May 19, 2008 • Vol. 13, No. 34
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« January 2007 |
Main
| March 2007 »
Here's Rep. Jim Moran blogging at HuffPo yesterday (which is creepy enough given the HuffPo community's shameful response to the attempt on Cheney's life, eloquently described by Dean Barnett as a "paroxysm of joy diminished only by the fact that Cheney did not die"). Moran is writing about Murtha's "slow-bleed" strategy:
They suggest that efforts such as giving our troops 1) mandatory home base time with their families between deployments -- 365 days for the Army and 270 days for the Marines 2) sufficient training and equipment and 3) mandatory face to face physical, mental and emotional health evaluations upon their return from combat -- a standard practice before this Administration came to power -- will demoralize our soldiers and turn the Middle East into a cauldron of blood and chaos.
Actually, Murtha's strategy, as described by Politico.com, isn't about improving readiness, but hamstringing our military commanders in Iraq:
Top House Democrats, working in concert with anti-war groups, have decided against using congressional power to force a quick end to U.S. involvement in Iraq, and instead will pursue a slow-bleed strategy designed to gradually limit the administration's options. . . . It would restrict the deployment of troops to Iraq unless they meet certain levels of adequate manpower, equipment and training to succeed in combat. That's a standard Murtha believes few of the units Bush intends to use for the surge would be able to meet.
And then there's this little tidbit, a statement from Moran on the floor of the House in the early days of the American-led NATO campaign to oust Milosevic. A resolution had been put forward that would have required Clinton to seek Congressional authorization for the use of ground troops should the bombing campaign fail in its objectives. Said Moran,
Mr . Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this resolution, which would prohibit funding for ground forces unless deployment is specifically authorized. The only narrow exception provided in this measure is for rescuing US service personnel.
This resolution would undermine our ability to achieve NATO objectives in Kosovo and, more importantly, would send the wrong signal to President Milosevic about our resolve in the Balkans.
I encourage my colleagues to consider the ramifications of this resolution, which limits our country's military leaders. If we are to ensure a stable Europe and stop the atrocities, then we must destroy Milosevic's ability to wage his campaigns of ethnic cleansing.
I know, I know, when Democrats go to war it's different. But take that last line, replace "Europe" with "Iraq" and "Milosevic" with "al Qaeda," and you get the picture. Doesn't Murtha's plan "send the wrong signal" about our resolve to ensure a stable Iraq and stop the atrocities? Not for Moran, who wants only to see "our troops coming home and an end to this Administration's ill-fated, misguided military adventure." Why not just cut off funds entirely then? Because, call it what you will, this is a "slow-bleed" strategy.
A friend sends along this interesting analysis of the relationship between North Korea and Iran, the two remaining members of the axis of evil. The author, Alon Levkowitz, is a lecturer at the Department of East Asian Studies at Tel-Aviv University.
According to Levkowitz, there is ample evidence of nuclear cooperation between the two regimes, and Iran appears to have provided much of the finding for the North Korean missile program. The returns on that investment were apparent in Iran's proxy war with Israel last summer. And there's little reason to doubt that the close relationship between the two will hasten Iran's nuclear capability.
Another example of the cooperation between the two states involved reports of the joint development of an advanced version of the C-802 cruise missile, used by the Hezbollah in the last Lebanon war against the Israeli battleship "Hanit". On July 4, 2006, North Korea held missile testing that included the failed launch of the Taepodong-2 (ICBM) missile and other upgraded short and middle range missiles. According to foreign sources, an Iranian delegation participated in the missile tests.
These events provided yet another indicator of the continuing missile collaboration between the two states. Such cooperation not only increases North Korea's domestic export, but also allows Pyongyang to share information and benefit from missile experiments in Iran while avoiding political costs of conducting flight tests on home ground. Furthermore, the partnership contributes in advancing North Korean missile sales to other customers in the Middle East, such as Syria and Egypt. . . .
During the last two decades, nuclear experts and political delegates from North Korea and Iran have held visitations and increased the technological collaboration between the two states. Delegations from both countries have visited Pakistan as well. According to intelligence communities, Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan has provided the knowledge and some of the hardware for both the Iranian and the North Korean nuclear programs. Foreign intelligence sources even stated that the North Korean nuclear program was partially funded by Iran. The increase in Iranian financial assistance to the North Korean nuclear program, in conjunction with a decrease in other foreign assistance to that country, has made Iran an important ally to North Korea. According to intelligence reports, the nuclear test that North Korea conducted in October 2006 coupled with the sanctions on North Korea, Security Council resolution 1718, and the tension between Iran and the United States will further increase the nuclear collaboration between Iran and North Korea.
You can read the full analysis (pdf) here.
Pretty unbelievable, but perhaps the Senator has been leafing through old issues of THE WEEKLY STANDARD.
Here's the video from yesterdays hearings of the Senate Armed Services Committee.
And Michael Ledeen extends a hearty welcome to "the newly minted neocon from Michigan."
The Baghdad Security Plan is showing some early signs of success. Deaths from sectarian related attacks have dropped dramatically since December. "The number of bodies found this month in Baghdad--most shot and showing signs of torture--has dropped by nearly 50 percent to 494 as of Monday, compared with 954 in January," reports the Associated Press. "The figure stood at 1,222 in December, according to figures compiled by The Associated Press." Four additional Iraqi battalions are expected to report to Baghdad over the next two weeks, boosting a security presence.
The U.S. and Iraqi government are working to divide and conquer the Mahdi Army as Muqtada al-Sadr, its leader, is taking shelter in Iran. Sadr's Iranian backed Mahdi Army is behind a significant number of the sectarian murders, and has destabilized the Iraqi government. Asharq Alawsat has confirmed that Multinational Forces Iraq (MNF-I) is "holding talks with commanders of Muqtada al-Sadr's Al-Mahdi Army with the 'Iraqi Government's blessing,'" as well as "several Iraqi armed groups."
