Here's what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria - We Are The Mighty
Articles

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria

In a bold-faced power move, Russia just moved additional missile defense batteries to Syria and issued a thinly veiled threat that it would shoot down any US or coalition aircraft that tried to bomb Syrian regime targets without warning.


This step, just days after US and Russian bilateral negotiations for a ceasefire fell through, shows the depth of Russia’s commitment to Syrian President Assad, who has shown a ferocious willingness to use chemical and banned weapons against his own people since the war started in 2011.

Also read: Here’s who would win if Russia, China, and America went to war right now

But the Russian S-300 and S-400 missile defense batteries pose a serious question about US and coalition military capabilities versus the Russians.

Gen. Igor Konashenkov, a Russian Defense Ministry spokesman, went as far as to say that “all the illusions of amateurs about the existence of ‘invisible’ jets will face a disappointing reality,” referring to the US’s fifth generation stealth aircraft, the F-22 and F-35.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
Russia’s S-400 missile defense battery and the US’s F-22 Raptor. | Dragan Radovanovic

While the US fields the greatest Air Force in the world, the capabilities of Russia’s S-300 and S-400 air defense systems in Syria represent a very real challenge to the US’s ability to operate in those zones without being shot down.

Dr. Igor Sutyagin of the Royal United Services Institute, an expert on Russian missile defense systems and strategic armaments, told Business Insider that in this case at least, Russia is correct.

“Konashenkov is absolutely right – ‘stealth’ as ‘invisibility’ is just amateurs’ invention, not a technical term.”

However, according to Sutyagin, some of the Russian capabilities also fall in the category of speculation rather than hard capability.

For instance, as advanced as Russian surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems are, and they are really quite advanced, they still face very real limitations.

Russian “air defense systems are designed to intercept high flying targets at a maximum range of  about 250 miles,” said Sutyagin. While this does pose a threat to US and coalition aircraft operating normally in the region, the missile defense can be outfoxed, as they less optimal against low flying planes or missiles.

Even though the Russian systems have great radar range and capabilities, in the real world obstacles abound, and that makes it very hard to get a clear picture of real world air spaces.

The Russian missile defense systems sit on trucks, ready to be positioned wherever needed in a specific region. Some reports indicate that Russian crews can get the missile battery up and running within 5 minutes of parking the truck. Additionally, the mobile missile batteries present an ever changing target, and a puzzle that incoming aircraft must solve anew each time they enter the air space.

But they battery is still just a truck on the ground. Parking it on a hilltop makes it visible. Parking it in a valley severely limits the range due to natural obstacles. So just as the US fantasy of “invisible jets” doesn’t completely pan out when the rubber hits the road, neither does the Russian fantasy of a 250 mile air defense zone.

Indeed to flesh out this idea of the Russians, they’d need to operate Airborne Warning and Control Systems (AWACs), or planes that carry large radars and can survey battle spaces free from obstructions on the ground, which Sutyagin says Moscow does not currently have in Syria.

But who would come out on top?

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
Land-based S-300 surface-to-air missile launchers | Creative Commons photo

According to Sutyagin, stealth US planes like the B-2, F-22, and F-35 could knock out Russian SAM sites in Syria, but not without a fight.

“Yeah they can do it. In theory they can do it because they will be launching stand off weapons,” said Sutyagin, referring to long range missiles as “standoff weapons.”

“The tactics of these low visibility planes as they were designed originally was to use the fact that detection range was decreased so you create some gaps in radar range and then you approach through gap and launch standoff weapons,” said Sutyagin.

At this point, Russia’s “defenses will inevitably detect it, but maybe too late,” said Sutyagin, who emphasized that firing a missile doesn’t always mean a hit, and detecting a missile doesn’t always mean an intercept.

“There is no 100% reliability, but still it will be much more difficult” for Russian SAM sites to intercept missiles fired from US stealth aircraft that can get up close and personal and locate the site first.  “If the standoff weapon is also low visibility,” the chances only improve, according to Sutyagin.

Additionally, Russian SAM sites in Syria have a limited magazine capacity.

“One air defense battalion with an S-300 has 32 missiles. They will fire these against 16 targets (maybe against cruise missiles they would fire a one-to-one ratio) but to prevent the target from evading you always launch two… but what if there are 50 targets?”

This limitation explains why Russia deployed the S-300 battery to Syria when they already have the more advanced S-400 stationed there.

According to Sutyagin, it takes “40-50 minutes to reload launchers.” The SAM sites are then unarmed, with their positions exposed and they’re “not well prepared to meet another threat.”

What it comes down to

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
US Air Force photo

So the US could overwhelm Russian defenses. Or Russia could shoot down US fifth-generation aircraft over Syria. What it comes down to, according to Sutyagin, is training.

Sutyagin says that overall, the situation is “very complicated” and that there is “no easy solution to suppress air defense, but there are opportunities.”

Each combat scenario brings unique challenges and opportunities that may benefit one side or another. Generally, there is reason to believe that the pilots of US fifth-generation aircraft are among the best in the world, and that they would have the edge in almost every situation.

Indeed, Sutyagin says that the US’s airborne capabilities put them in a better situation than the US was in during Vietnam, when Russian SAM sites shot down many US planes.

Though the details of the how US F-22 Raptor pilots would engage an enemy SAM site are classified, a pilot with the program recently told National Interest’s Dave Majumdar that the F-22 pilots are confident they could prevail.

But jets and SAM sites fight battles on air, over seas, and on land — not on paper.

“If American pilots will be not experienced in their fifth-gens, they will be shot down. If they are brilliant, operationally, tactically brilliant, they will defeat them,” concluded Sutyagin.

MIGHTY TACTICAL

US Marine Corps’ new sniper rifle is now fully operational

Recon Marines and scout snipers now have a new weapon in their arsenal.

The Mk13 Mod 7 Long Range Sniper Rifle is a bolt-action, precision-firing rifle that offers more accuracy and range than similar weapons of yesteryear. The system partially replaces the M40A6 — the legacy system — and gives Marines increased lethality.

