These vets made a one-shot video simulating 'Call of Duty' - We Are The Mighty
MIGHTY GAMING

These vets made a one-shot video simulating ‘Call of Duty’

U.S. Army vet Gregory Wong is no stranger to making fan films. His Jurassic World fan films and their behind-the-scenes extras have 2 million+ views on YouTube alone thanks to the military perspective he and his teams brought to the franchise.

An avid airsofter and gamer, Wong enjoys bringing those tactics to life after his military service.

Most recently, he teamed up with some fellow veterans and civilians to create a one-shot style video that emulates the experience from the new Call of Duty game.

Check it out right here:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81gi7ikIwsg
CALL OF DUTY IN REAL LIFE | CLEAN HOUSE MODERN WARFARE – SIONYX

www.youtube.com

“Since everyone, both civilian and military, has been sinking their time into the game, it felt like a fun opportunity to explore and experiment by emulating the most talked about portion,” shared Wong.

The video also uses a color night vision camera built for outdoor use — and a little help from post-production.

“We used editing software to give it that iconic green look,” Wong divulged. “It’s a good exercise for making fan projects with limited budget but high attention to detail. We were fortunate to have gear from one of the companies that actually supplies the CTSFO (British national police force like FBI SWAT or FBI HRT).”

Also read: Some veterans went balls out and made a ‘Jurassic Park’ fan film

Wong’s team used the Aurora, a day/night camera with true night vision that uses Ultra Low-Light IR sensor technology that delivers true night vision capability in monochrome or in color. They also shot with gear from c2rfast, Airsoft Extreme, and PTS Syndicate.

The Clean House mission in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare takes place in a large house that the player must infiltrate, eliminating enemies and protecting hostages. Forbes magazine called it the “finest single-player FPS experience in years.”

Check out the video above and see what you think.

Articles

Gurkha soldiers are rebuilding vets homes after massive earthquake

When a massive earthquake struck two years ago in Nepal, a sudden coalition formed to help. Service organizations, allied militaries, and others rushed from near and far to dig out survivors and provide help. And some native Gurkha soldiers are still there, lending their expertise to the rebuilding of hundreds of homes.


A total of 8,891 people are thought to have died and another 22,300 injured in the earthquakes on April 25 and May 12, 2015.

A Nepalese soldier carries a young earthquake victim from a U.S Marine Corps UH-1Y Venom helicopter assigned to Joint Task Force 505 to a medical triage area at Tribhuvan International Airport, Kathmandu, Nepal, after a 7.3 magnitude earthquake struck the country, May 12, 2015. (Photo: U.S. Marine Corps Gunnery Sgt. Ricardo Morales)

One of the military forces that rushed in were Gurkha soldiers from the British Army in Operation Leyland. The Gurkhas are recruited from the same region of Nepal that was worst hit, and the troops were deployed to help their own families and forebears.

But the Gurkhas didn’t leave once the emergency passed. They’re still taking turns rotating into the area to help rebuild the homes of Gurkha veterans. Operation Marmat was a deliberate deployment of about 100 Gurkhas at a time to build homes with materials purchased by the Gurkha Welfare Trust.

A Gurkha soldier helps rebuild the home of a former Gurkha rifleman during Operation Marmat, an ongoing effort to rebuild the homes of Gurkha veterans. (Photo: Facebook/British Army)

In addition to their labor in the mountains of Nepal, the Gurkhas have raised money — approximately $65,000 — across the world with an emphasis on the United Kingdom where they are based.

An update from the British Army Facebook page says that 800 homes have been rebuilt by the trust and 61 of them were built with labor from the active duty Gurkha soldiers in the past two years.

Another 300 homes are still slated for reconstruction. People who want to help can visit the Gurkha Welfare Trust.

A Nepalese soldier from the Royal Gurkha Rifles regiment of the British Army stands guard in Sanger, Afghanistan. (Photo: U.S. Navy Petty Officer 2nd Class Jonathan David Chandler)

Gurkha soldiers have served the British Army with distinction for over 200 years, including deployments to both world wars, Iraq, and Afghanistan where they served alongside American troops.

To learn more, check out this short video from the British Army (you must be logged into Facebook to see the video):


MIGHTY TACTICAL

5 close-air support weapons for the Lancer that are better than a cannon

Recent reports have surfaced that state that the B-1B Lancer might get a cannon to help provide close support for troops on the ground. Now, as we all know, when it comes to using a gun to provide support for the troops, nothing beats the A-10’s BRRRRRT.


The A-10 may be legendary, but that doesn’t mean Boeing won’t try and top it. Currently, according to an Air Force fact sheet, the Lancer carries “84 500-pound Mk-82 or 24 2,000-pound Mk-84 general purpose bombs; up to 84 500-pound Mk-62 or 8 2,000-pound Mk-65 Quick Strike naval mines; 30 cluster munitions (CBU-87, -89, -97) or 30 Wind-Corrected Munitions Dispensers (CBU-103, -104, -105); up to 24 2,000-pound GBU-31 or 15 500-pound GBU-38 Joint Direct Attack Munitions; up to 24 AGM-158A Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missiles; 15 GBU-54 Laser Joint Direct Attack Munitions.”