Rabita, an Iraqi newspaper, reports that in yesterdays attack at the Ministry of Public Works, the bomb was placed under Vice President Mahdi's seat, and the person that detonated the device was inside the ministry. That ministry is run by Muqtada al-Sadr's political bloc, and the speculation is that the attack was a hit by Sadr (I reported this was likely the morning of the attack.) Ghazi Al-Anbari, a ministry undersecretary, died from wounds sustained in the attack.
The Habbaniyah bombing last weekend highlights the divisions within the Sunni community and in the insurgency in Anbar province. "Senior commanders of the Islamic Army in Iraq, the Jaish Al-Mujahideen and the 1920 Revolution Brigades" were killed in the Habbaniyah bombings last weekend, according to the Al-Badeel Al-Iraqi website. The tribal leaders were upset and cursed al Qaeda for the attack. “May God expose the privates of their women and families, like they have done to ours,” said the son of an Al-Bu Nimir clan leader.
On the security front, Iraqi and Coalition forces continue to target al Qaeda cells, and have pressed operations against the violent Shia cult known as the Army of Heaven. The Coalition killed 8 al Qaeda and captured six during raids in Baghdad, Taji, and Amiriyah. Samarra police detained 4 members of an IED cell. Iraqi police and Army units inn Diwaniyah captured 157 members of the Mahdawiyah, or Army of Heaven, the apocalyptic Shia cult that attempted to killed pilgrims in Najaf at the end of January. The Hilla SWAT police captured another 8 members of the cult. The terrorists struck back as 10 were killed and at least 20 were wounded in a carbomb attack in a market in Baghdad.
On the Iran front, Mike McConnell, the new director of National Intelligence, told the Senate Armed Services Committee "it was 'probable' that Iranian leaders including Ayatollah Ali Khamenei were aware that weapons known as explosively formed penetrators, or EFPs, had been supplied to Iraqi Shi'ites." Iran is also considering joining a regional summit hosted by Iraq, which will include Syria and the United States.
The referendum on the fate of the oil producing city of Kirkuk has been delayed for two years, reports Azzam. The Kurds and Turkmen have fought over the status of the city. The Kurds want Kirkuk to be a part of the semi-autonomous Kurdish confederation.
You can read more news from Iraq at billroggio.com.
On February 21st, sina.com, the largest Chinese-language infotainment web portal, carried a story titled “U.S. Air Force General Says China, Iran and Venezuela Should Be Regarded as Threats.” It discusses an article--“China, Iran Top USAF’s Threat List”--recently published in Defense News that describes in detail remarks made by General Michael Moseley, Air Force chief of staff, at a February 8th Air Force Association conference.
Shortly after the story was posted, reader comments began pouring in. By Tuesday morning China time, there were more than 3,500 of them. The overwhelming majority bristle with rage. Below are translations of two representative responses.
The opinion of the four-star general speaks volumes about the hostility the U.S. harbors towards China. It would be great for China if Iran had nuclear weapons. The more countries there are with nuclear weapons, the better it is for China, because it would decrease the odds of a direct China-U.S. conflict.
The United States is deploying F-22s in Okinawa. Treacherous indeed are its intentions. We should act tough, like Russia. Aim medium-range missiles at the Okinawa airport where the F-22s are. If the F-22s invade our air space and violate our sovereignty, our medium-range missiles will strike the airport… By deploying the F-22s in Okinawa the United States is trying to provoke China and disrupt the regional security balance. That is intolerable. We should demand that the U.S. withdraw its F-22s; otherwise, we will deploy medium-range missiles in North Korea, or Venezuela, Cuba and Iran.
In a similar vein, the February 26th edition of People’s Daily published an article titled “In the Face of the ‘China Threat Proposition,’ China Cannot Choose to Remain Silent.” The piece was authored by Jin Yinan, deputy director of the Strategic Research Department at the PLA National Defense University, which operates under the direct jurisdiction of the Central Military Commission. Jin’s work bears the subheading “China never issues threats to others; China is never intimidated by threats from others.”
Jin Yinan contends that the “China Threat Proposition” has been circulating since the late 19th century, beginning with the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882--a time when China was actually on the decline. Therefore, he argues, it is a notion that defies logic: “The United States has its military deployed around the world. Its aircraft carriers are cruising all over the globe. Its military budget accounts for half of total world military expenditures. It has more satellites in outer space than do all other countries combined. The United States Navy has announced its intention to control 16 strategic sea lanes, seven of which are in the Atlantic…two in the Mediterranean…two in the Indian Ocean…and five in the Pacific… This pretty much covers all major waterways in the world. Since the end of the Cold War, in addition to its so-called ‘surgical strikes,’ the United States military has engaged in the following large-scale operations, all of which can be characterized as wars: the Gulf War, the Kosovo War, the Afghan War, and the Iraq War.”
The article concludes with a declaration: “We have no choice. We must be pro-active, especially when others are trying to smear us. We cannot give up our right to speak… We Chinese never issue threats to others; we Chinese are never intimidated by threats from others.”
That should be a relief to any Taiwanese who mistakenly thought that the 900 ballistic missiles pointed at them from mainland China were meant to serve as some kind of threat.
From the Washington Post: Europe's Runaway Prosecutions, by David B. Rivkin Jr. and Lee A. Casey.
From the Los Angeles Times: Going it alone because we have to, by Max Boot.
From Slate: The Tehran Option, by Shmuel Rosner.
From the Washington Post: Justice for Darfur, by Angelina Jolie.
From the Examiner: Another front on the Sunni-Shiite war, by Olivier Guitta.
Rich Lowry posts this email from a “Pentagon intel guy":
Since my job at the Pentagon is to follow and report these kinds of things- there are several trends we are seeing lately.