In the second quarter of fiscal year 2019, the Mk13 reached full operational capability.

“This weapon better prepares us to take the fight to any adversary in any clime and place.”

The Mk13 delivers a larger bullet at greater distances than the legacy sniper rifle. The additional velocity offered by the Mk13 will be advantageous on the battlefield, said Berger.


“When shooting the Mk13, the bullet remains stable for much longer,” said Maj. Mike Brisker, MCSC’s weapons team lead for Infantry Weapons. “The weapon gives you enough extra initial velocity that it stays supersonic for a much longer distance than the M40A6.”

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria

U.S. Marines with Bravo Company, 3rd Reconnaissance Battalion, 3rd Marine Division, fire the MK13 Sniper Rifle.

(U.S. Marine Corps photo by Lance Cpl. Joshua Sechser)

Additionally, the rifle includes the M571, an enhanced day optic that provides greater magnification range and an improved reticle. The new optic enables Marines to positively identify enemies at greater distances and creates a larger buffer between the warfighter and adversaries.

Mk13 a ‘positive step forward’

The M40A6 has served the warfighter well for many years. However, the Corps searched for ways to enhance their sniper capability after identifying a materiel capability gap in its sniper rifles, said Brisker. He said Marines will primarily use the Mk13 during deployments, while the M40A6 will serve as a training rifle for snipers.

“We are looking to conserve the barrel life of the Mk13 Mod 7 and facilitate training aboard all installations,” said Berger.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria

Sgt. Randy Robles, Quantico Scout Sniper School instructor and Marine Corps Systems Command liaison, demonstrates the Mk13 Mod 7 Sniper Rifle during training aboard Marine Corps Base Quantico, Virginia.

(U.S. Marine Corps photo by Kristen Murphy)

Since its initial fielding to I Marine Expeditionary Force in 2018, the Mk13 has been popular among Marines. The 3rd Battalion, 5th Marines Scout Sniper platoon used the weapon for more than a year in support of the 2025 Sea Dragon Exercise. Many users emphasize how the weapon significantly improves their precision firing capability, said Berger.

“At our new equipment trainings, the resounding feedback from the scout snipers was that this rifle is a positive step forward in the realm of precision-fire weapons,” said Berger. “Overall, there has been positive feedback from the fleet.”

Both Berger and Brisker expressed encouragement for the Mk13 after the weapon reached FOC. They believe the rifle will give the warfighter an additional option, increase lethality and enhance the ability to execute missions on the battlefield.

“The fact that we managed to get a gun of this capability out to our sniper teams is really positive,” said Brisker. “We’re looking forward to doing even more in the future.”

This article originally appeared on Marines. Follow @USMC on Twitter.

MIGHTY CULTURE

7 things only siblings of military personnel know

We learn from our siblings. We watch them. We copy them. We accidentally erase the save on their Pokèmon game when we’re 10 years old and they still, to this day, think the game file was “probably ruined from leaving it in the sun too long.”

Maybe siblings of construction workers know why it takes so long to fill in city potholes. Maybe siblings of newscasters know why they all talk in that really creepy rhythm. Maybe siblings of chess masters know the actual names of the “horsey” or the “castle” or the “boob-shaped thingie.”

Then, there are some things that all siblings of military personnel know…


Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria

​​​​​Actually knowing how to mail a letter

On base, deployed, or on a ship — we send our love in envelopes. Now look to your left. Look to your right. Neither of those people can properly address an envelope without Google… unless they are both over the age of 70, in which case, you are 100% at a community center playing bingo and should pay better attention to that.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria

(Photo by Lt. Col. John Hall/173rd Airborne Brigade)

You do not need to set out a sleeping bag… or blankets… or anything at all

You know how military personnel sleep after coming home. They sleep like astronauts without gravity. They don’t need blankets or pillows. Hell, they barely need a floor.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria

(Xinhua/Sipa USA/Newscom)

The difference between Memorial Day and Veterans Day

You celebrate the men and women throughout time who have served our country in any capacity on Veterans Day. But you also know that some men and women made the ultimate sacrifice for their loved ones, and they’ve got a day, too.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria

The many functions of a styrofoam cup

It turns out this can do much more than hold an .89 cent future-diarrhea-slushie from the gas station. Apparently, they can also: hold dip spit, sunflower seeds, and make a cell phone speaker louder…. Alright, it’s mostly for dip spit.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria

Why they might not tell a drunk dude at the bar that they served

Besides blabbering two inches away from your face for 45 uninterrupted minutes about their real estate failures and how quick their fastball was in high school, drunk dudes at bars can pose a lot of really uncomfortable and, frankly, dumbass questions. Much like college baseball scouts did to them in the 1980s — it’s best to ignore them.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria

Why you should willingly answer 3 a.m. calls from some random, 999-999-9999 number

Your civilian homies probably let anything outside their immediate area code go straight to voicemail. If your brother or sister is on deployment, though, you know you can get some calls at any hour of the night from some weird numbers. It’s worth it to stomach the pleas for help from a phony Nigerian prince if it means every 5th one is the resolute voice of your sibling, hundreds of miles away, asking what the new J. Cole album sounds like.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria

You have traded your soul for a spaghetti MRE

Once your lips have tasted the eternal glory of it, there can be no going back. Chef Boyardee will taste like blasphemy on the tongue. My soul is currently screaming silently from a jar in the pocket of my brother’s BDUs. I traded it long ago, and it was worth every dehydrated, calorie-packed ounce.

Articles

6 ridiculous things POGs do at the range

Yes, #notallPOGs and all that. But seriously Persons Other than Grunts, the range rules aren’t that crazy. First, learn to safely handle your weapon. Second, learn to fire your weapon. And third, get off the range without embarrassing yourself.


Unfortunately, these 6 things manage to pop up every time POGs go to the range en masse:

1. Targets that look like they were hit with birdshot

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
Photo: U.S Army W.T.F! moments Facebook

“Are you changing your sight picture?”

“No, sergeant.”

“Shut up. Yes, you are.”