In addition to this diverse lineup, Boeing wants to mount a cannon onto the plane that retracts into the airframe’s belly. However, we think the Lancer deserves something a little more exciting than a cannon. Here are five suggestions:

The CBU-100 cluster bomb, also known as the Mk 20, carries 247 bomblets in a 500-pound package.

(U.S. Navy)

1. CBU-100 Rockeye cluster bomb

This is a 500-pound cluster bomb that’s carried the same way that a Mk 82 is carried on tactical aircraft. This bomb, also known as the Mk 20, carries 247 bomblets and weighs 490 pounds. Just imagine a B-1 dropping 84 of these on the bad guys…

www.youtube.com

2. Mk 77 incendiary bomb

The Lancer has a wide variety of armaments — why not give it the capability to permeate the air with the “smell of victory?” The Mk 77 is a 750-pound bomb that uses kerosene as opposed to traditional napalm. Mixing these with Mk 82 general purpose bombs would create the ultimate “shake and bake” loadout for the B-1.

The B-1 could carry the AGM-86 Air-Launched Cruise Missile prior to enactment of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty,

(USAF)

3. AGM-86 Air-Launched Cruise Missile

Before the B-1 was denuclearized by the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, it was able to carry the massive AGM-86 on external pylons. Today, there are a number of conventional variants of this missile — and maybe it’s time to let the B-1 carry those again. Besides, the Russians are cheating on some arms-control treaties, why shouldn’t the B-1 get ALCMs again?

This test of a GBU-24 shows this bomb’s precision and power.

(DOD)

4. GBU-24 Paveway laser-guided bomb

GPS is nice but, sometimes, you need a bit more precision than GPS guidance can provide. Or perhaps you just want more oomph than the 500-pound GBU-54 can provide. In either case, the GBU-24 fits the bill nicely, since it’s based on the Mk 84 2,000-pound bomb.

The ADM-160 is perhaps one of the most diabolical weapons the Air Force could add to the B-1B Lancer.

(USAF photo)

5. ADM-160 Miniature Air-Launched Decoy

Okay, this one doesn’t go boom, but the ADM-160 messes up enemy defenses by presenting a lot of false targets. At just 100 pounds, a single B-1 could easily send a few dozen towards an enemy to simulate a massive raid. The enemy, in response, would likely light off radars and shoot missiles at the swarm of decoys. Meanwhile, real strikes will hit targets, which may be the very radars and missile sites busy trying to shoot down the decoys.

What bombs would you like to see the Air Force equip the Lancer with? Let us know in the comments below!

Articles

The Navy is now creating its own version of ‘Waterworld’

The Navy has had a change of heart about the new expeditionary floating base sailing to the Fifth Fleet. The vessel USNS Lewis B. “Chesty” Puller (T ESB 3) will become USS Lewis B. Puller (ESB 3), becoming a commissioned warship.


No matter the designation, in essence, the Kevin Costner box-office bomb “Waterworld” — where people were living on supertankers because ocean levels rose and covered almost all the land — partially become reality.

Artist’s impression of USS Lewis B. Puller (ESB 3). (USMC image)

The Puller is a 78,000-ton vessel capable of operating up to four Sikorsky CH-53E Super Stallion helicopters. It has a crew of 145 and will be commanded by a Navy captain. It can also accommodate up to 298 additional personnel. Unlike the Exxon Valdez from “Waterworld,” the Puller is propelled by diesel-electric engines that give her a top speed of 15 knots.

It’s part of an ongoing program within the Navy and Marine Corps to create offshore bases for troops to execute raids and amphibious operations where countries are reluctant to base U.S. troops. Think of them as floating versions of the Chinese artificial islands cropping up in the South China Sea.

According to a report by USNI News, the decision to make the Puller a commissioned warship is due to requirements of the law of armed conflict. The current afloat base in the region, the Austin-class amphibious ship USS Ponce (AFSB(I) 15, ex-LPD 15), is a commissioned warship that has supported mine countermeasures and special operations forces.

USS Ponce. (US Army photo by Staff Sgt. Ian M. Kummer)

“Without going into specific details on missions USS Ponce carried out, warship status for ESB will greatly enhance the combatant commander’s flexibility in using the ship to respond to emergent situations,” Navy Lt. Seth Clarke told USNI News. “Without this status, there would be significant limitations on ESB’s ability to support airborne mine countermeasure and special operations missions.”

The Lewis B. Puller will operate alongside the Ponce for a while, until Ponce returns to Norfolk for a 2018 decommissioning. While some assets will be transferred during that time, one item that won’t be is the prototype Laser Weapon System on board the Ponce.

Articles

Here is what Capt. Kirk’s ship could do to the North Korean navy

With the news that the stealth destroyer USS Zumwalt (DDG 1000), under the command of United States Navy Capt. James A. Kirk (we won’t know for another two centuries if he is related to James T. Kirk), is potentially deploying off the North Korean coast.


The question many will ask is: “What can the Zumwalt do against the North Korean Navy?”

The short answer is: “A lot.”

