The United States has approved a $330 million arms deal with China’s neighbor Taiwan, in a move set to further increase tensions between Beijing and Washington amidst the escalating trade war, The South China Morning Post reported.
The news comes as China said on Sept. 24, 2018, that it was impossible to hold trade talks with the US while Washington’s tariffs are like “a knife” to China’s neck, following a fresh $200 billion of tariffs on China, and US President Donald Trump’s threat of $267 billion more.
The proposed arms deal which was announced on Sept. 24, 2018, by the Pentagon and will be put before the US Congress would include parts for F16 and F5 fighter jets, C130 cargo planes, Taiwan’s Indigenous Defence Fighter, and other aircraft systems.
The sale will contribute to the “foreign policy and national security of the United States,” the Pentagon’s Defense Security Cooperation Agency said, adding that Taiwan “continues to be an important force for political stability, military balance and economic progress in the region.”
Taiwan has welcomed the move, and said that the deal helps the independent nation off the coast of China strengthen its defenses and deal with the challenges from Beijing. A spokesperson for the presidential office of Taiwan said, it would boost confidence in the face of “severe” security challenges, adding “We greatly appreciate that the US government takes note of the national security of Taiwan.”
President Donald Trump.
(Photo by Gage Skidmore)
China sees Taiwan as its sovereign territory, and as a breakaway province that must be united with the mainland by force if necessary. China has previously warned the US not to sell weapons to the country or establish close military ties there, the South China Morning Post reported.
The sale which is not yet finalized is the second under Trump following a id=”listicle-2607841195″.4 billion sale in June 2017 that also prompted anger from Beijing.
Critics of the deal in Washington said it bows to the wishes of Chinese opposition including US defence secretary, Mike Pompeo who criticised the Obama administration for delaying weapons sales to the area.
Officials in Taipei and Washington say it is now likely that the Trump administration will resume regular weapons sales to Taiwan, the Financial Times reported.
The escalating tensions come in the context of China rejecting an invitation for official talks in Washington, with its vice commerce minister, Wang Shouwen saying, “Now that the US has adopted this type of large-scale trade restrictions, they’re holding a knife to someone’s throat. Under these circumstances, how can negotiations proceed?”
US military officials said On Sept. 23, 2018, that the Chinese government denied permission for a US Navy ship to do a port visit in Hong Kong in October 2018, the Wall Street Journal reported. The denial comes amid escalating tensions between the countries over both economic and military issues.
This article originally appeared on Business Insider. Follow @BusinessInsider on Twitter.
US Naval Forces Central Command said last Wednesday that 11 Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy boats “conducted dangerous and harassing approaches,” repeatedly crossing the bows and sterns of the US ships.
At one point, the US said, one of the Iranian boats closed to within 10 yards of a Coast Guard cutter.
The US military said that the US vessels issued multiple warnings over bridge-to-bridge radio and sounded their horns but that the Iranian boats did not respond for about an hour.
After responding, the Iranian vessels moved away from the American ships.
The Navy said in a statement last week that the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy had committed “dangerous and provocative actions” that “increased the risk of miscalculation and collision.”
At the time of the incident, the Navy expeditionary mobile base vessel Lewis B. Puller, the destroyer Paul Hamilton, and the patrol ships Firebolt and Sirocco, together with the Coast Guard cutters Wrangell and Maui, were carrying out joint operations with Army AH-64E Apache attack helicopters in the Persian Gulf.
The US military, according to a separate recent statement, has been letting US Army helicopters take off from Navy ships in exercises meant to boost “the capabilities of US forces to respond to surface threats,” such as the gunboats Iran routinely sends out to harass both military and commercial vessels.
In its statement following last week’s run-in with Iranian forces, US Naval Forces Central Command concluded by saying that “US naval forces continue to remain vigilant and are trained to act in a professional manner, while our commanding officers retain the inherent right to act in self-defense.”
