Flak-damaged Sea Venom of 893 Squadron during the Suez Crisis...

pic via FishStickMonkey Tumblr Page.

THE SUEZ CRISIS (OPERATION MUSKETEER) 1956
A flak-damaged Sea Venom of 893 Squadron, landing safely without undercarriage on HMS EAGLE. The aircraft has been caught by the arrester wires on the Flight Deck.

Interesting.

I haven't taken a good look (and neither have many historians) at all the minor actions that were taking place worldwide between the 50s and 60s.  The Suez Crisis deserves a look see and I think I'll turn to doing just that.  The idea that a Brit Sea Venom would take flak damage in a mission in that region (I don't know the specifics) is simply amazing.  On a side note.  I know EXTREMELY little about carrier but I wonder why they would attempt a landing which could damage the ship instead of just ejecting and getting picked up.  Is this safer?  Are ejections that dangerous?  Honest question, I don't know.

Open Comment Post. Feb 5, 2017

China builds another Combined-Arms Mechanized Infantry Brigade

via China Defense Blog

ZBL09, ZSL10 and ZTL11 have arrived - so this is becoming another 8x8 Light Combined-Arms Mechanized Infantry Brigade.
HQ-7B's have arrived, most likely 1 company of 3 launchers, as part of the AD battalion

They go on to state in the very brief article that it will belong to the 20th Group Army Central Command.

On a side note.  We have enough information from China Defense and other open source blogs on the Chinese military to build a pretty good order of battle.  It might be something worth doing on a lazy Sunday.

Having said that the focus for me turns to the type of units that the Chinese are building.  I admit that their focus is entirely within their region but I fully expected to see the paratroops and Marine Corps expand.

We aren't seeing that.

I don't know if this is Asian practicality or stubbornness but they're continuing to modernize their conventional forces.  They live in the region but they're not pumping out units built to fight in Mega Cities, not pushing for more amphibious vehicles (although they are working on landing craft...what the modern day Marine Corps call "surface connectors"...what an idiotic rebranding!) but simply developing forces to kill us in a standup fight.

Why is that interesting?

Because they sought to match us when it comes to stealth aircraft.  They're building aircraft carriers to match us.  They have anti-ship ballistic missiles to defeat our capital ships.

But on the ground?

They're not looking to develop anything fancy.  They're just gonna come at us head on with nothing more fancy than vehicles that mirror our own, and maybe might be a little less powerful.

That should worry us all.

Why?

Because that indicates on a man for man level they believe that they're better than us.  That was once Marine Corps thinking.  We could use old vehicles/equipment but individually we were better than the enemy.  More capable, and able to make up for material differences with the quality of our personnel.

In every other domain the Chinese are looking to either match or exceed our capabilities.  When it comes to ground combat they're happy with where they're at.

America First...WW2 vs Today...A reality check...

The America First "meme" developed by the Trump campaign has been compared to the WW2 iteration and is lambasted because the early committee supposedly ignored the plight of the Jewish people and denied entry of many during the time leading up to the Holocaust.  This is a quick (and I mean quick) down and dirty. You can verify easily enough what I'll say with a quick Google search. First what did the America First WW2 committee stand for? via Wikipedia...

When the war began in September 1939, most Americans, including politicians, demanded neutrality regarding Europe.[9] Although most Americans supported strong measures against Japan, Europe was the focus of the America First Committee. The public mood was changing, however, especially after the fall of France in spring 1940.[10]

The America First Committee launched a petition aimed at enforcing the 1939 Neutrality Act and forcing President Franklin D. Roosevelt to keep his pledge to keep America out of the war. They profoundly distrusted Roosevelt and argued that he was lying to the American people.

On the day after Roosevelt's lend-lease bill was submitted to the United States Congress, Wood promised AFC opposition "with all the vigor it can exert." America First staunchly opposed the convoying of ships, the Atlantic Charter, and the placing of economic pressure on Japan. In order to achieve the defeat of lend-lease and the perpetuation of American neutrality, the AFC advocated four basic principles:

*The United States must build an impregnable defense for America.

*No foreign power, nor group of powers, can successfully attack a prepared America.

*American democracy can be preserved only by keeping out of the European war.

*"Aid short of war" weakens national defense at home and threatens to involve America in war abroad.

So with this being the case and with public attitudes changing rapidly after war arrived in Europe, how did the meme that America First WW2 was anti-semitic?