Let’s take a look at the firepower the Zumwalt carries. According to a US Navy fact sheet, the USS Zumwalt packs two 155mm Advanced Gun Systems, two 30mm “Close-In Guns,” 80 Advanced Vertical-Launch System cells, and two M-60R helicopters capable of carrying torpedoes and AGM-114 Hellfire missiles.

The 80 missile cells can carry BGM-109 Tomahawk cruise missiles, RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow Missiles, RIM-66 SM-2 Standard Missiles, and RIM-174 SM-6 Extended Range Active Missiles.

(Photo: U.S. Navy)

This is a very powerful weapons suite.

To compare, let’s look at the North Korean navy’s most powerful ship, which is known as 823 — the only Soho-class frigate in service. According to the “16th Edition of Combat Fleets of the World,” that ship has four single SS-N-2 launchers; a single 100mm gun; two twin 37mm guns; two twin 30mm guns; and two twin 25mm guns.

“Combat Fleets” notes that the North Korean Navy also has at least one Najin-class light frigate, and 15 missile boats, all armed with at least two SS-N-2A missiles.

Najin-class light frigate. (US Navy photo)

How does the Zumwalt fare against this swarm? The good news is that the helicopters on board will likely be able to pick off a number of the missile boats before they can launch their missiles.

Since each MH-60 carries four Hellfires, we can assume that the fifteen missile boats will be cut down some. Zumwalt will probably empty her Tomahawks at North Korean targets as well.

Lil’ Kim ain’t gonna like how that ends up.

The survivors may launch their missiles at the Zumwalt but the SS-N-2A is a much less advanced missile than the Noor anti-ship missiles launched at USS Mason (DDG 87) on multiple occasions of the coast of Yemen in October. Zumwalt, with the ability to use the same missiles as the Mason did, will likely be able to shoot them down or decoy them using chaff.

At this point, the Zumwalt will use her 155mm guns to take out any North Korean surface vessels that try to approach. What rounds they will fire is up in the air due to the cancellation of the Long-Range Land Attack Projectiles, but there are a number of options that she can use aside from spitballs.

Once she dispatches the surface force, the Zumwalt will then make sail away from the coast to evade North Korea’s sizable force of old electric (and quiet) submarines. Any that are close will likely get a torpedo from a MH-60.

In short, the Zumwalt can trash the North Korean Navy’s surface fleet. Her Tomahawks will trash their bases. Then, she will reload and come back to hit land targets with her weapons.

MIGHTY CULTURE

Never miss the drop zone when the Unit Cartoonist is watching

Master Sergeant George Hand US Army (ret) was a member of the 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment-Delta, The Delta Force. He is a now a master photographer, cartoonist and storyteller.

(Feature cartoon: Delta’s Marinus Pope is grilled for missing his intended touch down point by a significantly wide margin East by Northeast [E/NE]. His reconnaissance brothers approached me about roasting him for all eternity in the Unit Cartoon Book; an ask I joyfully accepted.)

My Special Mission Unit did a lot of parachute training, almost exclusively jumping from very high altitudes pulling out our parachutes at low altitudes, a technique called High Altitude Low Opening (HALO) drops. The technique leverages the high altitude to help cover the presence of the delivery airframe, and the low opening to keep the view of parachutes in the sky at a minimum.


To this day, I have a clinical fear of heights. That kept me away from trying out for elite units for the longest time, but after two years in a regular infantry unit, I was heading to airborne with or even without a parachute.

A modification of the HALO drop is the High Altitude High Opening (HAHO). In this scenario, paratroops exit at ~18,000 feet and pull immediately. Now the troops are under a parachute at nearly 17,000 feet!

At that altitude, a parachutist can travel a staggering lateral distance, even as far as from one end of a state to the other. (A point of humor: in addition to the HALO and HAHO capability we invented a faux elitist group of jumpers called OSNO men; Outer Space No Opening)

Under such conditions a man will descend under (parachute) canopy for an extended period of time — upwards of nearly an hour — and as you might already imagine, the higher the altitude, the greater the propensity for navigational errors.

Once I had a canopy malfunction at 17,000 feet, causing me to lose position in the group formation and drift so far away from my Drop Zone (DZ), that one of our ground support crew had to jump in a truck and race to where I hit the ground to pick me up. My impact was many (MANY) miles off target. I recall free-falling over a near-solid cloud cover and watching my shadow race across the top of the cloud bank toward me at great speed until it met me just as I penetrated the cloud top. Just me and my shadow I say, though I did not know it at the time; I had never heard of or experienced the phenomenon, and rather thought it was another jumper on a collision course toward me. I braced the bejesus out of myself for impact.

Anyhoo… I came down in a cornfield, which was odd, in that there were no cornfields in the state that my jump aircraft took off from. A fine American patriot came screaming up in a really large, really old all-metal Impala:

“I seen ya coming’ down in that-there parachute. Me, I ain’t nevah see anything like it ’round this cornah of Nebraska!”

“Nebraska?!?” Yeah, that was not a good day; that wasn’t where I started from in Colorado.

Did I mention the time I collided with a fellow jumper at night at 24,000 feet? Yeah — pretty much hated it! It was already stressful enough, as we were all breathing pure oxygen through a pilot’s face mask since there was not sufficient breathable oxygen at that extreme altitude. In the collision, my oxygen supply valve had been shocked shut, leaving me with only the rarified atmospheric gas I could suck through the seal of my mask.

