Here's who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry - We Are The Mighty
Articles

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

The United States Marine Corps: 241 years of butt-kicking and tradition.


Russian Naval Infantry: A Russian military force with 311 years of victory — and defeat.

Which is the deadlier unit in a matchup of the U.S. versus Russia when it comes to naval infantry?

In a major crisis, the U.S. would likely send a Marine Expeditionary Brigade. Perhaps the most notable example was its use in 1990 after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.

Using a force of five pre-positioned vessels, the U.S. delivered the gear and supplies needed for the 4th MEB to operate for 30 days as additional heavy forces arrived. It wasn’t anyone’s idea of a slouch: It brought a reinforced regiment of Marines (three battalions of Marine infantry, a battalion of artillery, and companies of AAV-7A1 Amphibious Assault Vehicles, Light Armored Vehicles, and tanks) for ground combat, and also featured three squadrons of AV-8B+ Harriers, two squadrons of F/A-18C Hornets, a squadron of EA-6B Prowlers, and seven squadrons of helicopters.

A Russian Naval Infantry Brigade is also quite powerful. For the sake of this discussion, let’s look at the forces of Red Banner Northern Fleet, centered on the 61st Kirkinesskaya Red Banner Marine Brigade.

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry
030612-N-3725V-001Ustka, Poland (Jun. 12, 2003) — A Russian Naval Infantryman provides cover for his counterparts from Denmark, Lithuania, Poland and United States during an exercise at Ustka, Poland as part of Baltic Operations (BALTOPS) 2003. (U.S. Navy photo by Photographer’s Mate 1st Class Chadwick Vann)

The Red Banner Northern Fleet’s naval infantry force has three battalions of naval infantry, one air-assault battalion, one “reconnaissance” battalion, one “armored” battalion, two artillery battalions, and an air-defense battalion.

If things were to come to blows in Norway during the Cold War (or today, for that matter), these units would go head-to-head. In fact, ironically, the 4th MEB was diverted from preparations for a deployment exercise to Norway to respond to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. So, who would win that face-off?

With what is effectively four battalions of infantry, a reconnaissance battalion, a tank battalion, two artillery battalions, and the other attachments, the Russians have a slight numerical edge in ground firepower. The air-defense battalion can somewhat negate the air power that a Marine Expeditionary Brigade would bring to a fight.

That said, some of the equipment is older, like the PT-76 light tank and the BRDM-2 armored car. The BMP-2 is equipping some units, but many still use BTR-80 and MT-LB armored personnel carriers. Very few BMP-3 infantry fighting vehicles or T-90 main battle tanks have arrived.

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry
Marines with Company C, 1st Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment, fire down range during a CS gas attack during a live fire range August 18, 2016, at Bradshaw Field Training Area, Northern Territory, Australia. The range was the final training evolution of Exercise Koolendong 16, a trilateral exercise between the U.S. Marine Corps, Australian Defence Force and French Armed Forces New Caledonia. Marines held a defensive position while engaging targets and working through the CS gas, which simulated a chemical attack. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Sgt. Sarah Anderson)

That said, the American Marines have potent firepower of their own. Perhaps the most potent ground firepower would come from the company of M1A1 Abrams tanks. Don’t be fooled by their 1980s lineage — these tanks have been heavily upgraded, and are on par with the M1A2 SEP tanks in Army service.

Marine Corps LAV-25s and LAV-ATs can also kill the armored vehicles attached to the Red Banner Northern Fleet. This does not include man-portable anti-tank missiles like the FGM-148 Javelin or the BGM-71 TOW.

What will really ruin the day for the Russian Naval Infantry is the Marine aviation. Marine aviation specifically trains to support Marines on the ground, and the close-air support — particularly from the AV-8B+ Harrier — will prove to be very decisive.

In short, the Marines might be spotting Russian Naval Infantry seven decades of tradition, but they will show the Russians why they were called “devil dogs.”

Articles

US commandos want full-color night vision and silent drones

The Pentagon office in charge of outfitting America’s secret warriors is asking industry for new technologies that will allow commandos to target and track bad guys through goggles or a head’s up display in their weapon sights, see colors at night and fly small surveillance drones that are nearly undetectable.


The new technologies sound like something from science fiction, but the spec ops gear buyers want to see what industry has in the works that could get to troops behind enemy lines in places like Syria, Iraq and Libya.

According to an official industry solicitation, U.S. Special Operations Command will hold a so-called “Military Utility Assessment” at Camp Blanding, Florida, in mid-November to see what capabilities are out there to enhance special operators’ ability to see the enemy in adverse conditions, surveil bad guy positions at great distances and tag and track targets without detection.

Current night vision equipment either enhances available light like stars or the moon or uses thermal imaging to see heat. Both technologies can be digitally modified to present the images in limited color, but the detail is usually poor.

The special operations community wants to see if there are options out there that help commandos identify objects and people in the dark with better resolution.

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry
Afghan and coalition force members provide security during an operation in search of a Taliban leader in Kandahar city, Kandahar province, Afghanistan, April 21, 2013. (U.S. Army photo by Spc. Matthew Hulett)

The command is looking for night optics “that aid in target discrimination, mobility, combat identification, identify friend or foe, or situational awareness via a natural appearing manner.”

