Let’s give some local flavor to the debate.   Where I live, March 2014 has had a mean temperature nearly NINE DEGREES below normal.  That is an astounding figure.  In March of 2012, when we had temperatures in the 70s for several days and the global warming alarmists were in full frenzy, the mean temperature was just 7.2 degrees ABOVE normal.   Despite their prognostications of certain doom, March of 2014 is actually significantly colder than March of 2012 was warm.   Such is also not in isolation.  The previous 12 months have been a full 2.0 degrees below their average since 2006.   Talk about “hockey stick” graphs.

Nationally, the US just experienced the coldest six months in more than 100 years.  Since the winter of 1911-12.  If that is true in the US, it is very likely true in Canada and Mexico.  For the last six months, at least one quarter of the globe has been significantly colder than the norm.   Climate scientists have already been caught red-handed manipulating data sets to produce “global warming” outcomes.  As have US agencies.   These aren’t mistakes.  Not errors in calculation.  They are LIES.

Our President, not surprisingly, is using those lies to perpetuate HIS agenda, and the agendas of his political and financial supporters.   For people like Barack Obama, the truth is something to be avoided at all costs.   That should surprise nobody.  After Benghazi, Obamacare, the IRS scandal, Fast and Furious, “red lines”, etc., he can be called an inveterate liar.

And it shouldn’t surprise us that Obama embraces the Global Warming anti-capitalists.  It isn’t like he doesn’t have a history of hanging out with Weathermen.

*******************************

It would seem that the “just a few deniers” have a few things to say.    It makes a good read.

10 Comments

Filed under anthropology, Around the web, budget, history, obama, Politics, space, stupid, Uncategorized

America Rising: I’m Just Wild About Harry!

reid

Seems that Harry Reid wants us to believe that he never stated that the legion examples of the horrendous impact of that colossal train-wreck known as Obamacare were simply “lies” made up by Republicans.  Not only did he claim such was “simply untrue”, but Harry made that claim while admonishing a Republican Senate colleague who had called him out for his words.  Reid’s piqued denial came after having said precisely what he was accused of saying (on CSPAN, no less), on the Senate floor barely a month earlier.  (See links in the previous sentence for Reid’s statements.) Ol’ Harry’s shenanigans would otherwise have escaped the dogged investigative talents of the Mainstream Media except for a wonderful little organization called “America Rising PAC”.  Their digging unearthed Senator Reid’s earlier comments, exactly one month prior.

Exactly a month ago today, Harry Reid took to the Senate floor to say that the  ObamaCare horror stories that were being told across the country were lies:

“We heard about the evils of Obamacare, about the lives it’s ruining in Republicans’ stump speeches and in ads paid for by oil magnates, the Koch brothers. But in those tales, turned out to be just that: tales, stories made up from whole cloth, lies distorted by the Republicans to grab headlines or make political advertisements.”

Today, Harry Reid took to the same Senate floor to say that he had never said that any ObamaCare horror stories were lies… to his recollection:

“Mr. President, the junior Senator from Wyoming has come to the floor several times recently talking about the fact that examples that he and other Republicans have given, dealing with ObamaCare, examples that they think are bad, I’ve called lies. Mr. President, that is simply untrue. I have never come to the floor, to my recollection, and I never said a word about any of the examples that Republicans have given regarding ObamaCare and how it’s not very good.” 

So let’s go to the videotape!

The americarisingpac.org posting has gone absolutely viral.  I have it on the best of sources that Karl Rove “tweeted” it, and now the Daily Caller picked it up, as has CNS, Town Hall, Fox, the Weekly Standard, Heritage, the American Thinker, and a number of others.  No word on MSNBC or CNN saying a peep about Harry’s little falsehood.   What a shock.

It is difficult to tell if the far-left crusaders and fellow-travelers that have populated Congress and the Obama Administration, including President Obama himself, have yet to grasp the import of the information age or not.  Or whether they think that things they have said publicly, recorded on audio or video, can simply be made to be forgotten by indignantly asserting after the fact that they were never said.  Or, if they are arrogant enough to believe that their standing among the American public is so esteemed that nobody cares.  Or, perhaps, that the beholden formerly-independent press will dutifully bury such stories and intentionally spin and obfuscate the truth in their “analysis” of whatever unpleasant issue the Administration wants entombed and out of the public eye.  Perhaps it is some combination of all of the above.

Certainly with Benghazi, and the IRS scandal, voter intimidation in Philadelphia, Fast and Furious, Obamacare, the DoJ AP phone subpoena scandal, and myriad other scandals big and small, this Administration and its minions in Congress have lied repeatedly, deliberately misleading the American public with the complicity of the Mainstream Media, who act, nearly universally, as shills for their political patrons.  We know what happens when the line is not toed.  Just ask Sheryl Atkisson, whose probing of the Benghazi debacle made Obama & Co. distinctly uncomfortable, or the aforementioned AP reporters.

So now we have Senator Harry Reid, doubling down on his accusations by lying about his previous statements.  Imagine if this was Boehner or Rand Paul, or Ted Cruz.  This would be fodder for the talk shows for weeks, and the MSM would work hand in glove with the Obama Politburo to destroy the Republican politician in question.   But this is Harry Reid, the leftist Senator from Nevada, Senate Majority (for now) leader, and he thought he could bald-face bullsh*t on the Senate floor, and claim he never said what he is on record as saying.

And he’d have gotten away with it, too, if it weren’t for those meddlesome kids!

H/T to DB!!!!

4 Comments

Filed under Around the web, history, obama, Politics, stupid, Uncategorized

Russians Claim US Drone Captured While Flying Over Crimea

hunter_1

Stop me if you heard the one about anything with an uplink/downlink being vulnerable to MIJI and capture.  From Yahoo news, via Drudge.

“The drone was flying at about 4,000 metres (12,000 feet) and was virtually invisible from the ground. It was possible to break the link with US operators with complex radio-electronic” technology, said Rostec in a statement.

The drone fell “almost intact into the hands of self-defence forces” added Rostec, which said it had manufactured the equipment used to down the aircraft, but did not specify who was operating it.

“Judging by its identification number, UAV MQ-5B belonged to the 66th American Reconnaissance Brigade, based in Bavaria,” Rostec said on its website, which also carried a picture of what it said was the captured drone.

Super.   Perhaps President Obama will take the strong-arm stance he took when Iran did a similar thing.  Ask politely for them to return it.  Yeah, that’ll show ‘em.   One has to wonder when this actually occurred, and if this information was released specifically to discredit Kerry on the day of his meeting with Lavrov in London.   But that would be strategic messaging, which is part of Information Dominance.   And WE have Information Dominance, dammit!

Our foreign policy is being dictated by nincompoops and imbeciles.  We are screwed.

7 Comments

Filed under Air Force, Around the web, Defense, history, Iran, obama, planes, Politics, Uncategorized

MORE Things That Make You Go “Hmmmmmmmmmm”

iran-coup

This little tidbit managed to elude the American press.  The SAME American press that can tell you nothing about Benghazi, but everything about the George Washington Bridge scandal, nothing about Barack Obama’s college transcripts, but everything about George W. Bush’s military service (even if they have to make it up.)

From Iran’s Fars News Agency, via Drudge, these statements from Brigadier General Hossein Salami of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps:

“Today, we can destroy every spot which is under the Zionist regime’s control with any volume of fire power (that we want) right from here,” Salami said, addressing a conference in Tehran on Tuesday dubbed ‘the Islamic World’s Role in the Geometry of the World Power’.

“Islam has given us this wish, capacity and power to destroy the Zionist regime so that our hands will remain on the trigger from 1,400km away for the day when such an incident (confrontation with Israel) takes place,” he added.

Well, given by Islam and Barack Obama.  I am sure the General doesn’t MEAN anything by it.   It isn’t like he has the ear of the Supreme Leader or anything.   And I am certain that Iran is bargaining for uranium enrichment in good faith.  The Israelis?  They’re just paranoid.

6 Comments

Filed under Around the web, Artillery, Defense, guns, history, Iran, islam, israel, nuclear weapons, obama, Politics, Uncategorized, war

Infographic: Maersk Triple-E Class

BgBz4uKCEAExUXY

The Maersk Triple-E is the newest class of container ships. First built and delivered in 2013 (the first example being named the Maersk Mc-Kinney Moller) there are 20 total units planned (as of January this year, there are 7 units) with planned complete production in June 2015.

In the hull, there’s some interesting technology (from Wikipedia):

One of the class’s main design features are the dual 32-megawatt (43,000 hp) ultra-long stroke two-stroke diesel engines, driving two propellers at a design speed of 19 knots (35 km/h; 22 mph). Slower than its predecessors, this class uses a strategy known as slow steaming, which is expected to lower fuel consumption by 37% and carbon dioxide emissions per container by 50%

Maersk Triples-Es are designed to be the world’s most efficient container ships by virtue of their hull and how they’re operated:

Unlike conventional single-engined container ships, the new class of ships has a twin-skeg design: It has twin diesel engines, each driving a separate propeller. Usually, a single engine is more efficient;[10] but using two propellers allows a better distribution of pressure, increasing propeller efficiency more than the disadvantage of using two engines.[19]

The engines have waste heat recovery (WHR) systems; these are also used in 20 other Mærsk vessels including the eight E-class ships. The name “Triple E class” highlights three design principles: “Economy of scale, energy efficient and environmentally improved.[20]

The twin-skeg principle also means that the engines can be lower and further back, allowing more room for cargo. Maersk requires ultra-long stroke two-stroke engines running at 80 rpm (versus 90 rpm in the E class);[21] but this requires more propeller area for the same effect, and such a combination is only possible with two propellers due to the shallow water depth of the desired route.[11][11][22]

A slower speed of 19 knots is targeted as the optimum, compared to the 23–26 knots of similar ships.[11] The top speed would be 25 knots, but steaming at 20 knots would reduce fuel consumption by 37%, and at 17.5 knots fuel consumption would be halved.[23] These slower speeds would add 2–6 days to journey times.[24][25]

The various environmental features are expected to cost $30 million per ship, of which the WHR is to cost $10 million.[10]Carbon dioxideemissions, per container, are expected to be 50% lower than emissions by typical ships on the Asia-Europe route[26] and 20% lower than Emma Maersk.[27] These are the most efficient containerships in the world, per TEU. A Cradle-to-cradle design principle was used to improve scrapping when the ships end their life.[28]

As noted in the infographic the transit from the China to Europe takes 20 days. Maersk is hoping the increased fuel efficiency will offset the increased transit times.

