The International Space Station is getting the most amazing home-food delivery since the early days of Uber Eats. The recent launch of a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket bound for the ISS carried genetically identical mice, a spherical AI robot named Cimon, and Death Wish Coffee — the world’s strongest coffee — at the request of Serena Aunon-Chancellor, one of the astronauts floating above the Earth.
The Upstate New York-based company created a zero gravity-friendly brew of their powerful joe just for the members of Expedition 56 aboard the ISS. The coffee has a whopping 472 milligrams of caffeine — more than twice the caffeine of a Starbucks Pike Place Roast, 13 times as much as a can of Coca-Cola, and four times as much as a Red Bull energy drink.
Astronauts love having fresh hot coffee aboard the International Space Station so much that they’ve designed and patented an espresso maker (called the ISSpresso machine) and the Zero-G Coffee Cup to facilitate their morning ritual.
Not having to drink the coffee from a bag is a big deal to astronauts. Any coffee aficionado will tell you that being able to smell a fine coffee is an important factor in tasting the coffee. Astronaut Don Pettit was one of many who were sick of the bags of coffee. So he crafted a prototype cup using overhead transparency film into a teardrop-shaped container and poured the coffee in. The design worked.
By 2021, Amazon has pledged to hire 25,000 U.S. military veterans across all of its operations. More than that, they are also dedicated to hiring veterans reservists, spouses, and family members – regardless of rank or military specialty. These “Amazon Warriors” as the company calls them, come to Amazon through a number of programs, each focused on a different aspect of veterans’ lives. This includes wounded warriors, active and transitioning veterans, student vets, and more.
You can catch Amazon and its employees active in all area of veteran culture, from the Old Glory Relay to RED Fridays and even doing 22 pushups every day. Amazon even partners with the Department of Veterans Affairs to create certification programs for vets with no costs.
One of Amazon’s best programs is an employment plan for wounded vets designed to fill skill gaps due to service-related wounds, injuries, and illnesses. Through education, advocacy, and training for wounded warriors, this one-of-a-kind program seeks America’s wounded vets to show the world the possibilities and potential these prior-service workers still have.
Amazon also launched the Amazon Military Leaders Program in an effort to find innovative, experienced talent to transition from military service and into the senior leadership at Amazon. It just makes sense – in order to fill the most necessary roles at the top of one of the world’s biggest and most profitable companies, Amazon wants to look for those people who volunteered for some of the most dangerous and critical jobs out there.
This company also goes above and beyond for National Guardsmen and Reservists who are activated or called away to training. Not only does the company ensure the member has job when they come back, as required by law, Amazon seeks to place the employee in a role they would have worked if they had never left their Amazon job at all. What’s more, if the pay the military member receives from serving is significantly less than their Amazon pay, Amazon will make up the difference.
“There are veterans and active duty service members from the Guard and Reserve at every level of the company,” says Ardine Williams, Amazon Web Services’ Vice-President of Talent Acquisition, who also happens to be a former Army officer. “That population, that community, makes it really easy for us to not only do the right thing but also do what we say we will do.”
When Amazon isn’t hiring veterans and preparing service members for their post-military careers, they are supporting other organizations with the same intent, mission, and drive. Amazon is a sponsor of the Military Influencer Conference, a three-day business development and networking event that brings together non-profit startup accelerators geared toward vet-owned businesses, successful veteran entrepreneurs, and like-minded veterans who are looking to change their lives by starting their own enterprises.
To learn more about what Amazon is doing for veterans in terms of training and employment, check out Amazon’s military page. To learn more about the Military Influencer Conference, check out the speakers list, or find a Military Influencer Conference close to you, visit MilitaryInfluencer.com and take a look around. It could be the first step to an entrepreneurial career.
Military stories are popular for many reasons; they celebrate heroes, mourn the fallen, and remind us all that war is heart-wrenching.
The military is one of the most detail-oriented, standardized, and training-intensive operations ever to exist, which should mean that films and shows depicting the military should have that same level of precision. The only way to accomplish that is to hire veterans for your set.
By seeking out real vets whenever possible, you’ll not only elevate your project, but you could be making major strides to “support the troops.”
SEAL Team Celebrates Veterans Day by Honoring Real Life Veterans on the Show
Whether they’re in front of or behind the camera, veterans will make your military film more realistic. There’s nothing worse than watching a film where the star snaps a terrible salute or wears a jacked up uniform. Mistakes like those are not only cringe-worthy for the military audience, but they can also reflect upon actual service members and their experiences.
Technical advisors and producers (like Army Ranger Tyler Grey, featured in the SEAL Team video above) keep shows and films accurate with hard work behind the scenes. Meanwhile, opening auditions to real veterans who transitioned to professional entertainment careers after their service means bringing in actors who already know how to wear the uniform, execute salutes and facing movements, and handle a weapon.
Behind-the-scenes photo from SWAT Season 2 Episode 14 featuring Guest Star (and U.S. Marine) Michael Broderick on-set with a cadre of veterans.