“The need is from clear sky no moon to daylight conditions,” USSOCOM says. “A capability that allows true color at higher illumination and switch or transition to black and white at the lowest illumination is of interest.”

The special operators will consider systems that either attach to existing goggles, scopes or optics or entire new night vision equipment that can replace them. The key is keeping down the weight and increasing battery life, the command says.

SOCOM also wants to see if there are options out there for passive targeting scopes that will allow commandos to move a cursor to their target and share that data with other assaulters and snipers. They even want to be able to call in air strikes using the embedded targeting capability.

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry
U.S. Army Rangers from 75th Ranger Regiment shoot at targets on Farnsworth Range, Fort Benning, Ga., July 27, as part of a stress fire competition as one of the events of Ranger Rendezvous 2011. (U.S. Army Photo by Sgt. Marcus Butler, USASOC Public Affairs)

Clearly, unmanned aerial vehicles have become an important part of warfighting these days, and SOCOM wants to see how it can take advantage of the bleeding edge of technology for unmanned systems. The command has asked industry if it can field drones that are unseen and unheard above a target and can see details like vehicle license plates or the types of bombs loaded on a parked plane.

The special operators want “technologies that can be programmed to orbit or perch and stare at an area or object of interest,” it said. “Technology should be visually and acoustically undetectable by persons or systems resident at an observed area or object of interest, while providing users VNIIRS 9 or better video quality in real time.”

SOCOM is asking for technology proposals that are either on the drawing board or have prototypes ready for field testing.

MIGHTY TRENDING

13 photos from ‘Keen Sword,’ the Pacific exercises NATO drowned out

While most of the world was watching Trident Juncture, the massive NATO war games where 31 countries sent 50,000 participants and Russia responded with missiles and other provocations, the U.S. was participating in more war games on the other side of the world.

The U.S. and Japan sent a record number of troops to Keen Sword, Pacific war games to which Canada also sent ships and sailors.


Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

The aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan, center left, and the Japanese helicopter destroyer JS Hyuga, center right, sail in formation with 16 other ships from the U.S. Navy and Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force as aircraft from the U.S. Air Force and Japan Air Self-Defense Force fly overhead in formation during Keen Sword 2019 in the Philippine Sea, November 8, 2018.

(U.S. Navy Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Kaila V. Peters)

Keen Sword is focused on ensuring that Japan can defend its territory, and the U.S. and other allies take part to improve their ability to operate with the Japanese Self-Defense Force. Over the past few years, China’s aggression in the region has increasingly shaped the narrative — but China is far from the only threat Japan faces.

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

An E-2D Hawkeye lands on the flight deck of the Navy’s forward-deployed aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan during exercise Keen Sword 19, November 7, 2018.

(U.S. Navy Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class MacAdam Kane Weissman)

Japan is deeply within range of North Korea’s missiles and has an ongoing dispute with Russia over islands dating back to World War II.

Therefore, its annual hosting of Keen Sword is crucial. Japan sent 47,000 troops, about a fifth of its active military, and America sent 9,500 more. Canada sent two ships to the exercise.

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

U.S. Sailors assigned to Explosive Ordnance Disposal Unit 5 fast rope from an MH-60S Sea Hawk helicopter onto the USS Ronald Reagan during Keen Sword 19 in the Philippine Sea, November 1, 2018.

(U.S. Navy Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Erwin Jacob V. Miciano)

The Japanese forces carry a lot of American hardware, everything from F-35s to Apache helicopters to Aegis missile defense systems. But Japan has still felt the need to further expand their military capabilities, standing up amphibious assault forces and increasing their ability to rapidly deploy with forces such as paratroopers.

The forces practiced these marine and airborne operations as well as submarine hunting, combat search and rescue, and other operations. See more photos from the exercise below:

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

A Japan Ground Self-Defense Force soldier assigned to the 1st Airborne Brigade jumps from a U.S. Air Force C-130J Super Hercules assigned to the 36th Airlift Squadron over Hiju-dai drop zone, Oita prefecture, Japan, November 4, 2018, during Keen Sword 19.

(U.S. Air Force Yasuo Osakabe)

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

A Japan Ground Self-Defense Force solider assigned to the 1st Airborne Brigade performs personnel accountability on a U.S. Air Force C-130J Super Hercules at Japan Air Self-Defense Force Tsuiki Air Base, Japan, November 4, 2018, during Keen Sword 19.

(U.S. Air Force Yasuo Osakabe)

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

A Japan Ground Self-Defense Force soldier assigned to the 1st Airborne Brigade waits to jump from a U.S. Air Force C-130J Super Hercules over Hiju-dai drop zone, Oita prefecture, Japan, November 4, 2018, during Keen Sword 19.

(U.S. Air Force Yasuo Osakabe)

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

Rear Adm. Karl Thomas, commander of Task Force 70, departs an E-2D Hawkeye on the flight deck of the Navy’s forward deployed aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan during exercise Keen Sword 19, November 7, 2018.