Drastic circumstances call for drastic measures, and I did what any other warrior would do — I passed out. Since I was not conscious, I don’t know exactly what happened in the next 16,000 feet or so, but I estimate that I fell flat and stable. When I was low enough for breath-worthy air, I came to, only to find a brother was falling right with me some three feet away staring me in the face intently, ready to pull my reserve for me if I failed to snap back to reality. A glance at my altimeter strenuously urged me to pull my ripcord immediately.

Another thing that happened during the time I was “away” from my fall, was that it had begun to lighten up on the horizon as the sun crept in. The aurora made it able for me to see the details of the men around me and the ground below. It all looked so so so much like a cartoon… but I had my sense about me and saved my own life; oh, but that doesn’t count for a medal.

MIGHTY TRENDING

The Marines’ Jungle Survival puts the ‘cobra’ in Cobra Gold

Sunlight peeks through the treetops as the Marines make their way through a dense and humid jungle.


Rations and water have been consumed — there is no opportunity for resupply for several days. The Marines are hungry and thirsty.

Yet, the Marines will continue on with their mission because they’ve had jungle survival training.

American and South Korean Marines were taught jungle survival skills by members of Thailand’s Marines here, Feb. 19, 2018.

Learning survival skills

South Korea Marine Corps Staff Sgt. Choelryoong Wyang holds a scorpion while U.S. Marine Corps Cpl. Alan Bounyasith, left, a 3rd Marine Division, reconnaissance Marine from Marietta, Ga., and Marine Corps Sgt. Leo Briseno, a 3rd Marine Division reconnaissance Marine from Corpus Christi, Texas, prepare to eat a scorpion during jungle survival training in Sattahip, Thailand, Feb. 19, 2018. (Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Micaiah Anthony)

“Today we’re teaching jungle survival to U.S. and [South] Korea’s reconnaissance Marines,” said Royal Thai Marine Corps Master Sgt. Pairoj Prasansai, a jungle survival training instructor. “Survival is an important skill for all troops to learn, especially troops who may only have experience in urban combat but not in jungle survival.”

The class taught Marines basic skills to help them survive and thrive in a hot, dangerous environment.

Also read: 5 military training drills that’ll blow your mind

“The course curriculum teaches troops how to find water sources, start fires, the differences in edible and nonedible vegetation, and finding vines suitable for consumption and hydrating.” Prasansai said. “They also learn about dangerous animals and insects — both venomous and nonvenomous — that are native to Thailand and are suitable to eat.”

Reconnaissance Marines gather vital intelligence and relay information up to command-and-control centers, enabling leaders to act and react to changes in the battlefield. Recon troops operate deep into enemy territory with limited backup.

Royal Thai Marine Corps Sgt. Maj. Chaiwat Lodsin, a jungle survival training instructor from Sattahip, Chonburi province, Thailand, peels the skin off of a cobra during jungle survival training Feb. 19, 2018, in Sattahip, Chonburi province, Thailand.  (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Micaiah Anthony)

“We fight at any time and place,” said Marine Corps Sgt. Stephen South, who hails from Goodyear, Arizona, and is assigned to the 3rd Reconnaissance Battalion, 3rd Marine Division. “This training can be used during recon if we find ourselves far away from support options. Knowing what we can and can’t eat is very beneficial.”

Marines were given the opportunity to try some of the fruits, vegetables, herbs, insects, and animals that can be found in the jungle, and were shown how to safely capture, handle, and consume both venomous and nonvenomous snakes.

Drinking cobra blood

Marine Corps Sgt. Christopher Fiffie, who’s assigned to the 3rd Reconnaissance Battalion, 3rd Marine Division, drinks cobra blood during jungle survival training in Sattahip, Thailand, Feb. 19, 2018. The training was conducted as part of Exercise Cobra Gold 2018. Snake blood can be consumed to keep an individual hydrated while the meat can be used as a source of nutrition. (Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Micaiah Anthony)

“In the wilderness, you can drink the blood of a snake to stay hydrated,” Prasansai told the Marines as he picked up a cobra. “Snakes can provide you with both the food and water you need to survive.”

After preparing the snake, students were given the opportunity to drink the cobra’s blood.

Related: 17 photos that show that the military’s water-survival training is no joke

“It tastes like blood with a hint of fish,” Marine Corps Sgt. Christopher Fiffie, a 3rd Reconnaissance Battalion, 3rd Marine Division, said.

Many students enjoyed the new experience and gained valuable knowledge to help them in the field.

“I’ve never done anything like this before, and I didn’t know you could eat most of those plants,” said Marine Corps Sgt. William Singleton, who hails from Franklin, Georgia, and is assigned to the 3rd Reconnaissance Battalion, 3rd Marine Division.

“Seeing the different animals that you can eat is pretty mind-blowing. It will help us recognize [edible food sources] easier in the wilderness,” Singleton added.