2. Truly baffling weapons malfunctions

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
When your soldier declares a weapons malfunction but his magazine is just empty.

The Army’s acronym for fixing weapon problems, O-SPORTS, is only effective against actual weapons malfunctions. It does little for operators who load their magazines upside down or don’t realize they can run out of ammunition.

3. So. many. safety. violations.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
GIF: YouTube/Gigan2004

See how this guy lowers his weapon when some schoolchildren move in front of him? And he doesn’t have to be told to not point his weapon at something he doesn’t want to shoot? Yeah, it’s not very complicated, POGs. All weapons should be pointed up and downrange when they’re not being aimed at targets. Stop flagging each other on the range.

4. MRE Alternatives

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria

When infantry goes to the field, they bring MREs and possibly even sleeping systems and tents to stay out there for a few days. Some POGs will at least bring MREs while others … others make arrangements with a gut truck or ice cream van.

5. “Easter basket” helmets and other uniform violations

 

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
Yeah, you better buckle that chin strap, John Wayne. Photo: US Army Sgt. 1st Class Michel Sauret

Helmet chin straps dangling like the soldier is in a John Wayne movie, troops carrying helmets by the chin strap like it’s an Easter Basket, mirrored sunglasses, armor lacking rank insignia or name tapes, the potentially catastrophic uniform violations are everywhere. It’s all a sergeant major’s nightmare.

6. “Clean” weapons that will never be accepted by an armorer

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
Photo: US Army Pfc. Nathaniel Smith

POGs will always declare their weapon clean after 30 minutes and then be surprised when the armorer turns them away to re-clean before they can turn in. Have you cleaned the star chamber with pipe cleaners and cotton swabs until you went mildly crazy? Then it’s not clean yet.

Articles

This is what a joint US Marine-Japanese training exercise looks like

Military planners spend years putting training exercises together and the political ramifications can be steep, such as with the annual Foal Eagle exercise on the Korean Peninsula. North Korea has a history of shelling South Korean islands and firing missiles into the Sea of Japan whenever the U.S. and South Korea come together to train. Calling them “maneuvers” or “war games” is an oversimplification. The long-term consequences could be life or death.


Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
Japanese soldiers with the Japan Ground Self-Defense Force move the F470 Combat Rubber Raiding Craft off the beach during a beach raid as part of training for Exercise Iron Fist 2016, at Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, Calif. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Lance Cpl. Ryan Kierkegaard, 1st Marine Division Combat Camera)

There are times the U.S. will even conduct joint training operations with rivals and allies, such as the annual Cobra Gold exercise in Thailand, where Chinese forces were allowed to join in the humanitarian part.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
Marines with 1st Battalion, 4th Marines, 1st Marine Division, post a security perimeter and provide suppressive fire during the Amphibious Landing Exercise (PHIBLEX) for Exercise Iron Fist 2016 aboard Camp Pendleton, Calif. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Xzavior T. McNeal)

2o16 marked the tenth year of Iron Fist, an exercise where soldiers of the Japanese Ground Self-Defense Force trained with U.S. Marines from the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) to refine their amphibious landing abilities. The 11th MEU trained with the Japanese for five weeks at Camp Pendleton and Twentynine Palms, California. Their focus was on small unit combat and amphibious landings.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
Western Army Infantry Regiment, Japan Ground Self-Defense Force, soldiers conduct a firing mission during the Supporting Arms Coordinating Center Exercise (SACCEX) for Iron Fist 2016 aboard San Clemente Island, Calif. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Xzavior T. McNeal)

The above video of the Marine-Japanese training exercise was produced by Gunnery Sgt. Robert Brown of the 11th MEU. It’s a compilation of the kinds of maneuvers our Marines and allied troops make during war games.

MIGHTY TRENDING

Army wants to see ‘explosive power’ in new physical fitness test

The general overseeing fitness for the U.S. Army hopes to see the proposed Army Combat Readiness Test approved next spring and, in time, become the service’s standard physical fitness test of record that all soldiers must pass.


The service is in the middle of the Army Combat Readiness Test, or ACRT, pilot, exposing soldiers to the six-event fitness test designed to better prepare them for the rigors of combat than the current three-event Army Physical Fitness Test, or APFT.

The ACRT was developed, at the request of Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley, to better prepare soldiers for the physical challenges of the service’s Warrior Tasks and Battle Drills — the list of key skills all soldiers are taught to survive in combat.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria

“As we look at physical fitness, we now know in order to be physically fit in support of the Warrior Tasks and Battle Drills — what we know we need to do for combat readiness — we have to be physically fit across five fitness domains,” said Maj. Gen. Malcolm Frost, who oversees the ARCT as commanding general of the U.S. Army Center of Initial Military Training.

Only two of those domains — cardiovascular endurance and muscular endurance — are supported by the current APFT, which consist of push-ups, sit-ups and a two-mile run, Frost said.

“There are three domains of physical fitness that are not addressed by that test but are nonetheless necessary … and those are muscular strength, explosive power, and speed and agility,” he said.

‘We Aren’t Where We Want to Be’

“We have world-class equipment … but do we have world-class soldiers that are world-class athletes at world-class level fitness? The answer is probably not one that we would want, meaning if you look at a lot of indicators from an individual physical readiness fitness standpoint, we aren’t where we want to be,” Frost said.

In 2016, the Army had 43,000 soldiers who were non-deployable, he said, adding that in fiscal terms, that equates to a loss of about $3 billion.

“Another staggering figure,” Frost said, is that about 78,000 soldiers were above a body-mass index of 30 percent.

“Musculoskeletal injuries about 500,000 a year; 10 million limited-duty days per year — that’s nearly $1 billion,” Frost said.

“To put it in fiscal terms is fine, but more importantly it is the lack of readiness due to some sort of physical fitness or readiness aspect — whether it’s injury, whether it’s being overweight or whether it is being non-deployable for a medical reason,” he said.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
Sgt. Jared Bruce, a combat engineer from the 36th Engineer Brigade, flips a tire as part of the Soldier Readiness Test during the 2017 Forces Command Best Warrior Competition at Fort Bragg, N.C., Aug. 20. | U.S. Army photo by Spc. Hubert D. Delany III

The ACRT is made up of six events:

Strength Deadlift:

This muscular strength test mimics movements required to safely and effectively lift heavy loads from the ground, then jump, bound and tolerate landing. The exercise is a strong predictor of a soldier’s ability to lift and carry a casualty on a litter and to lift and move personnel and equipment.

