America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan - We Are The Mighty
Articles

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan

The English Electric Canberra is a classic Cold War bomber. Its service with the United Kingdom and a host of other countries began less than five years after World War II, and it stuck around until 2006 with the Royal Air Force, while India flew them until 2007.


But less well-known is the American version of the Canberra, the Martin B-57, which has had the distinction of supporting combat troops almost 40 years after it was retired.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
B-57B Canberras in flight. (USAF photo)

Here’s the scoop on this plane. According to aviation historian Joe Baugher, the Korean War showed the United States that it would need a replacement for the A-26/B-26 Invader in the role of a night intruder.

The Air Force looked at the North American B-45 and A2J Savage, both of which were already in service, but found them wanting. Then, the Air Force looked abroad, and considered the CF-100 from Canada before deciding to license-build the English Electric Canberra.

What won them over was endurance: The Canberra could hang around a target 780 miles away for over two hours. The B-57 could carry up to 7,300 pounds of bombs, could mount eight .50-caliber machine guns or four 20mm cannon, and had a top speed of 597 miles per hour, according to MilitaryFactory.com.

The Air Force liked that long reach, and eventually 403 B-57s were built. The plane served as a bomber in the Vietnam War and some were modified to carry laser-guided 500-pound bombs and called the B-57G under a program called Tropic Moon III. One of the B-57Gs was even equipped with a M61 Vulcan and 4,000 rounds (which is a lot of BRRRRRT!). However, the United States soon realized that the Canberra’s true calling was as a high-altitude reconnaissance bird.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
A B-57G assigned to the Tropic Moon III program. (USAF photo)

The definitive reconnaissance version, the RB-57F, could reach an altitude of 65,000 feet. This gave it a very high perch that many fighters in the 1960s could not reach. Even one of today’s best interceptors, the Su-27 Flanker, can only reach a little over 62,000 feet, according to MilitaryFactory.com. Some of the RB-57Fs later were designated WB-57Fs to reflect their use as weather reconnaissance planes.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
A WB-57F parked on the ramp at Yokota Air Base in Japan. (USAF photo)

The Air Force retired the B-57s in 1974. However, a number of the WB-57F planes found their way to NASA, where they were used for research. This included monitoring for signs of nuclear tests.

At least two of the NASA birds, though, are reported to have served over Afghanistan in the War on Terror. Spyflight reported one of the NASA birds flew sorties from Kandahar in 2008, officially as a “geological survey” for Afghanistan. Wired.com reported in 2012 that two NASA planes have alternated flying out of Kandahar to help relay data, alongside modified RQ-4 Global Hawk drones and versions of the Bombardier business jet known as the E-11A.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
One of NASA’s WB-57F Canberras. (NASA photo)

This means that nearly four decades after officially retiring from service, these B-57s have been serving in wartime – while under NASA’s flag. Not bad for a plane that first took flight in 1949!

Articles

Inside the USS Zumwalt, the Navy’s most advanced warship

The United States Navy’s newest destroyer, USS Zumwalt (DDG 1000), is the most advanced ship in the ocean today. So what actually goes into making this ship the hottest of maritime hotrods?


America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
USS Zumwalt (DDG 1000) sails under the Pell Bridge. (US Navy photo)

According to All Hands magazine, the 15,656-ton vessel is equipped with many new advances. The most visible is the 155mm Advanced Gun System. Now, the Long-Range Land-Attack Projectile program was cancelled, but this gun has other ammo options. The Zumwalt also features 20 Mk 57 vertical-launch systems, each with four cells, capable of launching a variety of weapons, including the BGM-109 Tomahawk and the RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
USS Zumwalt (DDG 1000) emerges past a point. (US Navy photo)

But the Zumwalt has more than just new firepower. The wave-piercing tumblehome design and the composite superstructure help reduce the ship’s radar cross-section, and the ship is also one of the quietest vessels in the world.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
The 1,000-ton deckhouse of the future destroyer USS Zumwalt (DDG 1000) is craned toward the deck of the ship to be integrated with the ship’s hull at General Dynamics Bath Iron Works. The ship launch and christening are planned in 2013. (U.S. Navy photo/Released)