A check of the main figures involved reveals much.  These are the names of people in the organization that I recognized...Charles Lindbergh, Walt Disney, Sargent Shriver,  Frank Lloyd Wright and Lillian Gish.

I immediately focused on Lindbergh.  He was a known White Supremacists and known Nazi sympathizer.  Note that his history is bit mixed though.  While being a bigger star in Nazi Germany than he was in the US, he also pushed the Army General Staff to build up its air power after he saw (he was invited to observe) the Luftwaffe and the tremendous advances they were making.

To round out the case on Lindbergh, he was also known to be anti-semitic.

The other figures while famous don't appear to be the source of much controversy.  Disney was said to be racist but that has been disputed and his views expressed in his cartoons are said to be racially insensitive.  Apologists for Disney would say that he simply expressed the views of the times and that on a personal level with black employees he was fair and even handed.  I won't debate that, his reputation remains mixed in my opinion.  Shriver?  Just another famous dude who comes from a long line of money.  Frank Wright?  Famous building designer, historically important but no famous writings.  Gish, a famous actress of the times...again no famous writings.

So the basis for the accusation that America First WW2 was anti-semitic was based entirely (in my opinion) on the membership of Charles Lindbergh being part of the movement.

Is that fair?  I don't know.  I didn't live during the time but I can look at the rationale of the group and just by looking at the goals as they were written I can't argue with the thinking.

We're almost a century removed but it must be remembered that the US had involved itself in WW1 and saw many of its sons killed in that effort and now just a short time later the winds of war were blowing on that continent again?

I imagine the US population felt about Europe the way that I feel about the Middle East.  It's just not worth the effort if they're gonna be engaged in perpetual warfare.

The reality?

America First 2016/17 has little in common with America First circa 1940/41.  

Side note:  To cloud the issue even more are some of the popular movements that happened during this time.  One of those was the Eugenics movement and Lindbergh, the founder of Planned Parenthood and other wealthy Americans were a part of it.  That movement probably had more to do with the immigration policy at the time and the turning away of Jews fleeing Germany had more to do with the influence of that movement than America First.

Open Comment Post. Feb 3, 2017

An article to make you think...have at it men...I'm stepping aside, I truly want to see what you think on this one, not the politics but the conclusion...via Free Beacon...

Not only are there two Americas. There are two governments: one elected and one not, one that alternates between Republicans and Democrats and one that remains, decade after decade, stubbornly liberal, contemptuous of Congress, and resistant to change. It is this second government and its allies in the media and the Democratic Party that are after President Trump, that want him driven from office before his term is complete. You think I exaggerate. But consider this: When a former Defense official who teaches at Georgetown Law School takes to Foreign Policy to propose "3 Ways to Get Rid of President Trump Before 2020," and when one of those ways is "a military coup, or at least a refusal by military leaders to obey certain orders," we are in unknown and extremely unsettling territory.

Are we entering "unknown and extremely unsettling territory"?

Don't forget this is the root of the Ukrainian problem...

via BBC.

Voice thought to be Nuland's: What do you think?

Voice thought to be Pyatt's: I think we're in play. The Klitschko [Vitaly Klitschko, one of three main opposition leaders] piece is obviously the complicated electron here. Especially the announcement of him as deputy prime minister and you've seen some of my notes on the troubles in the marriage right now so we're trying to get a read really fast on where he is on this stuff. But I think your argument to him, which you'll need to make, I think that's the next phone call you want to set up, is exactly the one you made to Yats [Arseniy Yatseniuk, another opposition leader]. And I'm glad you sort of put him on the spot on where he fits in this scenario. And I'm very glad that he said what he said in response.

Nuland: Good. I don't think Klitsch should go into the government. I don't think it's necessary, I don't think it's a good idea.

Pyatt: Yeah. I guess... in terms of him not going into the government, just let him stay out and do his political homework and stuff. I'm just thinking in terms of sort of the process moving ahead we want to keep the moderate democrats together. The problem is going to be Tyahnybok [Oleh Tyahnybok, the other opposition leader] and his guys and I'm sure that's part of what [President Viktor] Yanukovych is calculating on all this.

Nuland: [Breaks in] I think Yats is the guy who's got the economic experience, the governing experience. He's the... what he needs is Klitsch and Tyahnybok on the outside. He needs to be talking to them four times a week, you know. I just think Klitsch going in... he's going to be at that level working for Yatseniuk, it's just not going to work.