Standing Power Throw:

Soldiers toss a 10-pound ball backward as far as possible to test muscular explosive power that may be needed to lift themselves or a fellow soldier over an obstacle or to move rapidly across uneven terrain.

T-Push-Up:

In this event, soldiers start in the prone position and do a traditional push-up but, when at the down position, they move their arms outward and then back in to do another push-up. It is a test of soldier’s ability to push an opponent away during man-to-man contact, push a vehicle when it is stuck, and push up from cover or off the ground during evade and maneuver.

Sprint/Drag/Carry:

As they dash 25 meters five times up and down a lane, soldiers will perform sprints, drag a sled weighing 90 pounds, and then hand-carry two 40-pound kettle bell weights. This can simulate pulling a battle buddy out of harm’s way, moving quickly to take cover, or carrying ammunition to a fighting position or vehicle.

Leg Tuck:

Similar to a pull-up, soldiers lift their legs up and down to touch their knees or thighs to their elbows as many times as they can. This exercise strengthens the core muscles since it doubles the amount of force required compared to a traditional sit-up.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
Sgt. Michael Smith, a multichannel transmission systems operator from the 58th Signal Company, 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault), drags a simulated casualty as part of the Soldier Readiness Test during the 2017 Forces Command Best Warrior Competition at Fort Bragg, N.C., Aug. 20 | U.S. Army photo by Spc. Hubert D. Delany III

Two-Mile Run:

This is the same running event as on the current APFT. In the ACRT, run scores are expected to be a bit slower due to all the other strenuous activity.

Part of the ACRT pilot, which is expected to continue into 2018, is working out how leaders will administer the six-event tests.

“Part of the challenge is if we are going to do six events, there is a scope and scale challenge to this — you can’t take a week to test a battalion,” Frost said. “You have got to be able to move a company through at the same pace you move a company through to do the APFT.”

There is also the challenge of figuring out the correct sequence to the events, he said.

“We have been able to test 50 soldiers in 75 minutes using 10 lanes, so this is doable; it’s executable with the right equipment,” Frost said.

The plan, he said, is to present the data collected so far in the pilot to Milley “in the next couple of months” and hopefully get a decision to move forward.

If approved, program officials will finalize the test protocol and other details before going back to Milley sometime next spring for final approval to start rolling the ACRT out in 2019 so soldiers can start training for it, Frost said.

“There has got to be a transition period,” Frost said. “You have to give them time to ramp up to it.”

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
Noncommissioned officers and Soldiers take a break to recover after completing the Soldier Readiness Test during the 2017 Forces Command Best Warrior Competition at Fort Bragg, N.C., Aug. 20. | U.S. Army photo by Spc Liem Huynh

Soldier Performance Training Centers

As a simultaneous effort, he said, the Army will launch a pilot program next year to develop “soldier performance training centers,” which feature the right equipment and resources to help soldiers prepare for the ACRT.

The plan is to put these centers in gyms at three installations and staff them with experts such as trainers, physical therapists and nutrition counselors. Eventually, centers would be established all over the Army, Frost said.

The centers will also need equipment for soldiers to train for the ACRT — pull-up bars, sleds for dragging weight, deadlift bars, weights and medicine balls.

A battalion set of this equipment to create 10 test lanes retails for about $12,000, but the Army will likely be able to get equipment for less, Frost said.

“If we buy this at scale, it will be much, much, much less, and a lot of this equipment is already out there so we have to kind of inventory what we have and then figure out what the need is,” he said.

“And that doesn’t mean every battalion is going to get it,” Frost said. “You may have a brigade set and every battalion is not going to take the ACRT on the same day, so there are a lot of things we can look at.”

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
Cpl. Mark Combs, an explosive ordnance disposal specialist from 52nd Ordnance Group, participates in the obstacle avoidance challenge as part of the Soldier Readiness Test during the 2017 Forces Command Best Warrior Competition at Fort Bragg, N.C., Aug. 20. | U.S. Army photo by Spc Liem Huynh

Transition Period

But there has to be a transition period before the ACRT can replace the APFT as the test of record, Frost said.

“Whether it is one year or two years, you train on one test — the other test is a test of record; maybe there is a transition period where both of them can be a test of record,” he said. “And eventually, you fade the APFT out — kind of like you did the gray PT uniform — and then the ACRT is the enduring test of record.”

There also has to be time for the Army to figure out the policy, legal and administrative factors involved with instituting a new test of record since there will be punitive and administrative measures that occur for soldiers who are not able to pass it.

“We are going to need feedback from the field, but my gut tells me before it becomes the test of record, it’s probably two years — so one year to train for it. Another year, maybe it could be a test of record maybe as an option with the APFT,” Frost said. “Then at the end of two years, the APFT is faded away, and the ACRT is the only test of record.”

MIGHTY TRENDING

One of the last Navajo code talkers has died

A Navajo code talker who used the Navajo language to outsmart the Japanese in World War II has died in New Mexico, Navajo Nation officials said.


David Patterson Sr. died October 8 in Rio Rancho at age 94 from pneumonia and complications from subdural hematoma.

Although Patterson didn’t talk much about his service, one of his sons said his father was proud of being a Navajo Code Talker.

“He attended as many Code Talker events as he could,” Pat Patterson said. “It was only when his health started to decline that he didn’t attend as many.”

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
The 18th Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps, Ronald L. Green, attends a celebration of the National Navajo Code Talkers Day in Window Rock, AZ., Aug 14, 2016. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Sgt. Melissa Marnell, Office of the Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps/Released)

Patterson served in the Marine Corps from 1943 to 1945 and was the recipient of the Congressional Silver Medal in 2001.