1) Definite and measurable decrease in number of sectarian killings within Baghdad: From nearly 1,400 to 680 in the last two months.
2) We are killing and capturing increasing numbers of Sunni insurgents and Al Qaeda fighters. And when I say "we"- I mean Multi-National Forces Iraq as well as the Iraqi Army, the Iraqi Police Commando, and the newer "National Guard"/Territorial Forces in Anbar.
3) The recent bombings in ANBAR demonstrate red on red kinetic operations. Something which has been rare until the last few months. More and more Sunni tribes are pledging fealty to the Iraqi government and the Coalition and turning their back on the insurgents/AQI. This has caused them to be targeted.
We have seen the enemy bomb police recruitment drives, and now mosques of "apostate" Imams and Sheikhs who have sided with the Americans. This has happened twice in the last week. While the mainstream media considers this more proof of failure- it is actually a sign of the precarious position the terrorists are in. They need the Sunni population to protect them and shelter them. If they are now butchering them like everyone else- this could be a turning point in the relationship. This is crucial to watch. We need to protect the tribal leaders who have come over to us- and AQI knows that it is a death sentence for them if they can't stop it.
We posted this morning on the hundreds of Huffington Post comments railing against the failure of the Taliban to kill the American vice president. It seems that HuffPo caught on, closing down and cleaning out the comments, but not before they became a major embarrassment to the site.
Dean Barnett has preserved a few choice comments over Townhall, and Mark Steyn has some interesting thoughts on the matter over at the Corner.
The Democratic party's embrace of the Huffington Post, which routinely invites Democratic Congressmen, Pelosi and Murtha included, to blog on the site, makes this whole thing stink even more. Now that they've been forced to shut down the comments section on a story about at an attempted assassination on the vice president of the United States, Arianna ought to ask herself how she attracted a readership capable of spewing such vile, and violent anti-Americanism. And if the Democrats are smart, they'll stay away from the site altogether.
Two weeks ago we linked to this story about a software malfunction on the F-22 that delayed a squadron of the stealth fighters from being deployed to Japan's Kadena Air Base.
Now reader Bill Walsh sends along a link to this story from Daily Tech explaining what went wrong. It seems that crossing the international date line prompted a system wide computer crash on multiple aircraft.
But while the simulated war games were a somewhat easy feat for the Raptor, something more mundane was able to cripple six aircraft on a 12 to 15 hours flight from Hawaii to Kadena Air Base in Okinawa, Japan. The U.S. Air Force's mighty Raptor was felled by the International Date Line (IDL).
When the group of Raptors crossed over the IDL, multiple computer systems crashed on the planes. Everything from fuel subsystems, to navigation and partial communications were completely taken offline. Numerous attempts were made to "reboot" the systems to no avail.
One of the most advanced weapons systems in the world, and it tripped over an imaginary line.
Less than two weeks after the official announcement of the Baghdad security plan, “reporting of sectarian murders is at the lowest level in almost a year,” and “170 suspected insurgents have been arrested and 63 weapons caches of various sizes have been seized," reports Stars and Stripes. Bomb attacks have decreased by 20 percent.
Over the past 24 hours, Iraqi and Coalition forces have pressed raids against al Qaeda in Iraq targets. Yesterday, U.S. forces captured 15 al Qaeda, including an emir (equivalent to a battalion commander in the U.S. military), during raids in Baghdad, Ramadi, Mahmudiyah, and Samarra. The Iraqi Army detained 6 insurgents near Baqubah. Today, 11 al Qaeda, including an emir, were captured during raids in Baghdad, Mosul and Ramadi.
One reason for the decrease in sectarian attacks is the pressure being placed on the Mahdi Army. While Muqtada al-Sadr is hiding in Iran, Iraqi and Coalition forces continue to dismantle his Mahdi Army. U.S. and Iraqi troops conducted raids throughout Sadr City, Muqtada's stronghold in Baghdad, and 16 Mahdi fighters were detained. The rumor in Baghdad is that Sadr himself is "doing some very deadly housecleaning," as "Mahdi Army members have been disappearing or turning up dead in the Sadr City, Kadhimiya, and Baladiyat areas of the capital." But Iraqi and Coalition forces have been conducting a shadow war against Sadr since last summer, maintaining the fiction that only "rogue elements of the Mahdi Army" are being targeted.
Two major attacks have occurred in the past 24 hours. The most significant was an explosion yesterday at the Ministry of Public Works, which nearly killed Adel Abdul Mahdi, one of Iraq's two vice presidents, as well as Riad Ghraib, the minister of public works. Twelve were killed and 42 wounded after a bomb placed in the ceiling of a ministry conference room exploded. Mahdi and Ghraib were both "lightly wounded" in the explosion, and were treated for "scratches" at a U.S. military hospital. An American intelligence source informs us that al Qaeda and Sadr are the prime suspects. Today, an IED attack outside of a Ramadi mosque killed 15 civilians and wounded 9, including women and children. Al Qaeda recently targeted a mosque in Habbaniyah, and assassinated an imam that spoke out against al-Qaeda.
The evidence that Iran is supplying weapons and explosives to insurgents and militias continues to mount. Iraqi newspapers are now reporting on this development, and are blaming Iran for fueling the violence in Baghdad. A significant find linking weapons and explosives back to Iran was discovered by the U.S. Army in the violent Diyala province. The cache included Iranian made C-4 explosives and mortars. "The explosives were found alongside enough bomb-making materials to build 150 EFPs [Explosively Formed Projectiles] capable of penetrating heavily armored vehicles, according to the expert, Maj. Martin Weber." This latest find follows an MNF-Iraq briefing that provided further evidence of Iranian munitions and support being supplied to insurgents and militias, as well as evidence that Austrian Steyr HS50 sniper rifles purchased by Iran had found their way into Iraq.