2. They’re a bridge to your military audience
The military is a vocal and well-connected community. When a film or TV show gets something wrong, vets don’t hold back about it. Hiring a veteran to help write your script could not only elevate the story but also help give insight into the military experience — and the military community will thank you for it when they watch the final cut.
Likewise, when Hollywood gets it right, vets are keen to broadcast it and show up in droves to watch. Groups like Veterans in Media and Entertainment provide professional mentorship for veterans in the entertainment industry — and then they amplify the success stories of their members.
The Vets Seen on TV team for the 2019 Run Ranger Run.
3. It’s a great way to actually thank them for their service
Veterans working in the entertainment industry put their creative careers on hold to serve, which means they lost some competitive years to their colleagues who spent that time building networks and fleshing out their resumes in Hollywood.
Vets aren’t asking for special treatment — they’re just eager for the chance to prove they have what it takes to bring a character or story to life. Don’t just give a vet the job; let them audition or interview for it like anyone else. After that, their work will speak for itself, whether they’re hired or not.
From portraying a vet or law enforcement on-screen, working stunts with weapons and hand-to-hand combat, or keeping your set in regs, veterans are instinctively prepared for the military movie life because they’ve already lived that reality.
Plus you know they’re going to show up early and squared away.
Featured Image: Navy veteran Jennifer Marshall playing Lt. Col. Bailey in Hawaii Five-O.
Another football season is nearing its end and the excitement surrounding this season, the surprise Clemson win, the NFC Championship controversy, and the upcoming Super Bowl inspired the people over at WalletHub to do yet another study on the habits and happiness of your average Americans – this time, with a focus on the gridiron.
Keep in mind, this isn’t just about NFL football, but you will find familiar NFL franchise cities on the top of the list. It also includes NCAA football. Some 244 American cities were graded on 21 different metrics using a 100-point scale, with 100 being a perfectly favorable score. WalletHub included one professional team or one college team, and assigned weights to each category based on its popularity with fans. The weighted averages comprise the list and are grouped by city size.
The top ten will likely not be a surprise to anyone. Pittsburgh, home of die-hard Steelers fans and the Panthers of the NCAA’s Atlantic Coast Conference, tops the list. That’s followed by the homes of the New England Patriots, Green Bay Packers, Dallas Cowboys, Giants, Dolphins, Saints, and so on. The first time the home of a nationally-ranked college football team comes is at the end of the 30 cities where NFL franchises are housed.
At the top of the college football list of best cities for football fans sits another unsurprising winner.
Clemson, S.C., may have defeated the Crimson Tide for the BCS National Championship, but they’re in second place when it comes to fandom. As you scroll the list you’ll find the homes of the Florida State Seminoles, the LSU Tigers, and the Penn State Nittany Lions. What might surprise you is the high ranking for the North Dakota State Bison, Appalachian State Mountaineers, and the U.S. Military Academy’s Black Knights.
In case you were wondering, West Point, N.Y. sits at number 39 while Annapolis, Md. is all the way at number 123, sandwiched between the home of the Cal Poly Mustangs and the Eastern Michigan University Eagles. Colorado Springs, the home of the U.S. Air Force Academy, is number 115.
There’s always next year, Navy.
As for the bottom of the list, the lowest ranked NFL city is Cleveland, which is unsurprising considering they once dubbed the Browns’ FirstEnergy Stadium the “Factory of Sadness.” In terms of the NCAA, the biggest surprise at the bottom of the college football list is the low, low ranking for the homes of the Oregon State Beavers and the Purdue Boilermakers, who scrape the bottom of a list of 244.
Check out the full list in the WalletHub Infographic.
These are all words that have been used to describe military kids. They’ve certainly earned these badges of honor, but military kids are still young and in need of strong guidance along the windy road of military life.
And along the way, we parents often hear the chorus of military life echoing in our minds:
Are the kids okay?
Even as we are proud of them for adapting to big challenges and embracing the world’s diversity, we still wonder how our military kids feel deep down inside. And we still hope they know that they can rely on us, talk to us, trust us.
When we’re caught wondering, we can turn to practical strategies that are proven to strengthen relationships between parents and children. Doing so is more productive than wondering and worrying, and the results might just give us the answer to that echoing question.
The next time you’re wondering, give these four strategies a try:
Break out the art supplies
(Photo by Nicolas Buffler)
Engaging in artwork is not only a great way for children (and adults) to express their emotions, it’s also a great way to bond and relax.
Developmental psychologist Richard Rende studied the effects of parents and children engaging in creative work together. Children experienced cognitive, social and emotional benefits, but Rende also emphasized that 95 percent of moms reported that the quality time spent with their kids was one of the most important benefits.
The Cleveland Clinic’s clinical psychologist Scott M. Bea notes that people can feel calmer by coloring in books like the popular mosaic coloring books. He describes this as a “meditative exercise,” which helps people relax and de-stress.
If you can’t stomach complicated projects involving paints and glue, then opt for plain paper and markers or coloring books. The creative activity will be pleasurable, allowing your minds to take a break from worrying about deployments and transitions, and enjoy special time together in the process.