The ship also has the new Integrated Power System, a highly-survivable system that allows the power output from the ship’s LM2500 gas turbines to be used for anything from propulsion – taking the ship to a top speed of over 30 knots — to charging a crewman’s Kindle to powering the AN/SPY-3 radar.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
The future USS Zumwalt (DDG 1000) is underway for the first time conducting at-sea tests and trials on the Kennebeck River. The multi-mission ship will provide independent forward presence and deterrence, support special operations forces, and operate as an integral part of joint and combined expeditionary forces. (U.S. Navy photo /Released)

The ship can also carry two MH-60R multi-role helicopters and has a crew of 158.

Below, take a look at a pair of videos of this American maritime hotrod.

Articles

US apologizes for leaflet drop that shows a dog carrying a Taliban flag

 


On Sept. 6, a US commander apologized for dropping leaflets in Afghanistan that were deemed offensive to Islam.

The leaflets dropped Sept. 4, which encouraged Afghans to cooperate with security forces, included an image of a dog carrying the Taliban flag, said Shah Wali Shahid, the deputy governor of Parwan province, north of Kabul. The flag has Islamic verses inscribed on it and dogs are seen as unclean in much of the Muslim world.

“Local people are very upset with this incident, and they want the perpetrators brought to justice,” Shahid said, adding that demonstrations were expected across the province.

Maj. Gen. James Linder apologized, acknowledging in a statement that “the design of the leaflets mistakenly contained an image highly offensive to both Muslims and the religion of Islam.” He offered his “sincerest apologies for this error.”

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
US Army Maj. Gen. James B. Linder. Photo by Staff Sgt. Ken Scar.

Throughout the 16-year Afghan war, US forces have struggled to convince ordinary Afghans to help them defeat the Taliban. Afghanistan is a deeply conservative country and alleged blasphemy has sparked riots.

Elsewhere in Afghanistan, two civilians were killed by a roadside bomb in the eastern Laghman province on Wednesday, according to Sarhadi Zwak, the spokesman for the provincial governor. No one claimed responsibility for the attack, but Taliban insurgents are active in the province.

Articles

US intel chief issues grim warning on Afghanistan

The U.S. must “do something very different” in Afghanistan, such as placing American military advisers closer to the front lines of battle, or risk squandering all that has been invested there in recent years, the head of the Pentagon’s military intelligence agency said Thursday.


The grim assessment by Marine Lt. Gen. Vincent Stewart, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, comes as the Trump administration considers Pentagon recommendations to add more U.S. and NATO troops and to deepen support for Afghan forces. The timing of a White House decision is unclear but is not expected this week.

In testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Stewart said he visited Afghanistan about six weeks ago to see for himself what others have called a stalemate with the Taliban, the insurgent group that was removed from power in 2001 by invading U.S. forces.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
U.S. troops are going to have to get closer to the fight or risk losing hard won gains, DIA chief says. (DoD photo by Cpl. Joseph Scanlan, U.S. Marine Corps/Released)

“Left unchecked, that stalemate will deteriorate in the favor of the belligerents,” Stewart said, referring to the Taliban. “So, we have to do something very different than what we have been doing in the past.” He mentioned increasing the number of U.S. and NATO advisers and possibly allowing them to advise Afghan forces who are more directly involved in the fighting. Currently the advisers work with upper-echelon Afghan units far removed from the front lines.

If such changes are not made, Stewart said, “the situation will continue to deteriorate and we’ll lose all the gains we’ve invested in over the last several years.”

Testifying alongside Stewart, the nation’s top intelligence official, Dan Coats, said the Taliban is likely to continue making battlefield gains.

“Afghanistan will almost certainly deteriorate through 2018 even with a modest increase in military assistance by the United States and its partners,” Coats said, adding, “Afghan security forces performance will probably worsen due to a combination of Taliban operations, combat casualties, desertion, poor logistics support and weak leadership.”

The Pentagon says it currently has about 8,400 troops in Afghanistan, about one-quarter of whom are special operations forces targeting extremist groups such as an Islamic State affiliate. Gen. John Nicholson, the top U.S. commander in Kabul, has said he needs about 3,000 more U.S. and NATO troops to fill a gap in training and advising roles.

