Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons? - We Are The Mighty
MIGHTY CULTURE

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

As the US, Russia and China test each other’s patience and strategic focus, speculation about the chances of a world war has hit a new high. But many of the people seriously engaged in this weighty discussion often get it wrong.

When it comes to estimating military capability, the Western media is principally concerned with the weapons capabilities of weaker states – and it rarely pays much attention to the colossal capability of the US, which still accounts for most of the world’s defense spending.

Any sensible discussion of what a hypothetical World War III might look like needs to begin with the sheer size and force of America’s military assets. For all that China and Russia are arming up on various measures, US commanders have the power to dominate escalating crises and counter opposing forces before they can be used.


Take missile warfare alone. The US Navy already has 4,000 Tomahawk cruise missiles, and the Navy and Air Force are currently taking delivery of 5,000 JASSM conventional cruise missiles with ranges from 200-600 miles. Barely visible to radar, these are designed to destroy “hardened” targets such as nuclear missile silos. Russia and China, by contrast, have nothing of equivalent quantity or quality with which to threaten the US mainland.

The same holds true when it comes to maritime forces. While much is made of Russia’s two frigates and smaller vessels stationed off the Syrian coast, France alone has 20 warships and an aircraft carrier in the Mediterranean – and US standing forces in the area include six destroyers equipped with scores of cruise missiles and anti-missile systems. At the other end of Europe, the Russian military is threatening the small Baltic states, but it is rarely noted that the Russian Baltic fleet is the same size as Denmark’s and half the size of Germany’s.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

A U.S. Air Force B-1 bomber.

(DARPA photo)

Meanwhile, China’s aggressively expansionist behaviour in the South China Sea is reported alongside stories of its first aircraft carrier and long-range ballistic missiles. But for all that the Chinese navy is large and growing, according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies, it’s still only numerically equivalent to the combined fleets of Japan and Taiwan, while the US boasts 19 aircraft carriers worldwide if its marine assault ships are included.

But overhanging all this, of course, is the nuclear factor.

Out of the sky

The US, Russia and China are all nuclear-armed; Vladimir Putin recently unveiled a new fleet of nuclear-capable missiles which he described as “invincible in the face of all existing and future systems”, and some have suggested that China may be moving away from its no-first-use policy. This is all undeniably disturbing. While it has long been assumed that the threat of nuclear weapons acts as a deterrent to any war between the major powers, it’s also possible that the world may simply have been riding its luck. But once again, the US’s non-nuclear capabilities are all too often overlooked.

US leaders may in fact believe they can remove Russia’s nuclear deterrent with an overwhelming conventional attack backed up by missile defences. This ability was cultivated under the Prompt Global Strike programme, which was initiated before 9/11 and continued during the Obama years. Organised through the US Air Force’s Global Strike Command, it is to use conventional weapons to attack anywhere on Earth in under 60 minutes.

This is not to say the task would be small. In order to destroy Russia’s nuclear missiles before they can be launched, the US military would need to first blind Russian radar and command and communications to incoming attack, probably using both physical and cyber attacks. It would then have to destroy some 200 fixed and 200 mobile missiles on land, a dozen Russian missile submarines, and Russian bombers. It would then need to shoot down any missiles that could still be fired.

Russia is not well positioned to survive such an attack. Its early warning radars, both satellite and land-based, are decaying and will be hard to replace. At the same time, the US has and is developing a range of technologies to carry out anti-satellite and radar missions, and it has been using them for years. (All the way back in 1985, it shot down a satellite with an F15 jet fighter.) That said, the West is very dependent on satellites too, and Russia and China continue to develop their own anti-satellite systems.

The air war

Russia’s bomber aircraft date back to the Soviet era, so despite the alarm they provoke when they nudge at Western countries’ airspace, they pose no major threat in themselves. Were the Russian and US planes to face each other, the Russians would find themselves under attack from planes they couldn’t see and that are any way out of their range.

US and British submarine crews claim a perfect record in constantly shadowing Soviet submarines as they left their bases throughout the Cold War. Since then, Russian forces have declined and US anti-submarine warfare has been revived, raising the prospect that Russian submarines could be taken out before they could even launch their missiles.

The core of the Russia’s nuclear forces consists of land-based missiles, some fixed in silos, others mobile on rail and road. The silo-based missiles can now be targeted by several types of missiles, carried by US planes almost invisible to radar; all are designed to destroy targets protected by deep concrete and steel bunkers. But a problem for US war planners is that it might take hours too long for their missile-carrying planes to reach these targets – hence the need to act in minutes.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

A U.S. Air Force B-2 Spirit stealth bomber.

One apparently simple solution to attacking targets very quickly is to fit quick nuclear ballistic missiles with non-nuclear warheads. In 2010, Robert Gates, then serving as secretary of defence under Barack Obama, said that the US had this capability. Intercontinental ballistic missiles take just 30 minutes to fly between the continental US’s Midwest and Siberia; if launched from well-positioned submarines, the Navy’s Tridents can be even quicker, with a launch-to-target time of under ten minutes.

From 2001, the US Navy prepared to fit its Trident missiles with either inert solid warheads – accurate to within ten metres – or vast splinter/shrapnel weapons. Critics have argued that this would leave a potential enemy unable to tell whether they were under nuclear or conventional attack, meaning they would have to assume the worst. According to US Congressional researchers, the development work came close to completion, but apparently ceased in 2013.