There have been two disturbing pieces of news from Britain in recent weeks. The first came earlier this month when the King Fahd Academy, an Islamic school in Acton, admitted that it uses some pernicious textbooks. The books refer to Jews as "apes" and Christians as "pigs." When confronted by the British media, a school official refused to discontinue using the books, explaining that "These books have good chapters that can be used by the teachers. It depends on the objectives the teacher wants to achieve."
That statement is probably true, as far as it goes. The King Fahd Academy is, as you might have guessed, funded by Saudi Arabia.
The second story appeared last week in the London Telegraph under the headline "Father killed family for being too western."
Mohammed Riaz was a 49-year-old man living with his wife and four daughters in Lancashire. An immigrant from Pakistan, Mr. Riaz was concerned because his eldest daughter, a 16-year-old girl named Sayrah, said she wanted to be a fashion designer when she grew up. He also worried that his other three daughters, ages 13, 10, and 3, might not want arranged marriages. So one night last October, while his family was sleeping, Mr. Riaz sprayed gasoline throughout his home. And set it on fire. His wife and four girls died. As a Telegraph story noted, Mr. Riaz "centred his life on the local mosque." (After setting the fire that killed his family, Riaz set himself on fire, too. He was rescued by emergency responders, but died two days later.)
Honor killings, anti-Judeo-Christian propaganda being taught in schools funded by foreign countries. Such is the state of affairs across the pond. Mark Steyn looks smarter every day.
From Bloomberg:
Shoichi Nakagawa, the policy chief of Japan's ruling Liberal Democratic Party said China's rising military spending may cause Japan to fall under the country's influence, the Sankei newspaper reported earlier today, citing his comments.
``If something were to happen to Taiwan in the next 15 years, then within 20 years, Japan might become just another Chinese province,'' Nakagawa said yesterday at a speech in Nagoya according to the Sankei.
Nakagawa characterized annual increases in Chinese military spending of between 15 and 18 percent as a ``serious situation,'' the newspaper said.
From U.S. News: Maintaining Perspective, by Fouad Ajami.
From the Arizona Republic: Cautious Optimism on Iraq, by Jon Kyl.
From the New York Times: Billions over Baghdad, by John B. Taylor.
From Politico: Pelosi Falls Short On Election Promises, by Daniel W. Reilly & Jim VandeHei.
From the Washington Times: Ex-CIA official urges silence after spy 'sting' by Bill Gertz.
After seeing the headline on Drudge, "Attacker Was Trying to Reach Cheney," for some reason my fist thought was to see how the Huffington Post would handle the story. He may be the vice president of the United States, but to the lefties at HuffPo, Cheney is every bit as evil as Mullah Omar, and twice as dangerous.
Well, the comments don't disappoint, here's the very first one:
"Cheney's spokeswoman said he was fine"
Fu@#.
If you head over to HuffPo you can read at least 100 more just like it, each lamenting the fact that the Taliban couldn't assassinate the vice president of the United States.
And remember, this is where Nancy Pelosi blogs when she wants to get her message out, and John Murtha, too. This is their base--people who would celebrate a successful attack on the life of the vice president.
Over the weekend, Coalition forces were tipped off to a major weapons cache in the turbulent province of Diyala. According to Capt. Clayton Combs, who commands the 1st Cavalry unit which raided what he called "an IED factory," the cache included 15 122-mm rockets, two dozen 120-mm mortar rounds, mines, anti-aircraft ammunition and rocket-propelled grenades. Combs also reported the discovery of some 150 machine-milled copper plates that are necessary to build the explosively formed projectiles (EFPs)--the most deadly form of IED--that have killed so many U.S. military personnel in Iraq.
The copper plates, Combs said, we're of Iranian origin, as were the rockets and mortars, which were dated to 2002 and 2006. Though the Captain was careful not to point the finger directly at the Iranian government, as the Los Angeles Times reported, the press briefing was "the latest attempt to link the deadliest form of roadside bombs in Iraq to components manufactured in Iran."
A U.S. soldier sets up a display of seized bomb components.
U.S. military officials said the components were clearly Iranian-made. (Courtesy of AFP/Getty Images)
This story is a few days old, but offers some insight into the mind of the world's most reclusive dictator. From the blog China Rises, which is an otherwise excellent resource on life in mainland China, comes this bizarre story of Kim Jong-Il's war on Japanese automobiles.
In one of the stranger items out of North Korea lately comes this new report that Kim Jong Il has issued an edict ordering most Japanese cars in the country seized.
According to South Korea’s semi-official Yonhap news agency, Kim grew angry when he saw a Japanese car stalled and blocking the road. So he ordered Japanese cars impounded. The event occurred Jan. 1 as Kim was going to visit his father’s mausoleum.
The upside: If the recently negotiated nuke deal leads to a thawing of relations between the United States and North Korea, America's struggling automobile industry may finally find a market where it can compete with the likes of Toyota.
Starting this week, Bill Roggio, who edits the excellent milblog The Fourth Rail, will be contributing daily updates on Iraq to the WORLDWIDE STANDARD. Also, each week Roggio will provide a longer synopsis of security developments in Iraq to THE DAILY STANDARD. The first of those is now posted here.
Roggio is one of the best writers and reporters on military affairs and we're thrilled to have him on board.
Over the last fiscal year, the United States Navy shelled out more than $1.7 billion for development of the DDG 1000, the Navy's next-generation destroyer, and in FY 2007 the Navy plans to spend an additional $3.3 billion, making the DDG 1000 the single largest procurement program in the Navy's budget this year. What are the taxpayers getting for their money? Well, for starters the DDG 1000 is, in the words of Ed Geisler, vice president of Raytheon and DDG 1000 Program Manager, a "poster-child" for cost management. At a time when the Navy's other major shipbuilding program, the LCS, has been temporarily suspended while the Navy examines the reason for major cost overruns, Geisler boasted that the DDG 1000 is currently on-schedule and a whopping 4 percent under-budget.