More than 2,200 U.S. troops have died in Afghanistan since the U.S. invasion in October 2001.

MIGHTY TACTICAL

This squid-like underwater drone will blow up warships

An underwater drone which moves like a squid and can explode on command was one of the stranger weapons on display at a massive arms fair in London.

The device, named the Sea Hunting Autonomous Reconnaissance Drone (SHARD), is being marketed by the Australian arms manufacturer DefendTex.

It was one of many exhibits at the Defence & Security Equipment International (DSEI) show, which is running this week in east London’s Docklands.


One was on display bobbing up and down in a tank, moving with its tentacle-like legs. Here is a video:

DefendTex staff told Business Insider that the drones are meant to float unassumingly in the sea, and are purposefully designed to look like squid as a type of camouflage.

The drones are meant to attach themselves to passing enemy vessels. They can then be detonated remotely by their operators. Each one can act by itself or as a swarm with others.

DefendTex said the drones swim using a motor, and can recharge by sinking to the ocean floor, attaching themselves to rocks, and allowing ocean currents to rotate and internal motor which charges the battery.

The drones are meant to be used in Anti-Submarine Warfare missions or Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance missions, according to DefendTex.

The project is still in development, and is not yet on sale.

DSEI is the UK’s largest arms fair, attracting representatives from the world’s 50 largest militaries, who come to view the latest defense and intelligence technology.

Over 1,600 manufacturers attend the event, which in 2019 is at London’s ExCel center.

This article originally appeared on Business Insider. Follow @BusinessInsider on Twitter.

Articles

This is General Nicholson’s vow to annihilate ISIS in Afghanistan

Afghanistan’s security forces, with the help of US and NATO ground and air support, will annihilate the Islamic State group affiliate in the country and crush remnants of al-Qaeda, General John Nicholson, the top US general in Afghanistan, vowed August 24.


Nicholson also had a message for the Taliban: “Stop fighting against your countrymen. Stop killing innocent civilians. Stop bringing hardship and misery to the Afghan people. Lay down your arms and join Afghan society. Help build a better future for this country and your own children.”

Nicholson and Hugo Llorens, the US Embassy’s Special Chargé d’Affaires, told reporters in the capital Kabul that President Donald Trump’s new strategy for Afghanistan, announced August 21, was a promise to Afghans that together they would defeat terrorism and prevent terrorist groups from establishing safe havens.

“We will not fail in Afghanistan,” Nicholson said. “Our national security depends on it, as well as Afghanistan’s security, and our allies and partners.”

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
Incoming Resolute Support Commander, Gen. John W. Nicholson Jr., addresses the audience during the change of command ceremony in Kabul, Afghanistan, March 2, 2016.

But Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid was defiant in a telephone interview with The Associated Press: “We are not giving our guns to any one and our Taliban are fighting until the last US soldier is no longer here in Afghanistan.”

Senior US officials have said that Trump may send up to 3,900 more troops, with some deployments beginning almost immediately. Nicholson did not offer a timeframe for deployment, however, saying only that “in the coming months, US Forces Afghanistan and NATO will increase its train, advise, and assist efforts in Afghanistan. And we will increase our air support to Afghan security forces.”

Nicholson had particular praise for Afghanistan’s commandos and special forces known as Ktah Khas, saying they had yet to lose a battle and plans were being made to double their size.

“The Taliban have never won against the commandos and Ktah Khas,” he said. “They never will.”

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
Ktah Khas Afghan Female Tactical Platoon members perform a close quarters battle drill drill outside Kabul, Afghanistan May 29, 2016. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Douglas Ellis.

Nicholson told reporters that the losses among Taliban foot soldiers have exceeded those of the Afghan National Security Forces, though he didn’t offer figures.

The US Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction in its latest report released July 31 said 2,531 Afghan service members were killed in action in just the first five months of this year and another 4,238 were wounded.

Nicholson said efforts were being made to tackle corruption within the Afghan security force, an issue that was flagged in the same July Inspector General report that identified more than 12,000 Afghan Ministry of Defense personnel that were “unaccounted for,” fearing some could be so-called “ghosts” who exist only on paper.