Nonetheless, the US has continued to develop other technologies across its armed services to attack targets around the world in under an hour – foremost among them hypersonic missiles, which could return to Earth at up to ten times the speed of sound, with China and Russia trying to keep up.

Missile envy

The remainder of Russia’s nuclear force consists of missiles transported by rail. An article on Kremlin-sponsored news outlet Sputnik described how these missile rail cars would be so hard to find that Prompt Global Strike might not be as effective as the US would like – but taken at face value, the article implies that the rest of the Russian nuclear arsenal is in fact relatively vulnerable.

Starting with the “Scud hunt” of the First Gulf War, the US military has spent years improving its proficiency at targeting mobile ground-based missiles. Those skills now use remote sensors to attack small ground targets at short notice in the myriad counter-insurgency operations it’s pursued since 2001.

If the “sword” of Prompt Global Strike doesn’t stop the launch of all Russian missiles, then the US could use the “shield” of its own missile defences. These it deployed after it walked out of a treaty with Russiabanning such weapons in 2002.

While some of these post-2002 missile defence systems have been called ineffective, the US Navy has a more effective system called Aegis, which one former head of the Pentagon’s missile defence programs claims can shoot down intercontinental ballistic missiles. Some 300 Aegis anti-ballistic missiles now equip 40 US warships; in 2008, one destroyed a satellite as it fell out of orbit.

War mentality

In advance of the Iraq war, various governments and onlookers cautioned the US and UK about the potential for unforeseen consequences, but the two governments were driven by a mindset impervious to criticism and misgivings. And despite all the lessons that can be learned from the Iraq disaster, there’s an ample risk today that a similarly gung-ho attitude could take hold.

Foreign casualties generally have little impact on domestic US politics. The hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians who died under first sanctions and then war did not negatively impact presidents Clinton or George W. Bush. Neither might the prospect of similar casualties in Iran or North Korea or other states, especially if “humanitarian” precision weapons are used.

But more than that, an opinion poll run by Stanford University’s Scott Sagan found that the US public would not oppose the preemptive use of even nuclear weapons provided that the US itself was not affected. And nuclear Trident offers that temptation.

The control of major conventional weapons as well as WMD needs urgent attention from international civil society, media and political parties. There is still time to galvanise behind the Nobel-winning International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons and the nuclear ban treaty, and to revive and globalise the decaying arms control agenda of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, which played a vital part in bringing the Cold War to a largely peaceful end.

Like the Kaiser in 1914, perhaps Trump or one of his successors will express dismay when faced with the reality a major US offensive unleashes. But unlike the Kaiser, who saw his empire first defeated and then dismembered, perhaps a 21st-century US president might get away with it.

This article originally appeared on The Conversation. Follow @ConversationUS on Twitter.

MIGHTY GAMING

Why the USAF sponsoring an eSports team is awesome for gamers

For as long as video games have existed, there have been fed-up mothers yelling at their kids to put down the controller and get back to their homework. As mom loves to remind us, “no one will ever pay you to play video games!” Well, we hate to disappoint you, ma, but for the last decade or so, there have been plenty of gamers who make a living enjoying their hobby.

As foreign as it may sound to some, there are people who are so good at video games that others will tune in (and even pay) regularly to see them compete, just like a traditional sports player. Today, we refer to this competitive gaming as “eSports.” This concept is slowly gaining traction, but just like any other idea, it’s been met with criticism from people who don’t understand that if enough are willing to pay money for something, it’s a feasible business model.

Now, the world of eSports may have just gotten the validation it needs from a brand people trust. Cloud9’s Counter Strike: Global Operations team has been officially sponsored by the United States Air Force.


Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

Red Bull has made a huge impact in the eSports world. Seeing as nearly every gamer is addicted to energy drinks, that’s an easy win.

(Red Bull)

Video game tournaments are nothing new. Way back in 1972, students at Stanford University competed to see who could get the highest score at Spacewar. In the 90s, Quake tournaments gained recognition around the world and, by 2015, a League of Legends tournament drew in 27 million viewers — seven million more than the highest viewership average of the NBA finals.

But, in a big way, there’s one thing missing from eSports: sponsorship from outside the gaming world. The biggest sponsors of eSports have always been AMD, Intel, and, typical, the company responsible for whichever game is being played. Occasionally, you’d find a sponsor from outside the hardware/software realm, including soft-drink companies, a certain adult-entertainment company, and even Audi — but these are typically outliers.

This pattern makes good sense in a way. It’s easy for sponsors to use gaming events to promote products that are directly applicable to eSports. Do you want to play like these guys? Buy this mouse and keyboard. Do you want to enhance your reaction times? Buy these goofy, yellow-tinted glasses. Do you want to practice late into the night? Chug some of this energy drink.

The sponsors have almost always directly related to gaming — not to a generally huge audience. That is, until the recent sponsorship deal of the Los Angeles-based Cloud9 by the United States Air Force.

“By developing a dynamic partnership with the Air Force, we will be able to deliver extraordinary content that will show fans a totally different side of the team. No one else in the world can put our team into a jet and let our fans watch the sheer thrill come over their faces. It’s going to be amazing.” says Cloud9 owner and CEO, Jack Etienne.