Insider reached out the Navy and US Central Command for comment but was redirected to the White House, which did not comment on the president’s tweet.
Since taking office, President Donald Trump has repeatedly criticized NATO over how the alliance is funded and pressured other member states to increase defense spending.
In the process, he has made a number of misleading claims about NATO, distorting how it works and why it exists in the first place.
On July 12, 2018, Trump reiterated his criticism of NATO in a tweet, stating, “Presidents have been trying unsuccessfully for years to get Germany and other rich NATO Nations to pay more toward their protection from Russia. They pay only a fraction of their cost. The U.S. pays tens of Billions of Dollars too much to subsidize Europe, and loses Big on Trade!”
Trump added, “All NATO Nations must meet their 2% commitment, and that must ultimately go to 4%!”
The North Atlantic Treaty was signed by US President Harry S. Truman in Washington, on April 4, 1949, and was ratified by the United States in August 1949.
NATO is an alliance that was formed in the wake of World War II as the US and its allies sought to counter the Soviet Union’s growing influence in Europe and beyond.
The alliance was founded upon the notion of collective defense, meaning an attack on one member state is considered an attack on all of them. This is precisely why NATO, for example, rallied behind the US in the aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacks and has sent many troops to fight and die in places like Afghanistan over the years.
Collective defense requires collective spending
Accordingly, every NATO member state contributes to a relatively modest direct budget: a roughly id=”listicle-2586418750″.4 billion military budget and a 0 million civilian budget.
Overall, the US provides about 22% of this budget based off a formula that accounts for the national income of member states.
Beyond the direct budget, NATO came to an agreement in 2014 that each member state will increase their own defense spending to 2% of their respective gross domestic product by 2024.
At present, NATO has 29 members and few have reached this goal — only five NATO members are expected to meet the 2% target by the end of the year. Meanwhile, the US spends roughly 3.6% of its GDP on defense, as its military budget in 2017 was approximately 8 billion.
There is no penalty for not reaching the 2% goal; it’s simply a guideline, and most member states have increased defense spending even if they haven’t reached that goal quite yet.
Moreover, NATO estimates collective defense spending among all member states will total more that 6 billion in 2018. US defense spending accounts for roughly 67% of this, but it’s also true the US has the highest defense budget in the world by far and this is linked to both its strong economy and internal politics.
President Donald Trump and NATO Secretary General Jens Stolenberg participate in a joint press conference, Wednesday, April 12, 2017.
(Official White House Photo by Shealah Craighead)
Here’s Trump’s big issue with NATO
Trump wants other NATO member states to increase defense spending — and soon.
On July 11, 2018, he tweeted, “What good is NATO if Germany is paying Russia billions of dollars for gas and energy? Why are there only 5 out of 29 countries that have met their commitment? The U.S. is paying for Europe’s protection, then loses billions on Trade. Must pay 2% of GDP IMMEDIATELY, not by 2025.”
There is an underlying truth to Trump’s criticism of NATO that the US spends a significant amount of money and provides an extraordinary amount of resources and manpower to the protection of Europe and Asia. But the US benefits a great deal from this, and US involvement in NATO has long helped it solidify its role as one of the globe’s leading powers, if not the most powerful country in the world.
Moreover, Trump’s remarks on NATO seem to suggest that Europe must pay the US for protection from Russia, when this is not how the alliance is meant to function. Not to mention, Trump already has a dubious relationship with Russia at a time when much of the world, especially Europe, is concerned about its aggressive military activities.
In this context, Trump’s criticism of NATO has been condemned by politicians on both sides of the aisle in the US as well as by other world leaders and foreign policy experts.
Trump caused a crisis at the NATO summit over the issue of defense spending
Trump reportedly broke diplomatic protocol on July 12, 2018, by referring to German Chancellor Angela Merkel by her first name, and his intense demands regarding defense spending saw NATO leaders enter a special emergency session.