MIGHTY TRENDING

US envoy doubts Taliban is really seeking peace

The U.S. special peace envoy for Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalilzad, has questioned the Taliban’s determination to end the 17-year war, after the group’s representatives refused to meet with an Afghan government-backed negotiating team.

“We have to wait and see their forthcoming steps,” Khalilzad told Afghan news agency Ariana News on Dec. 20, 2018, according to a translation of the interview provided by the U.S. Embassy in Kabul.

Khalilzad said that, while he was certain the Afghan government wanted to end the conflict, it was unclear whether the Taliban were “genuinely seeking peace.”


Khalilzad’s remarks came after his latest face-to-face meeting in December 2018 with the Taliban, which was held in Abu Dhabi, the capital of the United Arab Emirates and was also attended by Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.

The U.A.E. hailed the talks as “positive for all parties concerned.”

And the Saudi ambassador to Washington, Khalid bin Salman, said that the meetings will produce “very positive results by the beginning of next year.”

But the Taliban would not meet with a 12-person Afghan delegation, Khalilzad said, describing the decision as “wrong.”

“If the Taliban are really seeking peace, they have to sit with the Afghan government ultimately to reach an agreement on the future political settlement in Afghanistan,” the former U.S. ambassador to Iraq and Afghanistan said.

The Taliban has refused direct talks with the Afghan government, which it says is an American puppet.

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

Articles

Russia to unleash ‘Satan 2’ mega-nuke

Russia has unveiled images of a new super-heavy intercontinental ballistic missile that media reports claim could wipe out France, Britain or the entire state of Texas.


Dubbed the “RS-28 Sarmat” but carrying the NATO codename SS-X-30 “Satan 2,” Russia is the only country to really deploy any type of super-heavy ICBM. The intention behind those missiles was to take out American ICBMs before the National Command Authority could order a nuclear strike against the Soviet Union.

 

The first such missile Moscow had of this type was the R-36, known to NATO as the “SS-9 Scarp.” The Scarp had a range of up to 9,600 miles on land targets, and could also be used as the Fractional Orbital Bombardment System, with a range of up to 24,850 miles. It carried a single nuclear warhead, but that warhead had a yield of 18 or 25 megatons, based on the version of the missile.

The next super-heavy Russian ICBM was the R-36M, known as the SS-18 “Satan.” Some versions of this missile carried the single 25 megaton warhead. Others carried up to 10 multiple independently-targeted re-entry vehicles, or MIRVs. With a range of almost 10,000 miles, this missile was bad news for whoever it targeted.

The RS-28/SS-X-30 reportedly has a shorter range (about 6,200 miles), but it has the ability to carry as many as 15 MIRVs. It can swap out the MIRVs for a single 40-megaton warhead.

That would make it the most powerful warhead on an in-service missile. The Soviet Union did detonate a 50-megaton warhead, the Tsar Bomba, in 1961 on Novaya Zemlya. The Tsar Bomba was delivered by a modified Tu-95 “Bear” bomber, but was only an experimental system.

The closest an American missile came to the punch that these Soviet or Russian super-heavy ICBMs had was with the LGM-118 Peacekeeper missile. The Reagan-era Peacekeeper (also known as the MX) had a range of 8,700 miles, and could carry up to 10 MIRVs — usually equipped with W87 warheads capable of delivering a 475-kiloton yield. The Peacekeeper was deactivated in 2005 in accordance with the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty.

The SS-X-30 is slated to enter service in 2020, replacing the SS-18.

Makes the NATO codename of “Satan 2” seem pretty appropriate, doesn’t it?

MIGHTY MILSPOUSE

Military Spouse Mental Health – Who are our advocates?

In May we celebrate Military Spouse Appreciation Day, Mother’s Day, and Memorial Day. May is also Mental Health Awareness Month. The military lifestyle is one of constant change and uncertainty. This alone can be a trigger for mental illness. As a nation, we are now facing unimaginable mental illness triggers as quarantines, self-isolation, and social distancing continue. Throughout this month, let us focus our attention on this issue and ask:

Who is advocating for the mental health of our military spouses?



Mental Health Facts

According to the National Alliance on Mental Illness, a mental illness is defined as a condition which affects a person’s thinking, feeling, behavior, or mood. Mental health conditions can be triggered by influences in one’s environment, lifestyle, and/or develop as a result of genetics. A USO study conducted in 2018 reported military spouses expressed a lack of identity and sense of purpose. The same study highlighted their difficulty maintaining networks and support systems. In addition, military spouses felt a lack of control over their lives and expressed an inability to plan for their futures. A 2017 DOD study found that military spouses experience higher rates of stress, anxiety, depression, and unemployment than their civilian counterparts. Think about these statistics and ask:

Who is advocating for the mental health of our military spouses?

Barriers to Seeking Treatment

What barriers exist that prevent military spouses from seeking mental health treatment? There is a stigma associated with mental health disorders and a lack of knowledge regarding available treatments and resources. Some people may not even recognize they have an issue. Military spouses may have an additional fear of their condition negatively affecting the active duty member’s career. Could it affect opportunities for promotion, potential for future assignments and/or duty locations? There is a fear of family, friends, and colleagues being judgmental. In order to remove the barriers to seeking treatment, we need to remove the barriers to discussing mental health within the military spouse community and ask:

Who is advocating for the mental health of our military spouses?