The economics of the DDG 1000 aren't nearly as exciting as the technology it promises to deliver, but at more than $3 billion a copy, many have questioned just how worthwhile an investment the ship is in comparison to its predecessor, the DDG 51 Arleigh Burke class destroyer, which is roughly half the price. Geisler was confident that the ship would live up to the hype.
As Geisler explained, the initial investment in designing the DDG 1000 offers the hope of substantial savings in building and operating the ship. The ship's automated systems, which Raytheon designed, will mean a reduction in crew numbers from 370 sailors for DDG 51 to a mere 143 for DDG 1000, including helicopter pilots and UAV operators. Over the 35-year life of the ship, that ought to save the Navy nearly half a billion dollars in personnel costs. Furthermore, the ship's "open architecture" computing systems make this the Navy's first "plug and play" vessel, which ought to offer significant savings for any upgrading of the ship's systems.
What really excites though is the DDG 1000's promise of unparalleled combat capabilities. And like the Air Force, the Navy is going stealth. Geisler says of the ship, "the radar signature is in the single digits as a percentage when compared with the current class of destroyers." That means that, to an enemy radar, "the 600 foot destroyer will look like a small fishing boat." Raytheon has achieved this feat by eliminating right angles from the ship's superstructure, which is also made from a composite of wood and plastic rather than steel to further reduce the ship's signature.
The advantage of a small radar signature is amplified by the ship's advanced dual band radar, which Geisler says has been successfully tested and "performs better than any radar in service today." The Navy claims that tests have show the radar to offer 15-times greater detection against sea-skimming targets, 20 percent greater firm-track range against all antiship cruise missiles (which improves survivability), a 10-times increase in maximum track capacity, and dramatic improvements of performance in jamming environments. The combination of the ability to see without being seen gives the DDG 1000 "the warfighter advantage" of being able to "shoot the archer." Geisler says the DDG 1000 will be "able to detect a threat before they detect us...there isn't a ship in the world that can do this."
The DDG 1000 has an ultra-quiet and extremely survivable hull design which has been successfully tested on scale models. The ship's dual-band radar has also been successfully tested. And only last week Raytheon and BAE successfully tested the ship's MK57 Vertical Launching System. And the DDG 1000's Advanced Gun System (AGS), which has been touted as a solution to a critical gap in the Navy's volume fire capability, will be able to fire 10 155mm Long Range Land Attack Projectile (LRLAP) each minute. Using a rocket motor to boost the projectile's range, the LRLAP will also use GPS guidance to increase accuracy by a substantial margin.
DDG 1000 is supposed to be upgraded with an electromagnetic rail gun some time after 2016, which would represent a major advance in capability--more than tripling the range of the AGS. Raytheon is not the lead-contractor on that project, however, I wasn't bowled over by Geisler's enthusiasm for the new technology. He did say he was "optimistic" that the system's technical problems could be overcome.
The Navy is set to take delivery of two DDG 1000 destroyers in 2012, though how many more Zumwalt class ships will be ordered after that is anyone's guess. Still, with Democratic Rep. Gene Taylor--whose district includes Northrop Grumman's Pascagoula Shipyard where one of the DDG 1000s is being built--now holding the chair of the House Seapower and Expeditionary Forces Subcommittee, it seems likely that Congress will continue to fund what the Navy has described as the the centerpiece of its future surface combat fleet.
Update: This post originally stated that "Defense Daily reported late last year that Raytheon's AGS program has been plagued by inconsistent results. Said Admiral Michael Frick, 'What [Raytheon hasn't] been able to do to date is show that they can do it [hit the target] every time,' though he qualified his remark by saying 'That's a reliability issue not capability issue.'" Frick was referring to the ERGM munition which the Navy does not plan to use on DDG 1000.
Conceptual drawing of the DDG 1000. Notice the absence of any antennas on the ship's superstructure, as well as the inward-sloping "tumblehome" hull, which is more survivable than a traditional hull, and also reduces wave-induced movement, making the ship less easily detected by radar.
From the Wall Street Journal: The Choice on Iraq, by Joseph Lieberman.
From the Telegraph: Hatred of America unites the world, by Niall Ferguson.
From the Washington Post: Deauthorizing Iraq, by Robert Novak.
From the Christian Science Monitor: Europe warms to US missile shield, by Jeffrey White.
From the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: Quandary in Iraq, by Jack Kelly.
Among the items included in the Pentagon's supplemental funding request for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan is nearly $400 million for two F-35 Joint Strike Fighters and an additional $146 million for one CV-22 Osprey. The Air Force request explained that the F-35s would replace one F-15 and one F-16 lost in combat operations.
In a letter to Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Secretary of the Air Force Michael Wynne, the contents of which were first reported by Politico.com, McCain knocked the request:
In an emergency supplemental, you are proposing to replace combat loss with unproven platforms that not only are not yet operational but will also ultimately cost a lot more than they do now . . .
Both the JSF and Osprey are controversial, next-generation programs that require considerable congressional oversight . . . Your including the requests to procure both aircraft types in an emergency supplemental effectively insulates these programs from this committee's routine oversight. This is inappropriate.
What I find most troubling about the request is that for $400 million, the Air Force could have requested an F-22, which is a far superior aircraft and is already in production. Also, the F-35, especially the Air Force variant, should cost no more than $50 million each. The whole purpose of the F-35 was to provide the Air Force with an affordable alternative to the F-22. If it stops being affordable, than there isn't much point to the program. Which all just proves McCain's point--major military procurement programs require a great deal of Congressional oversight.
McCain's letter is also just good politics, making clear that he is fulfilling his responsibilities as ranking member of the Armed Services Committee despite the rigors of his campaign for president. John Kerry was criticized for his prolonged absences from the Senate during his run for president. And as I mentioned here before, Senator Clinton is on no less than five Senate committees, including the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities. It will be interesting to see if she follows McCain's letter with one of her own, just to let the public know that she, too, can find the time to fulfill her responsibilities in the Senate--that she doesn't devote all her time to fending off criticism from the likes of David Geffen.