Trump too addressed the need for reforms by the Afghan government in his August 21 speech.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
Photo by Michael Vadon

“The American people expect to see real reforms, real progress, and real results. Our patience is not unlimited,” Trump said. “We will keep our eyes wide open.”

Reporters questioned both Nicholson and Llorens about how the US would force Pakistan to close Taliban sanctuaries in its territory. Trump was uncompromising in his demand that Pakistan close the safe havens that the US and Afghanistan have repeatedly accused them of allowing on their soil.

“For its part, Pakistan often gives safe haven to agents of chaos, violence and terror,” he said. “That will have to change, and that will change immediately.”

Nicholson said discussions with Pakistan would be held in private, adding “it has already started” without offering more details.

MIGHTY TACTICAL

This Barracuda helps make the good guys invisible

Camouflage is one of the things that we take for granted in military applications. But these days, hiding stuff has become a lot more complicated than it was in the past.


It used to be a matter of just using colors that matched the environment, for the most part — the goal was to break up the silhouette, making it harder for the enemy to know your guys are there.

But these days, you need more than the right color palette.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
Marines of the US 10th Army in camouflage battle dress storm out of a landing craft to establish a beachhead, March 31, 1945 on Okinawa, largest of the Ryukyu (Loochoo) Islands, 375 miles from Japan. Back then, the visible light spectrum was the major concern in hiding troops and vehicles. (Photo: U.S. Department of Defense)

One of the big reasons for that is the advancement of sensor technology in general. In the past, when the only sensors were cameras that operated in the visual light portion of the electromagnetic spectrum, you could get away with using the right colors to hide – or just break up the outline – of vehicles and other systems.

Today, ground-search radars, like those used on the Joint Surveillance and Target Acquisition Radar System, and infra-red sensors like the Sniper Advanced Targeting Pod, make the right color palette only part of the solution.

If you ignore the non-visible portion of the electronic spectrum, they will see you, fix your location, and you will be hit. Or worse, they find your supply dump and hit that. Then you are royally screwed.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
An MQ-9 Reaper remotely piloted aircraft performs aerial maneuvers over Creech Air Force Base, Nev., June 25, 2015. The MQ-9 Reaper is an armed, multi-mission, medium-altitude, long-endurance remotely piloted aircraft that is employed primarily as an intelligence-collection asset and secondarily against dynamic execution targets. (U.S. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Cory D. Payne)

According to handouts available at the 2017 Association of the United States Army conference in Washington, D.C., Swedish company Saab is offering a camouflage system known as “Barracuda” that not only handles those prying human eyes, but also the prying eyes of radar and infra-red sensors. This comes in three varieties. We’ll do a quick review.

The Ultra Lightweight Camouflage Net System, or ULCANS, is designed to be deployed quickly. It works on just about anything — from a towed howitzer like the M777, to a tank like the M1 Abrams.

For bigger things that need hiding, like a supply dump, one ULCANS can be linked with others to create a giant net.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
You don’t see what is under the Ultra Lightweight Camouflage Net System, or ULCANS. You’re not supposed to. (Photo from Saabusa.com)

But what about for vehicles? Well, there are two options. First, there is the Mobile Camouflage System. Vehicles need to move, and often that means stowing the nets before you move, and unstowing when they stop for the night. The Mobile Camouflage System allows a vehicle to move, and still stay reasonably hidden.

Whoever cooked that up did troops a solid.

The other vehicle option is the Mobile Break-Away System. This is intended more for the vehicles used by Special Operations Forces like Delta Force, SEALs, the Rangers… you get the idea. In essence, this camouflage hides a vehicle well, but the vehicle can bug out in seconds.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
The Mobile Break-Away System gives vehicles invisibility and the means to bug out quickly. (Photo from Saabusa.com)

In short, camouflage has advanced a lot. Now, the sensor systems will need to be a lot better before they find the boots on the ground.

Articles

Hillary Clinton claims she almost joined the Marine Corps

Is Hillary Clinton that person at the bar who claims they almost joined the military?