You can learn more at Maersk’s Flickr site and at the Triple-E’s website.

It’s going to be interesting to see how these vessels will change the current maritime security environment.

5 Comments

Filed under Around the web, China, logistics, navy

Easy Company’s Sergeant “Wild Bill” Guarnere dies at 90

Bill Guarnere with Babe Heffron

Bill Guarnere with Babe Heffron

A sad day and a loss to our country.  NBC from Guarnere’s native Philly has the story.

“He was without a doubt one of the bravest and best soldiers in all of Easy Company,” said Easy Company historian Jake Powers. “He was one of the best combat leaders not only in his company but also the division. If there was a fight going on with the 1st Platoon or 3rd Platoon, Bill would miraculously show up and leave 2nd Platoon to go help. He would ‘march to the sound of gunfire.’ He had no reservations and was just a fearless man in combat.”

Guarnere’s time in the war ended when he lost his right leg while trying to help a wounded soldier. For his efforts during the Brecourt Manor Assault on D-Day, he earned the Silver Star. He later received two Bronze Stars and two Purple Hearts.

Men like Bill Guarnere are heroes.  He, and his ilk, will be missed.

2 Comments

Filed under army, Around the web, history, infantry, veterans, war

“When democracy turns to tyranny, the armed citizen still gets a vote”

Those wishing to disarm the law-abiding by passing laws infringing on the right to keep and bear arms have been warned.   From over at Sipsey Street:

An Open Letter to the Men and Women of the Connecticut State Police: You are NOT the enemy (UNLESS YOU CHOOSE TO BE.)

The following letter was sent via email to members of the Connecticut State Police, Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection. There are 1,212 email addresses on the list. There were 62 bounce-backs.

15 February 2014

To the men and women of the Connecticut State Police and the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection:

My name is Mike Vanderboegh. Few of you will know who I am, or even will have heard of the Three Percent movement that I founded, though we have been denounced on the national stage by that paragon of moral virtue, Bill Clinton. Three Percenters are uncompromising firearm owners who have stated very plainly for years that we will obey no further encroachments on our Second Amendment rights. Some of you, if you read this carelessly, may feel that it is a threat. It is not. Three Percenters also believe that to take the first shot in a conflict over principle is to surrender the moral high ground to the enemy. We condemn so-called collateral damage and terrorism such as that represented by the Oklahoma City Bombing and the Waco massacre. We are very aware that if you seek to defeat evil it is vital not to become the evil you claim to oppose. Thus, though this letter is certainly intended to deal with an uncomfortable subject, it is not a threat to anyone. However, it is important for everyone to understand that while we promise not to take the first shot over principle, we make no such promise if attacked, whether by common criminals or by the designated representatives of a criminal government grown arrogant and tyrannical and acting out an unconstitutional agenda under color of law. If we have any model, it is that of the Founding generation. The threat to public order and safety, unfortunately, comes from the current leaders of your state government who unthinkingly determined to victimize hitherto law-abiding citizens with a tyrannical law. They are the ones who first promised violence on the part of the state if your citizens did not comply with their unconstitutional diktat. Now, having made the threat (and placed the bet that you folks of the Connecticut State Police will meekly and obediently carry it out) they can hardly complain that others take them seriously and try by every means, including this letter, to avoid conflict.

Some of you are already working a major case on me, trying to figure out how I may be arrested for violating Conn. P.A. 13-3, which bears the wildly dishonest title of “An Act Concerning Gun Violence Prevention and Children’s Safety.” (What part of “protecting children” is accomplished by sparking a civil war?) Not only have I personally violated this unconstitutional and tyrannical act by smuggling and by the encouragement of smuggling, defiance and non-compliance on the part of your state’s citizens, but I have further irritated your wannabe tyrant bosses by sending them standard capacity magazines in my “Toys for Totalitarians” program. I further have annoyed them by pointing out — and seeking more evidence of — the existence of Mike Lawlor’s KGB file (as well as his FBI and CIA counter-intelligence files). In short, I have made myself a nuisance to your bosses in just about every way I could think of. However, their discomfiture reminds me of the wisdom of that great American philosopher of the late 20th Century, Frank Zappa, who said, “Do you love it? Do you hate it? There it is, the way you made it.” Whether you will be able to make a case on me that sticks is, of course, problematic for a number of reasons which I will detail to you in the letter below. I have already done so to your bosses and include the links in this email so that you may easily access them.

But even if you are not working on my case you will want to pay attention to this letter, because tyrannical politicians in your state have been writing checks with their mouths that they expect you to cash with your blood. We have moved, thanks to them, into a very dangerous undiscovered country. Connecticut is now in a state of cold civil war, one that can flash to bloody conflict in an instant if someone, anyone, does something stupid. So please pay attention, for Malloy and Co. have put all your asses on the line and are counting on your supine obedience to the enforcement of their unconstitutional diktat.

I apparently first came to your attention with this speech on the steps of your state capitol on 20 April 2013. It was very well received by the audience but virtually ignored by the lapdog press of your state. If I may, I’d like to quote some of the more salient points of it that involve you.

“An unconstitutional law is void.” It has no effect. So says American Jurisprudence, the standard legal text. And that’s been upheld by centuries of American law. An unconstitutional law is VOID. Now that is certainly true. But the tricky part is how do we make that point when the local, state and federal executive and legislative branches as well as the courts are in the hands of the domestic enemies of the Constitution. Everyone who is currently trying to take away your right to arms starts out by saying “I support the 2nd Amendment.” Let me tell you a home truth that we know down in Alabama — Barack Obama supports the 2nd Amendment just about as much as Adolf Hitler appreciated Jewish culture, or Joseph Stalin believed in individual liberty. Believe what politicians do, not what they say. Because the lie is the attendant of every evil. . .

Before this year no one thought that other firearms and related items would ever be banned — but they were, they have been. No one thought that the authorities of your state would pass laws making criminals out of the previously law-abiding — but they did. If they catch you violating their unconstitutional laws, they will — when they please — send armed men to work their will upon you. And people — innocent of any crime save the one these tyrants created — will die resisting them.

You begin to see, perhaps, how you fit into this. YOU are the “armed men” that Malloy and Company will send “to work their will” upon the previously law-abiding. In other words, this law takes men and women who are your natural allies in support of legitimate law enforcement and makes enemies of the state of them, and bully boy political police of you. So you all have a very real stake in what happens next. But let me continue:

The Founders knew how to answer such tyranny. When Captain John Parker — one of the three percent of American colonists who actively took the field against the King during the Revolution — mustered his Minutemen on Lexington Green, it was in a demonstration of ARMED civil disobedience. . . The colonists knew what to do and they did it, regardless of the risk — regardless of all the King’s ministers and the King’s soldiery. They defied the King. They resisted his edicts. They evaded his laws and they smuggled. Lord above, did they smuggle.

Now we find ourselves in a similar situation. The new King Barack and his minions have determined to disarm us. We must determine to resist them. No one wants a new civil war (except, apparently, the anti-constitutional tyrants who passed these laws and the media toadies who cheer them on) but one is staring us in the face. Let me repeat that, a civil war is staring us in the face. To think otherwise is to whistle past the graveyard of our own history. We must, if we wish to avoid armed conflict, get this message across to the collectivists who have declared their appetites for our liberty, our property and our lives — WHEN DEMOCRACY TURNS TO TYRANNY, THE ARMED CITIZEN STILL GETS TO VOTE.

Just like King George, such people will not care, nor modify their behavior, by what you say, no matter how loudly or in what numbers you say it. They will only pay attention to what you DO. So defy them. Resist their laws. Evade them. Smuggle in what they command you not to have. Only by our ACTS will they be impressed. Then, if they mean to have a civil war, they will at least have been informed of the unintended consequences of their tyrannical actions. Again I say — Defy. Resist. Evade. Smuggle. If you wish to stay free and to pass down that freedom to your children’s children you can do no less than to become the lawbreakers that they have unconstitutionally made of you. Accept that fact. Embrace it. And resolve to be the very best, most successful lawbreakers you can be.

Well, I guess at least some of my audience that day took my message to heart. As Connecticut newspapers have finally begun reporting — “Untold Thousands Flout Gun Registration Law” — and national commentators are at last noticing, my advice to defy, resist and evade this intolerable act is well on the way. The smuggling, as modest as it is, I can assure is also happening. This law is not only dangerous it is unenforceable by just about any standard you care to judge it by. Let’s just look at the numbers mentioned in the Courant story.

By the end of 2013, state police had received 47,916 applications for assault weapons certificates, Lt. Paul Vance said. An additional 2,100 that were incomplete could still come in.

That 50,000 figure could be as little as 15 percent of the rifles classified as assault weapons owned by Connecticut residents, according to estimates by people in the industry, including the Newtown-based National Shooting Sports Foundation. No one has anything close to definitive figures, but the most conservative estimates place the number of unregistered assault weapons well above 50,000, and perhaps as high as 350,000.

And that means as of Jan. 1, Connecticut has very likely created tens of thousands of newly minted criminals — perhaps 100,000 people, almost certainly at least 20,000 — who have broken no other laws. By owning unregistered guns defined as assault weapons, all of them are committing Class D felonies.

“I honestly thought from my own standpoint that the vast majority would register,” said Sen. Tony Guglielmo, R-Stafford, the ranking GOP senator on the legislature’s public safety committee. “If you pass laws that people have no respect for and they don’t follow them, then you have a real problem.”