Starting this week, at the ELEAGUE CS:GO Premier 2018, the Cloud9 uniforms will now proudly sport the U.S. Air Force logo.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

“Join the Air Force! Do all the awesome stuff you see in the video games! Totally!”

(U.S. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Peter Reft)

The details of the partnership aren’t known — but it can be assumed that the USAF has spent more money on getting branded pens dumped into cups at recruitment centers than they did in putting the USAF logo on the t-shirt sleeves of four gamers. Money aside, this is huge news. This means that the United States Air Force has recognized the recruitment possibility in getting exposure in a new, emerging venue.

This offers legitimacy to the world of eSports. This means that a branch of the United States Armed Forces sees the possibility to attract potential recruits out of the pool of people watching eSports events. All jokes about the Air Force aside, younger, nerdy adults are kind of the Air Force’s target demographic — and they have been looking into many different avenues to meet recruitment numbers.

Since the Air Force has been pushing heavily for the cyber fields, this partnership makes absolute sense.

MIGHTY TACTICAL

The Army is shopping for attack, recon helicopter designs

U.S. Army aviation leaders offered details on Oct. 10, 2018, about recent solicitations to industry designed to advance the attack-reconnaissance and advanced drone aircraft programs for the service’s ambitious Future Vertical Lift effort.

“We had a very good week last week in dropping two [requests for proposal]. … The big one for us was the solicitation on the Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft,” Brig. Gen. Wally Rugen, director of the Future Vertical Lift, Cross Functional Team, told an audience at the 2018 Association of the United States Army Annual Meeting and Exposition.

Future Vertical Lift, or FVL, is the Army’s third modernization priority, intended to field a new generation of helicopters such as the Future Long Range Assault Aircraft to replace the UH-60 Black Hawk, as well as the Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft (FARA), by 2028.


The FARA will be designed to take targeting information from FVL’s Advanced Unmanned Aerial System and coordinate “lethal effects” such as long-range precision fires to open gaps into a contested airspace, Rugen said.

Released Oct. 3, 2018, the RFP for the FARA asks industry to submit proposals for competitive prototypes.

“All the offerors will basically get us their designs by Dec. 18, 2018; we will down-select up to six in June 2018 and, in 2020, we will down-select to two,” Rugen said.

The Army plans to conduct a fly-off event in the first quarter of fiscal 2023 to select a winner, he added. “It’s a tremendous capability … that we think is going to be the cornerstone for our close combat control of contested airspace.”

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

UH-60 Black Hawk.

The service also released a Sept. 28, 2018 Future Tactical Unmanned Aerial Systems RFP for industry to present platforms to conduct demonstrations for Forces Command units.

“Future Tactical UAS is really something that we have been asking for; it’s a [Brigade Combat Team]-oriented UAS,” said Brig. Gen. Thomas Todd III, commander of Program Executive Office Aviation. “It isn’t necessarily a replacement for the [RQ-7] Shadow, but it could be, depending on how it goes with industry … so we are ready to see what you’ve got.”

The Army plans to pick three vendors to provide “future tactical UAS platforms to FORCOM units, and they are going to go and basically demonstrate their capabilities,” Rugen said, adding that the Army is looking for features such as lower noise signature and better transportability.

The service plans to “do a fly-off in the next couple of months and down-select in February,” he said. FORCOM units will then fly them for a year in 2020.

The results of the demonstrations will inform future requirements for the FVL’s Advanced UAS, Rugen said. “If it’s something we really, really like, we may move forward with it.”

This article originally appeared on Military.com. Follow @militarydotcom on Twitter.

MIGHTY CULTURE

The commissary wants you to make these 10 game day recipes

We love the commissary for so many things: their low, low prices, the friendly baggers who maintain an excellent poker face when you can’t find your car, the guarantee that if you’re wearing something nice you’ll run into no one and the day you have on sweatpants while your kids are losing their shit, you’ll see everyone you know. Ah, the commissary.

And now, here are 10 more reasons to love this perk. They have game day recipes.


Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

www.commissaries.com

1. Cheesy jalapeno turkey sliders

Cheese. Jalepeno. Turkey. What could possibly go wrong? These little bite sized beasts are small enough to eat with your hands and just large enough that they’ll offset (some of) the beers.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

www.commissaries.com

2. Gouda turkey jalapeno poppers

In case your stomach wasn’t already on fire from the sliders, the gouda poppers promise to be a “smoky, tasty twist on typical poppers while using lower fat options.” Save the calories for the nachos.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

www.commissaries.com

3. Slow cooker carnitas

Set it and forget it with this easy recipe that will surely impress your guests as much as a Mahomes comeback. Cook on low for seven hours or high for four, these lovely three pounds of meat are a gift that will keep on giving throughout the night.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

www.commissaries.com

4. Pico de Gallo

If you’re feeling extra fancy, skip the store bought salsa and make your own. Since tortilla chips will almost definitely be on sale this weekend, give them the love they deserve with this easy to whip up dish.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

www.commissaries.com

5. Chicken enchilada casserole

We love a good casserole. It says “I tried and I love you, but I just didn’t really have time to roll individual enchiladas.” This is a classic with enough spice to keep it entertaining but mild enough that even the whiny nephew who always seems to be there, will eat it.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