Israel's political and military leaders are facing a crisis of confidence. The consensus view in Israel, as Peter Berkowitz wrote in THE WEEKLY STANDARD just a few weeks ago, is that Prime Minister Edhud Olmert, "and even more his hapless defense minister, Amir Peretz, as well as Lieutenant General Dan Halutz, an honorable man who only two weeks ago resigned as chief of staff of the Israeli Defense Forces--had proved themselves in the Lebanon war last summer unfit to continue to lead the nation."
Hapless indeed. Yesterday Peretz was inspecting troops in the Golan Heights alongside the IDF's new chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi. According to press accounts, "Peretz gazed through the capped binoculars three times, nodding as Ashkenazi explained what he was looking at."
What's wrong with this picture? (Effi Sharir / AP)
From the AP:
SAN JOSE, Costa Rica (AP) -- A tour bus of U.S. senior citizens defended themselves against a group of alleged muggers, sending two of them fleeing and killing a third in the Atlantic coast city of Limon, police said on Thursday.
One of the tourists--a retired member of the U.S. military aged about 70--put assailant Warner Segura in a head lock and broke his clavicle after the 20-year-old and two other men armed with a knife and gun held up their tour bus Wednesday, said Luis Hernandez, the police chief of Limon, 80 miles east of San Jose.
The two other men fled when the 12 senior citizens started defending themselves. The tourists then drove Segura to the Red Cross where the man was declared dead. The Red Cross also treated one of the tourists for an anxiety attack, Hernandez said.
The tourists left on their Carnival cruise after the incident and Hernandez said authorities do not plan to press any charges against them, saying they acted in self defense.
I'm sure the guy feels terrible that he killed the would be mugger. Still, the story is easily as inspiring as Dikembe Mutombo's--maybe Bush can recognize him at the next State of the Union.
On Tuesday night, David Gergen moderated a forum at Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government that featured five Harvard veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The event was billed as a special tribute to the roughly 100 veterans of those wars who are currently enrolled at the Kennedy School and Harvard Business School, and the audience was overwhelmingly supportive of the troops, if not their mission--at least there was no visible evidence of antiwar sentiment.
The evening began with a moment of silence for those who had given their lives in the service of their country and featured a uniformed ROTC color guard, rifles and all, which, despite the nature of the event, seemed somewhat out of place given that Harvard hasn't allowed ROTC on its campus since the late 1960s. Once the discussion got underway, the soldiers and Marines on stage pulled no punches in addressing the situation on the ground, even though Lieutenant General Douglas E. Lute, director of operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was sitting right in the front row. One Marine, who had been severly wounded in Ramadi, spoke about his unit's role in the Iraqi elections of October 2005--the polling station was attacked 9 times and only 12 votes were cast. In the next election in December, his unit stayed away from the polls and more than 50,000 votes were cast.
Another Marine, Captain Maura Sullivan, had served in Falluja. She spoke eloquently about the challenges of being a female officer in a combat zone, but her tone belied her claim that gender wasn't an issue. She was simply more passionate, emotional, and empathetic than the other speakers. I don't think women should serve in combat, but I walked away from the event thinking that such traits would be an asset more than a liablity.
Gergen himself was downbeat on our chances for success in Iraq, and kept asking the troops questions that were framed by references to "crumbling support at home." But the soldiers and Marines insisted that they "didn't pay attnetion to what was going on outside" Iraq. And there was some support among them for the surge.
Of course, in the People's Republic of Cambridge, an event conceived with the sole purpose of honoring the service of Harvard's students and alums could not pass without the expression of some antimilitary (though not antiwar) sentiment. What was surprising, however, was that that sentiment came not from students, or faculty, but a member of the press. It was left to Don MacGillis, who identified himself as a reporter for the Boston Globe, to ask these junior officers why it was that the military had not yet integrated homosexuals into its ranks.
As the Harvard Crimson reported, "after some in the audience gasped and murmured, panelists responded that they were uninvolved with decisions to implement such policies."
The troops handled it well, though Gergen, who was at the White House when "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" was implemented, defended the policy as something that had represented real progress at the time. He also said that he thought homosexuals would likely be integrated into the military by the next administration.
It was a pleasure to see just how bright and capable these junior officers were, and one couldn't help but be impressed by their uniform desire to get back to their comrades in Iraq. Funny enough, they all seemed to consider Harvard to be a tougher duty than combat--they spoke of the intense guilt they felt at leaving their buddies behind.
But if Harvard has embraced these veterans returned from combat, it still shuns those who would follow in their footsteps. Harvard undergrads have to make the trek to MIT to serve in ROTC, their service honored only when they make a useful prop for Kennedy School forums.
From the Washington Post: No Way To End A War, by Charles Krauthammer.
From USA Today: Vietnam pilot to receive Medal of Honor, by Alan Gomez.
From the New York Times: U.S. Used Bases in Ethiopia to Hunt Al Qaeda in Africa, by Michael R. Gordon & Mark Mazzetti.
From the Washington Times: Public doubts selling out Iraq.
From the Jerusalem Post: The diplomatic fetishists, by Caroline Glick.
Igor Khrestin, a researcher in the Russian Studies program at the American Enterprise Institute, writes in with news and links from the Russian-language media (you can also click here to read his latest piece in THE DAILY STANDARD):
In the wake of Putin’s unequivocal rejection of the “one master, one sovereign” world order in Munich last week, the Kremlin is putting its money where its mouth is. Clearly displeased by Washington’s decision to build missile defense systems in Poland and the Czech Republic, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stated in an interview today with Rossiyskaya Gazeta that “Undoubtedly, we will react. But we will do so without hysterics. We cannot allow [Russia] to be drawn into a new arms race.”