Good conversations don’t have to resemble a session with Freud, but the more you show your kids that you’re focusing on them and nothing else, the better. So leave your phone at home or keep it tucked in your purse or pocket. Do what you have to do to resist its temptation, so that you and your kids can enjoy talking, uninterrupted.
Go for a walk, have a picnic or take your kids out for a “date.” Ask simple questions about school or friends, and follow their lead from there. If a deployment or a PCS is approaching, ask them how they’re feeling about it. If they tell you, great – validate their feelings and help process them. But, if they don’t feel like sharing, that’s okay, too.
Clinical psychologist and developer of Parenting for Service Members and Veterans Peter Shore says, “Recognize and respect when children don’t want to talk, but be available when they’re ready.”
Tell them how you’re feeling, too. Military kids might not realize that their strong, confident parents also get nervous and frustrated (and excited and optimistic!) about major events in military life. Sharing your feelings and talking about how you cope with them will set a good example and build trust.
Create your own traditions
(U.S. Army National Guard photo by Sgt. Brad Mincey)
Traditions don’t have to be only about Christmas morning and birthday dinners – you can think outside the box and create traditions that are unique to your family and reflect your unique military life.
These can be as simple as family dinners, family game night or reading before bedtime. But you can also design traditions out of activities your family enjoys or the location where you’re currently stationed. If your family is adventurous, make the first Saturday of every month “Adventure Saturday,” and explore a different part of your current location. If you’re crafty, devote the first Sunday of every month to creating something to decorate your home or send to a family member.
As long as the focus is on the family bonding through that activity (i.e., no screens are on or within reach!), these moments can serve as special, reliable traditions that your children will grow to rely on and value, especially during times of added stress.
Open a book
(Photo by Neeta Lind)
Reading aloud to your kids, even when they’re independent readers, is one of the best ways to build a strong relationship with your child. Research shows that when parents read aloud to their children, the very sound of their voice is calming, and the feeling of being snuggled up on a bed or a couch provides a sense of security. This simple activity can be a welcome balance to the uncertain times of deployment or PCS.
Reading aloud can also prompt important conversations. When you read, pause and empathize with characters, or relate your own experiences to situations that occur in the story. Encourage your children to do the same, and remain open to discussing how stories relate to emotions and experiences in military life.
Reading just about any book will provide you with a great tool to bond with your military kid, but you can find suggestions for age-appropriate books that relate to military life here.
Even if you’re pretty convinced that the kids are, indeed, okay, trying one of these strategies could still reap some valuable rewards. Using the Month of the Military Child as an opportunity to make one of these activities a common practice in your house will show your military kids that you’re proud of them and you love them – something that even the toughest, most adaptable and most resilient kids still need to know.
This article originally appeared on Military Spouse. Follow @MilSpouseMag on Twitter.
Across the globe, the number of reported confirmed cases of the coronavirus is always higher than the day before, topping 1 million as of April 2.
But what if the true numbers are actually even higher?
Experts say data — and how it is reported, or not reported — can give us an incomplete portrait of the problem.
Testing, Testing, 1, 2, 3
Testing, or lack thereof, is one of the main reasons the true scale of the pandemic is unknown. And that may not be the fault of governments. Many of those infected show no symptoms and thus are not candidates for testing.
But there may be other problems with the data — namely, that some governments may be distorting figures to understate the scale of the problem in their respective countries.
U.S. media reported on April 1 that U.S. officials believe China has concealed the extent of the coronavirus outbreak in its country, with officials calling China’s numbers “fake.”
Like China, Iran has been hard hit by the coronavirus pandemic. And like Beijing, Tehran is also suspected of tampering with its numbers to distort the situation there.
Questions have also been raised by Russia’s relatively low numbers as well.
While some governments minimize the problem at home, they may be behind efforts to maximize the scale of the pandemic elsewhere.
An EU watchdog tracking fake news said on April 1 that pro-Kremlin sources on social media were promoting a narrative that the European Union is failing to deal with the pandemic and is on the verge of collapse.
The more testing, the more likely countries will be able to curb the pandemic, according to the World Health Organization.
But does that mean infections are rising? Not necessarily. Experts say more testing could explain, at least in part, the higher number.
As The Atlantic magazine put it in an article published on March 26:
“Is the U.S. currently experiencing rapid growth in coronavirus cases, or rapid growth in coronavirus testing, or both? The answer should sound familiar: We don’t know yet, and it will be a while before we do.”
While the United States has ramped up testing, India has taken a different tack.
New Delhi has refused to expand coronavirus testing, despite criticism that limited testing could leave COVID-19 cases undetected in the world’s second-most populous country.
As Al-Jazeera reported on March 18, Indian officials have said the WHO guidance on more testing didn’t apply in India because the spread of the virus was less severe there than elsewhere.
Balaram Bharghava, who heads the Indian Council of Medical Research, said more testing would only create “more fear, more paranoia, and more hype.”