www.commissaries.com

6. Chile chicken nachos

These bad boys are the real MVP. They take about 20 minutes to make and the glory you’ll receive will last a lifetime. You’re welcome.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

www.commissaries.com

7. Caprese salad on a stick

Tomatos, mozzarella, basil. These look fancy but they are something your 2nd grader could put together (from experience). The nice pop of color adds a little balance and nutrition to all of the cheese things you’re going to have.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

www.commissaries.com

8. Navy Chief’s bean peach salsa

No matter what branch you served in, this salsa is something you can get behind. With a sweetness from the peach but the spice from the jalapeños, you can eat this with as a dip, a topping on a steak or in your bed with a spoon like it’s ice cream. Like the baggers, we’re not here to judge.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

www.commissaries.com

9. Make a MyPlate of nachos

We’re not sure about the name, but this is the healthier version of “real nachos.” With ground turkey, greek yogurt and whole grain tortilla chips, it’s sort of like the real thing. Sort of.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

www.commissaries.com

10. Chunky chicken chili

What game would be complete without chili? Put it on your hot dogs if you like the meat sweats or eat it topped with cheese and Fritos and sour cream. You can’t go wrong with chili and this is a winner.

MIGHTY HISTORY

Here’s how the Navy kept its river forces going in Vietnam

For a lot of sailors serving in the Vietnam War, especially those on aircraft carriers, the war effort was a matter of routine. For many, that daily routine didn’t involve much combat. This wasn’t true for all sailors, of course. The pilots who flew from carriers or land bases, the SEALs and members of the Underwater Demolition Teams, and Navy corpsmen all saw plenty of action, among others.

One other group of sailors who often saw combat was the Navy’s riverine force. This force, known as the “Brown Water Navy,” took on the Viet Cong (and later, the North Vietnamese Army) in the Mekong Delta. These days, there are much newer, riverine combat vessels in service, and “brown water” sailors have seen action during Operation Iraqi Freedom.


In Vietnam, two classes of vessel primarily carried out operations. The first were PBRs (Patrol Boat Riverine). The Navy bought 32 of these 32-foot long vessels, each of which displaced seven tons. For small ships, they packed a huge punch: Three M2 .50-caliber machine guns and a Mk 19 automatic grenade launcher came standard. These small boats could be loaded up extras, too, including 7.62mm machine guns, 60mm mortars, and even flamethrowers!

Whatever configuration, these boats brought a lot of firepower for a crew of four to unleash on the enemy.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

A crewman rests near the forward gun turret of a PBR.

(US Navy)

The other vessel was the Patrol Craft Fast, known as the PCF or “Swift Boat.” This vessel, famous for being served on by former Secretary of State John Kerry (whose service drew controversy in 2004), packed three M2 .50-caliber machine guns and had a crew of six. 193 were built, and while they’re most famous for their service in Vietnam, the PCF was also exported.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

Swift Boats take South Vietnamese Marines to their infiltration point.

(US Navy)

While the sailors who went into harm’s way deserve our thanks, they could never have done it without the help of those who carried out maintenance on the vessels that brought them to the fight.

See how those maintainers kept the PBRs and Swift Boats in service and in action below!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMXkr17_Tls

www.youtube.com

MIGHTY TRENDING

Russian icebreaker under construction burns for hours

A fire aboard the under-construction Russian icebreaker Viktor Chernomyrdin engulfed a significant portion of the ship and injured at least two people before it was extinguished on Tuesday, according to Russian media reports.

The fire-alarm call came in around 7 p.m. Moscow time, or around 11 a.m. EST. Within three hours, it had reportedly been put out.


“At [9:10 p.m.] Moscow time it was announced that the blaze was contained and all open fire sources were put out at an area of 300 square meters,” a spokesperson for the Russian emergencies ministry told state-media outlet Tass. “At [10:15 p.m.] Moscow time, the fire was completely extinguished.”

Construction on the Chernomyrdin began in December 2012. The diesel-electric-powered vessel was expected to be the most powerful nonnuclear icebreaker in the world, according to Tass, and was supposed to operate on the Northern Sea Route, which traverses the Arctic.

pic.twitter.com/EWBk7D13nh

twitter.com

The Chernomyrdin has five decks, and the fire consumed parts of the third and fourth. The blaze affected a 300-square-meter area of the ship, out of a total of 1,200 square meters. According to Tass, “electrical wiring, equipment, and wall panels in technical areas” were damaged by the fire.

One of the people injured was hospitalized. The other was treated by doctors on-site, Tass reported, adding that 110 people and 24 pieces of equipment were involved in fighting the fire.

As noted by The Drive, which first spotted reports of the fire, the Chernomyrdin has been waylaid by budget and schedule problems.

The ship was supposed to be delivered 2015. In April 2016, an official from Russia’s state-owned United Shipbuilding Corporation said it would be delivered that year. In 2017, the ship was moved to Admiralty Shipyard in St. Petersburg, which is known for building warships, with the goal of speeding up construction.

Reports in January said delivery was expected by autumn 2018 — a date likely to be pushed back. The extent and impact of the damage are not yet clear, but fires can cripple ships.

In 2013, the US Navy decided to scrap a nuclear-powered attack submarine that had been severely damaged in a fire set by an arsonist, rather than spend 0 million to repair it.