After the session, Trump said NATO member states had agreed to quickly increase spending.
“We’re very happy and have a very, very powerful, very, very strong NATO. Much stronger than it was two days ago,” Trump said in an unscheduled statement.
This article originally appeared on Business Insider. Follow @BusinessInsider on Twitter.
It’s Saturday, but most of you enlisted fellows blew your paycheck last weekend and are now looking forward to sitting around the barracks this week. To alleviate your boredom, here are 13 military memes that made us laugh.
See, we know about you, privates.
Yay, submarines! A phallic object filled with phallic objects!
In these days of compulsive social media scrolling, email refreshing, and COVID-19 news updating, most of us are on our phones a bit more than we really want to be. Here to save us from ourselves and our over-connected online lives is the Light Phone II, an elevated offering in the so-called “dumb phone” product space.
Billed as “the phone that actually respects you,” this second iteration of the Light Phone is designed to give you back some of your time and attention. It’s incompatible with apps that have anything resembling a feed (email, social media, YouTube). What you can do with it is what some would argue is all you need to do: receive and make text messages and calls from your imported contacts, use a calculator, set alarms, and use it as a hotspot. (The company is developing tools to enable users to play music or hail a cab.) In partially disconnecting you from your digital world and its distractions, the idea goes, it can help you simplify your life.
Unlike the first Light Phone, which was a pared-down phone designed to be a secondary, feature-free device, the update includes a few more bells and whistles so that you can use it as your primary — and potentially only — device. Imagine a life without push notifications, invasive ads, and constant headlines. It’s like a mental detox. Alternatively, it can still be used as a secondary device if you want to balance out your desire to be present with your need to update your socials.
The most minimalist smartphone you can buy.
If you have T-Mobile, Verizon, or ATT service, you can switch the SIM card from your smartphone to the Light Phone II and you’re all set (the phone runs on 4G LTE connectivity). For others, you can subscribe for service through Light itself for a low monthly fee, though your Light Phone will have a different phone number from the one on your primary device. Note that the Light Phone II is an unlocked phone and ships to you without a SIM card.
In never serving up feeds, social media, ads, news, or email, the phone effectively discourages you from using it. That frees parents up to, well, talk to our kids. Or read a book. Or take a walk without being tethered to Instagram. By short-circuiting your screen time through the Light Phone II, you can focus on being present with your partner and children right now. Which is truly a bright idea.
A selection of security cameras that are being sold and touted by Amazon on its website come with “huge” security risks, according to findings from an investigation conducted by UK consumer watchdog Which? that were released on Sept. 27, 2019.
After testing six different wireless cameras, Which? found that the devices were easy to hack thanks to weak passwords and unencrypted data that could enable strangers to remotely take control of the camera to spy into people’s homes and view footage as they please.
One of the cameras tested in the investigation has an Amazon Choice label. This essentially means that it is an item that many buyers have purchased and were satisfied with, but it doesn’t mean it has been heavily vetted by Amazon. The Amazon Choice label is important as these are the items that Amazon’s search engine will deliver when you ask Alexa to search for you.
Which? says that the lack of vetting on these Amazon recommended products is extremely concerning.
“There appears to be little to no quality control with these sub-standard products, which risk people’s security yet are being endorsed and sold on Amazon,” Adam French, a consumer rights expert at Which? said in a statement to the press on Sept. 30, 2019.
“Amazon and other online marketplaces must take these cameras off sale and improve the way they scrutinize these products,” he continued. “They certainly should not be endorsing products that put people’s privacy at risk.”
Customers raised safety concerns in some reviews online.
“Someone spied on us,” said one customer who reviewed a .99 Victure security camera that carries the Amazon Choice badge. “They talked through the camera and they turned the camera on at will. Extremely creepy. We told Amazon. Three of us experienced it, yet they’re still selling them.” Business Insider has reached out to Victure for comment.
