Category Archives: iraq

VX in Syria; A Vexing Question

article-2191303-14A1D74F000005DC-798_306x423

The Telegraph reports, in an article on the fight for the Al-Safirah chemical facility:

The Syrian regime’s chemical warchest is indeed vast – the biggest in the Middle East, and the fourth largest in the world. Started in the 1970s ranks with help from Syria’s Cold War sponsor, Russia, today its programme includes facilities for making mustard gas, sarin and another nerve agent, VX, which stays lethal for much longer after dispersal.

Of course, this is not the first revelation that Assad’s chemical inventory contained VX.  Former Syrian Army Chemical Officer MajGen Adnan Sillou discussed the matter in a December 2012 interview:

He listed mustard gas along with the sarin, VX and tabun nerve agents as the main elements in Syria’s chemical arsenal, whose existence Syria doesn’t even acknowledge.

Despite the anguished cries of the Bush-haters, the question of VX in Syria is a vexing one for the “no chemical weapons in Iraq” crowd.   Only four countries have ever been known to produce VX; Great Britain, where it was discovered/invented, the United States, the Soviet Union, and Iraq.

So, how did VX end up in Basher Al-Assad’s arsenal?  One of two ways, it would seem, or some combination thereof.  It was either provided by what the Telegraph calls Syria’s “Cold War sponsor” (the Soviet Union, not Russia), or it came from Syria’s southeastern neighbor, Saddam’s Iraq.   Or both.

Methinks that the VX stockpiles have MAKSIM‘s fingerprints all over them.  The presence of a KGB General in Iraq in the months leading up to the US invasion cannot plausibly be explained by casting him as an “adviser”.    Primakov had intimate knowledge of Iraq’s chemical capabilties, and would have been in an ideal position to help remove Saddam’s remaining stockpile, along with evidence of Soviet/Russian culpability.

Another alternative is the possibility that the Soviet Union (or Russia post-1991) provided Syria with VX directly.    Were that the case, the likelihood that the Soviets/Russians did the same with Iraq (or provided technical assistance to manufacture) increases dramatically.

Perhaps this is one of the reasons that Putin’s Russia has remained in the protector role of Assad in Syria, far and above that which would logically attend a regime on such shaky ground internally.   And would explain Primakov’s presence in Iraq in the months leading up to the US invasion.

In either case, those who refuse to acknowledge Syria’s possession of VX, the most lethal of nerve agents, and by far the most difficult to produce, have to do some soul searching.   It might serve them well to search all the way back to 2003.

About these ads

5 Comments

Filed under Around the web, guns, history, iraq, islam, obama, Politics, Uncategorized, war

Obama’s Syria Intervention Talk: An Echo of Bush

O-2002-antiwar-rally-davidson

“I think that in many ways a line’s been crossed when we see tens of thousands of innocent people killed by a regime, but the use of chemical weapons and the danger that is poses to the international community, to neighbors of Syria, the potential of chemical weapons to get into the hands of terrorists, all of those things add increased urgency to what is already a significant security problem and humanitarian problem in the region,” Obama told reporters.

So the hundreds of thousands of innocent people being killed by a regime, the use of chemical weapons, the potential for chemical weapons to get in the hands of terrorists, ARE considerations for military intervention?    Could we say as a counter, perhaps, that Bashar al-Assad poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors…and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history?

Yes, indeed we could.  I am not advocating for or against intervention in Syria, though I would be curious to know whom we believe we would ally with, and whom against, and just what we could accomplish given the active opposition of Putin’s Russia (not least because of the possibility of Russian fingerprints on Syria’s chemical stockpile, and on a chemical stockpile of Iraqi origin).

It seems that President Obama’s “student union view” of the world and how it works has once again collided head-on with reality.    The “game-changer” bandied about so often of late has already happened.   The world, our allies, and our adversaries, will see what comes next.    Will we see the Obama who condemned his predecessor for Iraq?  Or the Obama whose tough talk regarding Syria is a virtual echo of that predecessor?  Has he the statesmanship and foreign policy acumen to act decisively and effectively?   Considering the string of diplomatic failures punctuated by the Benghazi catastrophe and the ineffectual confrontation with the DPRK, I am not terribly hopeful.

3 Comments

Filed under Air Force, army, guns, history, iraq, islam, israel, Lybia, marines, navy, obama, Politics, Uncategorized, veterans

This ain’t Hell, but you can see it from here » Blog Archive » The Iraq Medal of Commitment: Still in “5-Sided Asylum” Limbo

Many of you may remember an article Jonn did some time ago on the proposal by the government of Iraq to award a an “Iraq Medal of Commitment“. The new medal would go to those who served in Iraq between Mar 2003 and Dec 2011.

via This ain’t Hell, but you can see it from here » Blog Archive » The Iraq Medal of Commitment: Still in “5-Sided Asylum” Limbo.

I’m a little surprised this hasn’t come to pass yet. Though, if I recall correctly, it took years for the foreign awards from Desert Storm to come through.

I received two awards for the Liberation of Kuwait, one from the Saudi Government (and it was a rather splendiferous bauble) and a rather more restrained medal from the government of Kuwait. I think it took until almost the mid-1990s for the Kuwaiti version to be approved.

As one of the commenters at This Ain’t Hell notes, it’s not the end of the world if he doesn’t get one. But given the sacrifice made by so many Americans, it would be nice to receive some recognition from the Iraqis. I’m sure there’s a reasonable explanation for the delay, but I just don’t see how hard it is to gin up a medal, and get it approved. But then, I’ve never had a Pentagon tour.

5 Comments

Filed under army, Around the web, iraq

Blogs. Why We Write ‘Em, Why We Read ‘Em.

milblogs2a

Those of us in this somewhat focused community of MilBlog writers and readers are often asked by people who haven’t any exposure to MilBlogs, “Why do you do it?  You put in a lot of time and work.  What’s the point?”

It’s a fair question.   Thinking of ideas, and putting together a cogent discussion starter, or historical summary, takes more time than people think.  Knowing that, and being somewhat of an analysis geek (which may turn out to be a very good thing soon), I have my list of half a dozen daily reads, at least.  This’n here.  Salamander’s Front Porch.  Ray’s Information Dissemination.  OP-FOR, The Castle, and a number of other places make the list, blended with traditional news sources domestic and foreign, plus policy and analysis outfits.

Why?  Well, my gracious host here gives me an outlet for expression.  Like anyone with a fair-sized ego, I believe just a little bit that everyone is entitled to my opinion.  But there is also the great opportunity for feedback.  To hear from a mostly very educated crowd, their opinions and takes on events and occurrences domestically and in foreign affairs.  But it extends into culture, literary works, certainly history, and other aspects that spark discussion.

But one of the most valuable reasons to read and write in the Military Blogosphere is to hear from people who are truly experts in their fields, who possess great wisdom, are extensively experienced, and are considered and well-spoken people.  I do miss terribly reading the thoughts and musings of Lex, which was a morning staple and often provided several day-long trains of thought.  And this is true of not just Bloggers, but commenters.  Byron, the ugly old shipfitter, could wax authoritative about steel, and aluminum, and hull flex, and do it in a way that, perhaps over beer, I am sure I could listen intently to for hours.     Grandpa Bluewater’s urbane sophistication and eloquent dissertation always is worth the consideration, whether one agrees or not.    And there are others who add insight and humor, and are enjoyable to read.

Another such commenter is Steeljaw Scribe, shepherd of a superb blog of his own.   I did something the last two days that I rarely do, which is to go back and re-read a comment he made in Salamander’s post of the IG investigation of Admiral Gaouette.  His explanation of the dynamics of the bridge of a CVN, and the personalities and cultures that must blend and not clash if the mission is to be accomplished.

The bridge of a CVN is a unique environment that brings together two communities that normally opt to keep their distances from one another – SWOs and Aviators. That the three senior officers that regularly spend time up there (CO, XO and Navigator) are also aviators can at times, exacerbate that standoffish environment. This clash of cultures evolves from one group that is brought up in a dynamic environment and is used to rapidly changing events, making intuitive decisions and being cognizant that their butt and that of the x-number of NFOs or aircrew with them will suffer the consequences of those decisions. SWOs that typically (and note I said *typically* – there are always exceptions) come to the carrier do not come from the CRUDES environment, but from amphibs and auxiliaries and tend to be methodical if somewhat conservative and deliberative in their decision-making and watchstanding. At least that was my experience as a CVN nav. My challenge was working across that divide – to show the aviators (from watchstanders up to the XO who would go on to his first deep draft after this tour) on the one hand, how a series of events can unfold where little things not readily apparent to the eyeball can bite you (case history of the Eisenhower hitting the Spanish freighter at anchor in Hampton Roads being one of my teaching points). The flip side of that was getting the SWOs to be more anticipatory (e.g., looking to the next 2x cycles for managing sea space for downwind repositioning) as well as coming to grips with the immediacy of fixed wing operations at sea.