The Chernomyrdin fire is only Russia’s latest shipyard accident.

A power-supply disruption on the PD-50 dry dock caused the massive 80,000-ton structure to sink at the 82nd Repair Shipyard near Severodvinsk in northwest Russia.

The Admiral Kuznetsov, Russia’s only aircraft carrier, was aboard the dry dock at the time. The collapse of the dry dock brought down with it a crane, which tore a 200-square-foot hole in the side of the ship above the waterline.

The Kuznetsov was undergoing an overhaul expected to be completed in 2021, but Russian officials have admitted there is no viable replacement for the PD-50, which could take six months to a year to fix.

The absence of a suitable dry dock for the Kuznetsov leaves the Russian navy flagship’s future in doubt.

video

www.youtube.com

The Chernomyrdin is also not the first fire-related accident at a Russian shipyard this year. In January, video emerged of thick, black smoke spewing from the water near several docked Kilo-class submarines at Vladivostok, home of Russia’s Pacific fleet.

Russian officials said at the time that the fire was part of “damage control exercises,” which many saw as a dubious explanation considering the intensity of the blaze.

A month later, a fire sent smoke gushing from the deck of the destroyer Marshal Shaposhnikov while it was in port at Vladivostok. Despite a considerable amount of smoke, a shipyard representative said there was no significant damage.

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

MIGHTY TACTICAL

Air Force successfully flies hypersonic missile on B-52 bomber

The U.S. Air Force just flew its first test flight of the AGM-183A Air Launched Rapid Response Weapon, a hypersonic weapon Lockheed Martin says it will continue to ground and flight test over the next three years.

The weapon, known as ARRW (pronounced “Arrow”), flew on a B-52 Stratofortress bomber aircraft on June 12, 2019, at Edwards Air Force Base, California. The tests were aimed to gather data on “drag and vibration impact” to the weapon as well as the performance of the carriage bay on the aircraft, the service said. The Air Force released photos of the flight via Twitter on June 18, 2019.

As part of a rapid prototyping scheme, the Air Force has been working with Lockheed, the prime contractor, to develop the hypersonic tech that would move five times the speed of sound as the Pentagon races to win the global race for new hypersonic technologies.


Lockheed officials touted the Air Force’s first flight here at the Paris air show.

“This captive-carry flight is the most recent step in the U.S. Air Force’s rapid prototyping effort to mature the hypersonic weapon, AGM-183A, which successfully completed a preliminary design review in March,” Lockheed officials said in a release. “More ground and flight testing will follow over the next three years.”

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

(U.S. Air Force)

Joe Monaghen, spokesman for Lockheed’s tactical and strike missiles and advanced programs, told Military.com that the first test of ARRW represented a milestone that paved the way for future flights and continued integration.

While the Defense Department is pursuing multiple avenues for hypersonic technologies, the variety will give the Pentagon better selection “to determine what works best operationally, across the different branches and mission sets,” Monaghen said.

Boeing Co., manufacturer of the B-52, said the recent test shows that the Cold War-era bomber can operate for years to come despite its age.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

(U.S. Air Force)

“This recent success put the [Air Force] well on its way to the live-launch testing of an extraordinary weapon soon,” said Scot Oathout, director of bomber programs at Boeing, in a statement. “The future B-52, upgraded with game-changing global strike capability, such as ARRW, and crucial modernizations like a new radar and new engines, is an essential part of the [Air Force’s] Bomber Vector vision through at least 2050.”

The Air Force awarded a second contract to Lockheed in August 2018 — not to exceed 0 million — to begin designing a second hypersonic prototype of ARRW. The Air Force first awarded Lockheed a contract April 2019 to develop a separate prototype hypersonic cruise missile, the Hypersonic Conventional Strike Weapon (HCSW).

This article originally appeared on Military.com. Follow @militarydotcom on Twitter.

MIGHTY HISTORY

The Navy had a massive party the day it banned alcohol on ships

Unlike the rest of the United States, the Navy’s Prohibition Era will likely never end. The early 20th Century trend away from the use of alcohol spread to the Navy in 1914 when Secretary of the Navy Josephus Daniels issued General Order No. 99, banning liquor aboard Naval vessels. It ended more than a hundred years of privilege and tradition.


While Americans learned from their mistakes by 1933 flooding the streets with booze, the Navy never did. But before they tipped the grog, they tipped their glasses one last time – often with those who would soon be their enemy.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

Their enemy was in front of them the whole time.

For years, the Navy had been reducing the amount of alcohol aboard its ships already. Until 1899, sailors could even keep their own stocks of booze on the ships. When Daniels issued Order 99, the commanders of the Navy’s ships tried to sell off what they could of their great stores of liquor, but – amazingly – there was just so much of it and not enough buyers for it all. They couldn’t let all that hooch go to waste.

Each ship was about to use what was its stores of alcohol on the day before their ships were to be completely dry. Some of them got creative with just how.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

“So I told the SecNav… *UUUUUUURP* get your g*ddamned*hands off me.”

There were parties, banquets, and even a funeral mourning the death of the tradition aboard the American vessels. Some of the ships, docked or stationed around Veracruz or occupying Mexican ports in 1914, even invited those from other countries to join them in their massive toast to the end of the tradition. British, French, German, Spanish, and Dutch naval officers and men began making their way to American ships to get a taste of the punch being slung by America’s force for good. The international house party would be one of the last times these European powers spent time together instead of trying to kill one another – World War I was going to kick off later that month.