(U.S. Navy Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class MacAdam Kane Weissman)

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

U.S. Air Force pararescue specialists assigned to the 31st Rescue Squadron from Kadena Air Base, Japan, charge land during a combat search and rescue training near Misawa Air Base, Japan, October 31, 2018.

(U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Melanie A. Hutto)

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

Sailors perform preflight checks on an E/A-18G Growler on the flight deck of the forward-deployed aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan during exercise Keen Sword 19, November 1, 2018.

(U.S. Navy Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class MacAdam Kane Weissman)

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

Sailors assigned to Explosive Ordnance Disposal Unit 5 ready themselves for training during Keen Sword 19.

(U.S. Navy Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Erwin Jacob V. Miciano)

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

U.S. Airmen stand in front of an E-3 Sentry during Exercise Keen Sword 2019, at Kadena Air Base, Japan, October 29, 2018.

(U.S. Air Force Airman 1st Class Matthew Seefeldt)

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

A Los Angeles-class fast attack submarine participates in Exercise Keen Sword with Submarine Group 7 and Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force sailors and staff. For the submarine force, the exercise was an opportunity to demonstrate how both countries’ submariners would detect, locate, track and engage enemy assets.

(U.S. Navy Chief Electronics Technician Robert Gulini)

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

U.S. and Japanese ships maneuver during a photo event at the end of Keen Sword 19 on November 8, 2018.

(U.S. Navy Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Kaila V. Peters)

Articles

The Brits are going to deploy their ‘colossal’ new aircraft carrier to confront China

One of America’s closest allies is preparing to put China’s claims to the test in the South China Sea.


British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson revealed at a high-level meeting in Sydney, Australia, that the UK will be sending its new aircraft carriers into the region to uphold freedom of navigation and the rules-based international order. Australia has been hesitant to act, fearing increased tension with Beijing.

“One of the first things we will do with the two new colossal aircraft carriers that we have just built,” Johnson explained, “is send them on a freedom-of-navigation operation to this area to vindicate our belief in the rules-based international system and in the freedom of navigation through those waterways which are absolutely vital for world trade.”

The UK’s new aircraft carrier, the HMS Queen Elizabeth, is undergoing maiden sea trials and is expected to be commissioned into the Royal Navy later this year.

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry
The HMS Queen Elizabeth. Photo from UK Royal Navy

British Defense Secretary Sir Michael Fallon confirmed the deployment without providing any real details. “We haven’t mapped out the initial deployments yet but, yes, you would expect to see these carriers in the India Pacific Ocean, this part of the world because it is in this part of the world we see increasing tension, increasing challenges,” Fallon told the Australia Broadcasting Corporation.

Australian Defense Minister Marise Payne hinted that Australia might also step up its activities in the area.

“Importantly today, we also discussed developments in our region, particularly with respect to freedom of navigation and freedom of overflight which is a global issue and countries like Australia and the United Kingdom have a shared interest in those global freedoms,” Payne said, adding, “We agreed today that we would identify opportunities to conduct, where possible, cooperative activities in the region when we have assets that are in the area at the same time.”

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry
Royal Australian Navy Anzac Class frigate HMAS Warramunga. Canadian Forces Combat Camera Photo By Master Corporal Mathieu Gaudreault

There still appears to be a certain hesitancy to make the same commitment as the Americans and the British.

China claims the vast majority of the South China Sea, asserting its dominance through the illegal development of artificial islands, the construction of military outposts, and regular naval and bomber patrols in the area. Beijing’s claims were discredited by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague last year, but China rejected both the authority and ruling of the arbitration tribunal, declaring its sovereignty over massive swaths of the ocean to be indisputable.

The Trump administration has started putting increased pressure on China, which has so far failed to rein in North Korea, a major point of concern for the new administration. The US Navy has conducted two freedom-of-navigation operations and two bomber overflights in the South China Sea, angering Beijing.

popular

The real story of the Hell’s Angels biker gang and the military

The first Hell’s Angels Motorcycle Club (HAMC) was founded in the areas of Fontana and San Bernardino, California in 1948. From there, the club grew exponentially, becoming one of the largest in the world. The club has since earned a reputation in media and popular culture, thanks to a number of high-profile raids and wars on its various national charters, and in no small part to Gimme Shelter, a 1970 documentary about a riot during a Rolling Stones concert. The Stones’ management allegedly paid the Hell’s Angels to provide security at the concert and paid them in beer, which was a terrible idea. As a banner once read on the club’s website, “when we do right, no one remembers; when we do wrong, no one forgets.”


 

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

 

What the motorcycle club never forgets is its own heritage. While mainstream media gave the club a creation myth involving drunken, misfit airmen who flew bomber missions in World War II and struggled to adapt to life after the war, the real story is much simpler.

The fake story starts with a WWII Army Air Forces unit in Europe during WWII, the 303rd Bombardment Group. The 303rd was not a misfit group, as popular lore has implied, but rather one of the highest performers in the entire air war. In its official history, the motorcycle club tells the story of the B-17 the 303rd named “Hell’s Angels,” and its commander, the capable (and not drunken) Capt. Irl E. Baldwin. Why? To make sure the world knows this aircrew wasn’t a band of drunken misfits, but instead were heroes of the war in Europe. The aircrew has nothing to do with the motorcycle club. The Angels just care that the memory of the crew isn’t dragged through the mud. (They care too much, right? That’s always been a fault of the Hell’s Angels.)