This blithering idiot of a state senator is, as I warned Mike Lawlor the other day, extrapolating. It is a very dangerous thing, extrapolation, especially when you are trying to predict the actions of an enemy you made yourself whom you barely recognize let alone understand. I told Lawlor:

You, you silly sod, are extrapolating from your own cowardice. Just because you wouldn’t risk death for your principles, doesn’t mean there aren’t folks who most certainly will. And, not to put too fine a point on it, but folks who are willing to die for their principles are most often willing to kill in righteous self-defense of them as well. You may be ignorant of such people and their ways. You may think that they are insane. But surely even you cannot be so clueless that, insane or not from your point-of-view, such people DO exist and in numbers unknown. This is the undiscovered country that you and your tyrannical ilk have blundered into, like clueless kindergarteners gaily (no pun intended) tap-dancing in a well-marked mine field. The Founders marked the mine field. Is it our fault or yours that you have blithely ignored the warnings? If I were a Connecticut state policeman I would be wondering if the orders of a possible KGB mole throwback were worth the terminal inability to collect my pension. Of course, you may be thinking that you can hide behind that “thin blue line.” Bill Clinton’s rules of engagement say otherwise.

The odds are, and it gives me no particular satisfaction to say it, is that someone is going to get killed over your unconstitutional misadventures in Connecticut. And if not Connecticut, then New York, or Maryland, or California or Colorado. And once the civil war you all apparently seek is kicked off, it would not be — it could not be — confined to one state.

This is not a threat, of course. Not the personal, actionable threat that you may claim. It ranks right along with — no, that’s wrong, IT IS EXACTLY LIKE — an ex-con meeting me in the street and pointing to my neighbor’s house saying, “Tonight I am going to break in there, kill that man, rape his wife and daughters and steal everything that he is, has, or may become.” I warn him, “If you try to do that, he will kill you first. He may not look like much, but I know him to be vigilant and perfectly capable of blowing your head off.” That is not a threat from me. It is simply good manners. Consider this letter in the same vein. I am trying to save you from yourself.

For, like that common criminal, you have announced by your unconstitutional law and your public statements in favor of its rigorous enforcement that you have a tyrannical appetite for your neighbors’ liberty, property and lives. It doesn’t take a crystal ball to see that this policy, if carried to your announced conclusion, will not end well for anybody, but especially for you.

Now let’s examine those numbers in the Courant story. You know the size of the Connecticut Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection. Wikipedia tells us that “CSP currently has approximately 1,248 troopers, and is headquartered in Middletown, Connecticut. It is responsible for protecting the Governor of Connecticut, Lieutenant Governor of Connecticut, and their families.” There are but 1,212 email addresses listed on the state website to which this email is going, which presumably includes everyone including secretaries, receptionists, file clerks, technicians, etc. Now, how many shooters for raid parties you may find among that one thousand, two hundred and forty eight that Wikipedia cites, or whatever number will be on the payroll when something stupid happens, only you know for sure. I’ll let you do the counting. They are daunting odds in any case, and as you will see, they get more daunting as we go down this road that Malloy and Company have arranged for you. (By the way, don’t forget to subtract those on the Green Zone protective details, for your political masters will certainly see their survival as your mission number one.) So, how many folks would your superiors be interested in seeing you work their will upon? And of these, how many will fight regardless of cost?

Let’s assume that there are 100,000 non-compliant owners of military pattern semi-automatic rifles in your state. I think it is a larger number but 100,000 has a nice round ring to it. Let us then apply the rule of three percent to that number — not to the entire population of your state, not even to the number of firearm owners, but just to that much smaller demonstrated number of resistors. That leaves you with at least 3,000 men and women who will shoot you if you try to enforce this intolerable act upon them. Of course you will have to come prepared to shoot them. That’s a given. They know this. So please understand: THEY. WILL. SHOOT. YOU. (In what they believe is righteous self defense.) Now, if any of them follow Bill Clinton’s rules of engagement and utilize the principles of 4th Generation Warfare, after the first shots are fired by your raid parties, they will not be home when you come to call. These people will be targeting, according to the 4GW that many of them learned while serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, the war makers who sent you. This gets back to that “when democracy turns to tyranny, the armed citizenry still gets to vote.” One ballot, or bullet, at a time.

This is all hypothetical, of course, based upon the tyrants’ appetites for these hitherto law-abiding citizens’ liberty, property and lives as well as upon your own willingness to enforce their unconstitutional diktat. And here’s where you can do something about it. The first thing you have to realize is that the people you will be targeting do not view you as the enemy. Indeed, you are NOT their enemy, unless you choose to be one.

Again, an unconstitutional law is null and void. Of course you may if you like cling to the slim fact that a single black-robed bandit has ruled the Intolerable Act as constitutional in Shew vs. Malloy, but that will not matter to those three percent of the resistors — your fellow citizens — whom you target. They no longer expect a fair trial in your state in any case, which leaves them, if they wish to defend their liberty, property and lives, only the recourse of an unfair firefight. So to cite Shew vs. Malloy at the point of a state-issued firearm to such people is, well, betting your life on a very slender reed.

Thus, my kindly advice to you, just as it was to Lawlor, is to not go down that road. You are not the enemy of the people of Connecticut, not yet. The politicians who jammed this law down the peoples’ throats are plainly flummoxed by the resistance it has engendered. In the absence of a definitive U.S. Supreme Court decision do you really want to risk not being able to draw your pension over some politician’s insatiable appetite for power?

There are many ways you can refuse to get caught up in this. Passive resistance, looking the other way, up to and including outright refusal to execute what is a tyrannical law that a higher court may yet find unconstitutional and therefore null and void. Do you really want to have to kill someone enforcing THAT? Just because you were ordered to do so? After Nuremberg, that defense no longer obtains. (You may say, “Well, I’m just a secretary, a clerk, you can’t blame me for anything.” Kindly recall from Nuremberg one other lesson: raid parties cannot break down doors unless someone like you prepares the list in advance. In fact, you have at your keyboard and in your databases more raw, naked power than any kick-in-the-door trooper. And with that power comes moral responsibility. Adolf Eichmann didn’t personally kill anyone. But he darn sure made up the lists and saw to it that trains ran on time. When the first Connecticut citizen (or, God forbid, his family) is killed as a result of your list-making, do you think that because you didn’t pull the trigger that gives you a moral pass?)

So I call on you all, in your own best interest and that of your state, to refuse to enforce this unconstitutional law. There are a number of Three Percenters within the Connecticut state government, especially its law enforcement arms. I know that there have been many discussions around water-coolers and off state premises about the dangers that this puts CT law enforcement officers in and what officers should do if ordered to execute raids on the previously law-abiding.

You have it within your power to refuse to initiate hostilities in an American civil war that would, by its very nature, be ghastly beyond belief and would unleash hatreds and passions that would take generations to get over, if then.

Please, I beg you to understand, you are not the enemy, you are not an occupying force — unless you choose to violate the oath that each of you swore to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against ALL enemies, foreign and domestic. For their part, the men and women who will be targeted by your raids took an identical oath. Can you think of anything more tragic than brother killing brother over some politician’s tyrannical appetite?

I can’t. The future — yours, mine, our children’s, that of the citizens of Connecticut and indeed of the entire country — is in YOUR hands.

At the very least, by your refusal you can give the courts time to work before proceeding into an unnecessary civil war against your own friends and neighbors on the orders of a self-anointed elite who frankly don’t give a shit about you, your life, your future or that of your family. They wouldn’t pass these laws if they thought that they would have to risk the potential bullet that their actions have put you in the path of. They count on you to take that bullet, in service of their power and their lies. Fool them. Just say no to tyranny. You are not the enemy. Don’t act like one.

Sincerely,

Mike Vanderboegh

The alleged leader of a merry band of Three Percenters

PO Box 926

Pinson AL 35126

As the author states, the above is hardly a threat.  Unless, of course, those men and women of the CT State Police choose to serve their political masters rather than the Constitution they have sworn to uphold.    Law Enforcement officials everywhere, at all levels of government, would do well to read and heed.  In many areas, they are dancing dangerously close to a line they cross at their own peril.    The Second Amendment is the citizens’ last redress against the tyranny of government.

10 Comments

Filed under Around the web, Defense, guns, history, obama, Personal, Politics, veterans, war

It is Difficult to Overstate Our Diplomatic Incompetence

Head in Hands

A resurgent Russia, under a ruthless and savvy autocrat, is flexing its muscles in Eastern Europe.  Communist China is threatening our allies and our interests in the Pacific.  That same Russia and China appear headed for closer relations.  Iran, thanks to the feckless naivete of Obama and Kerry, are poised to have nuclear weapons, with which they have vowed to destroy Israel.  North Korea, in league with that very same Iran, continues to act provocatively, with full approval of the PRC, despite public protestations to the contrary.  The “Arab Spring” has unleashed radical Islamists throughout the region.  Russian influence throughout the Middle East has been exponentially enhanced by America’s “leading from behind” fiasco.  We are without a viable grand strategy, and are slicing our Armed Forces to well below the levels at which we can defend our interests and deter our adversaries.

So what is Secretary of State John Kerry’s “critical mission” in his message to his diplomatic corps?

“Protecting our environment and meeting the challenge of global climate change is a critical mission for me as our country’s top diplomat,” Kerry said in the letter issued on Friday to all 275 US embassies and across the State Department.

Yep.  Climate change.  America’s foreign policy team is being pushed around and laughed at for the pathetically weak milquetoasts they are.  Our credibility in the world is sinking alarmingly.   Our adversaries and rivals are acting with impunity, virtually without fear of repercussion from what remains (for the time being) the most powerful nation on earth.  Our allies are frantically scrambling to fill the security gap where America once stood.  What strategic leverage we might have, abundant sources of fossil fuel energy, is being deliberately suppressed by these same far-left “environmentalists” in the name of “saving the planet”.