Elsewhere around the world, U.S. naval forces held similar parties for their dear friend booze. But in 1933, even though the rest of the country voted liquor back into their lives, it did not find its way back to any ship’s stores.

MIGHTY CULTURE

The winter traffic collision this paramedic won’t forget

It was a cold December morning, and Taylor Olson and his fire department crew had just finished their start-of-shift checks on their gear. They wanted to get a hot breakfast before the winter storm set in, so they headed off while they had the chance. Olson had a paramedic student with him that day, one who hadn’t experienced any critical patients yet. Their fire station crews worked in 24-hour shift rotations, starting at 0700. As they loaded into their fire engine, a winter ice storm began to roll in. A mix of sleet and freezing rain was coming in heavy. 

Olson and his crew had to deviate from their breakfast plans twice because of separate 911 calls for minor car accidents related to ice on the roadways. The saying “where there is one, there are more” usually refers to critters and pests but also applies to winter storms and accidents in a paramedic’s world. 

The crew were eventually able to slam down breakfast. On their way back to the station, another call came in: lights-and-sirens response needed for a semitruck-versus-car accident on a two-lane interstate. To a paramedic, the combination of a semitruck, interstate speeds, and ice carries an ominous feeling — add a standard car to the mix, and it’s a recipe for disaster. 

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?
Light reflects off snow and sleet, impacting visibility while driving. Adobe Stock image.

Olson and his crew took off toward the call in the ambulance with its lights bouncing off the falling sleet. Icy roadways required the paramedics to navigate as quickly and efficiently as possible while being mindful of the conditions. There is a “golden hour” standard that establishes a 60-minute window after a traumatic injury during which a patient needs to receive definitive care at a hospital before risk of death and disability greatly increase.

As the crew crested the last hill on the interstate that was blocking their view, they started to get eyes on scene. A car appeared to have hit black ice, started to turn sideways, and then slammed under a tractor-trailer at highway speeds. Olson said it almost looked like the semi’s rear dual tires had run over the front end of the car and then back off.  

The emergency medical services crew had to piece together the puzzle of the accident from what they could see — there were no eyewitnesses coming forward. Because Olson and his crew handle both fire and EMS calls, they understand the different paths cars will take in various weather conditions and were well equipped to survey the scene.

Once an injury like this is identified, the “golden hour” is more like a couple of minutes — the patient is already in critical condition.

Olson and his ambulance crew approached the wreck as the engine crew dismounted and did the same. A woman stood next to the smashed car, trying to talk to the man inside. They found out he was her husband, and she had been in the car but was able to get herself out. Olson directed her to go with the engine crew since she was considered to be in stable condition. They needed to focus on the man trapped in the smashed car. 

“When I looked in the window, he kind of looked at me but had that thousand-mile stare look going on,” Olson said. “But you kind of know when it doesn’t look good.” Experienced paramedics know this look is a strong indicator of shock. Since there was sharp metal and glass everywhere, Olson and his partner ran back to the ambulance to put on their fire-department turnout gear. 

Olson crawled into the car through the passenger door, where the man’s wife had exited. He climbed into the back seat to better evaluate the trapped man. The driver’s side door was crushed into the patient, and the steering wheel had pinned down his legs. Olson did a double take.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?
A view of the damage to the patient’s vehicle. Paramedic Taylor Olson didn’t have much space to maneuver after the accident, giving CPR to the driver from the back seat. Photo courtesy of Taylor Olson.

“I looked down and his — basically his left leg was smashed completely up underneath the right leg. His pelvis was pretty much crushed,” Olson said, although he was surprised to find only minor scrapes and cuts outside of the man’s main injury.  

The internal bleeding caused by a crushed pelvis is fast and severe. Once an injury like this is identified, the “golden hour” is more like a couple of minutes — the patient is already in critical condition. Olson’s chief went to work with a ram bar in an attempt to slam the steering wheel away and free the man. Meanwhile, Olson placed an IV and started running fluids to assist with the man’s dropping blood pressure. The patient was no longer responding.

“He was awake, but I think nobody was home upstairs,” Olson said, identifying a hallmark of shock progressing to dangerous levels. 

The chief was experiencing difficulty moving the steering wheel over. Then the man slumped backward in his seat. Olson checked for a pulse but was unable to detect one, nor was his patient breathing. The man had suffered a traumatic cardiac arrest, which is common with severe trauma. Olson began to perform CPR, but with limited room, he had to work with one arm from the back seat while leaning over the center console. 

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?
A closer look at the space the paramedic and fire crew were dealing with after the accident. Photo courtesy of Taylor Olson.

Performing CPR is an exhausting measure even in a wide-open setting, but Olson put forth his best effort to maximize the modified form. He kept on administering chest compressions while the other crew members attempted to cut the car open. As the car was being dismantled, Olson covered the patient with his arms to protect him from getting sprayed with glass. “The cutter was right over my left arm,” Olson said, “like, probably a couple inches away.” 

Paramedic students are expected to familiarize themselves with an ambulance and all the gear they’ll use on the job. Olson’s student was on her first advanced life support (ALS) ride with them, so he wasn’t sure she would bring the right gear when he told her that the patient was in cardiac arrest. However, the student came running up with everything he needed. 