Changing the Mental Health Landscape

How do we change the landscape surrounding the mental health of military spouses? We can begin by supporting each other and fostering a culture of inclusiveness. Be an active part of the solution amongst our own by lending an ear, asking questions, and encouraging others to ask for and accept help. We need to increase our knowledge of available resources and share them with others. A list of free, confidential mental health resources is included at the end of this article. We have the ability to change the stigma. Let’s be the voice for those who aren’t able to speak by asking:

Who is advocating for the mental health of our military spouses?

No matter how resilient we are, there will always be aspects of our lives that are beyond our control. However, we need to recognize that we do have the ability to control our own identity, purpose, wellbeing, and mental health. It takes courage to ask for help and there is no shame in needing it. Military spouses have a duty to advocate for their active duty members and their families. In order to be able to help others, we must first take care of ourselves. Therefore, we must advocate for fellow spouses, ourselves, and our own mental health.

Mental Health Resources

If you or someone you know is having thoughts of hurting themselves or others, dial 911 or go to the nearest emergency room to get help immediately. Please don’t let a cry for help go unheard. Included below are several mental health resources.

  1. Tricare Mental Health Information: Phone numbers for a crisis hotline and nurse advice line, as well as information on coverage, available programs and resources.
  2. Military One Source: Comprehensive list of available military and nationwide resources for a wide range of mental health conditions.
  3. National Institute of Mental Health: Information on how to find help for yourself, a friend or family member, struggling with mental health issues.

This article originally appeared on Military Spouse. Follow @MilSpouseMag on Twitter.

MIGHTY MOVIES

‘Matrix 4’ confirmed with Keanu Reeves returning as Neo

“I know why you’re here. I know what you’ve been doing. I know because I was once looking for the same thing. I was looking for an answer. It’s the question that drives us, the question that brought you here. You know the question just as I did:”

Will there be another Matrix film?

Looks like the answer is yes, fellow cyberpunk warriors. Yes, you bet your pleather-clad ass there will be.


I know, right?

There have been rumors for years, but Warner Bros. just announced that Lana Wachowski is officially set to write and direct a fourth film, starring Keanu Reeves and Carrie-Anne Moss in their dynamic and ground-breaking roles of Neo and Trinity.

“We could not be more excited to be re-entering The Matrix with Lana,” said Warner Bros. Picture Group chairman Toby Emmerich. “Lana is a true visionary — a singular and original creative filmmaker — and we are thrilled that she is writing, directing, and producing this new chapter in The Matrix universe.”

The Matrix 4 script was also written by Aleksandar Hemon (Sense8) and David Mitchell (Cloud Atlas).

Also read: Watch Keanu Reeves get some tactical training for ‘John Wick 3’

This year marks the twentieth anniversary of The Matrix, which garnered four Academy Awards and birthed a franchise that has earned over id=”listicle-2639941881″.6 billion in the global box office. It is still considered one of the greatest science fiction films of all time — as well it should be. Have you watched it lately? It totally holds up.

It also doesn’t hurt that Keanu Reeves’ box office and cult followings are higher than ever.

Keanu dodging haters since 1984.

Production is set to begin in 2020, with no official release date.

No plot details have been shared, but of course the internet is full of theories:

Matrix 4 will confirm @JohnWickMovie was all a simulation :Ppic.twitter.com/y7pIGWkX6u

twitter.com

In the meantime, fans can enjoy special screenings of The Matrix in theaters starting August 30th.

MIGHTY TACTICAL

10 tanks that changed the history of armored warfare

The tank was introduced in World War I when Britain unveiled the then-secret weapon against German forces and were able to run these rolling fortresses right over German barbed wire and trenches, firing cannons and machine guns into German fortifications. Now, armored columns are a commander’s fist, punching holes in enemy lines and then rushing through them to annihilate enemy formations.


A Dutch Army Centurion Tank provides security while conducting a scouting exercise in Hohenfels, Germany, January 26, 2015.

(U.S. Army Spc. Tyler Kingsbury)

10. British Centurion

Originally designed to give British tankers and edge against German Panthers and Tigers, the Centurion arrived months after the end of World War II and ended up being the greatest Cold War tank instead. It had plate armor while cast armor was still the norm, and its 105mm gun was beefy for the time.

The British never used it in combat, but it earned lasting acclaim fighting for India and Israel. In the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Israel sent its customized Centurions to secure the Golan Heights, slaughtering Syrian tanks. Centurions converted into armored personnel carriers and engineering vehicles are still in Israeli service, 70 years after the tank’s debut.

A German Panzer Mk. II sits in a tank museum. Tankers didn’t want to get caught in this small beast, but it split the job of gunner and commander, giving a tactical advantage and setting the standard for all tanks that came after.

(Paul Hermans, CC BY-SA 4.0)

9. Panzer Mark II

The Panzer Mark II was, to say the least, not a “Tanker’s tank.” It was a stopgap design to hold the line in the 1930s until the Panzer Mk. III and IV were ready. It was a light tank with limited range, an only 20mm gun, and thin armor.