An editorial this Friday in the leftist rag that passes for the local paper here in Upper Valley of Vermont tried to make the argument that somehow Republicans were being disingenuous in claiming Obama to be a strong-arm quasi-dictator on the one hand, while accusing him of being pathetically weak on the other.   Of course, the columnist assiduously avoided the fact that Vladimir Putin (and Rouhani in Iran, Assad in Syria, etc.) is immune to intimidation by Eric Holder, or Lois Lerner, or Kathleen Sibelius.  Foreign policy means dealing with people whom cannot be silenced by Obama being able to sic the apparatus of government upon those who defy him.   Alinsky’s “rules for radicals” work for domestic politics, when opponents are not willing to kill and starve and imprison on a massive scale to achieve their goals.   But ideologues like Hillary Clinton, and John Kerry, and Barack Obama are way out of their element in dealing with foreign leaders who understand REAL power.  Leaders who call their bluffs regarding “red lines” and “severe consequences”, and such.  Which results in President Obama “prancing around swinging his purse at Moscow”, as SKK so eloquently expressed.  Putin and Lavrov have shown utter contempt for Obama and Kerry, and it is not difficult to understand why.

So in place of actual statesmanship, John Kerry injects tripe about “climate change”.  (Which used to be “global warming”, if you are keeping score, until far-left environmentalists could no longer obscure the fact that the world was not, in fact, getting warmer.  Not to be confused with “global cooling”, which 40 years ago was the “settled science”, until they could no longer obscure the fact that the world was not, in fact, getting cooler.)  It is not at all clear how a diplomat in an embassy or a consulate can quite go about “elevat(ing) the environment in everything we do”, or how that got to be the job of a diplomat in the first place.  Oh, wait.  Because it was one of John Kerry’s “causes”.

“The environment has been one of the central causes of my life.”

Right.  Along with claiming America was “the world’s monster”, advocating for wealth-redistribution statist socialism, collaborating with our nation’s enemies (worthy of a drone strike?), and fomenting anti-American sentiment wherever he went.    Oh, and avoiding taxes due on his yacht (where he spent significant time during the recent Egypt crisis and then lied about it, by the way).   And jet-setting to any of several multimillion-dollar homes.   No word on whether advancing America’s strategic interests appears anywhere in there.

And it ain’t like his boss drove a Prius to his Florida golf vacation.  Which comes just weeks after his Hawaii golf vacation.

The United States will pay a terrible price for the mind-boggling incompetence resident in the people entrusted with our foreign policy.  They, themselves, the Kerrys and Obamas, the Hillarys, they won’t.  But we will.  It is difficult to overstate that incompetence.  Though, between last week’s appearance on Meet the Press, and this inane memo to our diplomats this week, Kerry seems as if he is sure giving it a try.

7 Comments

Filed under Around the web, budget, Defense, history, Iran, islam, israel, Libya, nuclear weapons, obama, Politics, stupid, Uncategorized, war

A US-Japan Littoral Combat Ship Design?

The Diplomat has the story.  The possibility is certainly intriguing.  One can assume rather confidently that Japanese naval engineers are somewhat less enamored of “revolutionary”, “transformational”, and “game-changing” as we seem to be here at NAVSEA.  Japanese ship designs, particularly in smaller units, have always been excellent.  Fast, sturdy, powerful units for their size.

…analysts contend that the trimaran would likely be a lighter variant of the U.S. Navy’s 3,000-tonne littoral combat ship (LCS), a platform designed primarily for missions in shallow coastal waters.

According to reports in Japanese media, the high-speed J-LCS would give the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF) the ability to quickly intervene during incursions by Chinese vessels near the Senkaku/Diaoyu islets and other contested areas of the East China Sea. Chinese analysts speculate that the J-LCS could be intended as a counter to the PLA Navy’s (PLAN) Type 056 corvettes and Type 022 fast-attack boats, two types of vessels that could be deployed to the region should relations continue to deteriorate. Furthermore, early reports indicate that the slightly enlarged hull of the 1,000-tonne-plus vessels could accommodate SH-60K anti-submarine helicopters and MCH-101 airborne mine countermeasures (AMCM) helicopters.

If Chinese analysts are correct, and I hope they are, it is possible we will see a smaller, better-armed, more lethal, less fragile, and significantly less expensive warship which will be suitable for combat in the littorals.  Our lack of “low-end” capability to handle missions ill-suited for AEGIS cruisers and destroyers, such as mixing it up with ASCM-armed frigates and fast-attack craft, is nothing short of alarming.  It would be of benefit to the US Navy to scrutinize the results of such a design, which at first blush sounds much closer to the “Streetfighter” concept than either current LCS design, and that of the Cyclone-class Patrol Cutters.

It sure as hell would be an improvement over current designs.  Especially if the “joint” US-Japanese LCS actually shipped the weapons systems and capabilities required and didn’t stake success on as-yet undeveloped “modules” whose feasibility has come increasingly into question.

3 Comments

Filed under armor, Around the web, budget, China, Defense, guns, helicopters, history, marines, navy, Uncategorized, war

Disastrously Delusional- Kerry on “Meet the Press”

mtp_jk_aggr_140302_f67da166fe8d9c9bf62e203b1ec5c61f.330;320;7;70;5

The events of this week in the Ukraine, particularly Russia’s de facto occupation of the Crimea, have highlighted the shambles that is US foreign policy.  Aside from revealing the complete impotence of NATO, the situation which has evolved in the last 72 hours has brought to the fore the contrast between the Machiavellian power-broker realism of Putin/Lavrov and the naive and feckless bumbling of Obama and SecState John Kerry.

To the list of foreign policy disasters that include the Cairo speech, the West Point speech, cut and run in Iraq, a stunted “surge” in AFG, the “Arab Spring” debacle, leading “from behind” in Libya, the Benghazi attack and cover-up, supporting Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, being caught bluffing with the “red line” nonsense in Syria, selling out our Israeli allies to make a deal virtually guaranteeing a nuclear Iran, we have the crowning fiasco, and likely the most dangerous in long-term impact for the United States and the world.

Kerry’s appearance on “Meet the Press” today reveals just how misguided and dangerously naive the arrogant amateur buffoons are who are careening our ship of state onto the shoals at flank speed.

This is an act of aggression that is completely trumped up in terms of its pretext. It’s really 19th-century behavior in the 21st century, and there’s no way to start with that if Russia persists in this, that the G8 countries are going to reassemble in Sochi. That’s a starter. But there’s much more than that.

Is he kidding?  Power politics was centuries old when Machiavelli defined it in his works in the 1530s.  Power politics has dominated every century since, including the 20th.  In fact, there is virtually no reason to suddenly embrace some notion of “21st Century” statecraft that is any different from that of the previous five centuries, since the emergence of modern nation-states.  That Kerry and Obama think otherwise, and think the rest of the world behaves accordingly, is the height of hubris.  Treating the world as you wish it to be rather than how it exists is simply bankrupt intellectual foolishness.  But there’s more.

And we hope, President Obama hopes that President Putin will turn in the direction that is available to him to work with all of us in a way that creates stability in Ukraine. This does not have to be, and should not be, an East/West struggle.

There is no excuse whatever, other than a willful ignorance of history, to utter such a decidedly stupid and ill-informed comment publicly.  The central theme to the existence of European Russia is an eight-century long existential struggle between East and West.  The tragicomic foolishness of Hillary Clinton’s “reset button”, so contemptuously ridiculed by Foreign Minister Lavrov, was indicative of just how amateurish and incompetent the Obama Administration’s foreign policy and national security players were, and just how precious little they understood the art of statecraft.  Statements like the above reveal how little those players know about the history of the nations and peoples with which that statecraft requires them to interact.

There is worse to come later in the interview with David Gregory.   These two positively head-scratching pronouncements can rightfully make one wonder how tenuous this Administration’s grip on reality truly is:

David, the last thing anybody wants is a military option in this kind of a situation. We want a peaceful resolution through the normal processes of international relations.

President Putin is not operating from a place of strength here. Yanukovych was his supported president… President Putin is using force in a completely inappropriate manner that will invite the opprobrium of the world.

Such a bizarre pair of assertions is difficult to explain.  The several thousand Russian forces, which include mechanized infantry, attack aviation, and self-propelled artillery certainly seem to point to the notion that Vladimir Putin believed some semblance of a military solution was desired to ensure Russia maintained a friendly buffer between what Putin believes is a hostile West.   A buffer that incidentally includes the strategically vital naval base for Russia’s Black Sea Fleet, and has a population demographic of approximately 60% ethnic Russians.

As for understanding a position of strength, one might also wonder just how Kerry would go about defining strength.  There is virtually nothing NATO can do militarily, should they even be willing; the United States, with shrinking defense budgets, is in the midst of gutting its military to pre-World War II levels.   The leverage the EU has over Russia is limited, despite Russia’s very significant economic problems.   Any “opprobrium”, or threats by the US, France, Canada, and the UK to suspend the G-8 Summit, is positively pittance to the Russians in comparison to the security of their strategically essential western neighbors, regions that have countless times stood between Russia and destruction at the hands of a conquering West. Russia has acted virtually unchallenged, presenting a fait accompli to the West that, despite assertions to the contrary, will not be undone.  If ever there was a position of power, Russia holds it right now in the Crimea, and will be asserting it anywhere and everywhere in the “near abroad” that Putin has long promised to secure.

The United States never has had all that much leverage to prevent Russia and a talented autocrat like Putin from leaning on their western border states, despite the fitful attempts by the US to draw some of those states into the Western sphere.  The invasions of Georgia and South Ossetia in 2008 proved that beyond a doubt.  But what is most disturbing about the current crisis is watching the US Secretary of State and the US President misread, misstep, and attempt to bluster their way through another confrontation with a geopolitical rival that is acting without restraint and without regard for the empty rhetoric from the Obama Administration.   The most fundamental lesson of statecraft is that of understanding power.  To that end, we have another object lesson in the use of that power.  There is no such thing as hard power, soft power, or “smart” power.  There is just power.  As it has since antiquity, power consists of the capability to enforce one’s will upon an adversary mixed with the willingness to use that capability.

Putin and Lavrov know that lesson well.  They are hard-bitten professionals who act as they believe necessary to promote Russian interests and improve economic and physical security.  Obama and Kerry are rank amateurs, blinded by an ideology that begets a naive and woefully unrealistic understanding of how the world works.  They have been outfoxed and outplayed yet again, seemingly willingly forfeiting US influence and credibility in pursuit of a badly-flawed world view in which influence is based upon hollow threats and ill-conceived public statements.  Any doubts regarding that assertion should be erased when one listens to the cognitive dissonance emanating from our Secretary of State as he describes the Crimean crisis in terms which have little to do with reality.   It is to weep.