In 1994, the then-First Lady claimed she tried to join the Marines in 1975, but the Marine recruiter in Arkansas suggested she try the Army because she was too old for the Corps. She reiterated this story in a breakfast in New Hampshire while on the 2016 campaign trail recently.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan

“He looks at me and goes, ‘Um, how old are you?’ And I said, ‘Well I am 26, I will be 27,'” Clinton said. “And he goes ‘Well, that is kind of old for us.'”

“And then he says to me, and this is what gets me, ‘maybe the dogs will take you,’ meaning the Army.”

She meant “dogfaces.” In another version of the story, Clinton, then wearing thick glasses, said the recruiter included bad eyesight as a reason for being dismissed.

Maureen Dowd, a reporter for the New York Times, was as skeptical of Clinton’s claim as the world is now of Maureen Dowd. She noted Clinton’s status as an Ivy League, anti-establishment, anti-war, “up-and-coming legal star” would probably not make the Marines a real consideration for Clinton.

The Washington Post asked Marines who were Judge Advocate recruiters at the time if it would be possible the Marines would turn away a prime recruit with credentials like Hillary Rodham’s. The answer was a resounding no. Some lawyers in the Marines at the time “had coke bottle glasses” or “weighed 200 pounds.”

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan

Clinton’s friends at the time vouch for her story, saying that she was likely to press the military to see how far women could go and what kind of career access she would have.

Of course, the former First Lady’s almost-service certainly prepared her for the not sniper who didn’t shoot at her in Bosnia.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan

She could take some almost training from Donald Trump, who feels like he was in the military because he went to a military boarding school.

Clinton isn’t the only candidate with a fuzzy recollection of almost serving. GOP candidate Dr. Ben Carson recently admitted he was never offered  a “full scholarship” offer to West Point. Carson was found out when the world realized scholarships to West Point don’t exist and the dinner where Gen. William Westmoreland met Carson and would initiate the offer process didn’t happen because Westmoreland could not have been in Detroit as Carson claimed.

If the run for the White House doesn’t pan out, maybe Clinton and Carson can join the Almost-Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America to continue their almost service with Brian Williams.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan

(Featured image by Keith Kissel)

Articles

These are the slave soldiers that defeated the Mongols

The rulers of the Islamic world in the 1200s were not born into aristocracy or priesthood, as was the custom in Europe. They were an army of former slaves. Trained in combat and Sunni Islam from a young age, these “Mamluks” (from the Arabic for “property”) soon grew so vast in number that they wrested control of the Empire from the Abbasid Caliphs — one of very few times in history.


 

During the Crusades, it was Mamluks who met the Crusaders as they attempted to retake the Holy Land for Christendom. But the most important imprint the Mamluks have on history is a single battle that took place in modern-day Israel that meant the difference between centuries of rule and utter annihilation.

In the 13th Century, a wave of destruction flowed across Asia and into Europe. The Mongols, an amalgamation of far-east tribes and clans from the Mongolian Plateau, united their people, reorganized their armies, and began to expand their controlled territory.

 

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan

The Mongols began to expand under Genghis Khan, and that expansion continued long after his death. For over 100 years, the Mongol armies swept South and West, demanding immediate surrender and destroying and slaughtering those who didn’t submit.

They didn’t suffer a real defeat until more than 60 years into the conquest at the Battle of Ain Jalut, near the Sea of Galilee — at the hands of the Mamluks.

 

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
I don’t know what that weapon is but I want one.

The Mongols’ loss at Ain Jalut shattered the image of Mongol invincibility and slowed their advance so much they actually had to retreat from the Levant. The Mamluk victory kept the Mongols from taking Cairo and sweeping into Africa.

The Mamluks continued to rule the Islamic world for centuries, where they were subsumed by the emerging Ottoman Empire — though they remained influential in the Empire for centuries afterward, even fighting both Napoleon and U.S. Marines (but losing to both).

Watch more Elite Forces:

This is how piracy became totally legal during wartime

This is how Rome’s Praetorian Guard held so much power

This is why the rituals of the tattooed Maori Warriors live on

This is why Cossacks are Russia’s legendary fighting force

These are the slave soldiers that defeated the Mongols

4 awesome facts about Shaolin Kung Fu

MIGHTY HISTORY

The horrifying way Iran used kids to clear mines

The only good mines are one that are cleared — or better yet, never used in the first place. Today mines are generally seen as relics of bygone eras, deadly weapons that remain dangerous long after the war is fought. Forgotten minefields all over the world kill civilians by the score – more than 8,600 in 2016 alone. Many of those killed by mines are children.