 

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

This B-17F, tail number 41-24577, was named Hell’s Angels after the Howard Hughes movie about World War I fighter pilots. The bomber would fly with several commanders and numerous crewmen over 15 months and was the first B-17 to complete 25 combat missions in Eighth Air Force.

The 303rd’s story starts with naming their B-17 “Hell’s Angels” after the 1930 movie by famed aviator Howard Hughes. The plane was the first 8th Air Force B-17 to complete 25 combat sorties in the European Theater. It even participated in one of the first strikes on Berlin 1944. Two of the plane’s crewmen would earn the Medal of Honor. Another four would ear the Distinguished Service Cross. Fifty years later, the entire 303rd would vote to change its name to the Hell’s Angels, with “Might in Flight” as its motto. That name is the only common thread between the bikers and the airmen of the 303rd.

So where did the name Hell’s Angels really come from? The motorcycle club’s official history says it comes from a World War II veteran from the All-Volunteer Group (AVG), better known as “the Flying Tigers.” This Flying Tiger, named Arvid Olson, was a close friend of the founders of the Hell’s Angels Motorcycle Club after the war, but never even tried to become a member.

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry
The Flying Tigers, aka the A-10’s grandpa. You *might* have seen the tiger shark design before.

The Flying Tigers were an all-volunteer group of airmen and maintainers in service to the Chinese Air Force who fought the Japanese Imperial Air Forces in China, preparing for combat even before the U.S. entered World War II. The unit’s 3rd Pursuit Squadron, comprised entirely of Marine Corps aviators, called themselves the Hell’s Angels. They first saw combat against Japan days after the attack on Pearl Harbor. Over the life of the unit, the Flying Tigers would down almost 300 Japanese aircraft in combat between December 20, 1941 and July 4, 1942.

The Hell’s Angels Motorcycle Club’s copyrighted “Death’s Head” logo (below, left) can even be traced back to two U.S. Army Air Corps patches, from the 85th Fighter Squadron (center) and the 552nd Medium Bomber Squadron (right).

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

MIGHTY TRENDING

Senate’s UFO inquiry highlights Washington’s worries about “Doomsday” weapons

In April, the Department of Defense released three videos taken by U.S. Navy pilots showing what the military defines as unexplainable aerial phenomena, or UAPs — more commonly known in civilian vernacular as unidentified flying objects, or UFOs.

The Pentagon videos clearly show the objects flying in unusual ways, and the audio includes the pilots’ puzzled and astounded reactions, including:


“What the [expletive] is that?”

“There’s a whole fleet of them…my gosh.”

“Look at that thing, dude.”

“That’s hauling ass, dude…look at that thing…it’s rotating.”

“Wow, what is that man?”

“Look at it fly [laughing].”

‘UFO’ videos captured by US Navy Jets Declassified

www.youtube.com

Naturally, the revelation of these unexplained encounters sparked speculations in some quarters about the possibility of extraterrestrial life operating aerial vehicles in Earth’s atmosphere. Yet, when it comes to so-called UAPs, lawmakers in Washington have more earthbound concerns.

As China and Russia increasingly militarize space, and as Russia develops a new arsenal of high-tech “doomsday” weapons, there is mounting concern in Washington that these seemingly unexplainable aerial encounters could, in fact, be evidence of America’s adversaries putting their advanced new weapons into action — potentially over U.S. soil.

As a result, a group of U.S. senators has drafted an order for the Director of National Intelligence to report to Congress about what UAP encounters have already been recorded and how that information is shared among U.S. agencies. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence made the request in a report, which was included in the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021.

The report calls for a standardized method of collecting data on UAPs and “any links they have to adversarial governments, and the threat they pose to U.S. military assets and installations.”

The report also calls for the Director of National Intelligence, or DNI, to prepare a report for Congress on the sum total of reported UAPs. Based on information included in the report, the Office of Naval Intelligence maintains an Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon Task Force. That naval task force appears to be the nexus for America’s collation of reports of UAP sightings — comprising data from military branches, intelligence agencies, and the FBI.

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

The full text of the Senate report on UAPs. Courtesy U.S. Senate.

The report instructs the DNI to report to Congress “any incidents or patterns that indicate a potential adversary may have achieved breakthrough aerospace capabilities that could put United States strategic or conventional forces at risk.”

While the Senate report marks a major step in congressional oversight of America’s UAP sightings, the Pentagon and federal law enforcement have been alert to the threat for years.

In December 2017, the New York Times reported on the Pentagon’s Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program, which reportedly collected reports of UAPs from 2008 until 2012. And over the past two years, the FBI was reportedly tapped to help investigate a spate of UAP reports in Colorado and Nebraska. Some of those UAP sightings occurred near U.S. Air Force installations and were subsequently investigated by security forces at F.E. Warren Air Force Base in Wyoming.

F.E. Warren is a strategic missile base and home to the 90th Missile Wing, which operates some 150 Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles, which are armed with nuclear warheads. Those missiles are on 24/7 alert, 365 days a year, according to the U.S. Air Force.