19 Comments

Filed under armor, army, Around the web, Artillery, budget, Defense, guns, helicopters, history, infantry, Iran, iraq, israel, Lybia, obama, ossettia, planes, Politics, Uncategorized, veterans, war

“You Have No Rights!”

It seems that Towson, Maryland police officers verbalized what many in Law Enforcement have shown with their behavior nationwide for the last several years.  A man filming police officers at a disturbance is threatened and assaulted by a police officer who declares at one point that the private citizen he is responsible for protecting and serving has no rights.   The local CBS affiliate has the story.

It is well past time to view these cases in isolation.  I don’t want to hear that.  Nor do I want to hear about how the police “fear for their safety”.  Or how they were somehow justified in threatening jail or declaring which freedoms are permitted.   That, in large dose or small, is tyranny, plain and simple.  Trying to explain it away is to stretch plausibility to the breaking point and beyond in order to find excuses for such behavior.

Of course, police officials are always “concerned” and vow to investigate the “possibility” of wrongdoing.  The assertions that additional training and possible disciplinary action is a solution is entirely in error.  This is not a matter of training but of attitude and sense of unbridled authority and entitlement.  Borne of not being accountable.  David Rocah of the ACLU is quite right.  It is very problematic, and it does reflect a great and growing sense of impunity.

No, the solution to this, eventually and unfortunately, is for police officers like this jackass to face the wrath of an armed populace willing to assert their liberties forcefully.  And if he survives the encounter, he should consider himself lucky.   Of course, it is no coincidence that the Governor of Maryland has all but disarmed the law-abiding.  He, and his police forces, get to decide which of your Constitutional liberties they would like you to have and when.  Which, it should be noted, this Administration desires to make the national model.

Tyranny around every corner, indeed.

8 Comments

Filed under armor, Around the web, Defense, guns, history, obama, Personal, Politics, Uncategorized, war

Going Hollow: The Hagel Preview of the FY2015 Defense Budget

lets-be-honest-chuck-hagel-will-be-the-next-secretary-of-defense

Anthony Cordesman, the Arleigh Burke Chair at CSIS, provides a very cogent summary of the weakness of our Defense Department leadership and its inability or unwillingness to discuss the 2015 DoD budget meaningfully.

At the simplest level of budgetary planning, the Secretary’s budget statements ignore the fact that the Congressional Budget Office projects that the Department’s failure to manage the real-world crises in personnel, modernization, and readiness costs will have as negative an overall budget impact over time as Sequestration will. Ignoring the Department’s long history of undercosting its budget, its cost overruns, and the resulting cuts in forces, modernization, and readiness means one more year of failing to cope with reality.  Presenting an unaffordable plan is as bad as failing to budget enough money.

Cordesman gets to the real meat of our failure of strategic (dare I say “national strategic”?) thinking, as well.

He talks about cuts in personnel, equipment, and force strength in case-specific terms, but does not address readiness and does not address any plan or provide any serious details as to what the United States is seeking in in terms of changes in its alliances and partnerships,  and its specific goals in force levels, deployments, modernization, personnel, and readiness.

He holds nothing back in his contempt for the process of the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), either.

Worse, we are going to leave these issues to be addressed in the future by another mindless waste of time like the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR). All the past QDRs have been set so far in the future to be practical or relevant. Each successive QDR has proved to be one more colostomy bag after another of half-digested concepts and vague strategic priorities filled with noise and futility and signifying nothing.

Cordesman saves his best for last, however.

Like all of his recent predecessors, Secretary Hagel has failed dismally to show the U.S. has any real plans for the future and to provide any meaningful sense of direction and real justification for defense spending. The best that can be said of his speech on the FY2015 defense budget is that U.S. strategy and forces will go hollow in a kinder and gentler manner than simply enforcing sequestration.

We do need to avoid cutting our forces, military capabilities, and defense spending to the levels called for in sequestration. But this is no substitute for the total lack of any clear goals for the future, for showing that the Department of Defense has serious plans to shape a viable mix of alliances and partnerships, force levels, deployments, modernization, personnel, and readiness over the coming Future Year Defense Plan.

I don’t always agree with Cordesman’s assertions, but he is just about always a thoughtful if provocative commenter on Defense and National Security issues, and his analysis of SECDEF Hagel’s remarks are spot-on.  We are headed for a hollow force, despite its smaller size, as many of us have feared all along.  This, despite all the promises and admonitions of this Administration and our Pentagon leadership.  Go have a read.

 

 

2 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, Air Force, army, ARMY TRAINING, Around the web, budget, Defense, guns, history, Iran, iraq, marines, navy, nuclear weapons, obama, planes, Politics, recruiting, Uncategorized, veterans, war

Seduced By Success; An Army Leadership Untrained for True War?

blitzkrieg-europe-1940-ww2-second-world-war-illustrated-history-pictures-photos-images-french-soldier-tankman-surrenders

Our friend at Op-For, the urbane and erudite sophisticate LTCOL P (supplying some cogent comments of his own), points us to a superb article in AFJ by Daniel L. Davis outlining the very real possibility that our immense advantages over our foes in the last two-plus decades has left many of our middle and senior leadership untested and overconfident in our warfighting capabilities.

Imagine one of today’s division commanders finding himself at the line of departure against a capable enemy with combined-arms formation. He spent his time as a lieutenant in Bosnia conducting “presence patrols” and other peacekeeping activities. He may have commanded a company in a peacetime, garrison environment. Then he commanded a battalion in the early years of Afghanistan when little of tactical movement took place. He commanded a brigade in the later stages of Iraq, sending units on patrols, night raids, and cordon-and-search operations; and training Iraq policemen or soldiers.

Not once in his career did an enemy formation threaten his flank. He never, even in training, hunkered in a dugout while enemy artillery destroyed one-quarter of his combat vehicles, and emerged to execute a hasty defense against the enemy assault force pouring over the hill.

Spot-on.  Such sentiment applies to ALL SERVICES.  Even in the midst of some pretty interesting days in Ramadi and Fallujah, I never bought into the idea that was being bandied about so casually that “there is no more complex decision-making paradigm for a combat leader than counterinsurgency operations”.   It was utter nonsense.  The decisions to be made, as the author points out, above the troops-in-contact level, were seldom risking success or failure either in their urgency or content.  We had in Iraq and in AFG the ability to largely intervene with air or ground fires as we desired, to engage and disengage almost at will, against an enemy that could never have the capability of truly seizing tactical initiative.  Defeat, from a standpoint of force survival, was never a possibility.  To borrow Belloc’s observations of Omdurman, “Whatever happens, we have got, close air support, and they have not”.

Having a brigade of BMP-laden infantry rolling up behind the fires of a Divisional Artillery Group, supported by MI-24s and SU-25s, which stand a very real chance of defeating (and destroying) not just your unit but all the adjacent ones, is infinitely more challenging than even our rather intense fights (April and November 2004) for Fallujah.  The speed and tactical acumen of the decision makers will be the difference between holding or breaking, winning and losing, living or dying.   The author points out some significant shortcomings in our current training paradigm, and brings us back to some fundamentals of how we train (or used to, at any rate) decision-makers to operate in the fog and uncertainty of combat.  Training and exercises, designed to stress and challenge:

At some of the Combat Maneuver Training Centers, Army forces do some good training. Some of the products and suggestions from Army Training and Doctrine Command are good on paper. For example, we often tout the “world class” opposing force that fights against U.S. formations, and features a thinking and free-fighting enemy. But I have seen many of these engagements, both in the field and in simulation, where the many good words are belied by the exercise. For example, in 2008 I took part in a simulation exercise in which the opposing forces were claimed to be representative of real world forces, yet the battalion-level forces were commanded by an inexperienced captain, and the computer constraints limited the enemy’s ability to engage.

Many may remember the famed “Millennium Challenge 2002” held just before Operation Iraqi Freedom. Retired Marine general Paul Van Riper, appointed to serve as opposing force commander, quit because the exercise was rigged. ”We were directed…to move air defenses so that the army and marine units could successfully land,” he said. ”We were simply directed to turn [air defense systems] off or move them… So it was scripted to be whatever the control group wanted it to be.” For the U.S. Army to be successful in battle against competent opponents, changes are necessary.

Field training exercises can be designed to replicate capable conventional forces that have the ability to inflict defeats on U.S. elements. Such training should require leaders at all levels to face simulated life and death situations, where traditional solutions don’t work, in much more trying environments than is currently the case. They should periodically be stressed to levels well above what we have actually faced in the past several decades. Scenarios, for example, at company and battalion level where a superior enemy force inflicts a mortal blow on some elements, requiring leaders and soldiers to improvise with whatever is at hand, in the presence of hardship and emotional stress.Simulation training for commanders and staffs up to Corps level should combine computer and physical exercises that subject the leaders to situations where the enemy does the unexpected, where key leaders or capabilities are suddenly lost (owing to enemy fire or efforts), yet they still have to function; where they face the unexpected loss of key communications equipment, yet still be forced to continue the operation.

Such exercises should not all be done in nicely compartmentalized training segments with tidy start and end times, and “reset” to prepare for the next sequence. Instead, some exercises should be held where there is a beginning time “in the box” and no pre-set start or end times until the end of a rotation two weeks or more later. In short, the training rotation should replicate the physical and emotional stress of actual combat operations in which there is no “pause” to rest and think about what happened.

I couldn’t agree more.  However, in a budget-crunch environment where significant funding is going toward advancing political and social agendas even within DoD, I am not at all sanguine about such training occurring.  Worse, rather than having leaders champion the need for it and constantly fight for training dollars, I fear that such a requirement will be dismissed as less than necessary, since we already have “the most professional, the best educated, the most capable force this country has ever sent into battle.”  While our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines are indeed superb, and honed at the small unit level, our senior leadership is much less so.  What’s worse is that leaders who have no experience in battlefield command against a near-peer force have begun to assert that technological innovation makes such training superfluous.  That the nature of war has changed, and we are now in an era of “real-time strategy” and “global awareness”.   To steal a line from The Departed, there is deception, and there is self-deception.

