This guy is getting on my nerves...

Seriously getting on my nerves.

Dan Lamothe, Marine Times Reporter and blogger at Battle Rattle has a story up about an injured Marine.  Go over to his spot to check it out but this is what irritates...

Marine Corps Times has taken some heat for reporting that there are questions over whether Carpenter covered the grenade to protect his buddy, Lance Cpl. Nick Eufrazio. Actions along those lines have yielded prestigious valor awards in the past, obviously.
Those questions exist, though, at least in the minds of some in the Corps. Additional Marine sources have reaffirmed that since the story was published yesterday. Both lance corporals are heroes nevertheless, but Marine officials acknowledge they are uncertain what happened and still investigating.

Geez.

Talk about inside baseball.

Spell it out for Christ's sake.  Its annoying and demeaning.  Annoying because he treats his readers as if they're not worthy of knowing what the real issues are and demeaning because he acts as if this is info only he and the 'circle' can know about.

F-35 QLR...

Courtesy of my buddy Joe!....He also provided this link if you have difficulty reading the attachment here...
DOD F-35 Concurrency Quick Look Review, 29-Nov-2011

AMH Seacoaster...an air cushioned catamaran.

Have you ever heard of the Sea Coaster?

How about a prototype for an air cushioned catamaran that could serve as a ship to shore connector, deliver heavier loads at less power output, is beachable, and is able to deliver its cargo/passengers there with less discomfort than a standard LCAC or LCVP?

Oh and did I mention that its able to do all that in heavier sea states than the LCAC can while traveling at higher speed?

Well this project conducted in conjunction with ONR proved all of the above and then some.  The only question is...why go through all the trouble of proving this DARPA hard research (to include building a prototype) and then abandon the research?

I have no idea...but the missing link in the sea base (if it actually gets built...something I seriously doubt in a shrinking Navy and limited budgets) has been found. 

We just weren't bold enough to chase it.  Read more about it here and here.

F-35C future in doubt?

Wow.

This one caught me by surprise although I did do a "wouldn't it be ironic post" on the very subject.

From British Forces News.

The Royal Navy’s new Joint Strike Fighter may be unable to land on an aircraft carrier because of a design flaw according to a Pentagon report leaked to a national newspaper.
Documents obtained by The Sunday Times reveal the report – called the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Concurrency Quick Look Review – has identified a serious flaw in the aircraft’s design.
It reveals eight simulated landings of the new variant all-purpose jet, known as the F-35C, failed because the “arrestor” hook, used to stop the plane during landing, is too close to the undercarriage at just seven feet away, compared with 18ft on existing US Navy aircraft.
The report concludes that a “significant redesign” of the aircraft is needed and that the future of the aircraft is at risk.
It also suggests the new fighter may be unable to fire British Asram air-to-air missiles and is untested in several other areas. It says if a redesign proves too costly and complicated the entire F-35C programme may have to be scrapped.
The Ministry of Defence has declined to comment on the leaked report but said
Defence Secretary Philip Hammond “discussed a number of issues including the Joint Strike Fighter” with his counterpart Leon Panetta in his recent visit to Washington.
A spokesman said: "We are taking delivery of our first Joint Strike Fighters for test and evaluation purposes this year and are committed to purchasing the carrier variant of the JSF. Our plans remain on track to have a new carrier strike capability from around 2020.”

I don't know this website.

Don't know if its credible.

Don't know if its valid.

But if this is in anyway true then this is at the very least a matter of concern.  The APA boys have been playing this one up and the documentation they've provided seems spot on.  If the tail hook issue requires a redesign then the A and B are ok but the C is in serious jeopardy.  Add to it the fact that only the USN, USMC and RN are buying it (and the USMC very reluctantly and the RN seems torn with many---including famed Falklands Battle fighter pilot Sharkey Ward recommending the B for the Navy---and the USN seemingly not very enthused) and you have the makings of an easy exit ramp for the program...a Pentagon sacrificial lamb and the rest of the program proceeding on its merry way.

Now how do I drum up support in the UK for a switch back to the B model???

24th MEU practices airfield seizure.

31st MEU Helo Company in action (practice assault)

2nd F-35 (BF8) arrives at Eglin...

The second production model F-35B short takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) aircraft to be delivered, BF-8, arrives at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla. on Jan. 11, 2012. BF-8 was delivered to the U.S. Marine Corps 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing's Marine Fighter/Attack Training Squadron 501 at Eglin. BF-8 followed the first production model STOVL, BF-6, which was delivered earlier the same day.