Following the breakdown of the Cold War-era Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty between the United States and Russia last year, and with Moscow and Washington increasingly at loggerheads over a broad gamut of geopolitical issues, Russian President Vladimir Putin has embarked his country’s military on a crash-course program to develop new so-called doomsday weapons.

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

An Atlas V AEHF-6 rocket successfully launches from Space Launch Complex-41 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fla., March 26, 2020. The launch of the AEHF-6, a sophisticated communications relay satellite, is the first Department of Defense payload launched for the United States Space Force. Photo by Joshua Conti/U.S. Air Force, courtesy of DVIDS.

The 9M730 Burevestnik — known as the “Skyfall” among NATO militaries — is a nuclear-powered, nuclear-armed cruise missile with virtually unlimited range.

Apart from the Burevestnik, in March 2018 Putin unveiled other new weapons that he touted would be able to defeat U.S. missile defense systems. Among those was the Avangard hypersonic vehicle, supposedly capable of flying at Mach 27. The Avangard reportedly went operational in December.

Russia is also reportedly developing a nuclear-powered underwater drone — the “Poseidon” — that will creep up to an adversary’s coast, detonate a nuclear weapon, and create a 500-meter, or 1,640-foot, tsunami.

According to some scientific journal reports, Russia may also be resurrecting some Soviet-era antisatellite missile programs, particularly one missile known as Kontakt, which was meant to be fired from a MiG-31D fighter.

Whereas the Soviet-era Kontakt system comprised a kinetic weapon intended to literally smash into U.S. satellites to destroy them, the contemporary Russian program will likely carry a payload of micro “interceptor” satellites that can effectively ambush enemy satellites.

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

The first #SpaceForce utility uniform nametapes have touched down in the Pentagon. Photo courtesy of United States Space Force/Twitter.

The recent creation of the U.S. Space Force reflects the novel threats the U.S. now faces from its adversaries in space.

On June 23, China successfully launched an unmanned probe bound for Mars, underscoring Beijing’s increased interest in its space program. That same day, the U.S. Space Force announced that on July 15 Russia had tested a new antisatellite weapon.

According to a Space Force statement, a Russian satellite released an object that moved “in proximity” to another Russian satellite. Based on the object’s trajectory, Space Force officials said it was likely a weapon rather than a so-called inspection satellite.

That test was “another example that the threats to U.S. and Allied space systems are real, serious and increasing,” the Space Force said in a release.

“This is further evidence of Russia’s continuing efforts to develop and test space-based systems, and consistent with the Kremlin’s published military doctrine to employ weapons that hold U.S. and allied space assets at risk,” said General John Raymond, commander of U.S. Space Command and U.S. Space Force chief of space operations, in the release.

This article originally appeared on Coffee or Die. Follow @CoffeeOrDieMag on Twitter.


popular

These 4 wars started after ‘false flag’ attacks

What does an expansionist country do when it needs an excuse to invade a neighbor? Create one, of course. Their smaller, weaker neighbor isn’t going to spark a conflict on their own. It’s the perfect time for a false flag attack, where one country carries out a covert attack, disguising it to look like it was done by someone else.


The term is from old-timey naval warfare, where one ship flew a different nation’s colors before attacking as a means to get closer to their target. “False flag” is not just the stuff of conspiracy theorists and the tin foil hat society, there are actually precedents for this.

 

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry
This precedent’s a Muslim! Prepare for battle!

False flags happen a lot more often than one might think, which is why conspiracy theorists are so quick to draw that conclusion. The four wars on this list started under false pretenses, so maybe it isn’t that crazy to think false flags aren’t completely gone for good.

1. Mukden Incident  – Japanese Invasion of China

The Japanese set their sights on Chinese Manchuria as soon as they beat the Russians in their 1904-05 war. Japanese soldiers were already stationed in the provinces, ostensibly to protect the Japanese-owned South Manchuria Railway. Those troops were often bored and conducted raids on local villages. While the Chinese government protested, there was little they could do – the Japanese wanted the Chinese to attack their forces as an excuse to invade. The Japanese got tired of waiting.

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry
Yes, that circle is the entirety of the damage. They might as well have claimed China was harboring WMD.

A 1st Lieutenant from the Japanese 29th Infantry planted explosives on the tracks that damaged a 1.5-meter section of rail. It had little effect on the railway’s operations. In fact, a train on the track easily passed over the damaged area. The next day, September 19, 1931, the Japanese started shelling Chinese garrisons and attacked them. In one instance, 500 Japanese troops bested 7,000 or more Chinese. Within the next five months, the Japanese army occupied all of Manchuria. WWII in the Far East had begun.

2. Gleiwitz Incident – The German Invasion of Poland

In August 1939,  SS commandos, dressed as Poles, stormed and captured a radio station in what was then called Upper Silesia, in Germany. The attackers broadcast a short, anti-German message in Polish. The German assailants wanted the appearance of Polish aggression, murdering a German farmer who was caught by the Gestapo and killed with poison. The body was dressed as a saboteur, shot a number of times, and then left in front of the radio station.

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry
Sometimes you gotta raid a radio station.