Traffic on the interstate had been halted by police and firefighters, and an extensive line of cars had grown behind them. People were pouring out of their cars, phones in hand to record the event, which increased the stress of an already difficult situation for the first responders. 

“Everything from the waist down was pretty smashed. I mean, there wasn’t much — I don’t think there was anything solid down there.”

Olson attempted to intubate the man — to place a tube into his trachea — from the only position available in the limited space. He wasn’t able to perform a normal intubation and resorted to a last-ditch effort he had never done before: a technique called digital intubation. The paramedic places a hand in the patient’s mouth and uses fingers to guide the breathing tube into the trachea. 

“I got it!” Olson exclaimed after placing it on his first try. A burst of laughter escaped both him and his chief — in chaotic and morbid situations, humor can often help clear the mind to focus on the upcoming tasks. 

Olson continued CPR while another crew member attempted to breathe for the patient via the tube and a bag valve mask, or BVM. The chief and Olson continually knocked helmets in the cramped space while performing their separate tasks. Their patient’s heart had stopped, and to keep his odds of survival as high as possible, they had to keep working on the patient nonstop — and they also had to get him out of the car or the treatments would be in vain. 

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?
Taylor Olson on the scene of a fire. Photo courtesy of Taylor Olson.

Unable to get the ram bar to move the steering wheel, the chief switched over to a tool called a spreader. At last he was able to push away the wheel, and the crew outside pried the driver’s door open. The man was quickly extracted, moved onto a stretcher, and into the ambulance. They hit the road immediately. 

The hospital was close, but en route Olson and his paramedic student placed an IO — an intraosseous line, sort of like an IV into the bone marrow — for additional fluids and medications to be administered. Now that the patient was out of the car, the destruction he had endured from the wreck was obvious. “Everything from the waist down was pretty smashed. I mean, there wasn’t much — I don’t think there was anything solid down there,” Olson recalled.

The crew entered the emergency room with the patient on the stretcher, performing CPR and breathing for him the whole time. While the hospital staff took over, Olson gave them his report. With this transition of care, the role of EMS in the call was concluded. From the point of contact on scene to transferring care to the hospital, approximately 20 minutes had elapsed. The men and women of EMS work efficiently and fast. 

Olson and his crew, exhausted, walked back to the ambulance. They needed to clean up and prep for the next call that would inevitably come in. There was still the rest of their 24-hour shift to endure — just another day in the office.

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

MIGHTY TRENDING

What the Guard will be doing while deployed on the Mexico border

President Donald Trump’s deployed National Guard troops have already begun arriving at the US-Mexico border — and they’ll mostly be providing aerial support and helping with surveillance and infrastructure projects, the Pentagon said April 9, 2018.

But the troops are explicitly barred from helping arrest or deport immigrants, as the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 limits the military’s ability to enforce civilian law without authorization.


The troops are set to use drones and light-, medium-, and heavy-lift helicopters during their deployment, Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Jamie Davis told The Washington Post in a statement. They’ll also assist with surveillance systems such as cameras and blimps.

Beyond that, the troops will be doing maintenance work on roads and facilities, as well as clearing vegetation, Davis said. He did not clarify whether those infrastructure tasks would include border wall construction.

The Department of Defense confirmed in a statement that the troops won’t conduct law-enforcement activities or interact with migrants or detainees without approval from Defense Secretary Jim Mattis.

Davis also said the troops won’t be conducting armed patrols, and will only carry weapons in limited circumstances, depending on their mission.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?
(U.S. Air National Guard photo by Master Sgt. Matt Hecht)

“National Guard personnel will only be armed for their own self-protection to the extent required by the circumstances of the mission they are performing,” he said.

It’s still unclear exactly how many troops will be deployed to the border — though Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico have so far committed nearly 1,600 members altogether. Trump said April 5, 2018, he hoped the states’ governors would authorize “anywhere from 2,000 to 4,000.”

The only border state that hasn’t yet responded to the Trump administration’s request is California, whose Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown has been a vehement critic of Trump and his anti-immigration agenda.

It’s also unclear what the deployments will cost and how long they’ll last, though Mattis has already authorized a payment that would cover the cost of up to 4,000 National Guard members through September 30.

Trump’s demand to have the National Guard deployed along the border came after a days-long tirade against a “caravan” of hundreds of central American migrants traveling through Mexico. Some of those migrants intended to seek asylum in the United States or enter illegally.

Though the caravan has mostly dispersed, organizers said April 9, 2018, that roughly 200 migrants still intend to claim asylum in the US.

MIGHTY HISTORY

Ukraine’s Navy: A tale of betrayal, loyalty, and revival

When Russia seized the Crimean Peninsula in 2014, Ukraine’s navy lost nearly all of its ships and most of its sailors quit or defected. Now, with help from its allies, Ukraine is slowly getting its sea legs back. This is the story of those who remained loyal to Ukraine and were forced to choose between family and country when they left Crimea. But, as they rebuild their lives and their nation’s fleet, rough waters lie ahead with Russia flexing its maritime muscle on the Black Sea.


