I've had my dust ups with ARES Blog. I've found that on one particular issue they appear to be biased, and seem to have spun facts.
I thought the bias rested with only one author.
I was wrong.
Check out this story by Robert Wall.
Seriously?The U.S. Marine Corps has gotten a lot of attention for its MV-22 mission, this year, to rescue one of two downed F-15 pilots when the fighter went down in Libya owing to mechanical problems.But the U.S. Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC), not as publicity hungry or savy, has quietly carried out a far more significant search and rescue mission using its tiltrotor.
I mean seriously?
No, what I really mean is WHAT THE FUCK!
Lets look at the facts first, and I highly recommend that you read the whole story, but Robert reports that the AFSOC used the CV-22 to rescue personnel stuck in difficult conditions.
What difficult conditions means is beyond me. Snow bound? Under fire? An injured man that needed evacuation due to a non combat related cause? We just don't know and he doesn't say.
But to compare the rescue of service personnel under any circumstance as being more important is STUPID.
To say that the Marine Corps sought this publicity is equally insane and lastly that bit of speculation on the reporters part does nothing to advance the story but only shows his anti- Marine Corps feelings. This last part is equally telling.
Next year, AFSOC will also be the first to stand up an overseas V-22 base, when CV-22s will be based at RAF Mildenhall, U.K.Not only has the reporter not done his homework, not only has he introduced another non-factor into the story, but he again reveals his anti- Marine Corps bias. How? Because the USMC recently announced that it was going to station MV-22's in Japan. That covers the bias part, he's playing tit for tat with V-22 basing---perhaps it was a birdie put in his ear by the non-publicity seeking AFSOC. How did he not do his homework? Because he is showering AFSOC with praise when SecDef Gates just announced that the US will be realigning its forces to the Pacific! AFSOC is showing that its stuck in cold war thinking by putting necessary assets in the UK when we are moving forces (ground forces anyway) out of Europe.
I've been patient, but this kind of thing pushes me over the top. Get a grip guys!
Want a completely opposite view of the same briefing that Robert reported on? Check out the DewLine.
Ouch, you sure pull no punches Sol!
ReplyDeleteSurely Robert is hardly anti-USMC. He states that the difficult conditions include flying over the Hindu Kush mountain range and "...extremely bad weather that persisted at lower altitudes and made a rescue using a helicopter impossible."
I call that bad. :)
USMC MV-22s will move to Okinawa late 2012 (FY 2013, which starts Oct 1st 2012), so AFSOC CV-22s may beat the marines by a few months or so. That's ofcourse assuming the Okinawa/Camp Schwab move proceeds - there's a lot of opposition.
nope i don't Marcase.
ReplyDeleteif he isn't bias then he's looking at US military issues with a European eye...i noticed that many of the writers for ARES are either European or Europe based.
not painting with a brush but there is an anti-US sentiment in many parts of Europe (and vice versa here) so he must be reflecting his "upbringing or circle of friends" if he isn't bias against the Marines.
RAF Mildenhall isn't *just* a European base, it's a secure UK facility that has been used by AFSOC and SOCOM for years. In fact it's more of a US facility than a British one.
ReplyDeleteIt has a large secure comms facility and large(r) ammo/storage bunkers than comparable installations. USAF Pave Lows and HC/MC-130s used to be operate from there, as well as the various EC/RC-135s - just to illustrate its importance.
I expect CV-22s to stage from there, so if AFSOC Ospreys were to operate in Libya or Syria, I'd expect them to come from the Mildenhall sqn. The CV-22 has global range with refuelling, but it's always nice to be based closer to the action.
you're glossing over the fact that the SecDef has already said that after Afghanistan, the US will reorient toward the Pacific.
ReplyDeleteif the Europeans don't see a threat and can keep their spending low then why should we base troops there?
heck even the British are bringing back their troops from Germany!
Hehe, well, we've been down this road before.
ReplyDeleteMost US troops in Europe are staged there for operations *outside* of Europe.
The US 173rd Abn BCT based in Italy just returned from A'Stan, and iirc is also one of AFRICOMs earmarked units.
The USN's 6th Fleet is supported from Europe, but not necessarily under NATO command etc. etc.
Bottom line, it's valuable to have large, secure facilities available in the EU when your main interests are litterally on the other side of the world.
The main threat to European security is the fiscal crisis, as "we" see another one coming - one which will hit the US even harder btw (double dip).
For what it's worth, various influential voices are finally speaking up claiming that defense has been cut too deep - Europe wide.
It'll still take some time for politicians to be willing to increase defense spending, but at least it is widely acknowledged that the bottom of the barrel has been reached.
Can someone finally answer this for me. Post Afghanistan, do we really need all those troops in Europe sitting around to be shipped at a moments notice to the Middle East and Central Asia?
ReplyDeleteCouldn't amphibious and airlift get the job done more or less?
Those for the status quo and Ares parrot off that line, but no one ever answers that question as far as I can tell.
spot on Drake.
ReplyDeletethe US of A continues to carry Europe on our backs while they take care of their own people and we have needs here. i read the other day that the US actually gives CHINA foreign aid!
Washington needs an enema...its full of shit!
"do we really need all those troops in Europe"
ReplyDeleteUntill there are sufficient bases and overflight rights elsewhere in the world, the US DoD and State think so.
Short version; Europe is a springboard for US deployments to Africa, the Middle East and even Asia, because of the massive post-Cold War (US) foreign base drawdown.
Again, most of US troops in Europe are support and logistics units, only a third of the ~80K are combat troops.
Heck, troops and (non-combat) supplies are routed through Russia and Pakistan to reach Afghanistan.
"i read the other day that the US actually gives CHINA foreign aid!"
Yeah, and to Africa, Asia, South America and lets not forget lovely Pakistan, which is on top of that annual massive military aid package.
OBL must've loved that.
Edit: another advantage of Europe is its vast and efficient infrastructure. Large and bulky cargo unloaded via ship in the port of Rotterdam (the Netherlands) transported via rail can be at the Polish/Russian border within a day, in Turkey within two days, and from there to the Middle East or Asia a lot faster than via sea transport.
ReplyDeleteOnly airlift is faster, but restricted to size.
The V-22 is definitely going to take a more significant role because of its unique capabilities. As far as basing overseas, we need those bases for obvious global logistical needs... Unless, we can get better and larger Sea Basing platforms. About 15 years ago there was a floating base considered as an alternative to such controversial bases as Okinawa. Until we have V-22 the size of a C-5 Galaxy, or submersible aircraft carriers, the reality of pre-positioning supplies, vehicles and troops to have that global reach, will not go away. We're lucky to be based in so many countries, and it isn't far stretched to say that in the future we could have another Rammstein base in Iraq or Afghanistan.
ReplyDeletei totally disagree Ross.
ReplyDeleteyou're forgetting a couple of things. first is the war weariness of the US.
next is the natural desire of the US to only focus on our problems and issues.
then you have the fact that the US just can't afford to subsidize European defense...and why would we be developing a European Defense shield if we weren't subsidizing them?
point remains though. in my opinion we need to shut down shop in Europe, pull our troops back, depend on our Navy and Air Force to deal with situations and have an Army that is used only for wars of survival, not choice.