A few prisoners from the Dachau Concentration Camp received the same treatment, only their identification was made impossible as the Germans destroyed their faces. This was all part of Operation Himmler, designed to create justification for the invasion of Poland, which began the next day. World War II in Europe was on.

3. The Shelling of Manila – The Winter War

The Soviet Union was chafing under all of the nonaggression treaties on its Western border. Because peacetime seems to be boring for Communist regimes, Stalin decided he needed to mix things up a bit. Since a war with Germany seemed like a war he would most definitely lose on his own, he opted instead to invade Finland, a war (he thought) he could win easily. He couldn’t invade Finland legally because he signed a full three treaties that prevented him from doing so, including his entry into the League of Nations. Stalin, nice guy that he was, decided to go ahead anyway and set out to make Finland look like the aggressor.

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry
Stalin could almost be a cuddly guy if he didn’t kill like 25 million people.

On November 26, 1939, the Soviet Red Army shelled the Russian village of Mainila, 800 meters inside Soviet territory. The Finns even saw the explosions and offered to help investigate the incident, which Stalin declined before blaming the whole thing on the Finnish army. Mainila was out of range of the Finnish guns, but that didn’t matter. The Russians already got the propaganda boost and invaded Finland four days later. The war lasted five months and while the Russians captured 11% of Finnish territory, it came at a high cost: the Finns suffered 70,000 casualties while the Soviets had more than a million.

4. The Gulf of Tonkin Incident – The Vietnam War

On August 2nd and 4th, 1964 the USS Maddox was on a signals intelligence patrol in the Gulf of Tonkin off the coast of what was then called North Vietnam. She was confronted by three North Vietnamese torpedo boats who got a little too close for comfort. The Americans fired three warning shots. The Vietnamese opened up on the Maddox from torpedo boats.

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry
Torpedo boats like these.

The Maddox responded with 3- and 5-inch guns. The only thing wrong with that retelling of the incident is everything. The August 2nd attack happened but the Defense Department didn’t respond. The August 4th attack never happened. This is problematic because it was the justification for Congress’ passing of the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, giving the President full authority to use the military to assist “any member or protocol state of the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty” threatened by Communist aggression without a declaration of war.

MIGHTY TRENDING

Netflix wants to help you trick your kids on New Year’s Eve

Netflix just released 14 New Year’s Eve countdown specials to help kids ring in 2019 — and still get to bed early. Starting Dec. 26, 2018, the family-friendly shows will be available on the streaming service to be played any time of day or night.

The short segments (each one is about five minutes) star characters from some of the year’s most popular children’s shows, like Super Monsters and Boss Baby, and end with a countdown to 2019.


And this year, Netflix is offering an even greater variety of countdowns for parents to choose from, including options for older kids and tweens. In 2018, there were only nine New Year’s specials, five fewer than this year’s record-high of 14.

Netflix’s annual tradition is backed by recent research, too. According to a statement made by the streaming service, “77% of U.S. parents actually prefer to stay in than go out for the biggest bash of the year.” The company added that over the last five years, an average of five million people watch the New Year’s Eve countdown shows each year.

To find the popular holiday specials, which are usually available through the first week of January, parents can simply enter “countdowns” in the Netflix search bar.

2019 New Years Eve Countdowns | Netflix

www.youtube.com

Here’s the full list of shows getting New Year’s countdowns in 2018:

  • Alexa and Katie
  • Prince of Peoria
  • Pinky Malinky
  • Motown Magic
  • Larva Island
  • Beat Bugs
  • Skylanders Academy
  • Super Monsters
  • True and the Rainbow Kingdom
  • Tales of Arcadia
  • All Hail King Julien
  • Spirit Riding Free
  • Fuller House

Featured image: Netflix.

This article originally appeared on Fatherly. Follow @FatherlyHQ on Twitter.

MIGHTY MOVIES

The new Snakes Eyes movie looks as awesome as he is

After being delayed over a year by COVID, Snake Eyes: G.I. Joe Origins is scheduled for release in theaters on July 23, 2021. The film stars Henry Golding of Crazy Rich Asians fame as the titular character. As the film’s name states, it also serves as an origin story for the classic character and reboots the G.I. Joe film series.

Golding replaces Darth Maul actor Ray Park who portrayed Snake Eyes in previous G.I. Joe films. The reboot also stars Andrew Koji as Storm Shadow, Úrsula Corberó as The Baroness, Samara Weaving as Scarlett, Haruka Abe as Akiko, Tahehiro Hira as Kenta, and Iko Uwais as Hard Master.

After saving the life of the heir apparent to the ancient Japanese Arashikage clan, tenacious loner Snake Eyes is welcomed by the family. In Japan, the Arashikage teach him the ways of the ninja warrior and give him the home he has been searching for. However, when secrets of his past come to light, Snake Eyes’ honor and allegiance will be tested.

Snake Eyes: G.I. Joe Origins was directed by Robert Schwentke who also directed the action films Red and R.I.P.D. Filming began in October 2019 in Vancouver and wrapped in February 2020 in Japan. Originally scheduled to release on March 27, 2020, the film was delayed due to COVID. In March 2021, Golding announced that they were doing reshoots for the film. As COVID restrictions lift across the country, Snake Eyes: G.I. Joe Origins is now slated for a theatrical release on July 23, 2021 in RealD 3D, Dolby Cinema and IMAX.