After his military service, Patterson became a social worker and worked for the tribe’s Division of Social Services until retiring in 1987.

He raised his family in Oklahoma, California and Shiprock, New Mexico, and is survived by six children.

Pat Patterson told the Farmington Daily-Times that his father moved to Rio Rancho in 2012 to live with his youngest son.

Funeral services are pending and will be held at Christ The King Catholic Church in Shiprock, New Mexico.

Patterson will be buried on the military side of the Shiprock Cemetery.

MIGHTY TRENDING

Air Force warns that space war is a very real possibility

Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson spoke about the importance of modernization and innovation in space during a Center for Strategic and International Studies forum in Washington, D.C., Oct. 5, 2017.


“Our mission is to organize, train and equip air and space forces,” said Wilson. “We are the ones, since 1954, who are responsible for everything from 100 feet below the earth in missile silos all the way up to the stars…that’s our responsibility and we own it.”

The Air Force faces significant challenges in space because America’s adversaries know how important space is to the U.S., Wilson said.

She added the Air Force is responsible for providing the world’s first utility, which is the GPS system. This global system which the U.S. military uses is the same system that industry relies on. Whether it’s the local ATM or the stock exchange, the GPS is at the center, Wilson said.

“A huge part of our economy is dependent on what’s done in space,” she said.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
Photo: US Air Force Staff Sgt. Ryan Crane

The Air Force must deter a conflict in space, and has an obligation to be prepared to fight and win if deterrence fails.

To that end, the 2018 presidential budget proposed a 20 percent increase for space, which Wilson said is the next frontier of global innovation. The Air Force remains committed to gaining and maintaining space superiority across the spectrum of conflict in defense of the nation, she added.

“We need to normalize space from a national security perspective,” said Wilson. “We have to have all of our officers who are wearing blue uniforms more knowledgeable about space capabilities and how it connects to the other domains.”

Wilson added in the future, space will no longer be a benign environment, soon it will be a common domain for human endeavor. Accessibility to space is growing rapidly as launch technology evolves, the cost of launches will drop from thousands of dollars per pound of fuel to hundreds, the technology will get faster and smaller, and more nation-states and individuals will have greater access to space.

“Our most recent launch out of Cape Canaveral was a Space X rocket that launched, and then recovered using GPS guidance technology back on the pad from which that stage launched,” said Wilson. “That wasn’t possible 10 years ago, but it’s being done by American innovation. It’s an exciting time to be part of this enterprise.”

MIGHTY TRENDING

The Kremlin demands an explanation of Trump’s treaty rejection

The U.S. withdrawal from a landmark 1987 nuclear arms treaty could make the world “more dangerous” and force Moscow to take steps to restore the balance of power, senior Russian officials said as U.S. national security adviser John Bolton held talks on the issue in Moscow.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov issued words of warning on Oct. 22, 2018, two days after President Donald Trump declared that the United States would withdraw from the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty.


European allies of the United States also expressed concern, and the European Union’s executive commission urged Washington and Moscow to negotiate to “preserve this treaty.”

Peskov said Russia wants to hear “some kind of explanation” of the U.S. plans from Trump’s national-security adviser, John Bolton, who is meeting with senior officials in Moscow on Oct. 22-23, 2018.

“This is a question of strategic security. And I again repeat: such intentions are capable of making the world more dangerous,” he said, adding that if the United States abandons the pact and develops weapons that it prohibited, Russia “will need to take action…to restore balance in this area.”

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria

President Donald Trump’s national-security adviser, John Bolton.

(Photo by Eric Bridiers)

“Any action in this area will be met with a counteraction, because the strategic stability can only been ensured on the basis of parity,” Lavrov said in separate comments. “Such parity will be secured under all circumstances. We bear a responsibility for global stability and we expect the United States not to shed its share of responsibility either.”

The INF treaty prohibits the United States and Russia from possessing, producing, or deploying medium-range, ground-launched cruise missiles with a range of between 500 kilometers and 5,500 kilometers.

Peskov repeated Russian denials of U.S. accusations that Moscow is in violation of the treaty, and said that the United States has taken no formal steps to withdraw from the pact as yet.

Bolton on Oct. 22, 2018, met with his Russian counterpart Nikolai Patrushev, the secretary of Putin’s Security Council, and then headed into a meeting with Lavrov at the Russian Foreign Ministry that was described by the Kremlin as a ‘working dinner.”

Bolton was expected to meet with Putin on Oct. 23, 2018.

Russian Security Council spokesman Yevgeny Anoshin said Bolton and Patrushev discussed “a wide range of issues [involving] international security and Russian-American cooperation in the sphere of security.”

Ahead of the meetings, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov also said Russia hopes Bolton will clarify the U.S. position on the treaty.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria

Nikolai Patrushev and Vladimir Putin.

Earlier, Ryabkov said a unilateral U.S. withdrawal from the INF would be “very dangerous” and lead to a “military-technical” retaliation — wording that refers to weapons and suggests that Russia could take steps to develop or deploy new arms.

Both France and Germany also voiced concern.

French President Emmanuel Macron spoke to Trump on Oct. 21, 2018, and “underlined the importance of this treaty, especially with regards to European security and our strategic stability,” Macron’s office said in a statement on Oct. 22, 2018.

Many U.S. missiles banned by the INF had been deployed in Europe as a bulwark against the Soviet Union, but Macron’s remark underscores what analysts says would be resistance in many NATO countries to such deployments now.

European Commission spokeswoman Maja Kocijancic told reporters that the United States and Russia “need to remain in a constructive dialogue to preserve this treaty and ensure it is fully and verifiably implemented.”

The German government regrets the U.S. plan to withdraw, spokesman Steffen Seibert said on Oct. 22, 2018, adding that “NATO partners must now consult on the consequences of the American decision.”

German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas said a day earlier that Trump’s announcement “raises difficult questions for us and Europe,” but added that Russia had not convincingly addressed the allegations that it had violated the treaty.

China criticized the United States, saying on Oct. 22, 2018, that a unilateral withdrawal would have negative consequences and urging Washington to handle the issue “prudently.”