But it made this list because it did perform well on the battlefield and changed future tank design for one reason: It had a dedicated gunner and a dedicated tank commander. Many tank designs, especially smaller ones with smaller crews, combined these two roles, forcing the commander to ignore the larger battlefield for crucial moments while firing. The Mark II broke from that tradition and essentially all modern tank designs have a commander and dedicated gunner.

The British Whippet was a medium tank that could drive into gaps in German lines.

8. British Whippet Tank

Whippets were British medium tanks in World War I that had decent armor and speed and were designed to exploit gaps in German lines created by heavier tanks. It had either three of four machine guns but no cannon, meaning that today it would’ve been known as an armored vehicle.

But the Whippet was one of the fastest tanks of World War I with a blistering speed of 8 mph. One upgraded Whippet could hit a much more respectable 30 mph thanks to a V-12 Rolls Royce Eagle engine. This allowed them to fly through German gaps and break up enemy formations attempting to regroup.

The Panzer Mk. IV was a heavy hitter early in the war and got upgrades throughout, keeping it pertinent and threatening against Shermans and T-34s, but Germany still needed the Panthers and Tigers to tackle heavy tanks.

(AlfvanBeem, CCO)

7. Panzer Mk. IV

The Panzer Mk. IV served for all of World War II, starting as a heavy hitter fighting next to Panzer IIIs and eventually giving way to the more powerful and better armed Panther. The base Panzer IV was adequate in the early months of the war, but required upgrades to armor and its main gun as Allied armor got stronger.

By 1945, this resulted in a Panzer IV with a longer 75mm gun, widened tracks, and thicker armor than most medium tanks. It even had armored skirts to protect against infantry anti-armored weapons. This allowed it to tackle the Allies most numerous tanks—such as the Sherman and the T-34—with relative ease. But larger tanks were able to shred it, hence Germany’s growing reliance on the late-arriving Panther as those made it to the front.

A French Char B1 tank sits in a museum. The tanks were massively overpowered compared to their enemies in the open of World War II, but they didn’t receive many upgrades since, you know, France lost the war.

(The shadock, CC BY-SA 3.0)

6. Char B1

France’s tanks saw limited fighting in World War II since, you know, France fell so early in the war. But a couple of French tanks made a real impact, including the Char B1 with its sloped armor, two large guns, and decent speed. Its smaller, 47mm gun could kill many tanks while its 75mm could slaughter nearly anything available in 1939.

In one battle, a single French Char B1 rolled right into a German ambush in a French town, used the 47mm gun to kill the trail tank, the 75mm gun to kill the lead tank, and then started dismantling all the tanks trapped in the middle. It shrugged off 140 German rounds during the fight and killed an entire German Panzer company.

But, you know, France still fell, so that part sucked.

The British Mark I tank created tank warfare, eclipsing the armored cars that had been used previously.

(British Government)

5. British Mk. I

Look, to be honest, we’re including this little fellow because, for a while, it was the only deployed tank in the world. The British Mk. I was the first tank, dreamed into existence by British Royal Navy engineers under the “Landship” concept that would see America’s new tractors developed into weapons of war.

The Mk. 1 and its French and British descendants allowed the Allies to break the Central Power’s lines and begin winning the bloody stalemate that World War I had descended into. But these tanks were far from perfect, requiring eight crew members to fight, and four to just get the massive engine started. But they carried up to two cannons and four machine guns and slowly, very slowly, 4 mph slowly, overwhelmed German forces nearly anywhere they fought.

The German Tiger Tank was a legend of World War II. It was a logistical nightmare to keep the things fueled and running, but if you were caught in an armored battle in the war, this is the one you wanted to be in (but, preferably, without being a Nazi).

(German federal archives)

4. Tiger Tank

Ah, the legendary Tiger, the tank so powerful that it immediately became the focus of any battle in which it fought. Its thick armor could shrug off 75mm rounds from most guns at 50 yards. But its 88mm gun could open most Allied tanks like a can opener.

The tank was terrifying for enemy crews, but did suffer from horrible logistics issues as it required lots of maintenance and guzzled fuel. But in defensive warfare, the fuel problem was less of an issue, and single crews could destroy a dozen or more oncoming Allied machines and crews. One Tiger destroyed 18 Russian tanks on the Eastern Front, and one commander in Normandy lost six Tiger tanks while killing 25 British tanks and another 28 vehicles.

The M4 Sherman Tank was a commander’s dream tank, with good speed, easy repairs, and lots of them reaching the battlefield everyday. But it did struggle against heavier German armor.

(U.S. Army)

3. M4 Sherman

The M4 Sherman was one of the most widely deployed weapons of the war, serving with British, Canadian, Free French, Russian, and U.S. forces. The plucky little tank was designed for speed and ease of maintenance, taking limited armor and using a low-velocity 75mm gun to cut down on weight. It, unfortunately, got a reputation after the war for being a death trap, but that wasn’t the reputation during the fighting.

Russian crews often preferred the Sherman to the T-34, and they had good reason. The tank was easy to maintain and spare parts were almost always available, leading to an 80 percent rate of damaged Shermans returning to combat. In fights, the Sherman was able to kill Mk. IIs and Mk. IVs, but could only attack Tigers in desperation and Panthers in strength. It was a “commander’s tank,” great strategically but few tankers wanted to face a heavy tank in one.