Many who join armed forces around the world do so with the idea that they can keep their children and families – along with the children and families of their fellow countrymen – safe from the imminent dangers of impending war. When faced with an existential threat, countries will go to horrifying lengths to defend themselves. Apparently, using children to clear mines isn’t off-limits.

 

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
This isn’t World War I, it’s the 1980s. No one told Saddam or Khomeini.

Such was the case in the early 1980s, the nascent years of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Iran fought a brutal war against Iraq since 1980, when Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein smelled blood in the disorganized post-Revolution Iran and attempted to seize its access to the Persian Gulf by force.

The Iran-Iraq War was particularly brutal, even as far as warfare in the Middle East is concerned. The war was defined by eight years of stalemates and failed offensives, indiscriminate ballistic missile attacks — often using chemical weapons — and insane asymmetrical warfare.

Insane symmetrical warfare is a very clean term for the tactics Iran used to level the playing field of the Western-backed, technologically superior Iraqis. Iran recently purged its professional military of those loyal to the deposed Shah and was by no means ready to fight a war with a series of Revolutionary militias. The Ayatollah Khomeini was no military commander. He saw a success in war in terms of casualties inflicted on the enemy versus the number his forces took, a World War I-era approach to warfare.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
They also dug trenches. A lot of trenches.

 

To Khomeini, as long as the math worked and his fighters were sufficiently motivated by religious fanaticism and revolutionary spirit, he could push all the way to Baghdad. So he enlisted large numbers of civilians with little or no military training to execute his plans. This entrenched incompetence included the field command leadership who most often sent men to die in droves using human wave attacks, another World War I relic. The horror doesn’t stop there.

The New York Times’ Terence Smith, writing about Iran in 1984, described the use of child soldiers by Iran to clear minefields. Young boys, aged 12-17 years, wore red headbands with the words ‘Sar Allah’ in Farsi (Warriors of God) and small metal keys that the Ayatollah declared were their tickets to Paradise if they were martyred in their mission. Many were sent into battle against Iraqi tanks without any protection and bound by ropes to prevent desertion.

They were the first wave, making the way for Iranian tanks by clearing barbed wire and minefields with their bodies.

 

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
Iranian child soldiers marching off to fight Iraq in the Iran-Iraq War.

 

These children weren’t the only human wave attackers, but they certainly were the most notable – and effective. In the same interview, Smith notes the Iranian commanders are unapologetic. Iraq has many tanks and a lot of support. Iran has very few. What Iran had is exactly what the Ayatollah predicted, a large population filled with religious fervor.

The total number of casualties inflicted on Iran and Iraq throughout the war isn’t clearly known, but what is known is a number ranging anywhere between 500,000 to one million killed and wounded in the eight-year slugfest.

Articles

North Korean threats affect Marine relocation

A plan to relocate 4,000 U.S. Marines from Okinawa, Japan, to Guam is under review because of North Korean threats.


U.S. Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Robert Neller told the Senate Appropriations Committee May 24 a realignment plan for the military could be delayed, Kyodo News reported.

“The capabilities of our adversaries have changed the dynamic there,” Neller said, referring to North Korea.

Tokyo did not confirm Neller’s statement.

Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga told reporters May 25 that the “relocation to Guam remains unchanged and I’m not aware of anything otherwise.”

Pyongyang most recently launched a midrange ballistic missile on May 21, and claimed the projectile was a solid-fuel missile that can swiftly target South Korea’s missile defense system KAMD, as well as U.S. military bases in Japan and the Pacific.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
The test-fire of Pukguksong-2. This photo was released by North Korea’s Korean Central News Agency on February 13. (KCNA/Handout)

The original plan was to move 4,000 Marines to Guam and another 5,000 Marines to Hawaii by 2022.