Pyatt: Yeah, no, I think that's right. OK. Good. Do you want us to set up a call with him as the next step?

Nuland: My understanding from that call - but you tell me - was that the big three were going into their own meeting and that Yats was going to offer in that context a... three-plus-one conversation or three-plus-two with you. Is that not how you understood it?

Pyatt: No. I think... I mean that's what he proposed but I think, just knowing the dynamic that's been with them where Klitschko has been the top dog, he's going to take a while to show up for whatever meeting they've got and he's probably talking to his guys at this point, so I think you reaching out directly to him helps with the personality management among the three and it gives you also a chance to move fast on all this stuff and put us behind it before they all sit down and he explains why he doesn't like it.

Nuland: OK, good. I'm happy. Why don't you reach out to him and see if he wants to talk before or after.

Pyatt: OK, will do. Thanks.

Nuland: OK... one more wrinkle for you Geoff. [A click can be heard] I can't remember if I told you this, or if I only told Washington this, that when I talked to Jeff Feltman [United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs] this morning, he had a new name for the UN guy Robert Serry did I write you that this morning?

Pyatt: Yeah I saw that.

Nuland: OK. He's now gotten both Serry and [UN Secretary General] Ban Ki-moon to agree that Serry could come in Monday or Tuesday. So that would be great, I think, to help glue this thing and to have the UN help glue it and, you know, Fuck the EU.

Pyatt: No, exactly. And I think we've got to do something to make it stick together because you can be pretty sure that if it does start to gain altitude, that the Russians will be working behind the scenes to try to torpedo it. And again the fact that this is out there right now, I'm still trying to figure out in my mind why Yanukovych (garbled) that. In the meantime there's a Party of Regions faction meeting going on right now and I'm sure there's a lively argument going on in that group at this point. But anyway we could land jelly side up on this one if we move fast. So let me work on Klitschko and if you can just keep... we want to try to get somebody with an international personality to come out here and help to midwife this thing. The other issue is some kind of outreach to Yanukovych but we probably regroup on that tomorrow as we see how things start to fall into place.

Nuland: So on that piece Geoff, when I wrote the note [US vice-president's national security adviser Jake] Sullivan's come back to me VFR [direct to me], saying you need [US Vice-President Joe] Biden and I said probably tomorrow for an atta-boy and to get the deets [details] to stick. So Biden's willing.

Pyatt: OK. Great. Thanks.

Don't forget this is the root of the Ukrainian problem...Nuland and Pyatt were mapping out Ukraine's leadership.  Sounds shady to me....

Friday Funny...

 

http://uss-edsall.tumblr.com/post/156746417840/buckcompton-im-sorry

 

Semper Annoying Tumblr Page @ Marine Corps West Expo.

All pics via Semper Annoying Tumblr Page (here)...definitely worth a follow...oh and he really loves the JLTV, he raved about its comfort and an AC???!!!  Simply amazing.  I hope he posts more pics.  What I didn't realize and it might be a matter of perspective but the ACV 1.1 appears to be much bigger than the AAV-SU (which looks like a real good update).

2d Cavalry Regiment Strykers doing work (pics)....

Tick tock of the decision making leading up to the SEAL Team 6 raid in Yemen...

via CBS News.

According to Spicer, the first plans for the operation were filed by U.S. Central Command on Nov. 7, and got approval by the Defense Department by Dec. 19, at which time DoD recommended that it move ahead to the National Security Council staff.
In early January, before President Trump took office, an interagency deputies’ meeting was called to discuss the plan and recommend that it move “straight up.”
“The conclusion at that time was to hold for what they call a ‘moonless night,’” Spicer said, adding that such conditions wouldn’t exist until Mr. Trump was president.
On Jan. 24, Defense Secretary Mattis read the plans and conveyed his support of the operation to the White House. The following day, Mr. Trump was briefed by National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. And on the evening of Jan. 25, the president held a dinner meeting with Kushner, Bannon, and other security and intelligence officials, “where the operation was laid out in great extent and the indication at that time was to go ahead,” Spicer said.
The president signed the memo authorizing the raid the following day.

Story here.  Recommend you also watch the video where the Presidential Spokesman lines out the different approval entities in detail. 