As of April 3, India — a country of nearly 1.4 billion people — had just over 2,500 reported confirmed coronavirus cases and 72 deaths, according to the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center.
But even if governments have the means and are eager to test, it may not always be clear whom should be tested.
That’s because not everyone reacts the same way to the coronavirus.
Jarmila Razova, the Czech Republic’s head hygienist, told Czech media on April 2 that up to 40 percent of people infected with the coronavirus may show no symptoms at all.
These so-called silent spreaders are feared to be fueling the coronavirus pandemic.
“Stealth transmission” is not only real but a “major driver” of the epidemic, said Columbia University infectious diseases researcher Jeffrey Shaman, who led a study published on March 16 in the journal Science. Its contribution to the virus’s spread “is substantially undetected, and it’s flying below the radar.”
But even when the data may be as close as possible to giving a true picture of the coronavirus problem, some governments may be opting to distort it.
China, where the outbreak began in late December, has reported only about 82,000 cases and 3,300 deaths as of April 3, according to data compiled by Johns Hopkins University.
By comparison, the United States has reported more than 245,000 cases and more than 6,000 deaths as of April 3.
Doubts that the Chinese numbers are accurate have been fueled in part by stacks of thousands of urns outside funeral homes in Hubei Province, where the coronavirus was first detected.
U.S. intelligence concluded in a classified report that was handed over to the White house that China covered up the true extent of the coronavirus outbreak, officials said on April 1.
U.S. officials refused to disclose details of the report, saying only, according to a Bloomberg report, that “China’s public reporting on cases and deaths is intentionally incomplete.”
In the Middle East, no country has been harder hit than Iran. The Islamic republic has reported more than 50,000 cases and more than 3,100 deaths as of April 3, according to data compiled by Johns Hopkins University. However, many suspect the numbers being reported by Iran, notorious for its censorship and lack of transparency, are low.
Since the start of the crisis, members of parliament and local officials in some of the major centers of the coronavirus in the country have said the real number of dead and those infected is being grossly understated by the clerical regime that rules Iran.
Satellite images from mid-March appeared to show mass graves being dug in the area around the city of Qom, where the country’s outbreak is believed to have begun.
Faulty Russian Testing Tool?
With a population of over 144 million, Russia has reported some 3,500 confirmed cases and just 30 deaths, according to data compiled by Johns Hopkins University.
While Russia has been lauded for carrying out testing early and on a relatively large scale, some experts say the low numbers may be explained in part by the testing tool developed by a state-funded laboratory in the Siberian city of Novosibirsk, known by its shorthand name Vektor.
A Russian science blog called PCR News, which said it had reviewed the specific protocols of the lab’s test, said it only detects the virus if it is over a certain threshold in a sample. The test also appeared to give a higher than expected number of “false positives.”
On March 23, Moscow’s coronavirus task force said the testing protocol would be changed, but it is unclear if the move will win over skeptics.
Within Russia itself, the Kremlin has moved to shut down domestic naysayers, accusing them of spreading disinformation on social media.
In early March, Russia’s Federal Security Service and Internet watchdog moved to take down a viral post claiming the real number of coronavirus cases had reached 20,000 and that the Russian government was covering it up.
Shortly after the move, Facebook and Instagram users in Russia started to see coronavirus awareness alerts linking to Rospotrebnadzor’s official website.
While the Kremlin has been quick to downplay crisis at home, it appears eager to promote it abroad.
According to an analysis released on April 1 by the EU’s East StratCom Task Force, “claims that the EU is disintegrating in the face of COVID-19 are trending on social media in all analyzed regions,” including EU states and Eastern Europe.
It also said RT and Sputnik — Kremlin-funded media — were peddling conspiracy theories that the virus was man-made or intentionally spread, while portraying Russia and China as “responsible powers.”
June 6, 1944, will forever be remembered as D-Day. On this day, the Allies orchestrated a massive, complex assault on German fortifications, establishing a foothold on the Nazi-held European mainland. The invasion of Normandy required coordination between units in the air, on the land, and from the sea. Paratroopers dropped into place, troops stormed the beaches, and even George S. Patton was used as a decoy.
But one unassuming piece of technology was a crucial component to Allied victory: a small boat.
Officially, the Navy called it the Landing Craft, Vehicle, Personnel, but everyone knew it as the Higgins boat, named after its designer, Andrew Jackson Higgins. This small craft (it displaced just nine tons total) had a top speed of 12 knots in calm waters. That doesn’t sound like much when compared to today’s Landing Craft Air Cushion that carry 36 Marines at a blazing 40 knots, but it was was the Allies needed to fight and win this decisive battle.
A Marine officer observed Japan using Daihatsu-class barges in China and wrote a report.
The Higgins boat wasn’t an American original. Believe it or not, the inspiration came from Japan’s Daihatsu-class barges, 21-ton vessels with bow ramps, which were used in the 1937 Sino-Japanese War. Marine lieutenant Victor Krulak had observed the vehicles in action, photographed them from afar, and sent his observation to his superiors.