Neller also said he and Commander of the U.S. Pacific Command Harry Harris have reviewed and “looked at different options for where they might at least temporarily base aircraft because of the evolving threat.”

U.S. military experts and Japanese government officials are looking into relocation alternatives in Hawaii or Darwin, Australia, if transferring Marines to Guam presents challenges.

Maintaining forces in Guam, Tinian and other nearby islands must first take the environment into account, one Marine officer said, according to Japanese press reports.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
The launch of satellite-carrying Unha rockets is watched closely, since it’s the same delivery system as North Korea’s Taepodong-2 ballistic missile, which was tested successfully in December 2012 and January 2016. (Photo: Reuters/KNCA)

A separate decision to relocate a U.S. military base within Okinawa has been met with strong local opposition.

“They should not make Okinawa shoulder the burden of hosting [U.S.] bases anymore,” one protester said as a new base was being built in the Henoko area of the island in April.

The relocation within Okinawa has been a work in progress since 1996, and the United States and Japan had agreed a relocation facility in the Henoko area would be the “only solution” to problems with the current U.S. Air Station Futenma.

Articles

These US Marines are going back to their old battlefields in Afghanistan

In Afghanistan’s turbulent Helmand province, US Marines are rekindling old relationships and identifying weaknesses in the Afghan forces that the Trump administration hopes to address with a new strategy and the targeted infusion of several thousand American forces.


Returning to Afghanistan’s south after five years, Marine Brig. Gen. Roger Turner already knows where he could use some additional US troops. And while he agrees that the fight against the Taliban in Helmand is at a difficult stalemate, he said he is seeing improvements in the local forces as his Marines settle into their roles advising the Afghan National Army’s 215th Corps.

Turner’s report on the fight in Helmand will be part of a broader assessment that Gen. Joseph Dunford will collect this week from his senior military commanders in Afghanistan.

Dunford landed in Kabul Monday with a mission to pull together the final elements of a military strategy that will include sending nearly 4,000 more U.S. troops into the country. He will be meeting with Afghan officials as well as US and coalition military leaders and troops.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
Marine Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, meets with Afghan Air Force Brig. Gen. Eng A. Shafi. DoD Photo by Navy Petty Officer 2nd Class Dominique A. Pineiro.

The expected deployment of more Americans will be specifically molded to bolster the Afghan forces in critical areas so they can eventually take greater control over the security of their own nation.

The Taliban have slowly resurged, following the decision to end the combat role of US and international forces at the end of 2014. The NATO coalition switched to a support and advisory role, while the US has also focused on counter-terrorism missions.

Recognizing the continued Taliban threat and the growing Islamic State presence in the county, the Obama administration slowed its plan to withdraw all U.S. forces from Afghanistan by the end of last year. There are now about 8,400 there.

But commanders have complained that the sharp drawdown hurt their ability to adequately train and advise the Afghans while also increasing the counter-terror fight. As a result, the Trump administration is completing a new military, diplomatic, and economic strategy for the war, and is poised to send the additional US troops, likely bolstered by some added international forces.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
Defense Secretary Jim Mattis. Photo: USMC

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis will be in Brussels later this week and is expected to talk with allies about their ongoing support for the war.

While Turner said he has already seen improvements in the Afghan’s 215th Corps, he said adding more advisers would allow him to pinpoint problems at the lower command levels, including more brigades.

“The level and number of advisers you have really gives you the ability to view the chain on all the functional areas. The more areas you can see — you can have a greater impact on the overall capability of the force,” he told the Associated Press in an interview from Helmand Province. “If we had more capacity in the force we would be able to address more problems, faster.”

He said that although the Afghan forces have improved their ability to fight, they still need help at some of the key underpinnings of a combat force, such as getting spare parts to troops with broken equipment.

The seemingly simple task of efficiently ordering and receiving parts — something American forces do routinely — requires a working supply chain from the warehouse to the unit on the battlefield.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
Kentucky Guardsmen train Afghans. DoD Photo by Lt.j.g. Bryan Mitchell

And Turner said that’s an issue that could be improved with additional advisers.

Other improvements, he said, include increasing the size of Afghanistan’s special operations forces and building the capacity and capabilities of its nascent air force.

The Afghan ground forces in Helmand, he said, have been able to launch offensive operations against the Taliban, including a recent battle in Marjah.

“I don’t think last year they could have taken the fight to Marjah like they just did,” he said. “They’re in a much better position that they were a year ago.”

But they are facing a resilient Taliban, whose fighters are newly financed, now that the poppy harvest is over.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan
Marines in Helmand province, Afghanistan. | US Marine Corps photo by Sgt. Mark Fayloga

“Once they draw their finances, they start operations,” said Turner. “What we’ve seen so far since the end of May, when they made that transition, is a steady grind of activity across a number of places in the province.”

What has helped a lot, Turner said, is his Marines’ ability to renew old relationships with Afghan tribal elders, provincial ministers, and military commanders they worked with six or seven years ago.

Battalion officers they knew then are now commanders, and many government leaders are still in place.

“We obviously have a long commitment here in Helmand. It’s been good for the Marines to come back here,” he said. “This is a really meaningful mission. I think people realize that we don’t want to get into a situation where the kinds of pre-9/11 conditions exist again.”

MIGHTY HISTORY

3 historic wars that are still technically alive today

International diplomacy is a sort of constantly evolving, tangled mess. So much so that, in some cases, we could technically still be at war with a country that we’re now allied with. For instance, America never ratified the treaty that ended World War I, but invading Germany to finally settle the century-old grudge match would get fairly complicated since it’s now a NATO member. Here are three wars that we never bothered to wrap up on paper (but please don’t try to go fight in them):


America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan

U.S. Army infantrymen fight during the Meuse-Argonne Offensive of World War I.

(U.S. Army)

America never agreed to the final terms of World War I

Yup, we’ll just go ahead and knock out this one that we hinted at in the intro. America signed, but never ratified, the Treaty of Versailles that ended World War I.

Oddly enough, though, this wasn’t because of issues with the lay of the land in Europe as the war closed, or even land claims or military restrictions around the world. The actual issue was that American President Woodrow Wilson wanted to establish the League of Nations, the precursor to the United Nations, and he used the treaty to do it.

But isolationists in Congress didn’t want America to join the league, and so they shot down all attempts to ratify the treaty at home. And America only officially adopts treaties when ratified, not signed, so America never actually agreed to the final terms of World War I.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan

Gurkha troops march to escort Japanese prisoners of war at the end of World War II in 1945.

(Imperial War Museums)

Japan and China never made peace after World War II

There are a number of still-simmering tensions between combatants from World War II, including the Kuril Islands Dispute between Russia and Japan.

(This author even once made the error of saying that Russia and Japan were still at war, which is only sort of right. While the two countries never agreed to a treaty ending the conflict, they did agree to a Joint Declaration in 1956 that had a similar effect. Essentially, it said they couldn’t yet agree to a treaty, but they were no longer fighting the war.)

But there was an Allied country that never reached peace with Japan: China. And China arguably suffered the worst under Japanese aggression. But, because of the civil war in China at the time, there were two rival governments claiming to represent China, and no one could agree on which government to invite. So China didn’t take part in the peace process at all.

So China and Japan never technically ended their hostilities, and Japan’s almost-peace with Russia is not quite finished either.

America bought this British bomber in the 1950s and used it over Afghanistan

Marine Corps Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, visits the Demilitarized Zone on the Korean Peninsula in 2015.

(Navy Petty Officer 2nd Class Dominique A. Pineiro)

The Koreas are, famously, still at war.

The ongoing state of conflict on the Korean Peninsula is probably the most famous issue on this list. The Korean War sort of ended on July 27, 1953, when the United Nations and the Delegation of the Korean People’s Army and the Chinese People’s Volunteers signed the Korean Armistice Agreement which instituted a truce between North and South Korea.

But, importantly, no national government agreed to the armistice or the truce. The militaries involved essentially agreed to stop killing each other, but the larger governments never came together to hash out the real peace. And this is a problem since the two countries have a much more tense relationship than any other group on this list.

America and Germany are not suddenly going to revert back to 1918 and start killing each other again. But South and North Koreans at the border still sometimes shoot at one another, and people have died in border clashes.

Do Not Sell My Personal Information