I know of no other vehicle by which an audience can learn, and share the insights of men and women with such experience.   It is the gaining of understanding, at the end of the day, that makes all this effort worthwhile.   Brad’s rules here do not include “write only what I agree with” or “water it down so it couldn’t possibly offend”.   He trusts us to understand and abide by propriety, and we seem to, as do the commenters,  on the whole.  And that is appreciated.

So in the end, despite the trolls, and my own alarming tendency to follow links and wind up pissing away two hours looking at cool stuff, reading and writing is worth the effort.   Even if the pay isn’t great.

3 Comments

Filed under Air Force, army, Around the web, Artillery, guns, history, infantry, iraq, marines, navy, Personal, SIR!, Uncategorized, veterans

Our Political Navy: A Global Force for Far-Left Proclamations

Picture1

Nothing says “ready for combat in the service of our nation” like an Earth Day message in which our Sea Services “leadership” admonishes us to believe in the pseudo-science of Al Gore and the radical Left environmentalists.  Behold ALNAV 018/13:

3. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY LEADERSHIP IS KEENLY AWARE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHALLENGES AHEAD. CLIMATE CHANGE IS LEADING TO RISING SEA LEVELS AND LESS PREDICTABLE WEATHER PATTERNS IN THE AREAS WHERE WE TRAIN AND OPERATE. THE RAPID MELTING OF THE ARCTIC ICE CAP IS DRIVING NEW NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGIES AND PRESSING GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS. WE WILL CONTINUE ANALYZING THESE TRENDS AND WORKING TO ENSURE OUR FORCES ARE CAPABLE OF MEETING MISSION REQUIREMENTS. ONLY THROUGH A COLLECTIVE EFFORT CAN MILITARY AND OUR NATION PREPARE FOR THE CHANGES THAT MAY COME. WE MUST RECOGNIZE THAT OUR LOCAL ACTIONS CAN IMPACT THE SEVERITY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES AND WILL DETERMINE OUR FUTURE READINESS.

But wait, there’s more.

4. FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY IS ON EVERYONE’S MIND THIS YEAR. LUCKILY, THE EASIEST AND MOST
EFFECTIVE EARTH DAY PROGRAMS CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED AT LITTLE OR NO EXPENSE. PICKING UP TRASH AT A LOCAL PARK, CLEARING DEBRIS FROM A BEACH, OR VOLUNTEERING WITH A LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECT CAN ALL BE DONE ON A SHOESTRING BUDGET. BRING YOUR COWORKERS, FRIENDS, SHIPMATES, AND FELLOW MARINES AND INCREASE YOUR IMPACT EXPONENTIALLY AT NO EXTRA COST.

“Fiscal responsibility”?  Oh please.  Does that include not sending messages out that are blatant political indoctrination about “climate change” and how it has more of an impact on readiness than neglecting maintenance of our Navy’s warships, or cutting back on the training and education of our Sailors to perform their missions?  So that we might instead have ad nauseum lectures and training about sexual assault, human trafficking, breathalyzers, cultural sensitivity, and all politically-sensitive things non-warfighting, and idiotic messages that waste everyone’s time like the above example?   What really riles. however,  is the last line of the message text.

MAKE A DIFFERENCE THIS YEAR.

We have a Navy and Marine Corps with tens of thousands of combat veterans from OIF and OEF.  Many have been decorated for heroism in action against the enemy.  Thousands have lost comrades and shipmates (not frigging CO-WORKERS, jackwagon!).  Yet, we have a man who never served a single day in uniform directing us to make a difference.  As if he would know what that really means.  Despicable.  Absolutely unconscionable.

I have a much more fiscally responsible suggestion.   How about the Department of the Navy eliminate the position of “Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Environment)”.  How about SECNAV Ray Mabus show Donald Schregardus and his $200,000+ salary to the door, along with everyone assigned to his likely considerable staff, and use the money instead to maintain and train a Navy for war?  Just a thought.  And if Ray Mabus isn’t capable of that, he needs to follow Schregardus off the taxpayer dole, post-haste.  Perhaps we then can get someone who can provide a modicum of leadership worthy of our Navy and our nation.   That’d be a switch.


							

3 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, iraq, marines, navy, obama, Politics, stupid, Uncategorized, veterans, war

Obama to Israelis: “Put Yourselves in Their Shoes”

378c3badb1948c01260f6a7067005cec

President Obama’s remarks urging Israeli empathy with Palestinians is yet another indication that his (and his Administration’s) understanding of the world around him is woefully lacking, and remains, after four years,  not the slightest bit grounded in reality.   A nation whose founders were survivors of mass extermination attempts, a nation that sees mortal ideological and religious enemies in every direction, enemies that have openly vowed that nation’s destruction, is being lectured by America’s President as to where their sympathies should lie.

The President’s remarks reflect an astonishing arrogance.  Worse, they reveal a startling ignorance (and lack of propriety) that reflects the amateurish and muddled character of US foreign policy under this Administration.  President Obama is making no friends among our Israeli allies, which is reflected by his barely civil relationship with Prime Minister Netanyahu and his low regarding among the Israeli public.

When prodded in the early 1970s about Israel’s hyper-vigilant posture, Golda Meir remarked, “If the Arabs lay down their weapons, there would be no more war.  If the Israelis lay down their weapons, there would be no more Israel.”

In the forty years since she made those comments, little has changed for the good for Israel.  Israel’s neighbors are as fanatical as ever about her destruction, with one of those neighbors possibly less than a year away from being a nuclear power.  Her closest ally has a President whose lack of understanding of the Middle East and barely concealed hostility toward Israel is cause for real alarm.   Despite the platitudes of solidarity this week, the US-Israel relationship remains decidedly cool.  Remarks like today’s certainly won’t help.  Israel’s enemies are taking notice, to be sure.

If President Obama really wants to talk about people putting themselves in someone else’s shoes, here is what he can do.  His wife Michelle and his two daughters can take up residence in Beersheba for one year.  No special protection, no armored cars.  The girls can wait on the street corner with the other children for the school bus, and Michelle can shop at the mall and the grocery other places, like the other parents.  Perhaps then, as three thousand rockets and mortar rounds are fired into Israel from Gaza (with the blessing and encouragement of the leadership of the very people Obama believes deserve nationhood),  President Obama can better put himself in the shoes of Israelis who live day to day with the spectre of violent death of loved ones at the hands of Palestinian terrorists.   Doubtless, news reports of dead and wounded from bombings and rocket/mortar attacks emanating from Gaza may tend to get his attention just that much more.

Perhaps then, also, President Obama will be less prone to lecture Israelis about empathy for Palestinians, and a little more willing to understand that of which he speaks.

Perhaps.

10 Comments

Filed under history, Iran, iraq, islam, israel, obama, Politics, Uncategorized

General Barry McCaffrey: Lauds “Marines’ Aversion to BS” On Women in Infantry

Soldiers with the US Army's 6-4 Cavalry walk down a mountain path during a patrol near Combat Outpost Keating in eastern Afghanistan

Time Magazine (of all places) carries General McCaffrey’s missive.  Well worth the read (which contains a link to Marine General Newbold’s superb “Seven Myths about ‘Women in Combat’”).

The argument for women at rifle battalion team level is unsound. Makes as much sense as mandating women on all-male professional contact sports teams.

Life in a rifle company is still incredibly brutal, filthy, requires enormous physical energy and upper body strength, and calls for a spirit of personal violence. There is zero personal privacy. Bodily functions take place in close proximity.

Troops are constantly injured from carrying heavy loads and crashing down hills in the dark. They dig like moles to stay alive.

Infantry units live like wild animals during periods of extended combat. Mostly it is a business of self-selected young men.  Most of these combat soldiers end up in these units because they actually want to fight.

One might think there would be some additional recognition of such opinions expressed by long-time practitioners of the craft of ground combat.   But alas.   Objective analysis gives way to activism and some other “isms” all too often.

As General Newbold rightly asserts:

Pity the truthful leader who attempts to hold to standards based on realistic combat factors, and tells truth to power. Most won’t, and the others won’t survive.