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry
(Paramount Pictures)
MIGHTY HISTORY

This admiral might be the bluest falcon that ever lived

Fleet Admiral Ernest King was one of the greatest military minds of his generation, rising to command the entire Navy fleet after the attacks on Pearl Harbor and ensuring that every theater of the war had its needed material, manpower, and great thinkers throughout World War II.

But he also slept with the wives of subordinates, enforced prohibition on others while being staggeringly drunk, and punished the intelligence genius behind the Battle of Midway for outguessing his own team. Ya know, like a Blue Falcon.


Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

Fleet Admiral Ernest J. King, U. S. Navy, arrives at his quarters and salutes a soldier during the Potsdam Conference in 1945.

(U.S. National Archives and Records Administration)

Let’s start with his buddyf*ckery that actually affected the war. As mentioned above, King had an issue with the intelligence genius behind the Navy’s Midway success.

The problem came during the buildup to the battle. King’s staff briefed him that the most likely Japanese course of action was an attack on the U.S. West Coast and the Aleutian Islands of Alaska. Admiral Chester Nimitz’s staff intercepted and decoded Japanese radio transmissions that indicated an attack near Midway Island.

Both intelligence sections were actually correct. The Japanese did attack the Aleutian Islands in June, 1942, and occupy a few of them, but it was a relatively small and inconsequential action next to the massive attack at Midway that same week.

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

Captain Joseph J. Rochefort led the team that cracked Japan’s naval code, then prioritized which messages to translate first, and then took the collected information to paint a clear picture of the coming attack at Midway in 1942. He was rewarded by being shipped off to pasture.

(U.S. Navy)

Nimitz pressured King into giving him the needed ships for a defense at Midway, staged one of the most decisive engagements of the war, crippled the Japanese Navy, and then put in the top intelligence officer for a Distinguished Service Medal.

Seems well-earned, right? Captain Joseph J. Rochefort had led the team that cracked the Japanese code, then used intelligence garnered from that break to prepare the fleet for a decisive engagement that led to a massive American victory.

King didn’t think so. He summarily denied the award and then transferred Rochefort out of Nimitz’s staff and into a lesser position even though Nimitz begged him not to.

Caw. Caw.

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

The Japanese ship Mikuma slowly sinks during the Battle of Midway in 1942.

(U.S. Navy)

But King didn’t limit his Blue Falcon practices to the official realm. He also slept with the wives of his subordinates, and often sexually harassed them. Women knew not to sit next to him at official functions because he had a tendency to let his hands wander under the table.

One officer, Captain Paul Pihl, was friends with King. He and his wife, Charlotte Pihl, would regularly attend parties with him. King reportedly held his own parties with Charlotte, going to the Pihls’ farmhouse when Paul was away at sea. This happened so frequently that King’s wife, Mattie, knew to call the Pihl house if she couldn’t find her husband at the office.

But most subordinate officers were more familiar and resentful of King’s notoriety for enforcing the rules against his own subordinates while violating them himself. While there are plenty of examples of this from ship life and day-to-day operations, it’s perhaps most notable in King’s drinking.

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

The USS Lexington in 1941. King had predicted the rise of naval aviation and commanded the Lexington during a mock attack on Pearl Harbor in 1932 that almost perfectly predicted the 1941 attack.

(U.S. Navy)

King was in the service during Prohibition, and he encouraged officers around and beneath him to strictly follow the rules, except when he wanted to get drunk. He was known to carry a flask with him and doled out drinks with it when he wanted to party, even if he was pouring for people whom he would otherwise punish for drinking.

He even encouraged the commandant of his flight school to enforce prohibition against enlisted men and young officers while simultaneously joining an officers club known for its rancorous and alcohol-fueled parties.

All-in-all, not the best example or steadiest hand at the wheel.

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry

Admiral Ernest King onboard the USS Augusta (CA-31) with Secretary of the Navy Frank Knox during a visit to Bermuda in September 1941.

(Naval History and Heritage Command)

But the Navy put up with him and promoted him all the way to fleet admiral, making him one of only a handful of American service members who have ever worn five stars. Only five admirals ever received the honor, four of them during World War II.

That’s because, for his many flaws, he was also a brilliant tactician, strategist, and organizer. He predicted the rise of submarine warfare and naval aviation, attending and graduating both Navy schools, while the rest of his contemporaries were focused on battleships.

And he was known for doing what needed to be done, even if he was a jerk while doing so. When he was promoted to Chief of Naval operations over eight more senior admirals after Pearl Harbor. Legend has it that a reporter asked why he thought President Franklin D. Roosevelt had picked him, and King responded, “when the shooting starts, they have to send for the sons of bitches.”

As Roosevelt might have put it, “He’s a SOB, but he’s our SOB.”

Articles

This Army Spouse Was Hacked By ISIS And She Didn’t Flinch

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry


It’s not every day that you can say “Today I got a personalized tweet from someone claiming to be with ISIS.” And that’s probably a good thing.