The case is closed on this one.  The news media isn't trusted because they attempted to make a big deal out of this story.  They attempted to create the meme that Trump was sloppy, overly aggressive and cost a man his life.

They were as usual wrong.

Worse?

The usual Trump haters attempted to jump on this as if they didn't know better (talking about several people commenting on this page) and showed their true colors.

My advice?

Save your fire for the time he really screws the pooch...but understand that Mr Murphy showed up and he always gets a vote in operations.  This was a standard op that went bad.  But everyone here knows that sometimes shit happens.

Royal Saudi Air Force - F-15SA Strike Eagle Multi-Role Fighter Full Promo

ROK Navy First Four AW-159 Wildcat Naval Helicopters Now Operational via Naval Recognition.

More pics here.

The SEAL Team Raid, the Pentagon, Trump and how the media is trying to play it...

Thanks to Josephine for the link!

via the Guardian.

The US military has launched an investigation into the scale of civilian casualties in a botched special forces raid against a suspected al-Qaida base in Yemen, the first such mission to be approved by Donald Trump, as questions mount over the operation.

After initially denying there had been any civilian casualties in Sunday’s raid, US Central Command (Centcom), which is responsible for military operations in the Middle East and central Asia, acknowledged some of the dead may have included women and children, though claimed some of the women were armed.

Then this.

Both the New York Times and Reuters carried quotes from unnamed military officials that seemed to shift blame for the mission to Trump and his inner team. It would be an extraordinary development for a president, who is commander-in-chief, to be briefed against in such detail.
The briefings suggested that one thing after another went wrong from the start of the mission, with the Yemen villagers seemingly alerted to the impending raid by drones flying lower than usual.
The special forces, apparently lacking full intelligence, were confronted by heavily-fortified positions, including landmines, and faced heavy gunfire from buildings all around during the 50-minute firefight. One of the US planes sent in to help had to be left behind and was deliberately destroyed.

Story here. 

This story is a tempest in a tea pot.

Anyone that's been anywhere near the military know the sad truth.  The planning for these missions happen at SOCOM.  The intel is determined to be "well developed" or not at SOCOM.  When the mission is "ripe" is determined at SOCOM.

The President deciding to sign off on the mission is just that.

The President isn't a defense analyst, mission planner, and he damn sure isn't an operator.

The failure of this mission rests with SOCOM, intel agencies and Murphy.

The news media is trying to play up civilian casualties, poor planning etc...as being the fault of Trump.  Like I said.  ANYONE WITH COMMON SENSE KNOWS BETTER!

What has me spinning is that there are people with the necessary knowledge that are running with this reporting (even though they know better) because they're anti-Trump.

Never mind the fact that we've seen bodies of civilians lined up like firewood when a drone strike from previous administrations eradicated many more people from the face of the earth (I'm reminded of a certain wedding party that left many more people dead but much less outrage).

The anti-Trump hysteria is becoming boring.  The fact that some in the military MIGHT be dabbling in it is infuriating.  If anything, I'd bet SOCOM tried to impress the new boss and fucked up royally...but that's just me.

Anyone have a high rez pic of the painting by Tom Lovell of the Marines in Belleau Wood?

Hey all.  Looking for a high rez pic of Tom Lovell's painting you see above.  Just something I want and not for anything but my personal enjoyment.
So if you have one hit me up.

U. S. Marines, Khe Sanh, Vietnam 1968

pic via USS Edsall Tumblr Page.

An ammunition dump struck by a shell explodes in front of U.S. Marines. This picture was on the cover of Newsweek on March 18, 1968. by Robert Ellison, Khe Sanh, Vietnam

Defence Technology Review Magazine YouTube Page.

DTR has a YouTube and if you're into the latest in Armor, Military Aviation, Naval Forces etc...then you should check it out!

Open Comment Post. Feb 2, 2017

Time to create a Mega City Combat Unit?

Thanks to Sarabvir Singh for the link!

Note:  I hate the idea and think its crazy beyond imagination.  Fighting in a mega city?  We're not talking about a Western mega city (I think).  We're talking about a mega city in the Middle East, Asia or Africa.  That my friends is a nightmare.  But we have people actively talking about it.  I continue to be mystified by the thinking which brings me to the article.

via Modern War Institute.