The second production model F-35B short takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) aircraft to be delivered, BF-8, arrives at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla. on Jan. 11, 2012. BF-8 was delivered to the U.S. Marine Corps 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing's Marine Fighter/Attack Training Squadron 501 at Eglin. BF-8 followed the first production model STOVL, BF-6, which was delivered earlier the same day.

The second production model F-35B short takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) aircraft to be delivered, BF-8, departs Fort Worth on Jan. 11, 2012, destined for Eglin Air Force Base, Fla. BF-8 was delivered to the U.S. Marine Corps 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing's Marine Fighter/Attack Training Squadron 501 at Eglin. BF-8 followed the first production model STOVL, BF-6, which was delivered earlier the same day.

The second production model F-35B short takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) aircraft to be delivered, BF-8, arrives at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla. on Jan. 11, 2012. BF-8 was delivered to the U.S. Marine Corps 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing's Marine Fighter/Attack Training Squadron 501 at Eglin. BF-8 followed the first production model STOVL, BF-6, which was delivered earlier the same day.

 

You're not getting it!

Terminal Lance says it best...

My initial reaction to the video was something along the lines of, “What? How stupid do you have to be to film something like this and put it up online?” Many people are reeling in disgust, the very idea that someone could do such a thing to another human being is outrageous to most Americans. But then again, most Americans have never stepped foot in a combat zone, let alone killed anyone.
My question for the average person then is what is the line? The powers of the United States government have given Marines not only a license, but a mission to kill the enemy overseas in brutal combat. You can’t simultaneously praise the legal killing of other human beings and then be angered when you see the reality of it. When it’s all said and done, what difference does it actually make? The Marine Corps isn’t upset that these Marines relieved themselves on a dead enemy, they’re upset they got caught.
I guess I look at it the same way I look at why I don’t give a shit about eating free-range chickens and grass-fed cows. These animals are being raised to be slaughtered and eaten, regardless of how good or bad their lives are. In the end, does it really make you feel better if the animal had a good life and then found its way onto your plate?
If there is a line, it is a line of ethereal and subjective principle, not fact.
I’m not saying it’s in any way right, or that I would have done it myself; but to condemn these Marines for this is somewhat of a moot point considering the reality of it.

So long story short.

Back the fuck off.  These Marines went places that few would dare go.  Did a mission that few would be brave enough to do and we have these arm chair quarterbacks deciding that they're the worst thing that God put on the planet.

How quickly we forget real evil.

The twin towers...people jumping off the building so they wouldn't burn....having to decide between death by flames or by the horrific stop at the end of a jump off a 100+ story building.

The Blackwater attrocity.  Our guys dragged through the streets and then hung up on a bridge.

The throat slicing of Mr. Pearl.  I only saw the video and will never forget his screams.

The suicide bombers that disguise themselves and walk into the middle of our compounds and blow themselves up.

The Afghan 'allies' that suddenly turn their weapons on their US trainers.

So oh brave, honorable and forth right critic.

Tell me how morally superior you are again.

EFV Program. A textbook example of how NOT to do it.

Hey!

If you think the F-35 program is jacked up because its taking too long then compare it to the EFV debacle.

A look at the program track shows a development cycle of 23 years!

Let that sink in.

23 years. 

That's just counting from 1988 to 2011 (when the vehicle was cancelled).  Also note that by the time table that wouldn't even get us to LRIP!

In the meantime while the US Marines are unable to field a replacement for the AAV, the US Army has been able to go through 3 generations of vehicles...the M-113, Bradley and Stryker...and now they're trying to field the Ground Combat Vehicle and to be honest I wouldn't bet against them succeeding.

While HQMC is focusing on Marines urinating on dead Taliban, perhaps they should turn their attention to the canary in the coal mine.  A broken procurement system and maybe a systemic over reach along with misguided priorities.

Hey Commandant.  Going sleeves down isn't going to fix the real problems facing our Corps.  Time to man up cowboy!

Cyber Command in the Marine Corps?  Why!  That's a mission set that the Navy can easily cover for the sea services!  Expanded Civil Affairs?  Why!  We can attach appropriate Army units!  Expanded Special Ops?  Unless you're talking about making the MEU(SOC) more robust then why?  To duplicate SEAL and Ranger mission sets?  Really?  Say all of the above out loud and ask yourself if our Corps is being properly served by some of the guidance that's coming down the pike.


I'm personally unimpressed but your mileage may vary.

AAV Crewmen refresh Infantry skills.

Photos by Pfc. Ian McMahon Members of Amphibious Assault Vehicle Company move through the jungle surrounding their objective near Camp Hansen’s Combat Town Jan. 9. The jungle is an important part of the Marines’ training. Normally, the company trains at Camp Pendleton, Calif., where there is no opportunity for jungle training. AAV Company is currently attached to Combat Assault Battalion, 3rd Marine Division, III Marine Expeditionary Force.