(H/T to Battleland)

11 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, army, Artillery, girls, guns, history, infantry, iraq, marines, navy, obama, Politics, recruiting, SIR!, stupid, Uncategorized, veterans, war

Desert Rats to Lose Their Tanks in Defense Cuts

desert rats

Seems deeper Defense cuts in Britain will do something that Rommel and his Panzerarmee Afrika couldn’t do.  Destroy the  7th Armored Brigade as a tank force.   Sad commentary on the times, decades of budget-busting socialism, and askew priorities.    Though the Ministry of Defense asserts that the additional cut of some 20,000 soldiers amounts to the British Army “configuring itself for future conflicts”, it is hard to imagine such truly being the case.

I hate to say it, but Elvis Costello was wrong.  Oliver’s Army isn’t here to stay.  It is mostly gone, and likely forever.

But yes, London is full of Arabs just the same.

6 Comments

Filed under armor, army, Around the web, guns, history, iraq, Lybia, veterans, war

Counterinsurgency Words of Wisdom from Pete Ellis***

7961_512

There is a saying among historians that the best place to find a new idea is in an old book.   Time and again over the years, I have cracked open long-forgotten volumes to find gems of timeless and timely wisdom, astute commentary, and unimpeachable good sense.  Contained on those yellowed pages are answers to problems and challenges not at all different from contemporary times, and appreciations of conditions and factors that are surprising for their sophistication and insight.

In the March 1921 edition of The Marine Corps Gazette, then-Major Earl H. “Pete” Ellis penned an article entitled “Bush Brigades”, which dealt with the deployment of US Marine forces into areas in the Western Hemisphere in which instability and violence threatened US interests and the safety of the native populace.  These interventions, known collectively as the “Banana Wars”, were the basis for the seminal 1940 Small Wars Manual.  Interestingly, nearly two decades before SWM was published, Major Ellis struck upon a number of maxims that fairly leap off the page, and would have been excellent counsel for US commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan.

At the minimum, Ellis’s words would have permitted today’s Officers and NCOs (and politicians!) to understand that the challenges and issues faced in the decade-long counter-insurgency fights were not new or unprecedented, but rather something with which US military thinkers had had to wrestle and solve for a significant portion of the previous century.  And in those words and the words of others might have been lessons and cautions that aided in success on the battlefield and in the newspapers.

The mercurial Major Ellis expounded upon a number of topics from large to small, that military thinkers would find highly relevant today.   I will attempt to do justice to the more salient of those topics below:

  • The character of enemy operations:

a)      A somewhat disorganized attempt to prevent landings.

b)      More or less resistance in cities followed by a race to the jungle.

c)       The organization and operation of armed bands, at first risking open battle and finally waging guerilla warfare.

d)      The operation of outlaw bands (bandits, ladrones, cacos) who murder members of the forces of occupation and their own people indiscriminately.

In general, enemy operations will be those of irregular forces or guerilla bands with the usual series of surprise raids, ambushes, and assassinations.  The enemy will have moral support from most of his own people, material support from many, and will operate in their midst. 

Replace “landings” in a) with “invasion”, and “jungle” in b) with “desert”, and you have a pretty accurate description of the course of things in Iraq and Afghanistan.

  • The role of the press/media and the “peculiar attitude of the American people themselves”:

The Marines are down in Jungleland!- and killed a man in a war!

And the oft-forgotten fact that

…the Marines are only doing their job as ordered by the people of the United States.

  • The usefulness of cash payoffs to the locals:

…it must be emphatically stated that a flying column should never be sent into the bush unless amply provided with CASH.  With it can be purchased knowledge of the terrain and movement of the enemy, and food.  It is safe to say that at least 50 percent of the so-called harsh measures used in bush warfare could be eliminated by providing troops with adequate information money.

  • Considerations in the location of a fortified  post:

The site of the post should have, if possible, the following characteristics:

a)      Be capable of defense by a small detachment.

b)      Be of sufficient extent to permit the bivouac of … one hundred men, with mounted detachment.

c)       Permit control of any town in the vicinity and all approaches, especially roads and ravines.

d)      Have sufficient elevation to generally observe the surrounding country.

e)      Permit control of a landing field for aeroplanes.

The main requirement for a fortified post, garrisoned as it will be by only a few men, is that it cannot be rushed.

The above would have been a helpful guide to the Officers who decided to emplace COP Kahler Keating in Wanat.

  • What is now termed “Lawfare”:

To enforce one’s will upon an enemy of the nature depicted without subjecting one’s self to undue criticism is one of the most difficult tasks that can confront a soldier.   The “Rules of Land Warfare” lay down certain rules which are to be followed, subject to military necessity during hostilities between regular forces of civilized nations.  The “Rules of Land Warfare” for the guidance of regular forces engaged in hostilities with irregular or guerilla forces have never been written; and it is doubtful if they ever will be written…

  • “Phase Four” operations and “Information Dominance”:

It is the final phase which is difficult because, owing to the policy pursued, the following conditions will prevail to a greater or lesser extent:

a)      Bands of murderers and other criminals base in thick, difficult country, and prey indiscriminately on the peaceful people in the production areas.

b)      These bandits have no property other than that which they carry with them or keep in hiding.

c)       Many bandits, having been captured and turned over to proper authority, have been permitted to escape and have rejoined their bands.

d)      The inhabitants of localities frequented by bandits keep them informed of the movement of the force of occupation

e)      The forces of occupation are at a minimum.

Major Ellis’ article was never officially published by the Marine Corps (the Gazette is as then an MCA publication), but nonetheless provides context and narrative which our current generation of Officers and NCOs would find startlingly familiar a century hence.   As it would be to Napoleon’s veterans of the Peninsula War a century previous.

Most famous for his prescient divination of the character and requirements of the Pacific War yet to come, Ellis was no stranger to the counterinsurgency efforts of the Marine Corps in the early 20th Century, nor was he unversed in conventional war.  He had been plucked from Quantico by General Lejeune and was a key planner for the successful Meuse-Argonne Offensive in France in 1918.   Ponder.

*** Milblog writer/reader/commentor “Moe DeLaun” was most gracious in his gift to me of the March 1921 Marine Corps Gazette (along with a wonderful collection of Kipling by Somerset Maugham and the DVD of The Man Who Would Be King!)  There is much more in that March of 1921 edition that I will be sharing and commenting on over the next several months, including articles on Russia, American Marines in Nicaragua, and the Aisne-Marne Offensive of the late war.  THANKS MOE!

8 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, armor, army, Artillery, guns, history, infantry, iraq, marines, navy, planes, Uncategorized, war

Chinook

(Repost from 2009)

We’ve covered helicopters here before, such as the Huey, the Blackhawk, the OH-58 Kiowa and of course, Cobra and Apache gunships. Let’s talk about the big boy on the block. The Chinook. Or as it became known almost instantly in the Army, the Shithook. The CH-47 is the Army’s largest helicopter, used to transport critical logistical items, troops and artillery around the battlefield.

ch47

The Chinook has been around for a long time. It’s first flight was in 1961. But the issues surrounding its development deserve a little attention. In the late 1950s, the Army and helicopter designers began to realize that piston engines would never become a very efficient way of powering helicopters. Gas turbines (jet engines that provided power through a driveshaft, rather than thrust) were finally becoming a practical option for military use. With the advent of these new engines, the Army took a long look at what the next generation of helicopters should look like. Just how big should they be? At the same time, the concept of “air assault” or landing troops directly on the battlefied started to form. What was the best way to move troop unit? Should you use a smaller helicopter that could lift a squad? Or would the better bet be to use somewhat larger helicopters that could lift 15-20 men?  Smaller helicopters would cost more in the long run, but losing one helicopter in the assault wouldn’t result in as many casualties. The Army first decided to go with the larger helicopter, of about 20 men. The Vertol Company (later bought by Boeing) provided the Model 107. But the debate in the Army over helicopter size raged on. Some thought that the new UH-1B Huey could be scaled up to carry a full squad. That would handle most air assualt requirements, and still have a relatively cheap helicopter. The Model 107 would be larger than was needed. The other half of the problem was moving artillery and supplies. The Model 107 was just a bit too small for that job. The ideal was to move a 105mm howitzer, its crew, and a load of ammunition all in one lift by one helicopter. Boeing went back to the drawing board. The Model 114 was the result, and was soon bought by the Army as the CH-47 Chinook. And it wasn’t very long before the Chinook found itself in Vietnam, as part of the airmobile 1st Cavalry Division.  With Hueys to conduct the initial assualt, and Chinooks bringing in the follow-on elements and moving artillery, the Army’s pattern of air assault missions was set so soundly that it is relatively unchanged 40-odd years later.

But don’t feel bad for the Model 107. Even though it wasn’t selected by the Army, its development continued. Largely because the Marines didn’t have a lot of space on the Navy’s helicopter carriers, they were forced to go with  a somewhat larger helicopter. And the Model 107 fit the bill perfectly. They bought it as the CH-46 and operate it to this day.

Early Chinooks had engines of about 2,200 horsepower each. This was very quickly upgraded to about 2,600hp each. And improvements didn’t stop there. The rotor blades, rear pylon design, and transmission were all upgraded through the A, B, and C models to improve performance.  In the 1980s, the design was again refreshed, with attention focusing again on more horsepower, but also greatly improved avionics and better reliability, resulting in the CH-47D. Many “D” models were conversions from older models, but there were also quite a few new built airframes. These were delivered up until 2002.  And right about the time the last “D” model was delivered, the work on the latest model moved into high gear.

The newest model, the CH-47F is really an old model. While there will be some newbuild airframes, most will be remanufactured CH-47Ds. And since most of the “D” models were remanufactured earlier models, there will be some airframes well over 30 years old that will be expected to soldier on for another 20. Because of this, a large part of the program will be rebuilding them to make them easier to maintain, reducing vibration, making sure the components don’t have any fatigue issues, and making any issues easier to detect. Improvements in the avionics will include updating the instruments to the latest common “glass cockpit” standard, as well as building in the cabapility of operating in the Force XXI digital environment, which is the Army’s version of a battlefield internet.  Not surprisingly, the Army is going with more powerful engines as well. The latest version of the Chinook engines put out almost 4,900 hp each. The Chinook has gone from a useful load of 7,000 pounds in its early days, to over 21,000 pounds in the “F” modeland the new models are faster. Think about that. How many of us are faster and stronger now that we’re over 40?

By now, you ought to have figured out that the ‘hook is a pretty capable helicopter. Lots of other folks have reached that conclusion as well. Very few other nations have the same air assault capability that we do, but having a few heavy lift helicopters around is handy for them as well. Several other nations, notable Great Britain, the Dutch, and the Japanese have bought various versions of the Chinook. When Great Britain attacked to recapture the Falklands in 1982, they lost several Chinooks aboard the Atlantic Conveyor. Their one remaining Chinook was put to work, doing the job of several helicopters. In one instance, instead of carrying its normal load of 55 troops, the sole Chinook lifted 105 fully loaded troops. There are several tales of Chinooks in the Vietnam war carrying over 100 people (though usually lightly loaded Vietnamese civilians). I’ve been in a Chinook with about 40 other people- I can’t imagine just how crowded it was with over 100.

It wouldn’t be much of a stretch to say that without  the Chinook, the Army in Afghanistan would be crippled. Many of the smaller outposts can only be reached by helicopter. Given the high elevations and hot weather there, Blackhawks, normally very capable birds, struggle to carry a useful load. The Chinook, with its greater power, is able to support these high/hot outposts.

With the new “F’ models just beginning to come into service, we can expect this long serving veteran to serve for as much as 30 more years.

Mind you, we’ve scrimped on discussing the gunship version, or the several special operations versions. But here’s  a last look at the bird for you.

Comments Off

Filed under Afghanistan, army, ARMY TRAINING, infantry, iraq

The Drone Medal and The People’s Defense Commissariat

KasalBrad_WoundedPredator Pilotsef19b90103

MOTHAX talks about all of it over at The Burn Pit.  Worth the read.

It’s been a pretty wild last couple of months for the Pentagon, especially for our outgoing Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta.  First he drops the bomb about the women’s combat unit exclusion policy going away.  Then the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs says that maybe the standard will have to be lowered so we can have more women in those units.  Dire predictions flow every day from the puzzle palace about the effect of sequestration on the ability to fight and win wars.  Then comes the suggestion that we lower troops pay.  But while we’re doing that, we’re also expanding benefits to the spouses of same sex couples, even though that might violate the Defense of Marriage Act.  Congress jumps in with hearings about what happened (or more accurately didn’t happen) to on the ground support of the Ambassador in Libya, and why the DOD didn’t have anything in place to help those men out.  We may, or may not, be setting up a drone base in western Africa, and the drones may or may not be used to kill Americans who are working with Al Qaeda based on the legal papers that were leaked by the DOJ.  And the nomination for Panetta’s replacement, Senator Chuck Hagel, is currently being filibustered. In April 170,000 retirees are being pushed out of Tricare Prime in the western States, and we’re still passing out flyers in Afghanistan discussing how being courteous to the locals will stop them from shooting at us.

Somehow this all added up to it being a good time to anger just about everyone not angered by the preceding by creating a medal for drone pilots that is actually higher up in the hierarchy of medals than things like the Combat Infantryman’s Badge and the Bronze Star….

He adds some excellent commentary from Fehrenbach circa 1950 and the problem with this whole idea of the “changing nature of combat”.

Americans in 1950 rediscovered something that since Hiroshima they had forgotten: you may fly over a land forever; you may bomb it, atomize it, pulverize it and wipe it clean of life—but if you desire to defend it, protect it and keep it for civilization, you must do this on the ground, the way the Roman legions did, by putting your young men in the mud.

I doubt anybody will be awarded the Drone Medal posthumously, unless it is from blood clots due to sitting too long.  Like I said, worth the read.   And a nice H/T to B5.

 

2 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, Air Force, infantry, iraq, stupid, Uncategorized, war

More About Awards

Since there is no horse too dead, nor any cat too flat, let me suggest the following modifications to our Armed Forces awards chart:

Awards edits

Let’s have a look at the ones I would can, and why:

Defense Distinguished Service Medal- The same as the Distinguished Service Medal, except GOFOs get a separate one for doing something “joint”.  Rescind it, and either replace with the DSM, or the star for additional awards of DSM.

Defense Superior Service Medal- The “joint” equivalent to the Legion of Merit.  Another 0-6/GOFO bauble.  Get rid of it.  Award the Legion of Merit, or stars for additional awards.

Defense Meritorious Service Medal- You got it, the “joint” MSM.  Rescind.  Award MSM or stars for additional awards.

Joint Service Commendation Medal- Notice a trend here?  You have a service branch, presumably.  Make the Joint HQ convince your service branch that you rate your service branch’s Commendation Medal.  If they can’t, maybe you shouldn’t have one.   Certainly not some “joint” equivalent.  Rescind.

Joint Meritorious Unit Award- Precisely the same rationale as the JSCM above.  Except for the collective.  If your outfit was that good, your service branch should award as appropriate.

Global War on Terror Expeditionary Medal- Never understood creating an expeditionary medal for wars in which campaign medals were sure to be minted.  I might be able to see it for guys in the Philippines and elsewhere, not in IRQ or AFG.  BUT, we have the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal for that.  Rescind, and replace it with the AFEM.

Global War on Terror Service Medal- This formerly held the position of “Dumbest New Award”, but has been overtaken by the Drone Medal.  Get rid of it.  They already have the National Defense Service Medal for those who didn’t deploy.  (Formerly known as the CNN Medal.  As in “You saw Desert Storm on CNN?  Me too!”)  Rescind without replacement with a current equivalent.

Armed Forces Service Medal- “Significant activity”?  Are you kidding me?  Rescind without replacement.

Humanitarian Service Medal- Another non-warfighter feel-good award.  Get rid of it.  After Hugo ripped through South Carolina, Marines from MCB helped out cutting and clearing trees, and delivering water, etc.  The base CSTAFF spent a formation droning (!) on and on about how they worked twelve hour days for two weeks to help out.   Meanwhile, the Drill Instructors continued their 140-hour work weeks for the entire two year tour.  So the Sgt from base motors was awarded this thing while my Sgt Senior Drill Instructor got zilch, and had his NCM downgraded to a NAM.

Outstanding Volunteer Service Medal- Makes the Humanitarian Service Medal look like the Iron Cross.  Away with it.

Overseas Service Ribbon- Another “everybody gets one” trinket.  You were PCS overseas, with all the concomitant bennies that the UDP bubbas pumping to WESTPAC didn’t have.   Want a ribbon for being OCONUS?  Ride a gator freighter for 200 days.  Or do Camp Hansen unaccompanied.

Recruiting/Drill Instructor/Marine Security Guard Ribbons- Wrong, wrong, wrong.  No “special duty” ribbons on a Marine uniform.  Lousy idea from jump street, let’s get rid of them most rikki tik.

These are, of course, in addition to the Distinguished Warfare Medal, hereby unofficially known as the “Stays in Vegas” Medal.

Before you ask, yes, at least three of these are ones I am authorized.   By comparison, my Dad came home from the Pacific, after eleven landings and almost three years, with four ribbons.  One was a Navy Good Cookie, and another was the Asiatic-Pacific Theater Ribbon with four battle stars.   Along with a PUC.  He got a WWII Victory Medal on his way out in ’46.  In 1991, we had people sit at Al Jubayl for two weeks and come home with five.

amin_dada_lgdownload

It would do us well to have senior Officers that look like warriors instead of Idi Amin, or BG McSoulpatch.   Just sayin’.  Any others I failed to mention that should go?

18 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, Air Force, army, history, iraq, marines, navy, SIR!, stolen valor, stupid, Uncategorized, war

Justice Department Memo on Killing Americans

Gold Lady Justice, in Brugge, Belgium.

NBC has obtained the Justice Department memo used as justification for the September 2011 killing of Anwar Al Awlaki and Samir Khan, two US Citizens, by means of a drone strike.   “Due Process”, the memo asserts, can and should be transmogrified from what our Constitution defines under the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments, into an  allegation that “an informed, high-level official has determined”, well out of the light of public scrutiny.

Note that the language is very similar in character to that which Attorney General Thornburgh used during the George H. W. Bush Administration to justify greatly expanding the seizure provisions of the RICO act (1990).   The War on Drugs was too dangerous, and Law Enforcement didn’t have time for Due Process, so it wasn’t practical.  The very dangerous precedent was set, and Due Process has been a consistent casualty in the eroding of individual liberties since that day.

This Justice Department Memo represents another, very dangerous precedent.  That of the closed deliberations of a Government star chamber replacing the legal processes and requirements for charging American citizens with treason under Article III of our Constitution.  That article requires:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

No longer is any of that required for the US Government to pronounce and carry out a capital sentence against an American citizen.

Memo 1

  As for “two witnesses to the same overt act”, or to “a confession in open court”, it would seem that those requirements are also dispensed with.

Memo 2

And just where is this jurisdiction for the authorization of the use of force?  Why, it is anywhere at all where the Government perceives an enemy to be.   As the Memo informs us, there are no geographic limits.   Which implies no battlefield, or perhaps, that everywhere is a battlefield.

Memo 3

Read the whole memo.  It is enlightening and disturbing.  Especially in light of the fact that this same Administration wished to try illegal combatants (subject under the Geneva Convention of 1949 to summary execution) captured in Iraq and Afghanistan in US civilian courts, giving them all the rights of an American citizen in a capital crime, including the government requirement for presentation of classified evidence.

Look, I have no love lost for men like Awlaki and Khan.  If they are killed in an exchange of gunfire with US troops, let them rot in hell.  With bellies full of pork rinds.   And if they are captured in that fight,  the post or the gibbet is good enough for them.  But that is hardly the point.    And this Administration knows it.  The precedent here is not some bold statement of American willingness to fight its enemies wherever the find them.  Rather, it is that the US Government now has codified quasi-legal justification to kill an American citizen that a group of people, out of the public eye, have deemed a “threat”.  No evidence, no proof, no sworn testimony, and in fact, damned little other than the determination itself.

Attorney General Eric Holder has a massive integrity problem, ranging from the refusal to prosecute because of skin color, to his demands for new laws punishing people who “put guns in the hands of dangerous criminals”, he of Fast and Furious.   This Administration as a whole, with the shameful complicity of senior military leadership, has played very loose with the Constitution and has consistently sought to portray political opponents as dangerous national enemies.  From FBI memos to “full-spectrum” military training scenarios that intentionally portray law-abiding Americans as dangerous threats, in the wake of the Newtown tragedy, the collective guilt by association and the demonization of law-abiding citizens continues apace.

The new language for America’s enemies, “violent extremists” (replacing “Islamic extremists” in 2009) has been invoked to describe those who believe differently from what the radical Left who holds the levers of power believes.  Schumer, Boxer, Napolitano, Feinstein, have all described lawful American citizens using precisely these words in the last several months.

So then, these becomes the questions.  With the precedent set by the Justice memo to justify killing Americans without due process, how soon until this precedent reaches American soil?  After all, will not “imminence” be even greater here?  How easily will the claim be made that capture is “infeasible”?  And  will the Grand Jury indictment, the rights of the accused, the Government burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt, all disappear in the expedient of a puff of smoke and the impact of a bullet or a missile?

After all, in light of the Justice Memo, what’s to prevent it?

Despite my admitted distaste for this Administration and the people with whom our President surrounds himself and takes counsel, I do not wish ANY Administration to have such extra-Constitutional “authority”.    Never, ever give this government unbridled power that is only restrained by the civility of those who hold that power.  Ever.  No matter who they may be.  Our Constitution forbade it.   By the time those reasons become clear once again, it will be too late.

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

I must say I believed there scant chance that I would agree to something that MSNBC/NBC considered headline material.  But, a scant chance is still a chance.  Behold:

Legal experts fear implications of White House drone memo

And, frankly, I thought there would be less of a chance that I would agree with someone from Columbia.   Surprise, surprise, surprise, as Gomer might say.

“We should be concerned when the White House is acting as judge, jury and executioner,” she said. “And there’s no one outside of the White House who has real oversight over that process. What’s put forward here is there’s no role for the courts, not even after the fact.”

The fact that virtually nothing in the Justice Memo is a surprise, and none of this criticism was leveled before, say, the 2012 election, leads one to believe that these people felt compelled to say SOMETHING for the record, even as they perhaps hope that nobody quite remembers that they waited so long to say what they said.

11 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, guns, history, iraq, islam, obama, Politics, Uncategorized, war

Women in Combat Arms: The Perspective of a Warrior

The Late General Robert H. Barrow, former Commandant of the Marine Corps, winner of the Navy Cross, Distinguished Service Cross, Silver Star, Bronze Star, Veteran of three wars, World War II, Korea, and Vietnam, speaks on the notion of women in ground combat units.  Thirteen and a half minutes.  (The last three are dark screen.) Listen to it all.

Those who would dismiss General Barrow as hidebound, sexist, closed-minded, or any other of the various derogatory labels that tend to be employed by the feminists who push such agendas should feel a tinge of shame.  If they are capable of such, which I doubt.

Those who comprise the Joint Chiefs of Staff, particularly CJCS Dempsey, CSA Ordierno, and Marine Commandant Amos, should be ashamed of themselves.  They must know deep down that what a man like General Barrow asserts is the brutal truth.  Yet they have nodded their heads in enthusiastic agreement with their political masters as a sop to the feminists and progressives who despise our military and everything it stands for.  Gentlemen, you must do some serious soul searching.    You KNOW that General Barrow speaks an unvarnished truth honed by 41 years of wartime service and leadership of men in some of the most bitter combat of the 20th Century.   Are your current assignments and your careers so much more important than the lives of those you will unnecessarily risk to implement this corrosive policy?

The Commandant’s assertion that “we will maintain our high standards while ensuring maximum success for every Marine” smacks of the dishonesty of the “everyone gets a trophy” Left.   War, we damned well should know, knows no such considerations.   If we didn’t have such morally and intellectually bankrupt leadership spending so much time and money painting the Potemkin Village instead of training to win our nation’s wars, we would not find ourselves in the current fix.

4 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, Air Force, armor, army, Artillery, girls, history, infantry, iraq, marines, navy, obama, Politics, recruiting, SIR!, stupid, Uncategorized, war

Defense Chief Panetta to Clear Women for Combat Roles

relieved_Marines_return_from_the_frontMarines

Of course he does.  He is leaving in February, so the damage will be in his wake.  And the Democrats will gain big points from the far-left “DACOWITS uber alles” crowd.

“We are moving in the direction of women as infantry soldiers,” one senior defense official said.

No comment from the hordes of female volunteers who have successfully met the standard at the USMC Infantry Officers’ Course.

A few other things need to happen immediately.  Beginning tomorrow morning.  (Pardon if this is Marine Corps-centric, as the Corps is my service and its standards are the ones I shall address.)

As of 0001 on 24 January 2013:

All Marines must do a minimum of 3 pullups, 50 sit-ups in two minutes, and run 3 miles in under 28 minutes, and score a minimum of 135 on the formerly-male Physical Fitness Test.    That  means that pull-ups are five points apiece for everybody, and the run time score is one point for every ten seconds over 18 minutes.   (Hint, you have to do considerably more than the minimum on at least two areas to pass, with the minimum score for each being listed above.)

Any Marines unable to pass the PFT will be placed on remedial physical fitness IAW MCO 6100.3, regardless of rank or gender.   PFT failures will be annotated in directed comments on those Marines’ fitness reports.   Promotion and assignment eligibility will be contingent on meeting the standard.

On the Combat Fitness Test, all Marines must conform to the formerly male standards, including the Movement to Contact, which will require a time of 4:13 or under for Marines aged 26 and below, the lift of the 30-pound ammo can for a minimum of 33 reps, with 91 being maximum, and Maneuver Under Fire time of 3:58 and under.  All other formerly male age-specific scoring will apply.   CFT failures will be annotated in directed comments on those Marines’ fitness reports.   Promotion and assignment eligibility will be contingent on meeting the standard.

All Marines will adhere to the formerly-male body fat percentage requirements.   Marines ages 18-26 will ALL have a maximum body fat percentage of 18%.   Any Marine, regardless of gender, who exceeds that percentage (and it is graduated to a maximum of 21% for Marines over age 46) will be given the 60 day notification period, and then the 60 day caution period, IAW MCO 6100.3.  Failure to adhere to body fat standards will be annotated in directed comments on those Marines’ fitness reports.  Promotion and assignment eligibility will be contingent on meeting the standard.

All Marines, regardless of assignment, will be required to complete the annual MCCRE 25-mile, 8 hour conditioning march with 55 pounds of required march-order, plus organic Marine-portable unit equipment.

155 projo

110424-M-0000M-000

I doubt any of that will happen, of course.   Because that kind of equality, rather than the “equality” loaded with special considerations that so many push for, would thin the ranks of female Marines dramatically.   Instead, Panetta’s policy, like so many these days from the People’s Defense Commissariat, is about political grandstanding and not combat effectiveness or warfighting proficiency.    I am sure the glowing appraisals of how all this works out are already being written, talking points for “impromptu” interviews and Commanders’ assessments scripted carefully.

Of course, any problems or failures that may possibly be encountered will be blamestormed in the direction of sexual harassment, hidebound chauvinism,  discrimination, lack of “fairness”, or lack of “vision” on the part of those who might not nod enthusiastically enough.  Certainly the problems won’t be attributed to the notion that mixed-gender combat arms units is as horrendously unwise now as it was fifty years ago, and will be fifty years hence.   Not a chance of that.

“In fact, it’s important to remember that in recent wars that lacked any true front lines, thousands of women already spent their days in combat situations serving side-by-side with their fellow male servicemembers,” said Murray, who heads the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee.

Which is, of course, precisely the same as being in the Infantry or Artillery or Armor, where the MISSION of the unit is to “locate, close with, and destroy the enemy by fire and maneuver, or repel his (or her, apparently) assault by fire and close combat.”

Whatever, I am sure it will work out fine.  Just like in the movies.  Where chicks kick ass all the time.

The move came at the recommendation of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the sources said.

Why doesn’t that make me feel better?   “Three bags full”.

Note:  I have been very clear in my opinions that female Marines should be trained for combat.  The Marine Corps has done so for a very long time, and done so successfully.  I have served next to female Marines in combat.  But combat incidental to other missions is NOT the same as that of units in combat arms.   Despite the strident assertions of those whose interests are in furthering a special interest group instead of preparing for war.

 

34 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, armor, Artillery, guns, history, iraq, marines, Politics, stupid, Uncategorized, war

Op-For: Mattis Being Pushed Out?

James-Mattis-articleInline

A network of ruggedly handsome Marine Artillerists keeping an eye on the world is an invaluable commodity.  LTCOL P over at Op-For alerted me to Tom Ricks’ post this morning over at FP regarding near-legendary Marine General James N. Mattis.  Some telling statements from Ricks, an avowed Obama supporter.

CIVIL-MILITARY SIGNALS: The message the Obama Administration is sending, intentionally or not, is that it doesn’t like tough, smart, skeptical generals who speak candidly to their civilian superiors. In fact, that is exactly what it (and every administration) should want.

And:

SERVICE RELATIONS: The Obamites might not recognize it, but they now have dissed the two Marine generals who are culture heroes in today’s Corps: Mattis and Anthony Zinni. The Marines have long memories. I know some who are still mad at the Navy for steaming away from the Marines left on Guadalcanal.

If Ricks is finally admitting to Obama’s “smartest man in the room” act precluding his desire for informed advice, things have gotten damned bad.

…I am at the point where I don’t trust his national security team. They strike me as politicized, defensive and narrow. These are people who will not recognize it when they screw up, and will treat as enemies anyone who tells them they are doing that. And that is how things like Vietnam get repeated. Harsh words, I know. But I am worried.

The rest of us have been for a while, Tom.  ”Three bags full” has been the standard answer from senior military leadership regarding the social experimentation, group punishment knee-jerk overreactions to perceived discipline problems, and US Pol-Mil actions (or non-actions) in Libya.  Casey with Fort Hood, Dempsey in any number of situations.  Mabus bankrupting the Navy for a green-fuel pat on the head.  Why would he think such would not bleed over into strategic decision-making?

I don’t know if military action against Iran is the right course or not, but casting away men like Mattis and Zinni (and driving off Jim Jones) won’t do much to get him informed advice.  Coupled with the amateur-hour soup sandwich that is Foggy Bottom, the ship of state is running without charts into the shoals.   They may make Johnson-McNamara-Bundy look like a well-oiled machine, and George W. Bush look positively like Metternich.

4 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, Air Force, army, Around the web, Artillery, history, Iran, iraq, islam, marines, navy, obama, Politics, SIR!, war

An Open Letter to the Commandant Regarding the “Alcohol Policy”

2004_11_9PHO-1191

General Amos,

You are the senior Marine in our beloved Corps, holding a position entrusted to just 34 other men over the glorious history of our Sea Service.  You are not the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, or of the Army.  Nor are you Chief of Naval Operations.  You are the Commandant of the Marine Corps.

Your Marines have shed their blood and wrapped themselves in glory on battlefields in two wars.  Look out among the faces of your junior NCOs, your junior Officers, SNCOs, and Field Grade Officers, and you will see Combat Action Ribbons aplenty.  Purple Hearts.  Sprinklings of Bronze Stars and Silver Stars, and even a Navy Cross here and there.  Living Marines wear Medals of Honor from these wars.   More have been presented posthumously to parents of fallen heroes who displayed conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of [his] life above and beyond the call of duty, and whom gallantly gave his life for his country.

And then we, YOU, subject them to this:

The Washington Times reported earlier this week that the Corps sent a Dec. 12 message to commanders officially beginning mandatory breath tests for all 197,000 Marines twice each year.

A reading of just .01 percent subjects a Marine to counseling. A Marine who registers a .04 must be examined by medical staff for fitness for duty.

The Marine memo calls a “positive test result” a reading of .01 or greater, which results in automatic “screening and treatment as appropriate.”

They write with their blood and courage another glorious chapter in the long and storied combat history of the Marine Corps, and you treat them like children.  Under a teetotaling and stiff-necked schoolmaster.  Now, I don’t think you thought of this folly on your own.  Secretary of the Navy Mabus has been pushing this horrendously ill-advised plan for some time in the Navy.   Somewhere along the line, you or those who advise you, including your SgtMaj, decided that the Corps does things tougher and stricter than everyone else.   Someone forgot to tell you (and them) that when it comes to stupidity, that is not such a good idea.

“It’s possible if a Marine goes to a bar and is drinking a substantial amount of alcohol over the course of an evening, and he gets himself to a BAC of 1.5 or 2.0, if they are tested first thing in the morning when they report to duty, they may still have some alcohol in their blood and test positive,” he added.

General Amos, that scenario will encompass a great majority of your Marines from time to time, and will have included yourself and most of your General Officers at one time or another.   That is, if you are honest with yourselves.  These are MARINES, warriors, MEN (and WOMEN), who work hard, fight hard, and play hard.  You should know that.  If not, take those aviator wings off and hump a 60mm mortar plate around with 2/6 for a while to remind yourself.  Bring your SgtMaj, too.  And bring your Kipling.
An’ if sometimes our conduck isn’t all your fancy paints,
Why, single men in barricks don’t grow into plaster saints;
Leaders understand that sentiment, leaders of Marines, especially.   You had a choice, General.
You could have put your rank on the table and told SecNav, “Not in MY Corps!  Not while I am Commandant!  I will treat my Marines like the combat-hardened veteran men and women they are, not like schoolchildren!”, and taken your chances with the personal repercussions.  You would have earned the eternal respect and gratitude of the 197,000 marvelous Marines you are supposed to lead.
Or, you could have said “three bags full!” and put in place nonsensical, unfair, and insulting measures that display openly your lack of trust in your Marines.  Sadly, that is the course you chose.   And it will earn you the resentment and mistrust of your Marines.  Because that trust thing is still a two-way street, even when you wear four stars.
Marines who have problems have plenty of avenues for help, and good leadership at the NCO and junior Officer level suffices to get them on the straight and narrow, or to face the consequences of not doing so.  Just as it always has.  For the most senior of our leadership to demand treating everyone as offenders speaks volumes about that senior leadership, none of it good.
I have served under Marine Commandants since General Barrow.   I do believe few or none of them would have made the choice you did.   And that is telling.   The magnificent Marines of our Corps, Officer and Enlisted, deserve leadership that displays moral and physical courage.  Lord knows, they have shown you ample amounts and then some.   Show them the same, or find another job.

32 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, Air Force, army, history, infantry, iraq, marines, navy, Personal, Uncategorized, war

Bill’s “Smelly”

S. M. L. E., actually.  Short Magazine, Lee-Enfield, Number 1 Mark III, to be precise.  With the Pattern of 1903 sword-bayonet.    It is the rifle, and not the magazine, by the way, that makes the weapon “short”, being some 4.5″ shorter than the Magazine, Lee-Enfield, Mark I, which it replaced in service starting in 1907.

 

IMG00122-20121212-1528

IMG00123-20121212-1528

IMG00124-20121212-1529IMG00125-20121212-1531

IMG00128-20121212-1533

This is the rifle Bill asked me to have a look at and clean up a bit.  For which he was most generous and grateful.   She was pretty humble when brought to me, caked with rust, dirt, and residue in the crannies of long-ago applied cosmoline.  The stock, while beautifully showing years of oiling, cleaning, and handling (in a good way), had major damage on the fore-end portion.  Got the new piece in from Numrich last night, and with a little bit of fitting (a SHARP chisel beats all) got her back together and ready for use.  As soon as I figured out how to properly re-assemble the safety latch, thanks to some online help!  Some oiling of the untreated wood of the new stock followed.  I used almond oil, of all things.  It is used on guitar necks and is thin enough to soak into the wood and not leave a greasy surface to handle.  Three coats, and that stock fore-end looked like it had been on there for decades.

She is a wonderfully balanced piece, with a pivoting V-cut rear sight and a barleycorn front sight.  The distinctive snout (nosecap, technically) took considerable work to get passable.  And there is still some that should be done.  CLP will help dissolve some of the oxidation, and a brass chamber brush will help.   The bayonet, while rusty, was razor-sharp, and in perfect condition.  A good soaking in solvent, and then CLP, did the trick.

The first photo is the rifle itself.  The second shows the bolt, bolt handle, action, and guide bridge.   One of the business end, muzzle and nosecap, and one of the business end with the sword-bayonet attached.  The last shot is Bill’s Great War veteran with my No 4 Mk I from the Second World War above it.  Mine was made in Canada and was much more of a cleanup project than Bill’s.   I paid $15 for it at Rose’s Department Store on Lejeune Boulevard in Jacksonville NC.  It was so rusty I had to use a rubber mallet to get the bolt open.  But once cleaned up, has been an incredibly enjoyable (and accurate!) shooter.

Now that I have had a chance to work with Bill’s wonderful rifle, I will be seeking one of my own.  Need it?  Nope.  Want it.   A smooth and handy rifle, and a piece of history to be sure.

15 Comments

Filed under army, guns, history, infantry, iraq, Personal, Uncategorized, war

A Lot More VA Oversight

About damned time.   From MSNBC:

Members of Congress angrily vowed Wednesday to crank its investigative floodlights far brighter on the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, accusing agency leaders of dodging direct questions on travel and conference spending, failing to disclose a gathering in Las Vegas, and exhibiting “total incompetence” as veterans wait in record-long lines for medical help.

I will admit to some of this being personal, as “budget shortfalls” forced cancellation of a major (for us) contract with my business, which makes the $9 million for the Orlando fiasco all the more maddening.  (Note that the VA was one of two Federal entities to have budgets INCREASED in 2011.)

But the long lines and interminable wait times, and sometimes downright snotty and incompetent service that Veterans are having to endure are inexcusable.  These conditions seem to be true especially for new Veterans looking to have disability ratings judged, and wanting to receive medical care after multiple combat tours.

Earlier, Gould opened by describing the VA’s beefed-up oversight to block other Orlando-type escapades, which he called: “abdications of responsibility, failures of judgment, and serious lapses of stewardship.”

Now, the VA has a justifiably angry Congress breathing down their necks.  That gunshot wound to the foot is self-inflicted.     Were I Eric Shinsecki, I would have culled the upper management herd long ago.

But, of course, we will hear the platitudes about how dedicated and hard-working everybody is, and how they really care and do a great job.  Makes you puzzled as to how all those wonderful workers and managers can produce such a soup sandwich so often where the rubber meets the road.

A cautionary tale in all this is what happens when an institution has a captive audience and no particular motivation for customer satisfaction (it’s not like I can just go into ANOTHER VA system) or business efficiency.    Which is precisely the situation that any and every gummint-run enterprise finds itself in.  Sooner rather than later.

For all those in the VA who do such a wonderful job within an inherently unwieldy, unresponsive, and often obstructionist system, you are greatly appreciated.  To those who make that system unwieldy and unresponsive, be gone with you.  You are not worthy of the Veterans whom you are paid to care for.

7 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, Air Force, army, iraq, marines, navy, Personal, Uncategorized, war

Paper-thin super material stops flying bullets

Great article about bulletproofing efforts at MIT and Rice University.  One has to wonder how much such material can lighten up the body armor our folks wear into combat, including the helmet, while increasing ballistic protection.  Especially if they can keep the cost below a jillion dollars per Marine.

The material will have to be extensively tested, obviously.  This includes the crucial “Lance Corporal Using the Helmet to Hammer in Engineer Stakes” test.    But Marines have been begging for a helmet that is ballistic proof against 7.62×39, without excessive weight that makes extended wear a problem.

4 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, armor, Around the web, guns, infantry, iraq, marines, war

Veterans Day

vetdaypix

So today is Veterans Day. Today, dear friends, is not a day for mourning, but rather a day to remember the service of American veterans of all wars. Come Memorial Day we shall mourn our dead. Today, let us celebrate life instead.

Veterans Day is a relatively new observance. The holiday started out as Armistice Day, first observed in 1926 to commemorate the end of WWI. It wasn’t until 1954 that the observance was extended to veterans of all wars.  For  a brief time, 1971-1975, Veterans Day was observed on the closest Monday to November 11th, but thankfully, that foolishness went by the wayside and we now observe this day on the proper calendar date.

I don’t have any big plans for the holiday. I’ll celebrate the way I usually do, with quiet thanks for the opportunity to have served this great nation. Interestingly, while I was serving, I never did get Veterans Day off.

As you go about your day, either at work or leisure, take a moment to thank any veterans you know.

Update: As I’m currently sick as a dog, this is a repost of the first Veterans Day post on the blog, from 2008.

3 Comments

Filed under armor, army, ARMY TRAINING, infantry, iraq, Personal, Politics

Bloody Handprints in Benghazi

Tragic indicators of Americans whose call to duty and willingness to risk it all to protect their countrymen led to violent death at the hands of a savage enemy, mute testimony of an ethos and a courage that stands in stark contrast to the tenor of pathetic post-attack excuses for inaction offered by our Secretary of Defense:

“…you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on; without having some real-time information about what’s taking place,” Panetta told Pentagon reporters.

What happened to moving to the sound of the guns?   Panetta further invokes the names of General Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and General Carter Ham, AFRICOM, in his justification for letting the Americans who were trapped in the terrorist attack be slaughtered by America’s enemies:

“…the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.”

Right now, nobody can say about General Ham, though there is plenty of well-warranted speculation that such a characterization is knowingly false, which would be consistent with the Administration’s track record of lies, cover-ups, and deliberate deceit regarding the events of September 11th, 2012.    We do have several glimpses into General Casey’s character and loyalty, and those are most unbecoming.   He is not to be trusted, and is unworthy to lead the men and women of our Armed Forces.     EagleOne calls it “un-courage”, a term which fits quite well.

And what of the “free press”, that independent news media that is the shining pillar of our First Amendment freedoms?   Conspicuously, thunderously silent on the entire matter.   They are beneath contempt.