MIGHTY CULTURE

This is the Air Force version of Burning Man

For three years, RED HORSE airmen have been rotating every six months to Air Base 201 in Agadez, Niger, to participate in the largest troop labor construction project in Air Force history. RED HORSE stands for Air Force Rapid Engineer Deployable Heavy Operational Repair Squadron Engineers.

The Air Force built the base and its 6000-foot runway from the ground up. A similar mission had not been undertaken since Vietnam.


Airmen had to persevere and innovate through the lack of an asphalt production facility in the country, thunderstorms that caused flash floods, dust storms that made it impossible to work safely, high-sulfur diesel fuel that fouled construction equipment and even a plague of locusts.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

U.S. Air Force Tech. Sgt. Paul Waters, a vehicle maintance NCOIC with the 823 Expeditionary RED HORSE Squadron, maintains the squadron’s construction equipment. Sgt Waters and his team battle the harsh environment and poor quality fuel that frequently breaks their equipment.

(U.S. Air Force photo by Tech Sgt. Perry Aston)

Despite working in one of the harshest environments in the Sahel region of Africa, RED HORSE finished a project that will allow aircraft as large as the C-17 Globemaster III to operate in western Africa, expanding the Air Force’s ability to bring air power to combat increasing extremist activity.

This article originally appeared on Airman Magazine. Follow @AirmanMagazine on Twitter.

Articles

5 general officers who were almost certainly crazy

These five American generals and admirals did things that played with the thin line between cunning and crazy, but they were awesome at their jobs so most everyone looked the other way.


1. A Navy admiral dressed up in a ninja suit to ensure his classified areas were defended.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?
Photo: US Navy

Vice Adm. John D. Bulkeley was an American hero, let’s get that straight right out of the gate. He fought to attend Annapolis and graduated in 1933 but was passed over for a Naval commission due to budget constraints. So he joined the Army Air Corps for a while until the Navy was allowed to commission additional officers. In the sea service, he distinguished himself on multiple occasions including a Medal of Honor performance in the Pacific in World War II. War. Hero.

But he was also kind of crazy. As the commander of Clarksville Base, Tennessee after the war, Bulkeley was worried that his Marines may not have been properly protecting the classified areas. So, he would dress up in a ninja suit, blacken his face, and attempt to sneak past the armed Marines. Luckily, he was never shot by any of the sentries.

2. Lt. Gen. George Custer was obsessed with his huge pack of dogs.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

Gen. George Custer had “crazy cat lady” numbers of dogs with between 40 and 80 animals at a time. It’s unknown exactly when he began collecting the animals, but while in Texas in 1866 he and his wife had 23 dogs and it grew from there.

Custer’s love of the animals was so deep, his wife almost abandoned their bed before he agreed to stop sleeping with them. On campaign, he brought dozens of the dogs with him and would sleep with them on and near his cot. Before embarking on the campaign that would end at Little Bighorn, Custer tried to send all the dogs back home. This caused his dog handler, Pvt. John Burkman, to suspect that the campaign was more dangerous than most.

Some of the dogs refused to leave and so Burkman continued to watch them at Custer’s side. Burkman had night guard duty just before the battle, and so he and a group of the dogs were not present when Native American forces killed Custer and much of the Seventh Cavalry. It’s unknown what happened to the dogs after the battle.

3. Gen. Curtis LeMay really wanted to bomb the Russians.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

Air Force Gen. Curtis LeMay is a controversial figure. On the one hand, he served as the commander of Strategic Air Command and later as the Air Force Chief of Staff. He shaping American air power as it became one of the most deadly military forces in the history of the world, mostly due it’s strategic nuclear weapons.

On the other hand, he really wanted to use those nukes. He advocated nuclear bombs being used in Vietnam and drew up plans in 1949 to destroy 77 Russian cities in a single day of bombing. He even proposed a nuclear first strike directly against Russia. Any attempt to limit America’s nuclear platform was met with criticism from LeMay. Discussing his civilian superiors, he was known to often say, “I ask you: would things be much worse if Khrushchev were Secretary of Defense?”

4. LeMay’s successor really, really wanted to bomb the Russians.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?

Gen. Curtis LeMay may have been itchy to press the big red button, but his protege and successor was even worse. LeMay described Gen. Thomas Power as “not stable,” and a “sadist.”

When a Rand study advocated limiting nuclear strikes at the outset of a war with the Soviet Union, Power asked him, “Why are you so concerned with saving their lives? The whole idea is to kill the bastards … At the end of the war, if there are two Americans and one Russian, we win.”

5. Gen. “Mad” Anthony Wayne made his soldiers fight without ammunition.

Could the US win World War III without using nuclear weapons?
Portrait: Anna Claypoole Peale

In the Revolutionary War, bayonets played a much larger role than they do today. Still, most generals had their soldiers fire their weapons before using the bayonets.

Not Gen. “Mad” Anthony Wayne. He was sent by Gen. George Washington to reconnoiter the defense at Stony Point, New York. There, Wayne decided storming the defenses would be suicide and suggested that the Army conduct a bayonet charge instead.

Shockingly, this worked. On the night of July 15, 1779, the men marched to Stony Point. After they arrived and took a short rest, the soldiers unloaded their weapons. Then, with only bayonets, the men slipped up to the defenses and attacked. Wayne himself fought at the lead of one of the attacking columns, wielding a half-pike against the British. Wayne was shot in the head early in the battle but continued fighting and the Americans were victorious.