Amphibious Assault Vehicle Company Marines stack up and begin to move on a building inside Combat Town located in the Central Training Area. Lessons learned the day prior allowed the Marines to move in an alert, rapid fashion between the buildings.

Norway backs the F-35, warns about a weak NATO.

Defense News has a story on the future of NATO by Norways Defense Minister but a tidbit of F-35 news was thrown in too....

"We're purchasing the F-35," Barth Eide said. "Hopefully, we'll get it."
Norway made a "complex set of simulations" which showed that while conventional non-stealthy aircraft like the Eurofighter Typhoon, Dassault Rafale, and next generation Saab Gripen are perfectly adequate for wars like Afghanistan where there is a permissive threat environment, only the F-35 was suitable to fight a high-end adversary. Barth Eide, without mentioning a country by name, said that such a high-end threat existed in Norway's vicinity.
"There was only one aircraft that would do," he said.
Norway has made a "decision in principle" to buy four initial aircraft, and plans a fleet of 48.

and then this part about a weak NATO...

"I think we're getting worse at it because of the many cuts happening in a lot of European countries," the minister said. "If we're not smart, [defense cuts] may lead to a further weakening of the core ability to defend ourselves."
If NATO's core ability to defend itself is weakened, the alliance's ability to conduct out-of-area operations like Afghanistan will also wither away, Barth Eide said.
NATO has to strongly reassert Article 5 of the treaty and the decline of conventional capabilities has to stop, he said. The focus needs to shift away from large armies conducting stability operations to the air and sea, he added.

Wow.

Seems like Norway is signing on to an American two-fer...

First it's signing onto the F-35...and second, its appears that he's saying Air-Sea battle is the wave of the future.  Told you Counter Insurgency as conducted in Afghanistan is as dead as disco in the West.

Two viewpoints on the "pissing" Snipers...

I've been watching the 'pissing' Sniper coverage to see how the news breaks on the subject.  Predictably, the Pentagon and HQMC is going bonkers.

Condemning the actions.

Calling this a breakdown in discipline and a lapse in morals.

They ignore the atrocities committed by our enemies.  They ignore the facts of life.  They dismiss the failures of our National Command Authority in spelling out a clear path to victory.

But I found these two authors to be most compelling.  First up is Lex.  Love the guy.  He has a way of cutting through bullshit and hitting at the heart of the issue in a straightforward unapologetic way.  Read his post here but check out this tidbit....

The Taliban, with their indiscriminate murders and their cowardly tactics, have probably earned a very great deal of enmity from those who have been grappling with them for going on eleven years now. The danger when good men confront evil is that, over time, they may become what they beheld.
None of the foregoing is meant to excuse.
But it may help to explain.

Compare the Lex post with this tripe from BattleRattle.  I don't know whether I love or hate these guy.  The author continuously (in my opinion) touts his embedding with Marines as a cause celeb.  He gives me the impression that because he was on these embeds that he speaks with a Marines voice.  He doesn't.  But read his "article" here and check out this part....

In March 2008, a video surfaced of a Marine throwing a puppy off a cliff in Iraq. It sparked widespread outrage, including among active-duty Marines. Nearly everyone likes a cute puppy, after all.
In this case, the “puppy” is a dead insurgent — and he probably wasn’t so innocent. Consequently, many readers already have downplayed the significance of the event, even if it becomes a Taliban recruiting tool, reflects poorly on the Corps as a whole or harms the war effort in Afghanistan.
Already today, military leadership has responded swiftly to make it clear they won’t tolerate it. Amos said the service “will not rest until the allegations and the events surrounding them have been resolved.” Defense Secretary Leon Panetta called the actions depicted “utterly deplorable,” while stressing that the origins and authenticity of the video was not yet confirmed.
That’s very unambiguous, but the message clearly hasn’t reached those defending these Marines — even though very few service members would even dream of recording a video like this.
How does the U.S. military reinforce to rank-and-file troops that just because insurgents don’t fight fair doesn’t mean our country’s ethics can be thrown out the window in combat?

What a load of self serving bullshit.

Any Commander that allows someone like the writers at Marine Times to embed is making a mistake.

Any Marine that grants interviews to these self serving glory hounds needs to have a wall to wall wake up call.

Two different views of an incident.  One spot on.  The other WAAAAAAAAAY off the mark.

PS.


IF I EMPTY A FULL MAGAZINE INTO THE BODY OF A BAD GUY, I WILL FACE NO PUNISHMENT.  IF I STAND OVER THAT SAME TERRORIST AND TAKE A PISS THE WHOLE WORLD GOES CRAZY.  ITS A WEIRD WORLD!