“The document has an important role in developing international relations, in nuclear disarmament, and in maintaining global strategic balance and stability,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said when asked about Trump’s comments.

U.S. officials have said Russia has been developing such a missile for years, and Washington made its accusations public in 2014.

Russia has repeatedly denied the U.S. accusations and also alleged that some elements of the U.S. missile-defense systems in Europe were in violation of the agreement. Washington denies that.

Sharp criticism

The INF, agreed four years before the Soviet Union’s collapse in 1991, was the first arms-control treaty to eliminate an entire class of missiles.

“Russia has not, unfortunately, honored the agreement. So we’re going to terminate the agreement and we’re going to pull out,” Trump told reporters on Oct. 20, 2018, during a campaign stop in the state of Nevada.

The United States is “not going to let them violate a nuclear agreement and go out and do weapons [when] we’re not allowed to,” Trump said.

The announcement brought sharp criticism from former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, who signed the treaty in 1987 with U.S. President Ronald Reagan.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria

General Secretary Gorbachev and President Ronald Reagan signing the INF Treaty in the East Room of the White House.

Gorbachev, 87, told the Interfax news agency that the move showed a “lack of wisdom” in Washington.

“Getting rid of the treaty is a mistake,” he said, adding that leaders “absolutely must not tear up old agreements on disarmament.”

Reactions were mixed in the West.

In Britain, Defense Secretary Gavin Williamson said his country stands “absolutely resolute” with Washington on the issue and called on the Kremlin to “get its house in order.”

U.S. Senator Rand Paul (Republican-Kentucky), criticized Bolton, and said on Fox News that he believes the national-security adviser was behind the decision to withdraw from the treaty.

“I don’t think he recognizes the important achievement of Reagan and Gorbachev on this,” Paul said.

Bolton has been a critic of a number of treaties, including arms-control pacts.

Many U.S. critics of Trump’s promise to withdraw say that doing so now hands a victory to Russia because Moscow, despite evidence that it is violating the treaty, can blame the United States for its demise.

Critics also charge that withdrawing from the pact will not improve U.S. security and could undermine it.

Aside from the INF dispute, other issues are raising tensions between Moscow and Washington at the time of Bolton’s visit, including Russian actions in Ukraine and Syria as well as alleged Kremlin interference in U.S. elections.

Lavrov said on Oct. 22, 2018, that Russia would welcome talks with the United States on extending the 2010 New START treaty, which limits numbers of Russian and U.S. long-range nuclear weapons such as intercontinental ballistic missiles, beyond its 2021 expiration date.

Meanwhile, Peskov, when asked to comment on remarks Putin made on Oct. 18, said Russian president had stated that Moscow would not launch a nuclear strike unless it was attacked with nuclear weapons or targeted in a conventional attack that threatened its existence.

This article originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. Follow @RFERL on Twitter.

Articles

Here are the best military photos of the week

The military has very talented photographers in the ranks, and they constantly attempt to capture what life as a service member is like during training and at war. Here are the best military photos of the week:


AIR FORCE:

Maj. John Fuccillo, an air mobility liaison officer, looks on as a C-130 Hercules takes off during exercise Cerberus Strike 16-02 at the Red Devil Landing Zone, Colo., Sept. 12, 2016. Contingency response forces rehearsed potential real-world situations by training with Army counterparts during the exercise. Fuccillo is with the 621st Mobility Support Operations Squadron assigned to the Army’s 4th Infantry Division at Fort Carson, Colo.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
U.S. Air Force photo/Master Sgt. Joseph Swafford

Multiple B-2 Spirits land for aircraft recovery as storm clouds gather Aug. 24, 2016, at Andersen Air Force Base, Guam. The B-2s low-observable, or stealth, characteristics give it the ability to penetrate an enemy’s most sophisticated defenses and threaten its most valued, heavily defended targets, while avoiding adversary detection, tracking and engagement.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
U.S. Air Force photo/Senior Airman Jovan Banks

ARMY:

A soldier with 4th Squadron, 2D Cavalry Regiment, conducts a gunnery table during Exercise #BraveWarrior16 at CESR Training Area, Hungary, Sept. 15, 2016.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Ryan Spence

A soldier, assigned to the South Carolina National Guard, fires a M240B machine gun during crew-served weapons familiarization night training at Fort Jackson, S.C., Sept. 15, 2016.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
National Guard photo by United States Air Force Tech. Sgt. Jorge Intriago

NAVY:

GULF OF OMAN (Sept. 18, 2016) Seaman Kennedy Prescott performs a deadlift during a power lifting competition aboard the amphibious dock landing ship USS Whidbey Island (LSD 41). Whidbey Island is deployed with the Wasp Amphibious Ready Group to support maritime security operations and theater security cooperation efforts in the U.S. 5th Fleet area of operations.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Nathan R. McDonald

PHILIPPINE SEA (Sept. 20, 2016) Marines conduct maintenance on an SH-53E Super Stallion on the flight deck of amphibious assault ship USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD 6). Bonhomme Richard, flagship of the Bonhomme Richard Expeditionary Strike Group, is operating in the Philippine Sea in support of security and stability in the Indo-Asia Pacific region.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class William Sykes

PHILIPPINE SEA (Sept. 20, 2016) Amphibious assault ship USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD 6) steams through the waters near Guam during a routine deployment. Bonhomme Richard, flagship of the Bonhomme Richard Expeditionary Strike Group, is operating in the Philippine Sea in support of security and stability in the Indo-Asia Pacific region.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class William Sykes

MARINE CORPS:

Cpl. Chris Lawler, a crewmaster with Marine Aerial Refueler Transport Squadron (VMGR) 152, observes an F/A-18C Hornet with Marine Fighter Attack Squadron (VMFA) 122 approach the refueling hose during Exercise Pitch Black 2016 at Royal Australian Air Force Base Tindal, Australia, Aug. 9, 2016. VMGR-152 provides aerial refueling and assault support during expeditionary, joint and combined operations like Pitch Black. This exercise is a biennial, three week, multinational, large-force training exercise hosted by RAAF Tindal.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Nicole Zurbrugg

Marines with Marine Rotational Force Darwin and French Armed Forces New Caledonia service members paddle out to Orphelinat Bay, New Caledonia as part of the Nautical Commando Course. Marines with MRF-D are participating in the full Nautical Commando Course for the first time to engage their amphibious heritage during.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
U.S. Marine Corps photo by Sgt. Carlos Cruz Jr.