Anyway, the Armed Forces Journal article is a thought-provoking read.

26 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, Air Force, armor, army, ARMY TRAINING, Around the web, Artillery, budget, China, Defense, girls, guns, helicopters, history, infantry, iraq, logistics, marines, navy, planes, Politics, SIR!, Splodey, Uncategorized, veterans, war

Duffel Blog: Gen. Amos Nervously Awaiting Results Of Career Board

Those guys nail it yet again.  Is it an indicator that Jim Mattis finds the Duffel Blog hysterical but Jim Amos hates it?

Career Designation, according to Marine Corps, is “a force-shaping tool” that ensures Marines retain the best company-grade officers by firing half of them. The program was established in 2011, making this Amos’ first Career Designation, having recently hit the requisite post-MOS waiting period. Amos graduated at the bottom of his class in Commandant’s School in 2010.

Brilliant, I tell you.  Brilliant.

4 Comments

Filed under Around the web, Humor, marines, Uncategorized

Barack Obama and the End of the First Amendment

obama-big-brother.jpg w=590&h=320

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Those 45 words are at the very root of what some call American “exceptionalism”, the right to speak one’s mind and to hear the truth reported in the press without intimidation or interference from the Government, its agencies, or its officials.   While First Amendment rights have never been absolute, government infringement upon those rights has almost never been countenanced as Constitutional by the US Supreme Court, and not too much more frequently by lower courts at any level.    Those words are the verbal expression of the beacon held aloft by the Statue of Liberty, and have drawn the oppressed and the freedom-loving the world over to our great land.

Which is what makes this Administration so dangerous to our liberties.  Barack Obama, whose philosophy of government embraces the monolithic statism of Iron Curtain Europe mixed with Hugo Chavez-esque populist progressive communism, finds such liberties distinctly inconvenient and dangerous to his ambitions.  So, the Obama Administration, while mouthing the platitudes of reverence for our freedoms, has actively gone about shredding those liberties, demonizing political opposition as national enemies. The use of tax collection (the IRS) powers to persecute political opponents.  The subpoena of media phone records by the Justice Department without cause.  The senior Military Officer on the active list calling to demand a private citizen desist from lawful free expression.  All are disturbing but well-stifled examples of the such malfeasance.

In each instance, the President of the United States, when he deigned to address such egregious violations of Constitutional liberties and dangerous government overreach, did what he always does.  He lied.  He didn’t “spin” or “omit”.  He lied.  Said publicly things he knew not to be true.  As did his minions involved in the incident; Lois Lerner of the IRS (now seeking immunity since she perjured herself), Eric Holder, and General Martin Dempsey, all political sycophants who willingly lied publicly, not once but several times, in relation to the misconduct in which they were involved.

One of the reasons such misdeeds and lack of honesty has received such little attention has been the decidedly muted response by an overwhelmingly liberal news media.  They have given the Obama Administration little scrutiny, for its deeds or its words, and have played an active hand in attacking those who dared question the veracity of Obama’s words and actions.   But, apparently, that is not good enough for Barack Obama.  Now, it seems, he is interjecting government monitors into what is left of America’s “free” press.  The American Center for Justice and Law tells the story.  Which is interesting in and of itself.  For had a Republican Administration official at ANY level even whispered that such a thing was being discussed, the Washington Post and the New York Times would have it as front page news for weeks.  Complete with the outrage against the assault on the sanctity of that same free press.

Last May the FCC proposed an initiative to thrust the federal government into newsrooms across the country. With its “Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs,” or CIN, the agency plans to send researchers to grill reporters, editors and station owners about how they decide which stories to run. A field test in Columbia, S.C., is scheduled to begin this spring.

The purpose of the CIN, according to the FCC, is to ferret out information from television and radio broadcasters about “the process by which stories are selected” and how often stations cover “critical information needs,” along with “perceived station bias” and “perceived responsiveness to underserved populations.”

The results, predictably, will be a quasi-state-controlled media akin to TASS or state media in China and the DPRK.  Of course, there will be those whom, as they do with every dangerous precedent this Administration has set, will say that this is much ado about nothing.  They will assert that government “monitors” don’t actually threaten freedom of the press, and that “there is no evidence” that such is intended to intimidate news organizations into crafting only the news this Leftist Administration wants reported, and reporting it in an “authorized” manner.   They are increasingly assuming the role of the “useful idiots” of Lenin’s Bolshevik Revolution.  And, not surprisingly, they include major media personalities and executive ownership, men and women seemingly bent on self-immolation in their unswerving support for someone who has little use for a free press and is actively seeking to dispense with it.

The reality is grim.  Precedent is a very dangerous thing in government exercise of authority.  What we are seeing is the destruction of the free press that Jefferson believed so fervently was necessary for the flourishing of liberty.  Other infringement on our free speech will follow, and in fact has already been bandied about. Expect “hate speech” to be targeted for criminalization, which will include certain criticism of politically-favored demographics and government policies. There will already be precedent for dispensing with our liberties under the First Amendment.

When 2016 arrives, just remember that Hillary Clinton’s political philosophy is indistinguishable from that of Barack Obama.

Oh, and both wish to do away with our right to keep and bear arms as our last redress against the tyranny of government.   For our own good, of course.

That, when any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the People to alter or abolish it…

H/T DB!

8 Comments

Filed under Around the web, China, guns, history, obama, Personal, Politics, Uncategorized, war

One of the True Greats is Gone: Sid Caesar dies at 91

caesar

Comedic great Sid Caesar passed away yesterday at the age of 91.  If you have never seen his comedy, you missed out on a brilliance that was truly dazzling.  A talented musician and gifted performer, Caesar mixed highly intellectual comedy with an incredible ability to pantomime, act, and draw laughter on virtually every subject he expounded upon.  He worked with the all-time comedic giants, including close friends Mel Brooks, Carl Reiner, Nannette Fabray, Steve Allen, Howie Morris, and just about anyone you can name from the early and classic days of live comedy television.  His Your Show of Shows was a 90 minute sketch comedy show that is as funny sixty years after its broadcast as it was when first aired.  His award-winning comedy sketch, which is a close-up of his face (and in which he does not utter a single word) as his wife (the beautiful Nannette Fabray) comes home from a shopping trip and explains the great bargains she has gotten on her dresses and minks, ends with a tear running down his cheek.  He was admired and emulated by virtually every comedic actor of note that followed him.

The Dick van Dyke Show, a situation comedy from the 1960s which starred Carl Reiner as the acerbic star of the fictitious Alan Brady Show, was based on Caesar’s talented group of comedy writers from Your Show of Shows, with Alan Brady loosely parodying Caesar’s own personality.

Caesar starred on Broadway and had dozens of movies to his credit, none more memorable than his starring role in Stanley Kramer’s 1963 comedy epic It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad. Mad World.   He was a Coast Guard Veteran of World War II, and the son of Jewish (Polish and Russian) immigrants, who got his performing start as a saxophonist in the Catskills.

He and his brand of intellectual humor will be missed.   So long, Melville Crump, DDS.

2 Comments

Filed under Around the web, girls, history, Humor, Personal, Uncategorized, veterans, war

Gun Owners are the Enemy to Ohio National Guard

mq1

Seems that the 2nd Civil Support Team of the Ohio National Guard is participating in an exercise where the perpetrators of a chemical attack are posited to be “Second Amendment supporters”.    Media Trackers tells us the story.

Buckeye Firearms Association spokesman Chad Baus told Media Trackers that “it is a scary day indeed when law enforcement are being trained that Second Amendment advocates are the enemy,”

“The revelation of this information is appalling to me, and to all citizens of Ohio who are true conservatives and patriots, who don’t have guns for any other reason than that the Second Amendment gives them that right,” Portage County TEA Party Executive Director Tom Zawistowski said in a separate Media Trackers interview.

Not a new paradigm, of course.  Law-abiding citizens who are political opponents of the Obama-Holder secular-progressive statist left have been considered enemies all along.   Aside from the preposterous scenario, this is yet another of the Federal Government/Law Enforcement/Military leadership’s conditioning the American people to think of gun owners (and advocates of free speech, limited government, and due process) to be violent and unreasonable criminals, comprising threats that need to be dealt with in the harsh totalitarian measures so often favored by those far-left ideologues who despise our liberties so.  Of note is that, when similar training involved positing an environmental advocacy group committing an act of terror or violence, the apologies were profuse, and immediate.

Before I get the same hackneyed arguments that “this is just a training exercise”, the same weak reasoning was used to explain away the following:

  • The FBI report that white Veterans who believed in God, the Second Amendment, and limited government were a terrorist threat
  • The change in language from “Islamic extremists” to “violent extremists” was mere semantics and not for the purpose of labeling political opposition in the same language as America’s enemies
  • Increased militarization of police, including having them acquire heavy armored vehicles for use on American streets
  • When Barack Obama referred to political opposition when he talked of  “punishing our enemies”
  • The Joint Staff College posited a training scenario with the enemy being Tea Party activists

There have been myriad other instances where elements of the government have acted against law-abiding citizens as if they were criminals and threats to security, while often ignoring those who are sworn enemies of this country.

“You want to have it as realistic as possible, but you don’t want to single out an issue as emotional as that,” Eliason said.

Of course, the quote above would never be uttered by any official regarding demonizing of gun owners and advocates of our Second Amendment liberties.   Everyone knows that gun owners are evil.   That is to say, gun owners that didn’t vote for you.  Which is almost all of them.

It is telling that the spokesman for the Ohio National Guard was unwilling to talk.   Law-abiding citizens who choose to exercise their Constitutional liberties and see themselves portrayed as violent terrorists are due an explanation for such an outrage.

1 Comment

Filed under armor, army, Around the web, guns, history, islam, obama, Personal, Politics, stupid, Uncategorized, veterans, war

NextGen China Carrier?