Another customer wrote that he had “chills down his spine” after hearing a mysterious voice coming from a camera next to his child’s crib after it was apparently hacked, Which? wrote in its press release.
Which? said it asked Amazon to remove these products and is urging the company to monitor customer feedback and investigate cases where consumers have identified issues with security. Amazon declined to comment on Which?’s findings, however. A spokesperson for the company did not immediately respond to Business Insider’s request for comment.
This article originally appeared on Business Insider. Follow @BusinessInsider on Twitter.
This article is sponsored by Propper, the guys dedicated to equipping those who commit their lives to serving others. In addition to the Propper gear that’s perfect for the mission, we’ve scoured the market for the very best from other brands to build out a kit that will have you hitting the range, ready for action.
It’s time to train up. Whether you’re worried about anarchists, cultists, or voodoo priests summoning the living dead, your firearms aren’t doing you any good just sitting in a safe. You gotta train for the competition, for the fight, or just for the fun of it. But if your gear bag is a little light (or maybe you’re lacking the bag itself), here are some great items to get you ready to rock:
Propper® 36-inch Rifle Case — (.99)
First of all, speaking of that bag, you need something that keeps all your gear tight together if you don’t want to be bobbling your mags, ear protection, gloves, weapon, and coffee while heading out the door. Know what’s good for that? The Propper® 36-inch Rifle Case.
It’s got side pockets for the mags, MOLLE webbing for anything you want to attack, and padding to protect the goods inside. Just remember to store the ammo in another section of the car during the drive if you live in a place that requires that. This bad boy is so easy to schlep around that you might just forget what you’re carrying.
Awesafe Electronic Shooting Earmuffs — (.99)
At the range, you double-check your gear and start getting ready to fire. Your rifle is in good mechanical condition and you apply a little lubricant to make sure it’ll move freely.
But before you head to the firing line, you want to make sure you have all your protective gear. Gloves if you roll like that, knee pads if you have achy joints (or are just a wuss — you know who you are), and ear protection if you just want to be able to hear your children’s voices at some point in the future. Nothing too crazy, just Awesafe Electronic Shooting Earmuffs for amplifying low sounds and cutting down the little explosions of each shot you take.
TANTQTourniquet — (.97)
And, just in case of emergency, you pull out your first aid kit and make sure all the components are there. It shouldn’t come up, but trauma care is one of those things you don’t need until you do. So, you pack a simple kit with some gear you grabbed from some medics and corpsmen over the years.
Sure, you’ve got a nasopharyngeal airway and some chest seals that fell off the ambulance, but the things you always carry in your pocket around firearms and potentially treacherous areas are your TANTQTourniquets with windlass and cold-resistant buckles that won’t break just because it’s chilly and you take a fall.
You won’t, shouldn’t, and don’t need ’em… until you do.
Propper® Carbon Carry Belt — (.99)
You slap the tourniquets into the drop pouch hanging from your Propper® Carbon Carry Belt, the kind of belt you can wear to church or work without raising eyebrows. It’s made to fit any holster, either inside or outside the waistband, meaning it’s good both at the range for doing some quick drills or working security for a VIP who needs to blend in without sacrificing protection. Perfect.
Wiley X® Valor — (.50)
You’re a couple steps to the door before you mutter, “Ah, crap,” and double back to the driver’s side. With eye protection as comfortable as the Wiley X® Valor, it’s easy to get in the habit of wearing them everyday and keeping them in the car like standard sunglasses.
But you really buy glasses like these to protect your eyes and their sockets from shrapnel, debris, and burning gunpowder if something goes wrong on the range. Ballistic protection isn’t just for when you’re being shot at.
Pocket Pro Timer II — (1.58)
At your firing position, you pull out the training tools that help you get better, day-by-day, shoot-by-shoot.