It happened like this: The Twitter account of a military spouse who owns a spouse-focused non-profit was hacked by a group apparently affiliated with the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). The hackers then tweeted messages aimed at specific military spouses, including myself.

“Amy Bushatz! You think you’re safe but the IS is already here, #CyberCaliphate got into your PC and smartphone,” is, I’m told, what the tweet said (I did not actually see it before it was deleted, presumably by Twitter).

Not long thereafter I received a friend request from someone named “Gasper CyberCaliphate Sadz.” When I viewed their profile it was clear that they were not the sort of person I wanted to let into my social life. Within a few seconds the profile had been deleted. And yes, it was really creepy. The same photo and images were used in this account as were used during the CENTCOM hack.

Every spouse quoted in this CNN article was singled out in the tweets.

You might be thinking “that’s what you get for being stupid enough to be quoted by name in a CNN article about ISIS and cyber threats.” However, the decision to have my name used in that story wasn’t a hard one. My name is everywhere — here, on Military.com and in other national publications. I am a public person. That ship has sailed.

I’m told the FBI is investigating the situation, and all the proper military officials have been notified by those of us involved. My husband suggested I not let anyone dressed as a terrorist into our house.

I want to face this whole situation with a resolute jaw and a loud “being afraid means the terrorists win.” I’m not the type of person to live in fear or change my life just because some person on the internet wants to scare me. I’ve never done that before and I have no intention of doing it now.

Personal attacks bring up a variety of feelings. On the one hand, I’m super pissed. How dare they threaten me and my friends? Then there’s the maniacal laughter and the semi-inappropriate jokes about not opening the door for anyone in a bomb vest. I’ve got lots of those.

But then, underneath all of that somewhere deep in my core, I am trying to shake off the tiniest bit of what feels an awful lot like fear.

Because being singled out by someone claiming to be with a fairly terrifying terrorist organization? That’s scary. Knowing that, thanks to my job and public profile, my town of residence, spouse’s name and occupation, base, kid’s names and more wouldn’t take a rocket scientist to locate online? More than unnerving.

But I don’t think it’s the fear itself that matters. I think it’s what I choose to do about the fear that is the key. Do I let it change my habits? Do I ignore it completely and hope nothing bad happens?

Do I use it as a cautionary tale to be more vigilant — much like you would react to a story of a home robbery in your neighborhood?

Or do I completely change my life, delete my social media presence and lock down my family because I am afraid?

Being afraid doesn’t mean the terrorists won — it’s the living in fear that gives them the victory. I’m not giving them the victory.

More from Military.com:

MIGHTY TACTICAL

New flame-resistant uniforms will keep troops from feeling the burn

“Feeling the Burn” might be nice when you’re at the gym, but otherwise, it’s probably not good to be on fire.


Actually, burns are among the worst injuries to come out of war. They are disfiguring and excruciatingly painful — and the effects can be long-lasting.

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry
U.S. Navy aircraft carrier USS Enterprise (CVAN-65) on fire after air operations 14 January 1969. (U.S. Navy)

Unfortunately, burns are a military risk – particularly on ships, in combat vehicles, and around aircraft on flight lines. Take a good look at the photos of the fires on the USS Oriskany (CV 34), USS Forrestal (CV 59) or on USS Enterprise (CVN 65). Those three fires killed 206 sailors and injured 631, and caused over $198 million in damage. While the treatment of burns is improving, they are still very grave injuries. The best option is to avoid them in the first place.

Flame-resistant uniforms for the military have been a long-running pursuit. During World War II, sailors would be required to wear long-sleeved shirts and long pants – even in the hot and humid climates of the South Pacific. Uncomfortable in the steamy conditions, long layers were still far better at protecting sailors from burns than the shorts worn by other Allied navies (notably the Royal Navy).

A release from the Marine Corps Systems Command details the latest advancements in the effort to prevent burns: a new fabric combining cotton, nylon, and meta-aramid fibers (for example, Nomex) used in the Enhanced Fire Resistant Combat Ensemble. This upgrade will replace the Flame Resistant Combat Ensemble currently in service with the Marines and sailors involved with the Navy Expeditionary Combat Command (NECC).

Here’s who would win if US Marines went up against Russian naval infantry
Marines extinguish a fire during a controlled burn training exercise aboard Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort Feb. 17, 2016. (U.S. Marine Corps Photo by Lance Cpl. Jonah Lovy/Released)

These new uniforms also bring a bonus: they are twice as durable as the ones currently being used, which will save money previously spent replacing less effective uniforms.

Of course, more important than saving money is that these new uniforms could potentially save lives and will certainly mitigate flame-induced injuries — the real bargain of the Enhanced Fire Resistant Combat Ensemble.

Articles

QUIZ: Who said it, Tupac or Patton?

General Patton and Tupac are two very different historical figures. One is a legendary World War II hero, while the other is hip-hop royalty. Patton is immortalized in stories of military exploits and Tupac’s songs transcend time — he’s like the Elvis of the Hip-Hop genre.


Despite their differences, they both have a similar outlook on life. We gathered some of their most famous quotes to make this quiz. Did the Hip-Hop martyr or the World War II general say these things?

Do Not Sell My Personal Information