@SteelJawScribe found a little gem in a Chinese newspaper:

I can’t read any Chinese, so I can’t find the correct link, but the article is about (I guess) the future Type 055 Guided Missile Destroyer. That would be the ship in the foreground. And if you say to yourself, “Whoa, that looks a lot like a USN DDG-51!” you’re not alone.

I’d like a better look at the hull and the deck layout of the notional carrier but a couple things popped 0ut to SteelJaw. First, the carrier is a nuke. No stacks, ergo, nuke. Second, a closer look at the birds on the roof show what looks like the J-20 stealth fighter, and clearly shows the rotodomes of an Airborne Early Warning aircraft.

Mind you, it’s tough to really know what the Chinese are planning just by looking at pics found on the internet. There’s a ton of stuff floating out there, but until there are hulls in the water, it is often just speculation. The Chinese are a bit more tight lipped about their procurement process than we are.

Comments Off

Filed under Around the web, China, Defense

Words of Wisdom from Brian McGrath

gw

Over at Information Dissemination, Bryan McGrath has a post about the possibility that the Navy will be directed to maintain the current level of CVBGs, which means funding of USS George Washington’s (CVN-73) Refueling and Complex Overhaul (RCOH) rather than retirement and disposal of the 22-year old supercarrier.  In that post, McGrath posits what should be the well-ingrained mantra of our Navy leadership:

The debates should start with the proposition that the Navy is too small to accomplish its conventional and strategic missions, that what the Navy does for the country is simply more important that what other aspects of the military do (in a time of relative peace among great powers but tension on the horizon), and that we are making grave and irreversible mistakes as our maritime industrial base hangs in the balance.  No one argued that the Army had to get bigger and more robust to fight the wars we were in…the Navy needs to make a principled argument that now is ITS time for sunlight and growth, that what IT does is uniquely suited to our security and prosperity, and that cutting it increases what are now manageable, but growing dangers.

It is time to go to the mattresses.

Our Navy leadership has in recent past all but refused to discuss end-strength and high-low mix, with consensus of what our Navy should even look like in order to execute the Cooperative Strategy being conspicuously absent.   The current 280-0dd ship Navy is barely able to execute NOW, without anyone to contest us.  To cut further and still claim to Congress and the American people that the Navy is capable of carrying out the roles and missions assigned to it in defense of our nation and its interests is at best a fool’s errand, and at worst, the same ilk of blatant politically-driven dishonesty that has become all too common among those in senior uniformed leadership positions.

I am off to the AFCEA/USNI West conference tomorrow, and I will have an opportunity to see how many of the Navy’s senior leaders embrace Bryan McGrath’s wisdom.

2 Comments

Filed under Around the web, budget, Defense, guns, history, navy, obama, Politics, Uncategorized, war

Rules for Successful Platoon Leaders

Warcouncil.org has an interesting list of leadership tips for platoon leaders. I think a lot of these are applicable to Junior Officers of all branches of the armed forces  as well as to leaders in the civilian world as well:

1.   Love your unit and your job.  Love is not always a two way street, sometimes you give more than you get, and love is a choice.  Being an Infantry Platoon Leader is the greatest job in the world.  You have the ability to mold men and make our country stronger 24 hours a day.  Enjoy every minute of it, even the difficult times, and give of yourself freely to your mission and your men.  Hold nothing back and have a solid work ethic.  When your time is up, you need to know in your heart of hearts that you worked as hard as you could and did as much as you could to get your men ready for war

2.     Wake up before 0500 five out of seven days a week

3.     Be the most physically fit person in your unit

4.     Memorize and understand the steps to attack a strong point and engagement area development; know the components of IPB; be able to pitch your scheme of maneuver without referring to notes

5.     Read the news from credible sources which will challenge your view point and your vocabulary (The Economist, Foreign Affairs, PBS, NPR); read about things that have no apparent relation to your profession, you’ll be surprised at what you learn

6.     Set a reasonable number of realistic unit-focused goals and accomplish them

7.     Know how to call for fire

8.     Know how to call in a MEDEVAC

9.     Know the maximum effective range for every weapon system in your arms room

10.  Know what a sustained, rapid, and cyclic rate of fire is for every weapon in your arms room

11.  Be the arms room officer

12.  Have your property layout perfect before your commander gets there

a. Have the right TM

b. Have the shortages already updated on a shortage annex

c.  Have a binder with copies of 2062s signed down to the user level

d. Know what LINs will be inspected during cyclic inventories

e. Know how to read a property book

f. Know the difference between expendable, non-expendable, durable and AAL property items

g. Rehearse the layout with your NCOs

13.   Always maintain your integrity and tell your boss about bad news in a reasonable amount of time

14.  If it’s cold, hot, miserable, or sucks, be there – if it’s dangerous and it makes sense, be first

15.  Know the names of your Soldiers’ wives and kids

16.  Backbrief your platoon sergeant before you talk to your commander

17.  If you are backbriefing your commander, and your platoon sergeant is squared away, bring him

18.  Not every NCO is a 1-1; most PLTs only have 2-3 NCOs in the entire PLT who are a 1-1

19.  Counsel your platoon sergeant and squad leaders after every training event

20.  Counsel your platoon sergeant and squad leaders about your no fail missions prior to every training event

21.  The most important steps of the TLPs and 8 step training model are the WARNO and reconnaissance

22.  Identify risk and mitigate it through additional safeties, tempo, rehearsals, or location of key leaders; don’t be risk averse; ask yourself if you are being aggressive enough in your training events or if you are cutting corners in the name of safety that degrades from combat readiness

23.  Know how to write; proof read NCOERs and awards before they get to the commander; cut and paste your bullets in to Microsoft word – this will eliminate 70% of errors in Army correspondence; be familiar with AR 25-50

24.  Conduct a warno, oporder, and rehearsal prior to every operation; spot check one or two things from one or two Soldiers from each squad prior to execution; conduct a confirmation brief with your commander after he gives you an order; after you’ve come up with a tentative plan and issued a WARNO, backbrief your commander paying particular attention to your timeline and actions on the OBJ

25.  When you have the time available, plan every mission around the forms of contact and the eight points of failure.  At a minimum, plan your AOO and have a timeline for SP, LD, route and time to CPs, ORP, recon, AOO, consolidation, reorganization, and RTB.  There should be a phase line when you reach each form of contact, and that phase line should trigger some type of action by the friendly element; ie, at 800 meters from the OBJ we will cross PL Blue and we will be within the enemy’s crew served weapon range, to mitigate this, we will call smoke on target AB001 and change our movement technique to bounding overwatch and our movement formation to platoon column, squad wedge.  Have fires, HLZs/AXPs planned for each phase.  The eight points of failure are infiltration, exfiltration, fire support (TTLODAC, what assets are available, what is their max range, what is their response time, proficiency of assets in support, targets planned by phase of the operation), ISR (who is watching the enemy watch us), recovery (how are we recovering broken vehicles, mechanic plan, where do we get spare parts), sustainment (how do we resupply  ammo, food, water, medical supplies, FOO officer, batteries for electronics and commo), mission command (what is the PACE for communications, who is my higher headquarters, what is the CCIR, does my higher headquarters have the latest version of my common operating picture, do I have a GRG, do my graphic control measures add to the clarity of all players in the mission, when is my COMMEX, what is my interpreter plan, where is my QRF coming from, what is their composition, disposition, level of proficiency, reaction time, how am I talking to them, what is the trigger for them to launch), and MEDEVAC (plan HLZs/AXPs by phase of the operation, where is the nearest FAS, do I have a medic with each maneuver element).

26.  Don’t say that one of your Soldiers is a “good” Soldier; instead say that he scored 300 on his last APFT, got his EIB, shows up to work on time with a good attitude and that you have zero negative counseling statements on him.  On the other hand, if you have a “bad” Soldier, be able to quantify that as well – and make sure it’s documented

27.  Do the things the things that only you can do and delegate everything else

28.  If you don’t have comms with your higher element you are of very little use to anybody; if you haven’t heard any traffic on the net for more than five minutes, check your radios, your comms are probably out; unless you are personally engaging the enemy with direct fire, your commander wants to hear from you and not your RTO

29.  Have the personal courage to disagree with your commander; when you disagree with your commander have an alternate COA; it’s normally best to disagree with your commander behind closed doors unless it’s a matter of integrity or safety

30.  Trust your NCOs but don’t necessarily believe every word they say; NCOs rarely lie to officers, but they are known to stretch the truth on occasion; trust your gut

31.  When you communicate, it’s not enough to be right; you need to communicate in such a way so that those with whom you work see the merit of your point of view; there are many different ways to communicate, influence, and persuade

32.  Nothing good or productive comes from hanging out downtown Columbus on the weekend after 2200

33.  Watching TV is generally a waste of time; time is a precious commodity, use your free time to strengthen your family, increase your professional knowledge, improve your physical fitness, or take better care of your Soldiers; live by the philosophy of God, mission/family, men, self

34.  Bow hunting makes you a better infantry officer; everything you need to know about terrain analysis and pattern analysis, engagement area development, stealth, and patience you can learn by hunting deer with a bow

35.  Don’t ever let a JV product leave your platoon

36.  Attend mandatory fun events; as a lieutenant, you need to take every opportunity you can to learn about your profession and build relationships

37.  Know the task organization, capabilities, and equipment of each company in your battalion

38.  Make a concerted effort to know every lieutenant in your battalion

39.  Know the history of your battalion

40.  Prepare prior to any OPD/LPD you attend by reading and understanding the material to be covered; ask intelligent questions

41.  Take the time to publicly reinforce outstanding performance as close to the event taking place as possible

42.  Read as much as possible; you don’t  have to read every book cover to cover; at a minimum, read the preface, intro, conclusion, and notes page, then read the first and last paragraph of each chapter, write notes in the margin, and skim the body of each chapter; don’t waste of hours of reading time by reading things which you are not interested in or things that are not applicable; find out what your boss reads, he’s probably taking the time to read something for a reason

43.  Cultivate relationships with all of the key leaders in your company; don’t ever let there be daylight between you and your platoon sergeant

44.  If you can’t meet a suspense, don’t hope that your commander forgets about it, ask for an extension; if you have too many things going on, ask your commander for his priorities – what’s important to your commander is important to you