Your Pocket Pro Timer II can clip to your belt or sit on the ground or ledge, but it’s easy to program and start in any position, so you’re not fumbling with buttons when you’re trying to start your drill or check your final time. And with a 105dB buzzer, it can make itself heard even if you’re doubling up on hearing protection.
Sturdy Tiger 12″ Camera Tripod — (.99)
You set the timer up to sit on the ground in front of you, just in front of your Sturdy Tiger 12-inch Flexible Tripod, perfect for holding GoPros, cell phones, or most any other small recording device. You had originally grabbed it, sheepishly, just to record a little video so you could look for the minute mistakes that might be slowing you down or reducing your accuracy.
But once you started watching the videos, you realized that you actually look pretty good some days, and now you’ve shared a couple videos to YouTube and other sites for your friends to watch and critique. There’s even a remote for triggering it from afar, and the flexible legs can hold onto your weapon, a pole or firing stake, or just support it off the ground.
Putting it on the weapon does throw off the balance and weight, though, obviously. But that barrel video is pretty sweet…
Time to go full Deadwood on them. You may not look as good as Timothy Olyphant, but you’re trying to have some fun while taking some shots, not competing with some pretty boy. With everything set up, you start pumping rounds down range, churning through a little ammo and a few hours.
But then, your phone chimes and you check your messages. The spouse needs you back home sooner rather than later, meaning you’re not gonna get as much time to clean up as you would like.
AIRSSON Bore Cleaner Snake — (.99)
After clearing your weapon and policing up some brass, you make sure to get everything back into your bag and, before you go, run your AIRSSON Bore Cleaner Snake through your barrel a couple times. You may not have time for a full cleaning right now, but you’re still going to get what you can of the worst of the carbon out of the chamber and barrel, and the bore snakes makes that a snap with metal braiding.
You pull out in your car and head toward the house, the lingering smell of nitrocellulose filling your clothes and the car. It might’ve been cut short, but still a pretty good start to the weekend.
This article is sponsored by Propper, the guys dedicated to equipping those who commit their lives to serving others.
The battle to justify the need for a Space Corps rages on in Washington, but the war may soon be upon us, according to the Air Force Chief of Staff, Gen. David Goldfein. The waiting list to sign up as a Space Shuttle door gunner, sadly, isn’t yet available, as the actual battle will be satellite defense primarily.
Space isn’t just a vast nothingness outside of our planet. The placement of satellites in orbit has played a key, strategic role in combat. Historically, satellites in orbit were fairly hard to reach, so the need to defend them hasn’t been a concern. That was until an increasing number of nations gained the ability to knock them out.
The Air Force has kept their eyes on fighting in Space since before 1963. Following the Air Force’s lead, the Department of Defense has made many advancements to America’s space program, such as the Space and Missile Systems Center and free access to GPS satellites. In 2007, China took steps toward being able to shoot down satellites and, in 2008, America proved it could. Recently, Russia claimed to have a plane-mounted laser that can take out satellites.
Gen. Goldfein told the press we need “to embrace space superiority with the same passion and sense of ownership as we apply to air superiority today.” To do this, the United States needs missile-detection satellites in place to watch over our orbiting assets.
Of huge benefit to the USAF’s Space Program is the advancement of civilian space programs, such as SpaceX, and their ongoing innovations, such as the reusable super heavy-lift launch vehicle, Falcon Heavy. The USAF and SpaceX have worked hand-in-hand on all things space. SpaceX helps research and foot part of the bill while the USAF helps by providing equipment and certifications. Combined, they’re about to launch the Deep Space Atomic Clock. While this might not sound as impressive as an all-out war in space, it will help give an absolute measurement of time in Space — which, because of time dilation, is a pain in the ass to keep accurate.
Needless to say, the final frontier is going to get much more interesting in the next few years.
The idea of having a force designed for a special purpose dates far back into history and has been used in many wars. However, it is rare, if ever, that these forces meet in combat. Their targets are usually those too difficult to tackle by conventional forces. