This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Category: Military issues

  • Navy changes alcohol sales policy

    For some reason, its news that the Navy has decided to stop selling alcohol on it’s bases between the hours of 2200 and 0600, says the Associated Press;

    The Navy’s top admiral has ordered a series of changes to the way the Navy sells booze. Chief among them, the Navy will stop selling liquor at its mini marts and prohibit the sale of alcohol at any of its stores from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m.

    “It’s not going to fix everything, but it is a real step in the right direction,” said David Jernigan, Johns Hopkins University’s director of the Center on Alcohol Marketing and Youth. “Historically, the military, as elsewhere, has viewed these problems as individual problems to be dealt with by identifying the individual with the problem. While that’s important, the research shows it’s much more effective actually to look at it as a population problem and to deal with things that are affecting everybody across the population.”

    Yeah, well, it’s really not going to fix anything. I’ll have as much money to buy liquor before 10 o’clock as I would after 10 o’clock – it means that Navy people will have to plan ahead for their drinking.

    Just like the sexual assault problem, the suicide problem and any other number of problems that the civilians have decided are unique to the military, the military is only trying to be seen as doing something, no matter how useless it is.

  • Bright Star cancelled

    The Washington Times reports that the Obama Administration has cancelled our joint training exercise with the Egyptian Army for this year, based on the current situation there;

    “While we want to sustain our relationship with Egypt, our traditional cooperation cannot continue as usual,” the president said.

    Mr. Obama insisted that the U.S. is not taking sides in the dispute but that the violent clashes cannot go without an American response.

    The interim Egyptian government later rebuffed Mr. Obama, warning that his statement, “while it’s not based on facts … can empower the violent militant groups and encourage them in their destabilizing discourse.”

    Canceling the military exercises will be seen as a blow to a military that values its close relationship with U.S. forces and gets an annual subsidy of more than $1 billion from Washington. Mr. Obama also said he has asked his advisers to look at other avenues of action.

    I can’t imagine this administration taking the same course of action if the Morsi government was still in power there, so yeah, he is taking sides, and dragging us along with him. I mean it’s great that our troops aren’t going to be exposed to the current danger in Egypt, but the President isn’t telling us the whole truth. Not that it’s new or anything.

  • “Competition between real men on real tanks”

    According to Fox News, the Russians have invited the US to compete in their tank biathlon next year. Their competition started this week, too late for us to join them, but I guess Chuck Hagel accepted the offer. That’s good news – at least some of our tank crews are going to have money to train this coming year;

    The first-time event taking place this week has competitors from Russia, Armenia, Belarus and Kazakhstan racing T-72 tanks around a 13-mile track and shooting at five targets. Tanks that miss the targets must take a 1,600-foot penalty lap, The Telegraph reports.

    Thanks to Smitty for the link.

  • Expert in combat tells us what is important about combat (UPDATED)

    So this Army colonel who is an instructor at the US Army War College has decided that, based on her intense analytical viewing of “To Hell And Back”, the autobiographical tale of Audie Murphy’s experiences in World War II, we shouldn’t be paying so much attention to the amount of strength that a soldier needs to serve effectively in combat. From the Washington Times;

    Some military analysts fear the Pentagon will discard some standards to ensure that a significant number of women qualify.

    “Perhaps it is time to take a hard look at what really makes a competent combat soldier and not rely on traditional notions of masculine brawn that celebrate strength over other qualities,” Col. [Ellen] Haring says in the current issue of Armed Forces Journal.

    She cites World War II hero Audie Murphy and North Vietnamese insurgents as examples of small people who came up big on the battlefield.

    “If the going-in assumption is that physical standards are the only thing that needs to be examined, then we are also assuming that we have everything else just right,” she wrote. “This is belied by our less-than-optimal performances in many instances during the past 12 years. Fixating on physical standards is a tactical-level approach that misses a strategic-level opportunity.”

    Or, we can look at more recent Medal of Honor recipient, Dakota Meyer, who won the day by returning again and again into the face of fire and carrying injured American and Afghan soldiers on his back to his vehicle. Now I’ll grant Colonel Haring that Meyer’s exploits are still in book form and not easily perused on the screen yet, so that might account for her not mentioning this as an example to the need for physical strength. Or mentioning Staff Sergeant Clinton Romesha who recovered the body of a fallen comrade from the enemy.

    Of course, Colonel Haring is also engaged in a lawsuit against the military to allow women to serve in combat. She goes on to say that maybe Audie Murphy couldn’t pass the Marine Officer Infantry Course either. But I guess that’s speculation, and speculation in her favor since he’s dead and she can’t be proven wrong.

    Colonel Haring is a political hack whose interests are completely selfish, since she knows that she will not be called upon to serve in direct combat, given that the chances of her being required to pass an Infantry Officer’s Course are about the same as Audie Murphy’s. She might have a point in all of this if the Marines allowed men to serve in the infantry if they failed the course and they didn’t allow women to do the same, but, sadly for her, no, men who don’t have the physical stamina to complete the course are washed out.

    Someone sent us Colonel Haring’s résumé. Here’s her “experience”;

    Strategic Planner, US Army War College, Carlisle, PA. January 2013-Present.
    Joint Staff Officer, Solution Evaluation Directorate, Joint and Coalition Warfighting Center, Suffolk, VA. August 2011- January 2013. Provides supervision and oversight of staff officers who conduct evaluation and testing of innovative approaches developed by field operating forces. Ensures that validated solutions are disseminated to the joint operating force.

    Assistant Professor, Department of Joint, Interagency and Multinational Operations, U.S.
    Army Command and General Staff College, FT Belvoir, VA, July 2008-July 2011.
    Provided graduate level education to mid grade Army officers in topics including: a
    survey of the strategic environment; culture and conflict; intergovernmental and multinational capabilities; military operational planning processes; and foundations of critical and creative thinking.

    Commander, 8th Brigade, 84th Training Command, Charlottesville, VA, January 2007-January
    2008. Provided supervisory direction to over 85 assistant professors and instructors
    supporting the ROTC departments at 24 universities and colleges in the Virginia,
    Maryland and D.C. region.

    Executive Officer, 6th Brigade, 80th Training Division FT Belvoir, VA, September 2005-
    December 2006. Provided staff supervision and direction to a training brigade
    responsible for the training and education of mid grade Army sergeants and mid grade Army officers.

    Instructor, 10/80 Training Battalion (CGSOC), Owings Mills, MD, September 2002-August
    2005. Provided graduate level education to mid grade reserve Army officers in topics including: a survey of the strategic environment; intergovernmental and multinational capabilities;
    leadership; military history; military operational planning processes; and foundations in critical and creative thinking.

    Executive Officer, 309th Rear Area Operations Center, Hanau, Germany, September 2000-April
    2002. Provided rear area security planning for organizations operating in conflict environments.

    Civilian Property Control Officer, 322d Civil Affairs Brigade, FT Shafter, HI, January 1999-
    property June 2000. Oversaw the plans and training of military personnel to ensured protection of civilian in areas where military operations were occurring.

    Operations Officer, US Army Japan, FT Shafter, HI, January 1998-December 1998.

    Team Leader, 2nd Battalion, 383d Regiment, 5th Brigade, 75th Division, FT Leavenworth, KS,
    August 1995-July 1996.

    Commander, A Company, 1199th Signal Battalion, FT Huachuca, AZ, June 1991-August 1992.

    Adjutant, 1199th Signal Bn., FT Huachuca, AZ, December 1990-May 1991.

    Project Officer, Information System Engineering Command, FT Huachuca, AZ, June
    1989-November 1990.

    Student, US Air Force Communication/Computer System Staff Officer Course, Keesler AFB,
    MS, July 1988-May 89.

    Student, Signal School, Officer Advance Course, FT Gordon, GA, January 1988-January 1988. Operations Officer, 181st Signal Company, 43d Signal Battalion, Heidelberg, Germany,
    December 1986-December 1987.

    Platoon Leader, 43d Signal Battalion, Heidelberg, Germany, October 1984-November 1986.

    I honestly can’t imagine how someone can present themselves as an expert on what is required to be successful in combat when she herself has never deployed. In twelve years of war, she’s been hiding out at Fort Belvoir and the War College. She should be embarrassed instead of writing crap like this.

  • Will Lorance verdict have a “chilling” effect in combat?

    I’ll admit that I didn’t pay too much attention to the trial of 1LT Clint Lorance who as a cherry 2LT with 5 days in command of a platoon ordered his men to shoot three Afghans on a motorcycle because it was one of those things that you had to be there to pass judgement on his decisions. I still don’t have an opinion whether he was guilty or not, that’s for the courts, the courts that apparently decided that he is guilty. The discussion in the Fayetteville Observer yesterday was whether it will effect the troops in regards to their reaction time under similar circumstances. In regards to the circumstances in the Lorance case, the Observer reports;

    No weapons or equipment typically carried by insurgents were found on the bodies of the two men who were killed. The third man ran away.

    The 28-year-old 82nd Airborne Division officer also was convicted of threatening to kill local villagers, ordering a soldier to shoot toward villagers to harass them, asking a soldier to file a false report saying that villagers shot at the outpost, and obstruction of justice for efforts to cover up the circumstances of the two deaths.

    Two members of his platoon testified that they had seen no reason for firing at the men but had done so because Lorance ordered it.

    I’m guessing the members of Lorance’s platoon had more than 5 days in the conflict and given the information in the article, it sounds like an anxious newbie Platoon Leader not listening to his NCOs, and you know that was probably the first time in history that ever happened (that was sarcasm, if you didn’t recognize it). One random soldier is quoted in the article;

    “I’ve seen guys not pull the trigger when they should have because they feared the repercussions to their career,” said the soldier, who declined to give his name.

    The soldier, who said he had been a forward observer during two deployments to Afghanistan, said some of those soldiers who hesitated were then shot themselves.

    “Everybody’s scared of repercussions, even if you know you’re right,” he said.

    He said the Lorance case will only increase that fear.

    If the Lorance case was anything like it’s been described in the media, I don’t think it will have much effect on the troops, except anxious newbie 2LTs. According to members of the platoon, they didn’t see a need for any of the actions that the LT took, and I’d bank on their experience before cleaving to a decision of a 2LT. This is not to bash 2LTs…I’ve known some of the best 2LTs ever to serve in the Army, but you have to realize that some of them take their responsibility very seriously and would err on the side of caution, even they really don’t have to. But being in war isn’t like having a license to kill everyone. That’s why there’s a set of rules of engagement that the troops follow and it appears that Lorance disregarded his ROE.

  • Mushrooms

    Today marks the sixty-eighth anniversary of the second – and, hopefully, last – use of nuclear weapons in the history of mankind.

    At approximately 11:01 AM local time, the US Army Air Forces B-29 “Bockscar” – piloted by Major Charles W. Sweeney – released a nuclear weapon (“Fat Man”) over Nagasaki.  Forty-three seconds later, the device exploded.  It is estimated that between 60,000 and 90,000 individuals were killed outright or died within 4 months due to acute effects directly attributable to bombing.

    Nagasaki was not the original target for the raid – that was Kokura.  However, Kokura’s weather that day prohibited visual bombing outright; Major Sweeny diverted to Nagasaki, his secondary target.  A last-minute break in weather there allowed Nagasaki to be bombed using visual bombing procedures.

    The Nagasaka bombing followed the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima by three days, two hours, and 46 minutes.  In that attack, the “Little Boy” device (a highly-enriched uranium gun design vice “Fat Man’s” more advanced implosion design using plutonium) was used.  This earlier attack effectively destroyed the city of Hiroshima, inflicting between 90,000 and 166,000 estimated deaths – again, either immediately or within 4 months due to acute affects directly attributable to the bombing.

    The use of these two weapons had the desired effect:  it broke Japan’s will to continue the war.  Within a week, the Japanese Emperor had decided to “endure the unendurable” and publicly announced acceptance of Allied surrender terms, ending hostilities.  A formal and unconditional surrender was signed by the Emperor of Japan 17 days later.

    . . .

    Some today question the need for – and the morality of – these two bombings.  Allow me to express my opinion on that issue.

    Such individuals are at best damned fools.  At worst, they are simply anti-American tools.

    The two nuclear attacks killed between 150,000 and 256,000 individuals.  The lower estimates for projected US casualties for the anticipated invasion of Japan necessary to end the war include about that many US dead alone; other estimates give a likely figure several times higher.

    These figures do not include Japanese casualties; deaths for the Japanese side during an invasion were estimated to be literally in the millions.  (On Okinawa and Iwo Jima, in excess of 90% of Japanese military personnel opposing Allied forces were killed or committed suicide – as did many in the civilian population.)  Other alternatives that would end the war without the use of nuclear weapons – increased conventional bombings, an enhanced naval blockade to starve the Japanese into submission – were also estimated to kill literally millions of Japanese.

    Yes, the use of nuclear weapons at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was horrific.  But war itself is by its very nature horrific.  Further, all available alternatives were even worse – and would have caused more pain, suffering, destruction, and death.

    To argue against using nuclear weapons to end World War II is, in effect, to argue that prolonging the war and causing several times more unnecessary deaths and grossly more destruction and suffering would have been morally superior.  I’m sorry, but I just don’t buy that.  I suspect the Deity doesn’t buy that, either.

    . . .

    Still:  if you’re inclined towards prayer, please take a moment today and say a prayer for the souls of those who died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki – Allied, Japanese, and those of other nationalities.  Their deaths indeed were necessary for a swift end to the war; their deaths saved inestimable others elsewhere.  Mankind should forever remember and respect that.

    And while you’re at it, please add a second prayer.  Ask God to grant mankind the wisdom to ensure that Nagasaki forever remains the last use of nuclear weapons in human history.

  • Pentagon intends to lower standards for political points

    Our buddy, Rowan Scarborough at the Washington Times writes that with complete disregard for the safety of the force, they’re plowing ahead with plans to allow women in all combat roles and the Republicans are complicit;

    Rep. Duncan Hunter, California Republican, won passage of language in the pending defense budget bill that says any standard lowered for women also must be lowered for men. The logic behind the measure is that the military does not want less-capable men staffing combat units.

    Yeah, I’m sure that won’t work. The political forces that are driving this train aren’t concerned that there will be less-capable people in combat units, otehrwise would they be charging ahead. A moment’s thought would tell a rational person that altering the combat readiness of the most capable armed force in the world is madness.

    I don’t want a lowered standard for anyone, regardless of their sex organs, because ultimately it will result in casualties. But the people who are pushing this don’t have any skin in the game. Neither them nor their children will hear a shot fired in anger, so what do they care?

    “There will be a move to create a critical mass of young women in certain ground combat units,” said Robert L. Maginnis, a former Army officer with a new book, “Deadly Consequences: How Cowards Are Pushing Women Into Combat.”

    And those of you women who think that it will be completely voluntarily, just wait until the politicians discover that volunteer rates are dreary. Yeah, so then they’ll be offering bonuses to attract women to the ranks of the combat forces, then you’ll get the ones who are in it for the money, meanwhile men won’t be offered the same bonuses for the same job. No one will get mad over that, will they?

  • MTFs cut services for furloughs

    The USAToday reports that military treatment facilities are cutting back their treatment of soldiers and their families because of furloughs;

    The Pentagon’s top medical official, Jonathan Woodson, assistant secretary of Defense for health affairs, called the cuts illogical and a significant threat.

    “We simply cannot continue to sustain the burdens placed on the military medical system if sequester remains the law of the land,” Woodson says. “The men and women who have fought tirelessly on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan … deserve much, much more than this.”

    Thomas said that by sending patients to a network of private doctors who contract with the government for services, the Pentagon will spend more money in order to compensate for the automatic spending cuts.

    “As we curtail … we will inevitably refer more care out to the network,” he says. “We’ll end up spending more money in the long run.”

    At Walter Reed, the primary care facility for troops wounded in Afghanistan, the number of operating rooms has been cut from 23 to 20 Monday through Thursday and to 10 on Friday, when most civilians take their weekly furlough day, according to a memo July 15 from Navy Capt. Philip Perdue, deputy chief of surgery.

    Of course, USAToday blames Congress, disregarding the fact that sequestration came out of a White House strategy session, also disregarding that the White House has threatened to veto a Defense budget because it doesn’t squeeze veterans enough, and threatens to veto any spending bill that contains any cuts to domestic spending. When Mitt Romney mentioned sequestration last year during the presidential debates, President Obama assured the American voters that sequestration “won’t happen”, yet here we are.

    While we’re at it, lets’ talk about millions of dollars spent on the recent trip to Africa, the millions that will be spent on the Obama family vacation later this month.