In Al Anbar during the rather violent days of 2004, the Governance Support Team with First Marine Division was hardly a collection of elite warriors sworn by their ethos to die gloriously in a foreign land.    However, the Marines and Sailors which constituted that force made many, many forays into injun country, and understood well that if any Marine or Marines went missing or fell into the hands of the enemy, we would do every last thing in our power to get them the hell out.   It was not the stuff of brave oaths, but rather of grim understanding.  We all knew, down to our most junior Marine, that such an occurrence was not a theoretical training scenario but was a real possibility.

It is disturbing, and maddening, that such an understanding is so foreign to those whose duty it is to lead us.   And stomach-turning that our Commander in Chief cannot bring himself to tell the electorate the truth about his actions and those of his Administration.   And, frightening when a monolithic mainstream media treats the entire tragic and despicable episode as if it never happened.   XBRAD is indeed correct that protection of US diplomats and servants in overseas stations is imperfect.    Duty in a foreign land always carries risk.   But when an Administration is as callous, weak, cowardly, and deceitful as this one has been, it is a virtual guarantee of emboldened enemies, wary allies, demoralized and skeptical Armed Forces, and an electorate whose security is far less certain than it should be.

h/t to LLL

5 Comments

Filed under army, Around the web, history, iraq, islam, Lybia, marines, obama, Politics, stupid, Uncategorized, war

Northeastern University Muslim Chaplain’s Support for Islamic Extremists

Charles Jacobs over at Big Peace tells the story.  But here is a notable passage that gives insight into the Religion of Peace…  After a Muslim female student posted a comment in support of the firing of Abdullah Faruuq on the Big Peace Facebook Page:

Unfortunately, this moderate Muslim woman was immediately pounced upon by extremist Muslim Northeastern students – accused of being a traitor, a hypocrite, and an apostate. She deleted her message within two hours.

Yet, I am sure we need to have scenarios portraying the Tea Party as our domestic enemies, and returning Veterans who believe in God and the Bill of Rights as potential terrorists…  you know, so as not to offend.

8 Comments

Filed under guns, iraq, islam, Politics

Transformation

The only kind that matters.  The rest is fluff.

The ‘eathen in ‘is blindness bows down to wood an’ stone;

‘E don’t obey no orders unless they is ‘is own;

‘E keeps ‘is side-arms awful: ‘e leaves ‘em all about,

An’ then comes up the Regiment an’ pokes the ‘eathen out.

 

All along o’ dirtiness, all along o’ mess,

All along o’ doin’ things rather-more-or-less,

All along of abby-nay, kul, an’ hazar-ho,

Mind you keep your rifle an’ yourself jus’ so!

 

The young recruit is ‘aughty — ‘e draf’s from Gawd knows where;

They bid ‘im show ‘is stockin’s an’ lay ‘is mattress square;

‘E calls it bloomin’ nonsense — ‘e doesn’t know, no more –

An’ then up comes ‘is Company an’kicks’im round the floor!

 

The young recruit is ‘ammered — ‘e takes it very hard;

‘E ‘angs ‘is ‘ead an’ mutters — ‘e sulks about the yard;

‘E talks o’ “cruel tyrants” which ‘e’ll swing for by-an’-by,

An’ the others ‘ears an’ mocks ‘im, an’ the boy goes orf to cry.

 

The young recruit is silly — ‘e thinks o’ suicide.

‘E’s lost ‘is gutter-devil; ‘e ‘asn’t got ‘is pride;

But day by day they kicks ‘im, which ‘elps ‘im on a bit,

Till ‘e finds ‘isself one mornin’ with a full an’ proper kit.

 

Gettin’ clear o’ dirtiness, gettin’ done with mess,

Gettin’ shut o’ doin’ things rather-more-or-less;

Not so fond of abby-nay, kul, nor hazar-ho,

Learns to keep  ‘is ripe an “isself jus’so!

 

The young recruit is ‘appy — ‘e throws a chest to suit;

You see ‘im grow mustaches; you ‘ear ‘im slap’ is boot.

‘E learns to drop the “bloodies” from every word ‘e slings,

An ‘e shows an ‘ealthy brisket when ‘e strips for bars an’ rings.

 

The cruel-tyrant-sergeants they watch ‘im ‘arf a year;

They watch ‘im with ‘is comrades, they watch ‘im with ‘is beer;

They watch ‘im with the women at the regimental dance,

And the cruel-tyrant-sergeants send ‘is name along for “Lance.”

 

An’ now ‘e’s ‘arf o’ nothin’, an’ all a private yet,

‘Is room they up an’ rags ‘im to see what they will get.

They rags ‘im low an’ cunnin’, each dirty trick they can,

But ‘e learns to sweat ‘is temper an ‘e learns to sweat ‘is man.

 

An’, last, a Colour-Sergeant, as such to be obeyed,

‘E schools ‘is men at cricket, ‘e tells ‘em on parade,

They sees ‘im quick an ‘andy, uncommon set an’ smart,

An’ so ‘e talks to orficers which ‘ave the Core at ‘eart.

 

‘E learns to do ‘is watchin’ without it showin’ plain;

‘E learns to save a dummy, an’ shove ‘im straight again;

‘E learns to check a ranker that’s buyin’ leave to shirk;

An ‘e learns to make men like ‘im so they’ll learn to like their work.

 

An’ when it comes to marchin’ he’ll see their socks are right,

An’ when it comes: to action ‘e shows ‘em how to sight.

‘E knows their ways of thinkin’ and just what’s in their mind;

‘E knows when they are takin’ on an’ when they’ve fell be’ind.

 

‘E knows each talkin’ corp’ral that leads a squad astray;

‘E feels ‘is innards ‘eavin’, ‘is bowels givin’ way;

‘E sees the blue-white faces all tryin ‘ard to grin,

An ‘e stands an’ waits an’ suffers till it’s time to cap’em in.

 

An’ now the hugly bullets come peckin’ through the dust,

An’ no one wants to face ‘em, but every beggar must;

So, like a man in irons, which isn’t glad to go,

They moves ‘em off by companies uncommon stiff an’ slow.

 

Of all ‘is five years’ schoolin’ they don’t remember much

Excep’ the not retreatin’, the step an’ keepin’ touch.

It looks like teachin’ wasted when they duck an’ spread an ‘op –

But if ‘e ‘adn’t learned ‘em they’d be all about the shop.

 

An’ now it’s “‘Oo goes backward?” an’ now it’s “‘Oo comes on?”

And now it’s “Get the doolies,” an’ now the Captain’s gone;

An’ now it’s bloody murder, but all the while they ‘ear

‘Is voice, the same as barrick-drill, a-shepherdin’ the rear.

 

‘E’s just as sick as they are, ‘is ‘eart is like to split,

But ‘e works ‘em, works ‘em, works ‘em till he feels them take the bit;

The rest is ‘oldin’ steady till the watchful bugles play,

An ‘e lifts ‘em, lifts ‘em, lifts ‘em through the charge that wins the day!

 

The ‘eathen in ‘is blindness bows down to wood an’ stone –

‘E don’t obey no orders unless they is ‘is own.

The ‘eathen in ‘is blindness must end where ‘e began

But the backbone of the Army is the Non-commissioned Man!

 

Keep away from dirtiness — keep away from mess,

Don’t get into doin’ things rather-more-or-less!

Let’s ha’ done with abby-nay, kul, and hazar-ho;

Mind you keep your rifle an’ yourself jus’ so!


-Rudyard Kipling, "The 'Eathen"

8 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, army, history, infantry, iraq, marines, recruiting, Uncategorized, war

A Beautiful Late-Summer Tuesday in September

That is the weather forecast for tomorrow.  Brilliant sunshine, mid-70s, warm and dry.  An absolutely perfect day.  As was another Tuesday, on the 11th of September.   I remember walking into work on that terrible day at around 7 am, thinking what a glorious day it was, a wonderful day to be alive.    Until men filled with the hate of their beliefs killed three thousand of our countrymen in the name of their religion.

May those hate-filled men burn for eternity in their own special hell.   And may there be a hell also for those around the world who cheered and celebrated the murder of the innocent on that day.    The anger I feel in my heart has not much subsided.   I doubt it will.    I have become as tolerant of Islam as Islam is of me.  If one who professes that faith wishes to live peaceably next to me, then we shall live in peace.  If any who profess that faith demand either my conversion to their faith or death as an infidel, then death is what they deserve.   Not because of their religion, but because of their desire to punish me or forbid me mine.  As Marine General Kelly so eloquently stated,

It is not about the god you worship, if you worship any god at all; but you will respect the right of your neighbor to respect the god he or she damn well pleases.

4 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, history, Iran, iraq, islam, Uncategorized, war