After his report was dismissed and filed away by Navy bureaucrats, Krulak made a model of the boat and went to directly to Higgins, asking him if he could create a version for American use. Higgins proceeded to design what would become the LCVP using his own money — he even constructed three prototypes.
German troops who saw hundreds of LCVPs closing in on the Normandy beaches or ferrying troops across the Rhine – as this LCVP is doing – had no idea the idea came from observing Japanese barges in China.
With the start of World War II, the Allies needed a landing craft. Higgins was ready to produce. The LCVP allowed the use of just about any open beach as a landing point. It was first used in Operation Torch, months after the failed raid on Dieppe.
If Nazi Germany ever wondered who was to blame for the Allies getting their hands on such a boat, perfect for amphibious assaults, they’d never think to look toward their own ally, Japan.
Normally, asking which of two beloved characters with rabid fanbases is a way to rile people up, to start up a spirited debate. Kirk vs. Picard is the classic example of this kind of question: there’s no right answer, which is why it’s fun to talk about.
So when a Twitter user asked who gives the better speeches, Captain America or Optimus Prime, we didn’t expect anything approaching a consensus to emerge. And yet, one did.
It’s Optimus Prime, by a mile. And honestly, after we rewatched the speeches people posted in the replies, it’s hard not to agree. It might not be fair—he’s a massive robot after all—but he has more gravitas than Cap. There’s also the fact that the Transformers stories present plenty of opportunities to talk about the future of the human race and that, in the Avengers films at least, Cap is one of dozens of characters competing for screen time.
As a refresher, here is one of Optimus Prime’s best speeches from the Transformers films.
And here’s one of Cap’s, from Winter Soldier.
Captain America’s Epic Speech Scene – Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014) HD
Army officials at Fort Benning, Georgia, are rewriting the requirements infantry soldiers must meet when they test for the Expert Infantryman Badge.
Each year, infantry soldiers who have not earned the distinctive badge, consisting of a silver musket mounted on a blue field, must go through EIB testing, a series of 30 infantry tasks, ranging from land navigation to completing a 12-mile road march in under three hours.
Soon, EIB testing will feature more up-to-date tasks to reflect the modern battlefield, according to a recent Army news release.
Infantry officials recently conducted a modernized EIB pilot with multiple infantry soldiers, Master Sgt. Charles Evans, from the office of the Chief of the Infantry, said in the release.
“Their feedback was really essential to rolling out this new standard, making sure it was validated,” Evans said. “Just working out all the kinks and making sure that all the tasks were applicable, realistic and up-to-date with the latest doctrine.”
Parachute infantryman Spc. Sean Tighe, assigned to B Company 1st Battalion (Airborne) 501st Infantry Regiment, performs push-ups as 1SG Landon Sahagun, B Company 1st Battalion (Airborne) 501st Infantry Regiment, counts his repetitions during the Expert Infantryman Badge testing.
(U.S. Air Force photo by Justin Connaher)
Many of the changes in the manual are designed to standardize options for units in how to conduct the testing, but “there will be significant changes to some of the tests themselves,” according to the release.
“Indirect fire, move under fire, grenades, CPR and care under fire are all being reworked,” the release states.
The results of the pilot will soon be put into an updated training manual for EIB testing.
“The reason we did this event was to make sure it wasn’t just written from a single perspective, that it had feedback from all the different types of units across the Army,” Evans said.
The headlines in Georgia read that the country will one day join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization – whether Russia likes it or not. The man who made the declaration is NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg. The Secretary was visiting Georgia at the end of a set of joint NATO-Georgian military exercises.
No firm date has been set but the Kremlin, long opposed to Georgia’s membership in the anti-Russian alliance, can’t be pleased with the idea of another NATO country along its border.
From the 2011 Film “Five Days of War,” about the Georgian side of the 2008 Russia-Georgia War.
The Russians have occupied part of internationally-recognized Georgian territory since capturing it in 2008. The aftermath of that conflict saw Russian occupation of the territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Russian recognition of those territories as sovereign states, and a permanent Russian military presence in both areas. Thousands of Russian troops are stationed there to this day. Georgia still considers those areas to belong to Georgia.
That same year, the NATO membership decided Georgia would definitely become a NATO member one day. Secretary Stoltenberg reaffirmed the commitment of NATO allies to Georgia, saying there was nothing Russia can do to prevent the move.
“We are not accepting that Russia or any other power can decide what members can do,” he said. “No country has the right to influence NATO’s open-door policy.”
American and Georgian troops during military exercises in the Caucasian country.
Georgia has been in what Russia considers its sphere of influence since the days of the Tsar, which can put the country in a precarious situation so close to its powerful neighbor. Ukraine has also been trying to escape Russian influence since the fall of the Soviet Union and has tried to do so by moving closer to joining the NATO alliance. Russia considered Ukraine’s membership in NATO to be a direct national security threat, which led to the unofficial invasion of Ukraine and the annexation of the Crimean Peninsula.