Russia’s top military commander, General Yuri Baluyevsky, doesn’t seem to share the top diplomat’s views. In an interview with the RIAN news agency, Baluevsky declared that his country is being forced into a new arms race, while noting that “being aware of the technical characteristics [of US military hardware], we can with complete certainty state that despite declarations that these systems are not aimed against Russia, they can affect our deterrence potential.”
In order to counter America’s “aggression at Russia’s borders,” the Kremlin apparently plans a tit-for-tat response. The Rossiyskie Vesti weekly reports that Russia’s Air Force chief, Vladimir Mikhailov, has made a visit to Armenia in order to lobby for joint missile defense systems to be installed on the territory of Russia-friendly post-Soviet states. The newspaper notes that a three three-tiered geographical structure is planned: European (in Belarus), Caucasus (Armenia), and Central Asian (Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan).
In the meantime, Sergei Ivanov, who was only recently promoted from minister of defense to deputy prime minister, has been lobbying hard for increased funding for the Russian military. Earlier this month, Ivanov stressed the need for wholesale modernization of Russia’s armed forces, while on February 2, an article in Moskovskiy Komsomolets noted that during Ivanov’s six-year tenure as defense minister, the defense budget increased sixfold. During this Monday’s national security briefing, Ivanov even proposed the military-industrial complex model as a means of modernizing Russia’s economy. As reported by Nezavisimaya Gazeta, Ivanov argued “with unhidden pride” that defense industry growth levels--10 percent in 2006--far exceed those in other industrial areas.
Here's the video, by way of Defense Tech. And for those who enjoy Defense Tech as much as I do, be sure to check out Noah Shachtman's new blog, The Danger Room.
From the Australian: Blair is right on troops, by Mark Steyn
From Real Clear Politics: The Thinking Behind Blair's Iraq Decision, by Gerard Baker.
From the Washington Post: A Lack of Courage In Their Convictions, by George F. Will.
From Politico: Military Tells Congress of Equipment Shortfalls, by Christian Lowe.
From the Wall Street Journal: Plus Ça (Climate) Change, by Pete du Pont.
The Humvee is an icon of the modern American military--the primary vehicle for moving American troops and materiel in both times of peace and war. But the vehicle has earned a less than stellar reputation for its service in Iraq, where its limited survivability has been only marginally improved by "up-armor" kits. Now the Pentagon is looking to the next generation of tactical wheeled vehicles, and is gearing up to begin replacing the Humvee two years ahead of schedule due to the unanticipated wear-and-tear of increased armor and the unforgiving desert environments of Iraq and Afghanistan. The U.S. military operates approximately 160,000 Humvees, which means that the contract to replace them will be extremely lucrative for the company with the best design. But, more important, replacing the Humvee offers the military a chance to provide troops in the field with a vastly superior vehicle.
The competition for the contract has only just begun really, and no company has yet submitted a demonstration vehicle, but some of the nation's largest defense contractors have already started testing the technologies that will ultimately be incorporated into the new Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV). Last week I spoke with Kathryn Hasse, director of Lockheed Martin's tactical wheeled vehicle program, about what that company is doing to position itself for this massive contract, and how American troops might benefit from their work.
Hasse told me that Lockheed had taken a "system of systems" approach in designing its Future Technology Truck System (FTTS)--a technology demonstrator which has been delivered to Fort Lewis for testing. The truck, which will never go into production, represents what is essentially a "massive R & D program" to refine the technologies that will be be incorporated into the JLTV. Among the features of this military concept-car is an innovative chassis, an advanced gear suspension, and system variable height. All of which ought to provide soldiers with a more comfortable ride over rough terrain--an important consideration given the long distances that soldiers must travel in Afghanistan and elsewhere.
More important, though, is the increased fuel efficiency of the FTTS. The vehicle will rely on a hybrid diesel-electric engine, with the aim of increasing the vehicle's range to 600 miles, from the 300 miles of the Humvee, and with no increase in the amount of fuel the vehicle carries. Globalsecurity.org explains the cost-savings of such an engine: "70 percent of the logistic burden on a battlefield is fuel, and that fuel delivery can cost between $30 (by Hemtt tanker) and $ 400 (by CH-47, as in Afghanistan) per gallon." Also there is the fact that supplying fuel to American forces in Iraq requires the military to put a large number of fuel tankers on the roads, leaving soldiers and contractors further exposed to attack. Any increase in fuel efficiency will likewise reduce that exposure.
And the JLTV will "absolutely have a v-shaped hull" of the kind that has made MRAP vehicles like the Cougar and Buffalo, which have been covered here before, so much more survivable than the Humvee. The v-shaped hull "appears to be the most survivable design" for deflecting the force of an IED blast, and will offer a critical improvement over the Humvee.
Hasse said that there is "a real sense of urgency" within the military to begin production of the JLTV, and that a contract for the vehicle will likely be announced by January of next year. She expects the contract to call for the production of 5,000 to 6,000 vehicles a year, and in order to meet those demands Lockheed Martin has formed a joint venture with Armor Holdings, which produces a variety of tactical wheeled vehicles.
But will the JLTV provide soldiers with enough protection against IEDs? That's the real question the program faces as the military ramps up production of the far more survivable MRAP, especially in light of the fact that the Marine Corps has recently signaled its intention to replace its entire fleet of Humvees in Iraq with MRAPs of one kind or another. The JLTV will never be able to provide the kind of protection that the MRAP does, but it simply isn't feasible to replace the military's enormous fleet of Humvees with MRAPs, which are much more expensive by comparison. And the JLTV does offer an "affordable and safe" solution to the shortcomings of the Humvee. Still, according to Hasse, the demand for MRAP vehicles "may affect JLTV quantities." Especially in Iraq, where the threat from IEDs is acute, the Army and Marine Corps may opt for a more survivable vehicle in the form of an MRAP. Outside of Iraq, however, the JLTV is likely to be as ubiquitous as its predecessor.