But despite the clear recognition that armed forces will increasingly be required to fight in urban areas, no army has committed to train, organize, and equip forces specifically to operate in cities. It is time for the US Army to do just that.

A 2016 United Nations report estimated 54.5 percent of the world’s population lived in urban areas. By 2030, that percentage is projected to rise to 60 percent. As a result of this rural-to-urban migration, cities themselves are growing. In 2016, there were 512 cities with at least one million inhabitants globally. By 2030, a projected 662 cities will have at least one million residents. And the number of “megacities” in the world—those with ten million residents or more—is projected to grow from thirty-one to forty-one in the same period.

In 2014, the chief of staff of the Army’s Strategic Studies Group (SSG) chose megacities to be the organizing theme for its yearlong research projects. Concept teams looked at the unique characteristics and challenges of a megacity, future maneuver and mobility concepts, Army force design considerations, personnel talent management, and other topics, assessing the requirements for operating in megacities. The conclusions of the SSG research are clear: megacities are unavoidable, they are potentially the most challenging environment the Army has ever faced, and the Army is unprepared to operate in them. The SSG also recommended that the Army, charged with the mandate of preparing forces for sustained operations on land, take the lead in training, organizing, and equipping forces for megacities.


As William Adamson noted in his 2015 Parameters article, “Megacities and the US Army,” the research conducted by the SSG was not the first to take a long and hard look at the challenges of large urban areas. Adamson highlighted a 2000 Government Accounting Office report, which noted that “despite a growing unease that the urban environment is a known vulnerability of US forces, DoD has not made a major commitment to dramatically improve urban capabilities.” Shortly after this, the 2001 Defense Planning Guidance commissioned a study and eighteen-month project that resulted in the Joint Urban Operations (JUO) Master Plan 2012–2017.

Story here.

Major Spencer, the author, is a Ranger...and SOCOM is awe struck with the idea of operating in this type of environment.  I highly recommend you read the entire article for yourself but from what I was able to gleam he's talking about forming specialized 5k man brigades and equipping to fight in this terrain.

Like I said, read the entire article but its been wargamed and this stood out to me...

the wargame specified that a brigade conduct three operations in a megacity—joint forcible entry, major combat, and subsequent stability operations—without unacceptable levels of military or civilian casualties.

This is Krulak's 3 block war but on steroids.

The idea of doing such a thing with "unacceptable levels of military and civilian casualties" is wall pounding.  How can this be done?  History has shown (even recent history) that a city fight will be perhaps the most vicious we've ever seen.

And we're  talking about doing a forcible entry into a mega city...making our way thru sewage infested slums that have shacks built upon shacks, making our way thru the suburbs (where we will face continued resistance after the hookers, drug dealers and gang members in the slums are dealt with...and then the same but better dressed in the suburbs) all while dealing with civilians simply caught in the middle of the fighting and evacuating them while continuing with the assault...till we reach the city center and then have to assault our way thru the rest of the town?

This is a crazy idea.

Why any planner would even consider such an idea is beyond me.  Some missions are simply too hard, will cost too much in lives and just aren't worth it.

Fighting in a mega city is such a mission.

NOTE:  Below are pics of slums just outside cities in Brazil and India.  This is what our troops will have to wade thru before they begin to REACH THE START of their jumping off point to the objective!

Blast from the past....civic responsibility during WW1.

pic via SmartSurvivalBlog

Stunning isn't it.  At the turn of the century the US govt expected and produced literature that encouraged "prepping" and individual responsibility.  Today those that take part in those activities are viewed with suspicion (even though we get the competing message of having at least two weeks food and water on hand in case of emergencies!).

Did the new deal really transform the relationship between citizen and govt that much?  I have studied the great depression and now how terrorizing that event was for the US (its still my belief that the great recession has left the same type of trauma on citizens worldwide which partly explains the rise of nationalism) but I have to reassess things.

Did we move from a more pure form of a republic toward semi-socialism because of economic upheaval?  Does that explain how divided the US is today?

Blast from the past....M1 Abrams Air-Ground Defense System

Thanks to BlackTail for reminding me of this...

This puppy would have been so glorious!  Twin, hard hitting 35mm cannons (of course we would upgrade this to either a 57mm or 76mm setup today) with 12 ready to fire missiles?

M1 mobility so it could keep up with the Ground Combat Element?

Already in service so we could simply use hulls in storage?

This was a no brainer that the Army should consider!