Russia used similar tactics in the lead-up to its 2008 invasion of Georgia, including the use of Russian-backed insurgents, Russian-made weapons, and even the first use of concurrent cyberattacks during a conventional armed conflict. If the Russian Army made such an aggressive move on Georgia as a NATO member, the attack would trigger NATO’s Article 5 – that an attack on one member country is an attack on all countries.
American troops with the NATO flag in Afghanistan.
The first and only time Article 5 was automatically invoked, the alliance took immediate action. Less than a day after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, struck the United States, NATO member countries informed the United Nations they were invoking Article 5 and that each country would take an immediate eight steps to assist the United States. While provoking the alliance isn’t Russia’s style, the addition of Georgia could still lead to a war.
On three separate occasions, the collective defense agreement came to member state Turkey’s aid at the request of Turkish officials. In 1991, 2003, and again in 2012, the NATO alliance responded with allied troops, weapons, and equipment to the call for aid from a NATO ally. A buildup of allied troops near the border with the breakaway republics of South Ossetia and Abkhazia would surely be met with a buildup of Russian troops on the opposite side.
Russian Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev and President Vladimir Putin.
The Kremlin has not specifically responded to the recent statements made by Jens Stoltenberg, but most recently, Russian Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev warned of “a terrible conflict” brewing just by making such a move. He also questioned the wisdom of provoking such a conflict.
This week, historic news filtered out of North Carolina saying that a female National Guardsman will be the first woman to pass the Special Forces Qualification Course (Q-Course) and will earn the title of Green Beret. While the enlisted soldier has not passed the course yet, officials say that at this point barring a medical injury, she is practically guaranteed to graduate.
This morning, the New York Times reported that in 1980, a woman named Kate Wilder did indeed graduate the course but was told the day before graduation she was not allowed to graduate with her class, because of her gender. Ms. Wilder fought back and six months later was finally given the certificate stating she had earned the right to wear the Green Beret, but Wilder had already left the Fifth Special Forces Group and eventually transitioned to the Reserves.
Prior to now, only a few women have passed the Special Forces Assessment and Selection Course but none of them passed the year long Q-Course. The soldier is going to be an 18C or Engineer Sergeant.
According to the Army, the Special Forces Engineer Sergeant is a construction and demolitions specialist. As a builder, the engineer sergeant can create bridges, buildings and field fortifications. As a demolitions specialist, the engineer sergeant can carry out demolition raids against enemy targets, such as bridges, railroads, fuel depots and critical components of infrastructure.
The New York Times also reported a second female soldier is working through a longer Q-Course (the course length will depend on the prospective Green Berets MOS) as a 18D or Medical Sergeant.
This is no small feat. As we all know, making it into the Special Forces required many attributes including superior physical fitness, an ability to handle traversing rugged terrain, weapons proficiency and strong mental aptitude to solve problems on the fly. Green Berets deploy and execute nine doctrinal missions: unconventional warfare, foreign internal defense, direct action, counter-insurgency, special reconnaissance, counter-terrorism, information operations, counterproliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and security force assistance. Also, passing the Q-Course is one thing. The constant tempo of deployments and training while keeping up with high physical fitness standards and training can take a toll on even the most seasoned Green Berets.
There is no doubt the newly minted Green Beret will have tough challenges in her career in the Special Forces. And there will probably be resistance from a few people that struggle to accept that a woman made it through such an arduous course. (The course has been modified due to feedback from active Green Berets so it could be more compatible with deployments and retention but the standards are still the same.)
However, the potential benefits to having women as part of the Special Forces community are too great to ignore.
Retired Lt. Gen. Steve Blum, a 42-year Army veteran who spent 16 years with the Green Berets said, “I applaud and celebrate the fact because half of the world that we have to deal with when we’re out there, half of the people we have to help, are women. The days of men fighting men without the presence of women is long gone.”
When it comes to unconventional warfare, it’s safe to say pretty much every engagement we are involved with nowadays is unconventional. The role of women has expanded dramatically during the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan and women have been decorated for bravery on the battlefield.
In recent years, we have seen ISIS be thoroughly beaten when engaged by Kurdish forces comprised of women. Having a female advisor in those units would allow better access, more trust, and better control when it comes to directing forces to defeat our enemy.
The same can be said for counter-insurgency and counter-terrorism. The Green Berets were some of the first troops to go into Vietnam as advisors to the South Vietnamese who were fighting a counter-insurgency campaign against the Viet Cong. The Viet Cong and many other insurgent troops have used local females as fighters, transporters and for intelligence gathering. Having a female Green beret engage local women could potentially make counter insurgency easier.
When it comes to reconnaissance, we all know there are places that are harder to get close to because men would stick out like a sore thumb. Certain places in the Middle East and elsewhere have places where men can’t get into and having a highly trained female would be a great way to circumvent that potential issue.