45.  Always seek out the difficult jobs and tough missions and always volunteer for extra responsibility; lieutenants learn by doing and you need to learn as much as possible so that when you’re a commander you delegate more effectively

46.  Spot check your platoon sergeant’s trackers

47.  If you are sitting around at work and you have nothing to do it’s an indicator you are or are becoming irrelevant to your organization

48.  Create a live fire packet with range control

49.  Execute combat focused team building events with your platoon once a month

50.  Get accounts for platoonleader.com, companycommander.com, S1 Net, LIW, PBUSE; be familiar with the HRC website

51.  Lead by example and from the front at all times; every action you take, every word you speak, and every interaction you have will increase or decrease the combat readiness of your unit

52.  Have a copy of the GARSOP and TACSOP and reference these products – make suggestions for how to improve them

53.  Read the attachments on the emails that you receive; you will often find that whoever sent an email with 12 attachments didn’t read each one, and in one of those attachments is a friction point or a valuable piece of information that needs to be disseminated or investigated

54.  Don’t eat fast food

55.  Maintain a good relationship with the guy you replace or the guy who replaces you

56.  Be on the same page as your fellow platoon leaders

57.  Be aggressive

58.  Ask yourself what a great leader would do when you encounter difficult situations

59.  Seek counsel from your company XO; he has more insight and experience than you do; support him and do what he asks in a timely manner

60.  Be present for command maintenance, bring additional work to do in the motor pool while your guys are on their tracks; spot check your M240s after a live fire exercise – weapons get cleaned before Soldiers eat or sleep

61.  Figure things out on your own but make sure you have your commander’s intent; when you ask a commander for his intent, you are not bugging him; often commander’s overlooked a detail or are not tracking the same reality that you are; therefore, prior to undertaking any significant project, make sure you have your commander’s intent

62.  Don’t ever take credit for any positive event; don’t ever shirk responsibility for any negative event

63.  Don’t get flustered and don’t undertake any significant action when your temper is running high; if you need to chew someone out, do it when you’re calm and tailor your comments to achieve the endstate that you want

64.  Spend at least 15 minutes a day with the door shut with just you and your platoon sergeant

65.  70% now is better than 100% an hour from now; be aware of the details you have left out

66.  Make your Soldiers stand at the position of attention when they speak to you until you put them at ease; make your Soldiers stand at the position of parade rest for your NCOs

67.  If you have the opportunity to do something to take care of one of your Soldiers, do it.  For example, it’s easy to give a guy a couple days of leave to take care of a family situation and that Soldier will remember that you helped him when he needed it and Soldiers are more productive when they aren’t distracted

68.  Use the battalion Chaplain generously – he has a lot of resources and can make your life easier – not all Chaplains are created equally

69.  When someone tells you “no” find a way to get them to “yes”; an experienced NCO can make just about any administrative action happen by talking to the right person in the right manner

Given the vast experience I’d be interested to know what the readership thinks.

 

6 Comments

Filed under army, ARMY TRAINING, Around the web

McGrath: Surface Warfare Rules of the Game

Bryan McGrath over at Information Dissemination has an absolutely superb piece on the overlay of a peacetime mentality on what might suddenly and shockingly be a wartime Navy.

You see, the heavy influence of the PEACETIME NAVY was at work.  We over-analyzed, over-plotted, over-targeted and over-thought every single engagement, driven in no small measure by the fear of hitting “white shipping”, or the clueless merchant who meanders into a hot war zone during the scenario.  Never mind that the flight path of the missile avoided the merchant by hundreds of yards.  Never mind that its seeker head wasn’t active when it CPA’d the merchant.  Never mind that the height of the missile at that part of its flight path would have flown over most of the merchants in the world at that time.  Never mind that merchants don’t have AAW radars and missiles.

No, invariably we would hold off on the shot to allow for “adequate” separation, or as some unfortunate watch teams found, take the shot and then suffer the ignominy of some OS Chief who couldn’t sit watch supervisor on your watch team tell you that you had failed to account for white shipping.

Letting the bad guy get in the first punch at sea is as dangerous and foolhardy as doing so on land.  And, when you behave as if the battlefield must be antiseptic out of the fear of being blamed for collateral damage, you set yourself up for just such an eventuality.  And those who constantly rub their hands in worry and obsess over “lawfare” concerns have the effect of taking a grinding wheel to the sharp edge of our combat forces.  They see risk as being blamed, not getting killed.  Shame on all of them.  You play the way you practice.  War is a place where the decision cycle must be as rapid and unencumbered as possible.  The difference between winning and losing most often hangs in the balance of faster tempo and seizing the initiative.

Definitely worth the read.  McGrath shows again why he is among the most insightful of the voices about maritime strategy and naval policy.  Oh, and he does tout Andrew Gordon’s book on Jutland and the Royal Navy, which I am eagerly anticipating plowing into as soon as I am finished this current project. (A re-assessment of Manstein’s Lost Victories, if you must know.)

15 Comments

Filed under Around the web, China, Defense, guns, history, navy, planes, veterans, war

Iran: “We did not agree to dismantle anything.”

Obama-as-Munich-copy

Well, that didn’t take long.   From The Weekly Standard, via Drudge.  Just 48 hours after sanctions were lifted against Iran, and several billion dollars in assets and capital were released, Iran’s Foreign Minister tells the world Iran’s true intentions, and lets the world know that Barack Obama, John Kerry, and the United States were played for fools.  Or worse.

The worst aspect of this statement from the Iranian Foreign Minister is that I have a sinking suspicion Zarif is telling the truth.  Which means, of course, that the American people were lied to (again) by this Administration, because the terms of a “deal” with Iran were so unfavorable as to be a virtual sell-out.  So, essentially, what we have lifted three decades of sanctions for is an Iranian promise not to enrich uranium past five percent.   With virtually no way to verify if they comply or not.  Despite UN Security Council Resolution after UN Security Council Resolution demanding Iran stop enrichment altogether.   Already, the talk about sanctions being lifted has had the profound effect of bolstering Iranian currency, which was once in free-fall.  Now, with the injection of the hard capital released as the sanctions are lifted, any economic leverage we had to turn the screws on the recalcitrant supporter of terrorism and violence the world over, is gone.  G-O-N-E.

Congress, for its part, has feet as cold as this Vermont evening, and wants no part of the Iran deal.  A bipartisan coalition has threatened to vote further sanctions against Iran, carrying enough votes to override Obama’s veto.   Not getting the hint, Obama then threatened (why is it that all of his threats are directed at political opponents and not national enemies?) to use executive orders to override sanctions against Iran.

Expect that Iran’s nuclear program will continue, unabated.  Enrichment to weapons grade can re-start at any time, if indeed it is ever halted.  The sanctions which had allowed the West leverage over the sponsor of terrorism are now lifted, and cannot be easily, if ever, resumed.  Sort of like putting toothpaste back in the tube.  Even if Congress wishes to do so, our own President has promised to thwart the effort.

So, not long from now, Iran will have a nuclear weapon to put atop the ICBMs they are jointly developing with the North Koreans.  They will once again threaten Israel with destruction, and have exponentially increased their ability to do so, with the acquiescence of the United States, especially Barack Obama.

One has to wonder whether Barack Obama is more Neville Chamberlain or Vidkun Quisling.

It’s a good thing we don’t look like idiots in Syria, at least…..

5 Comments

Filed under Around the web, history, Iran, islam, nuclear weapons, obama, Politics, stupid, Uncategorized, war

NASA argues with itself

Press release today from Goddard Institute for Space Studies says:

The temperature analysis produced at GISS is compiled from weather data from more than 1,000 meteorological stations around the world, satellite observations of sea-surface temperature, and Antarctic research station measurements, taking into account station history and urban heat island effects. Software is used to calculate the difference between surface temperature in a given month and the average temperature for the same place from 1951 to 1980. This three-decade period functions as a baseline for the analysis. It has been 38 years since the recording of a year of cooler than average temperatures.

(emphasis mine)

He’s not mentioned in the press release, but GISS is the home of Dr. James Hansen, the guy who earned a quarter of a million bucks or more in just one year for speaking about “climate change”.

Here’s the GISS temperature anomaly chart for 2013.
2013 anomaly

Wow, lots of red, very little blue. Hmmm. My opinion is that GISS distorts and uses fudge factors to keep the alarm going, even as everything in DC gets shut down for snow. Now here is some data I can believe in:
2013_LT_map

Well, that looks a little different, doesn’t it? If you go to Dr. Spencer’s website, he has actual numbers. I bet you could file FOIA requests on GISS for a year and never get the raw data, much less what their “software” is doing to it. Dr. Spencer also says things like:

What is astounding from a science perspective is that [Science Czar John] Holdren blamed warming on waste heat, the result of humans and their energy use, rather than a slowly increasing greenhouse effect… Assuming today’s global energy use is about 150 petawatthours per year, and dividing that by the number of hours in a year and the surface area of the Earth, this yields an average energy flux of 0.03 Watt per sq. meter. This is about 100 times smaller than the estimated heating from increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. It is almost 10,000 times smaller than the rate of solar energy input into the Earth.

(Spencer also says things like, “You have to laugh at least once a day. Because a day without sunshine is like…night.” Gotta love a scientist with a sense of humor.)

Going back to the first article, GISS says that 2013 was the hottest year on record for Australia. Joanne Nova looks at the discreptancy between what the ground stations and the satellites say. That group of researchers looked at the weather station data and tried to come up with the same answer as the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM). The only way they could do it was to use the hottest 339 weather stations in Australia and ignore the other 382.

For most Australians on Jan 7th the heatwave averaged somewhere around 35C, not 40.3C.
To have any legitimacy with a new record, the BOM needs to publish its methods that explain how temperatures can be calculated every day over a hundred years from weather stations that in many cases didn’t exist. How else would we know it was a reasonable effort? We all know that tweaked black-box statistics could be used to achieve meaningless records that drive news headlines. Of course, the BOM wouldn’t stoop that low, would they?

(emphasis in original)

I wouldn’t hold my breath for that.

2 Comments

Filed under Around the web, space