COAST GUARD:

Washdown at OPBAT! Petty Officer 2nd Class Ronald Carrasquillo from Air Station Clearwater, washes down an MH-60 Jayhawk helicopter in Great Inagua, Bahamas.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
U.S. Coast Guard photo

Coast Guard Petty Officer 3rd Class Schuyler Chervinko, an aviation maintenance technician from Air Station Clearwater, takes a fuel sample from an MH-60 Jayhawk helicopter in Great Inagua, Bahamas. Aircraft maintenance crew members, like Chervinko, deploy to the opbat constantly ready to support Operation Bahamas Turks and Caicos.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
U.S. Coast Guard photo

Articles

Intel from Yemen raid prompted latest TSA electronics ban

Intelligence gathered during the Jan. 28 raid on an al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula complex in Yemen prompted a new restriction on electronic devices on flights arriving to the U.S. from certain countries.


According to a report by The Daily Beast, the information gathered in the aftermath of the raid — which resulted in the death Senior Chief Special Warfare Operator William Owens and injured several other troops — indicated that al-Qaeda had developed bombs that could fit inside laptop computers. An explosion on a Somali airliner last year was seen as a “proof of concept” for the new bombs, failing due to the low altitude of the plane.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
A Navy SEAL fires an M-60 from the shoulder, because that’s how SEALs roll. (Photographer’s Mate Petty Officer 1st Class Chuck Mussi)

The Daily Beast reported that the bombs must be manually triggered, prompting their ban from the aircraft cabins and carry-on luggage, but not from checked baggage. Wired.com reports that the American ban applies to inbound flights from eight predominately Muslim countries. The Daily Beast reported that the United Kingdom imposed a similar ban in the wake of the American one.

The Somali terrorist group al-Shabaab claimed responsibility for that airliner attack, which reportedly used PETN, the same explosive used by “shoe bomber” Richard Reid in 2002. As little as three and a haf ounces of PETN could bring down an airplane.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
Seen through the greenish glow of night vision goggles, Navy SEALs prepare to breach a locked door in Osama Bin Laden’s compound in Columbia Pictures’ hyper-realistic new action thriller from director Kathryn Bigelow, ZERO DARK THIRTY.

The Jan. 28 raid was controversial, not only for the death of Owens, but also due to civilian casualties, the unexpected heavy opposition, and the loss of a V-22 Osprey tiltrotor.

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, labeled the operation a failure. President Donald Trump, though, called the operation a success, and also claimed that substantial intelligence had been gathered.

Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula has targeted airliners in the past. In 2009, the terrorist group was involved in the plot to use an underwear bomb to bring down Northwest Airlines Flight 253. The device malfunctioned, injuring the terrorist.

MIGHTY TRENDING

The Doomsday Clock is closer to midnight than ever before

A group of eminent scientists behind the “Doomsday Clock” symbolically moved its time forward another 30 seconds on Jan. 25, marking an alarming one-minute advancement since 2016.


“As of today, it is two minutes to midnight,” Rachel Bronson, the president and CEO of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, which sets the clock’s time, said during a press briefing.

The clock is a symbol created at the dawn of the Cold War in 1945, and its time is set by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, a group founded by researchers who helped build the first nuclear weapons during the Manhattan Project.

The Bulletin began publicly adjusting the clock in 1947 to reflect the state of dire threats to the world, primarily to address the tense state of U.S.-Soviet relations and the risk for global nuclear war.

But since the closing of the Cold War in 1991, the clock has come to represent other major threats, such as climate change, artificial intelligence, and cyberwarfare.

“This year, the nuclear issue took center-stage yet again,” Bronson said. “To call the world nuclear situation dire is to understate the danger, and its immediacy.”

Why the Doomsday Clock’s time was moved forward

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
In January 2018, the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists moved the Doomsday Clock forward 30 seconds, to two minutes to midnight. (Image from Bulletin of Atomic Scientists)

For the 2018 time shift, members of the Doomsday Clock panel squarely took aim at the rhetoric and actions of President Donald Trump, who has said he is pushing for a nuclear arms race.

Bronson and the panel specifically cited a leaked draft of the Trump administration’s 2018 Nuclear Posture Review, which lays out U.S. strategy surrounding its nuclear arsenal and suggests that the president intends to act on his word.

“The Trump administration’s Nuclear Posture Review appears likely to increase the types and roles of nuclear weapons in U.S. defense plans and lower the threshold to nuclear use,” the panel said in an 18-page statement emailed to Business Insider.

The panel also noted the worrisome state of nuclear programs and security risks in Pakistan, India, Russia, and North Korea in its decision to move the clock forward, as well as Trump’s lack of support for a deal to monitor Iran’s nuclear program. The tense situation in the South China Sea, over aggressive Chinese claims to territory, also played a role in the group’s decision, according to the statement.

Also Read: Trump’s leaked nuclear report suggests Russia has a doomsday device

The Doomsday Clock experts are also gravely concerned about the state of the warming planet, the resulting climate change, and a fractured global effort to confront and mitigate its worst threats by reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

The group said in its statement that it is “deeply concerned about the loss of public trust in political institutions, in the media, in science, and in facts themselves — a loss that the abuse of information technology has fostered.”

The time of two minutes “is as close as it has ever been to midnight in the 71-year history of the clock,” Lawrence Krauss, a physicist at Arizona State University and a Bulletin chair member, said during the briefing.

The last time the Doomsday Clock was set at two minutes to midnight followed U.S. and Soviet test detonations of thermonuclear (or hydrogen) bombs in 1953.