William Denn, an Army Captain who served multiple combat tours said in an interview with the Washington Post that, “Most Iraqi men were reticent to speak with us for fear of retribution from al-Qaeda. Iraqi women, often fed up with the violence in their neighborhoods, could be persuaded to provide information, but first we had to bridge the gender gap, build rapport and earn their trust, all of which took valuable time.” Denn went on to write that “including women in front-line units would be more than an exercise in social equality; it would be a valuable enhancement of military effectiveness and national security.”
While we won’t know her identity anytime soon, it will be awesome to see the path she trailblazes for other women who seek to serve in the Special Forces and how it can help us earn victories in the toughest environments.
Forget three square meals a day. Fasting may be the ultimate recipe for long-term health.
This is a piece of advice that cultures and religions around the world have been taking for centuries.
In recent years, a version of this practice called intermittent fasting, where people skip eating anywhere from several hours to several days in a row, has started taking off. Hugh Jackman once said he only eats for a strict 8 hours each day, and Silicon Valley biohackers are embracing a 36-hour water-only “Monk fast,” as they call it, which some perform once a week.
Another popular version of the plan, the 5:2 fast, lets people eat normally most of the week, but then requires a strict limit of around 500 calories per day on the remaining 2 days.
There’s clear evidence that fasting, when done right, can reduce a person’s chances of developing long-term health issues like diabetes, heart disease, and multiple sclerosis (MS). And it helps some people lose weight, too.
Dr. Miriam Merad, director of the Precision Immunology Institute at Mount Sinai School of Medicine, said the typical modern diet of constant eating is making our immune system cells work overtime, and it’s not good for long term health. Her team’s small study (in both people and mice) out in the journal Cell today provides some of the first essential clues about why letting our guts spend many hours of the day without food can do a body good.
(Photo by Toa Heftiba)
Eating food turns on inflammatory cells in the body
The reason why fasting is good for us has to do with a type of immune cell called a monocyte, which our bodies typically release to fight off infections and wounds.
Monocytes are inflammatory, and the white blood cells can cluster to heal the body when we’re injured. But any time we eat food, monocytes are also standing guard in case we ingest any threatening microorganisms. This is especially true when we eat (and drink) sugar. Monocytes also accumulate in fat tissue, contributing to chronic disease.
Merad’s new study provides some of the first evidence that intermittent fasting can help calm these inflammatory cells, making them less active. By taking blood samples from 12 healthy adults who were asked to fast for 19 hours in a day (and performing similar experiments with similar results on mice, too), Merad’s team of scientists discovered that the subjects’ circulating monocyte levels were astonishingly low while fasting.
“That scared us, because we thought maybe when you diet like this, if you have an infection, this monocyte won’t be able to react to it,” Merad said. This turned out not to be the case.
Her hunch is that by being well-fed every day, we are creating a perfect storm of inflammatory monocytes running on overdrive in the body, setting people up for chronic diseases like diabetes, heart disease, and liver issues, especially if we run on lots of sugar.
When we fast, though, we deprive our bodies of glycogen, a simple energy source that often comes from carbohydrates like sugar.
“Usually the number of monocytes that we have circulating is pretty high because, in America especially, we eat all the time, Merad said. “We snack. I don’t know whether you snack, I snack all the time.”
Don’t start a fasting plan without expert advice
Merad cautions that her study should not serve as dietary advice on its own.
“All fasting has to be done in discussion with a dietitian, with a nutritionist, with your general practitioner,” she said.
She said it’s important to understand the difference between fasting and starving, which can cause long-term brain damage or even be deadly. People who are particularly sensitive to glucose levels (like diabetics) and other at-risk groups, including pregnant women, likely should not fast.
Fasting is not 100% safe for anyone when taken to extremes.
“If you start fasting for too long you destroy your immune system,” Merad said. “You become very susceptible to infection. So fasting is not a trivial thing. It’s good to fast, but you cannot starve yourself.”
Fasting has so many health benefits, they’re hard to count
Researchers have known for a long time that caloric restriction is tied to a host of health benefits. Periodic fasting can help people steer clear of long-term health problems like diabetes, high cholesterol, and obesity. It can also can boost the production of a protein that strengthens connections in the brain and serve as an antidepressant. Some scientists even think fasting can help people live to a ripe old age by keeping cells healthy and youthful longer.
Merad now tries to eat dinner a few hours earlier than she used to, and she said other researchers in her lab (as well as her husband) are also experimenting with their own versions of intermittent fasting plans, like skipping breakfast.
“Often we eat because we want some social time with family and friends, but do we need to eat three times a day?” she asked. “Maybe eating two times a day would be entirely sufficient and very beneficial, in fact, in terms of health.”
This article originally appeared on Insider. Follow @thisisinsider on Twitter.
While the Pentagon has questioned the need for a dedicated Space Force, the U.S. is already a signatory to multiple space treaties that spell out its obligations in the final frontier. And there are already a number of missions being done by other forces that would clearly be the purview of an independent Space Force.
Here are nine things the Space Force must do — and two things it can’t.
They probably won’t need so many graphical overlays to do it, though.