A T-34 tank sits with open hatches during a battle re-enactment. It was the most produced tank of World War II and could kill any tank in the world at the time of its debut. Meanwhile, Germans had to press anti-aircraft guns into service to try and kill it.

(Cezary Piwowarski, CC BY-SA 4.0)

2. T-34

The T-34 was technically a medium tank, but its sloped armor was fairly thick and could deflect rounds like a heavy, and its powerful engine could propel it to 35 mph while its 76mm high-velocity gun could kill any other tank in the world at the time. Its combat debut came when Germany invaded Russia in Operation Barbarossa.

The Germans were forced to call on any weapon they thought could pierce the armor, deploying anti-aircraft guns and infantrymen carrying shaped charges to try and take the T-34 down. It was a leading factor in the Russian victory at the Battle of Kursk, the largest tank battle in history, and it eventually became the most-produced tank of the war.

U.S. Marine Corps M1A1 Abrams tank participates in a simulated security patrol in Storas, Norway, October 25, 2018.

(U.S. Marine Corps Sgt. Williams Quinteros)

1. M1 Abrams Tank

The legendary M1 Abrams main battle tank is a gas-guzzling, sabot-throwing, and armor decimating beast. Its turbine engines produce massive amounts of power that allow it to hurtle across the battlefield at over 40 mph despite its 68-ton weight. And while it started life with a 105-mm gun, it was quickly upgraded to a 120mm smoothbore capable of firing a lot of different rounds including its deadly depleted-uranium sabot rounds.

During Desert Storm, Abrams tanks faced off against Soviet-made T-72s and were overwhelmingly powerful. At the Battle of 73 Easting, future-National Security Advisor Capt. H.R. McMaster took a single armored cavalry company against an Iraqi division and cut a “five-kilometer wide swath of destruction” while suffering zero losses. It’s still in service with the U.S. and other forces, but America has started eyeing either a new light or main battle tank.

Articles

Here’s why the battle for Mosul could ‘mark the beginning of the end’ for ISIS

The battle for ISIS’ stronghold in Iraq has kicked off this week.


But if it’s not handled well, the long-term consequences could be severe.

“If handled successfully, Mosul could mark the beginning of the end of the Islamic State; if handled poorly, it could be yet another pause before an inevitable resurgence of terror,” said an online intelligence briefing from The Soufan Group, a strategic security firm.

Also read: Everything ISIS has lost at Mosul . . . so far

The Iraqi Security Forces don’t have enough troops to retake and hold Mosul and the surrounding area without help. So other factions — including Kurdish forces and Shia militias (known as Popular Mobilization Units) backed by Iran. If left unchecked, these other factions could use the battle for Mosul to further their own agendas.

Shia militias have been accused of reprisal killings, torture, and kidnappings when they have assisted in liberating other areas from ISIS. And Kurdish forces have been known to displace Sunni Arabs from their homes as they take control of areas they help liberate from ISIS. Turkey is also participating in Mosul operations.

ISIS fighters in Iraq | Photo via Flickr

“The military challenges of removing an entrenched foe in an urban warfare environment, while simultaneously protecting as many as one million civilians caught in the cross fire would be daunting in the best of circumstances,” said The Soufan Group intelligence briefing. “But lacking unified combatants and commands, Iraqi military considerations must always include every level of sectarian and ethnic concerns that could turn a military victory into a strategic defeat.”

In short, even if Iraqi forces manage to win the battle against ISIS in Mosul, they’re in danger of losing the war if there isn’t a solid plan in place to govern effectively and inclusively after ISIS leaves.

“Given the sheer size of Mosul — and its experience of savage rule at the hands of the Islamic State—revenge killing will likely be an issue in the days and months ahead,” said The Soufan Group intelligence briefing.

“The level of atrocities and outrages perpetrated against minority communities such as the Yazidi and Christians, as well as to the population at large, rank among the worst war crimes in recent history. A massive effort will be required to begin to heal what is a truly fractured city and society.”

A local Mosul historian who blogs about life in the city under the pseudonym Mosul Eye explained the stakes of the ongoing battle in a statement posted to Twitter on Thursday.

“The people of Mosul cannot trust what will happen during and after the liberation, and our concerns grow bigger every day,” the historian wrote. “The upcoming dangers are no less than ISIL. There are many factions who are trying to divide and to tear down our city, and turning it into parts where each part would be given to an ethnicity group, separating it from the rest.”

He continued: “History tells [us] that Mosul has always built its civilization upon an ethnically and religiously diversified population. It is impossible to imagine Mosul without its rich and diversified heritage, culture, history, and ethnicity.”

Mosul Eye recommended that the city be placed under international trusteeship with joint supervision from the Iraqi government and the US.

“We, the civilized people of Mosul, don’t want to hand our city over, after liberation, to the tribes or to the Kurds, or the Popular Mobilization Units, or any other faction that is out of the Iraqi government,” he wrote on Twitter. “We also believe that the Iraqi government alone is not capable of managing Mosul after liberation.”