Here’s how scientists have shifted the clock’s time from its creation through 2017:

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
A timeline of the Doomsday Clock’s setting from 1947 through 2017. (Image from Wikimedia Commons)

The 2018 shift is the sixth instance the time has been moved to three minutes or less until midnight — the others were in 1949, 1953, 1984, 2015, and 2017.

How to turn back the clock

The Doomsday Clock and the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists are not without their critics, however.

Writer Will Boisvert argued in a piece published in 2015 by The Breakthrough Institute that the symbology may be counterproductive to actually solving the problems the Bulletin hopes to spur action on:

Apocalypticism can systematically distort our understanding of risk, mesmerizing us with sensational scenarios that distract us from mundane risks that are objectively larger. Worse, it can block rather than galvanize efforts to solve global problems. By treating risks as infinite, doom-saying makes it harder to take their measure — to prioritize them, balance them against benefits, or countenance smaller ones to mitigate larger ones. The result can be paralysis.

Yet members of the Bulletin, who announced their Doomsday Clock decision at the National Press Club in Washington, DC, noted their full statement comes with multiple recommendations for turning back their clock, including:

  • Trump should, “refrain from provocative rhetoric regarding North Korea.”
  • The U.S. should open multiple lines of communication with North Korea.
  • A global effort to push North Korea to stop testing nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles.
  • The Trump administration should support the deal to oversee and inspect Iran’s nuclear facilities.
  • The U.S. and Russia should enact peacetime measures to avoid border conflicts in Europe.
  • Peaceful U.S.-Russian negotiations on nuclear weapons should resume.
  • Governments around the world “should redouble their efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions” beyond the Paris Agreement.
  • The international community should rein in and penalize any misuse of information technology that would “undermine public trust in political institutions, in the media, in science, and in the existence of objective reality itself.”

But Krauss said that if governments are unwilling to lead the way in fighting threats to global civilization, the people will have to step up their efforts to do so.

“It is not yet midnight and we have moved back from the brink in the past,” Krauss said. “Whether we do so in the future may be in your hands.”

MIGHTY MOVIES

This is the hilarious new podcast from the creators of Terminal Lance and Duffel Blog

Spending an hour listening to “After Action with Max and Paul” –a podcast about national security, military life, and other random bullsh*t – is like spending an hour with Max and Paul themselves. While you’re listening, you genuinely feel as if you’re hanging out with your best veteran friends… if your best veteran friends are prominent members of the Marine Corps veteran community, that is.


Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
Look for this logo.

Max Uriarte is the mind behind “Terminal Lance,” a Marine Corps-based comic strip he created while he was still in the Corps. He also created Terminal Lance’s crowdfunded offshoot, “The White Donkey.” Since being published in 2016, “The White Donkey” has become a New York Times bestseller and Uriarte is working on an “omnibus” of Terminal Lance strips.

Paul Szoldra is the creator of Duffel Blog, the military-themed satire site that’s so popular with active duty personnel, civilians, and veterans from of all branches. He just released Mission Accomplished: The Very Best of Duffel Blog, Volume One.

The two are very busy. And they are really good friends. And it shows as you listen to their podcast.

“Me and Max hang out quite a bit and we always have these conversations” Szoldra says. “We’re just talking about the news or what’s going on in the military space, and it always bounces around so much. One day we both realized, hey, we should record this. This might be something people would like to listen to. So, we did.”

For all the joking about their other projects, they are extremely grounded in reality and it shows in what they choose to talk about — some of the most divisive wedge issues among the military-veteran community. The Trump trans-ban, North Korea, and whatever else may have come up that week, for example.

The issues many veteran-related blogs and websites are polarized about Max and Paul laugh and riff on – then they inject a dose of reality or humor to the discussion.

Paul: Most of the arguments against women in the infantry are really dumb. They could be dismissed pretty easily. Most of them against are basically like “men are shitty.” Or, like, “Oh, they’re gonna inconvenience everybody ’cause they gotta use different toilets,” or something. Really, like that’s gonna be so difficult?

Maximilian: I think what’s funny is men … we can get super feminist, political about this because this is sort of a larger issue too. … You know, men get so worried about women’s genitals. They’re like, “How are they gonna handle their period?” Let them worry about it.

Paul: They already go to the field. They already go to basic training.

Maximilian: “They’re bleeding down there. I don’t know, it’s a problem. What are they gonna do? I don’t think they should be there.” I don’t know. They handle it.

Paul: “And they attract bears. You know that, right? It’s science. Okay?”

Maximilian: I think there could be a discussion about the logistical difficulties, but it’s one of those things where we’re so past the point of debate. You can’t go back with it now. Right now it’s more like, “How do I make this work?”

Paul: Yeah, and everybody’s still yelling about, “Women shouldn’t be the infantry.” It’s like, well-

Maximilian: They’re already out there.

It’s not all about serious issues with Max and Paul. The same conversation recounted above eventually evolves into a discussion about women in the infantry in “Starship Troopers,” movies in general, and then dragons.

Here’s what would happen if US tried to strike Russian-backed targets in Syria
Tune in to the podcast to find out how.

As with most discussions that turn to politics, not everyone will agree with Max. Or Paul. Or Max and Paul. But what you get is a really hilarious and irreverent back and forth that will make even the most closed-minded person crack a smile. They may even rope in one of their Marine friends via phone or Skype (in their second episode, they call Jack Mandaville, star of “Range 15” and outspoken “former Marine”).

“We’re sort of both leveraging our kind of pseudo-celebrity status to get the coolest guests that we can get,” Uriarte laughs. “We got a lot of great people coming on the show. Everyone seems to like it a lot.”

But there is something for everyone, not just Marines. And not just veterans. Max and Paul are two very talented, educated, and witty individuals — and it shows in their work, especially “After Action With Max and Paul.”

Here’s Mandatory Fun’s interview with Max Urierte in which he explains the  “After Action” podcast.

Subscribe to Mandatory Fun: Apple Podcasts | Google Play | Stitcher

“After Action With Max and Paul” can be found and downloaded on Stitcher and iTunes and probably elsewhere, because this is the veteran podcast we’ve all been waiting for.

Do Not Sell My Personal Information