Protect American satellites
American satellites are one of the most important parts of modern, digital infrastructure. They’re also extremely vulnerable. They’re under constant threat of striking debris that’s already flying through orbit and China and Russia both have demonstrated the capabilities to bring one down at any time.
A Space Force would likely be tasked with building countermeasures to protect these valuable assets. Oncoming missiles could be confused with jamming or brought down with lasers — but lasers can also serve as an offensive weapon against enemy satellites. Additionally, some spacefaring nations, including the U.S., are developing technologies that could allow them to seize enemy satellites and steer them into danger.
Tactical battles in space sound complicated.
(U.S. Air Force)
Identify enemy killer satellites and template attacks against them
Speaking of which, the Space Force will likely need intelligence assets to identify satellites with offensive capabilities and template ways to neutralize them quickly in a space war. Satellites could be the U-boats of a future conflict, and the best way to stop them before they can hide amidst the space junk is to take them out at the first sign of conflict.
Satellites are expensive. And hard to make. And worse to replace.
(U.S. Air Force)
Ensure plans for the replacement constellations are viable
But there’s no way that American defenses could stop all — or likely even the majority of — attacks. Luckily, DARPA and other agencies are already testing potential ways to rapidly rebuild capabilities after an attack.
They’ve tested launching moderate-sized satellites from F-16s as well as sending up rockets with many small satellites that work together to achieve their mission, creating a dispersed network that’s harder to defeat.
(Graphic by U.S. Air Force)
Figure out how to destroy space debris
We mentioned space debris earlier — and it’s important for a few reasons. First, it’s a constant threat to satellites. But more importantly for strategic planners, most methods of quickly destroying an enemy’s satellite constellation will create thousands (if not millions) of pieces of debris that could eventually destroy other satellites in orbit, including those of the attacking nation.
So, to create a credible threat of using force against other nations’ satellites, the U.S. will need a plan for destroying any space debris it creates. The most pragmatic solution is to create weapons that can kill satellites without creating debris, like the lasers and killbots. But those same lasers and killbots could be used to clear out debris after satellites are killed with missiles.
China has proposed a “space broom,” armed with a weak laser that could clear debris (and, purely coincidentally, might also be used to destroy satellites).
Air Force graphics are as complicated as Army graphics. I wonder if everyone thought it was the graphics that decided who got the Space Force? (You win this round, Air Force).
(U.S. Air Force)
Protect American industry in space
The U.S. military branches are often called to protect national interests. Among those national interests is business — and business in space is likely to be massive in the near future, from private space companies teasing the possibility of tourism to asteroid mining to zero-gravity manufacturing.
Of course, building the infrastructure to do these things in space will be expensive and extremely challenging. To make sure that America can still gather resources and manufacture specialized goods — and that the military and government can buy those goods and resources — the Space Force will be tasked with protecting American interests in space.
There is little standardized equipment between different space agencies, though Russia does share some matching equipment thanks to their access to Space Shuttle schematics when overhauling the Soviet space program. The Space Force will likely have to figure out ways to rescue astronauts and civilians in space despite equipment differences.
Yeah, you guys can hitch a ride. Did you bring your own spacesuit or do you need a loaner?
(Photo by U.S. Air Force Senior Airman Ian Dudley)
Provide orbital rides for other branches
While the Marine Corps has already done some preliminary work on how to move its Marines via orbit, little planning exists for the nitty gritty details of moving troops through space. All of the branches will likely develop some tools for moving personnel, but Congress will likely demand that the branches prevent unnecessary redundancy — like how the Army has its own boats, planes, and helicopters, but has to get most of its rides from the Navy and Air Force.
The Space Force will be the pre-eminent branch in space, and will likely need the spaceports and shuttles to match.
Learn to steer (or at least divert) asteroids
Currently, NASA has the lead on detecting near-Earth objects and preventing collisions, but the military generally gets the bigger budget and, as they say, “with great funds comes great responsibility.”
Of course, the Space Force won’t be all shuttle pilots and flight attendants — the admin folks will have a lot of paperwork to do, too. Another U.S. space treaty obligates America to provide details of every object it launches into space as well as every person who enters space.
All of those details that get passed when personnel enter or leave a country will also have to get passed when they enter or leave space, necessitating an admin corps who join the space force exclusively to pass paperwork.
If you think that makes the Space Force more boring, just wait until you see the things they, by treaty, aren’t allowed to do.
Super sexy — but also not allowed to be based on the Moon.
(U.S. Air Force)
No carrying weapons of mass destruction
The Outer Space Treaty of 1967 bans any spacefaring nation from putting weapons of mass destruction in orbit or basing them on celestial bodies, like the Moon. So, no Space Marines with nuclear missiles in orbit. Rockets, bullets, and lasers? Maybe.
Nukes? No way. Gotta leave those back on Earth.
No building military bases on celestial bodies
Even worse news for Space Force personnel: They can’t have any dedicated military bases on celestial objects either, also due to that same Outer Space Treaty of 1967. The U.S. will need to renegotiate the treaty, build more space stations, or keep nearly all Space Force personnel on Earth, only sending them up for short missions.