Lockheed Martin's FTTS technology demonstrator
Rich Lowry writing at NRO:
Murtha repeatedly says in the webcast that his proposals are meant to “protect” the troops. But he is frank about the not-so-ulterior motive of keeping more troops from heading to Iraq, explaining that “they won’t be able to do the work.” Because his provisions can be sold as guaranteeing the readiness and quality-of-life of the troops, Murtha believes that they “will be very hard to find fault with.”
Only if one ignores our constitutional scheme. The president, not Congress, is the commander in chief. Congress was never meant to, nor is it suited to, direct tactical military decisions, as Murtha seeks to do with his restrictions.
Arguably, his maneuver will be the most blatant congressional intrusion on the president’s war-making powers in the nation’s history. . . .
The subconscious logic of their position on the war has thus taken a subtle turn. It used to be that the war had to end because it was a failure; now it must fail so that it can end.
Democrats don’t see this distinction, since they simply believe the war is irretrievably lost. But they still pay laughably unserious lip service to the notion of success. Murtha says there’s no military solution in Iraq, that we can win in Iraq only through the political process — as if it has no effect on the political process whether Shia militias are murdering Sunnis unchecked or laying low to avoid the surge. In a howler, he maintains that if we leave, “al Qaeda’s going to disappear.” Maybe if we spread pixie dust and close our eyes?
The Jawa Report has the scoop:
Fahd al-Utaibi a/k/a Naif Fahd Al Aseemi Al Utaibi arrived in Saudi Arabia May 18, 2006 from Guantanamo, along with 14 others released by the US. He is currently on trial in Yemen for forging travel documents in order to join the jihad in Iraq.
And Armies of Liberation provides a link to this Human Rights Watch report warning that Fahd and the other 14 detainees had been "deprived of access to justice for years in U.S. military detention, [and] they may face continued incarceration with no legal process in Saudi Arabia." If only.
From the New York Times:
They [experts] say North Africa, with its vast, thinly governed stretches of mountain and desert, could become an Afghanistan-like terrorist hinterland within easy striking distance of Europe. That is all the more alarming because of the deep roots that North African communities have in Europe and the ease of travel between the regions. For the United States, the threat is also real because of visa-free travel to American cities for most European passport holders.
Our own expert, Olivier Guitta, reported in THE DAILY STANDARD this week on the alarming spread of terrorist groups in North Africa. His piece, Terror in the Maghreb, made much the same point as New York Times reporter Craig Smith:
GSPC, which officially merged with al Qaeda over the summer--underlined by al Qaeda's Ayman Al Zawahiri in a September 11, 2006 video--and changed its name a few weeks ago to al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, is clearly the dominant terrorist group in the Maghreb and the countries of the Sahel. The organization's aim is to make the Maghreb a springboard to Europe with the help of the Algerian Islamist Khalid Abou Bassir, believed to be one of al Qaeda leaders in Europe. This was confirmed last year when Belgian police arrested a Moroccan Islamist named Mohamed Reha, who told police that "not only were we preparing jihad operations in Morocco, but we were working to expand our jihadist movement to all the countries of the Maghreb with the help of our Algerian brothers from the GSPC."
Guitta also points to "reports that this new terror group has been recruiting scores of Moroccan, Tunisian, and Algerian volunteers; to join the forces of al Qaeda in Iraq." As worrisome as that may be, it seems Europe has the most to fear from the unchecked spread of these groups. And it will be interesting to see how Europe confronts this problem. Guitta says that the French have a great deal of knowledge about the old-guard GSPC, but the groups is "recruiting every single day in the suburbs of Algiers," with the aim of enlisting young men who have no criminal background and whom the French authorities will be unable to track. The French are supporting the Algerian government, financially and otherwise, in its fight against the GSPC, but Guitta says that the French so fear their own restive Muslim population, that any direct action is out of the question.
Conservatives have rightly been grousing about the latest nuke deal with North Korea. As John Podhoretz put it in the New York Post, "the Bush administration has now gone down the same path as everybody else--paying Kim a bribe in exchange for promises of change." True enough, the North Korean nuke deal isn't all that different from the deal President Clinton worked out back in 1994. In this nifty little table put together by Eric Hundman over at FP Passport, one can see the similarities.
| 1994 | 2007 | United States was promised:
- A freeze on graphite-moderated reactors and related facilities (along with a promise to eventually dismantle them)
- North Korea would remain party to the NPT (and eventually come back into compliance with all its agreements with the IAEA)
| United States is promised:
- Shutdown of Yongbyon nuclear facility
- Reimplementation of all North Korea's agreements with the IAEA
- Promise of a "discussion" (i.e., a disclosure) of all of North Korea's nuclear programs
| North Korea was promised:
- A light-water reactor project supplied by a U.S.-led international consortium
- Shipments of heavy oil up to 500,000 tons annually
- A promised "move toward" full normalization of economic and political relations
- An assurance "against the threat or use of nuclear weapons by the U.S."
| North Korea is promised:
- Possible removal from U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism
- Immediate shipment of "energy assistance" equivalent to 50,000 tons of heavy fuel oil
- Bilateral talks with the U.S. aimed at "moving towards" full diplomatic relations
- Promise to "advance the process" of removal from penalties under the Trading with the Enemy Act (pdf)
|
Equally disconcerting--and Clintonian--is that the deal seems to hinge on the "disablement" of the North Korean nuclear program. According to the blog China Matters, the Chinese word for "disablement" has a rather murky etymology:
I don’t think it’s really a Chinese word. I didn’t find it in my dictionaries. Google the phrase and you get about 600 hits, virtually all of them embedded in news stories covering the February 13 announcement.
It crops up a few times in other contexts. | | | |
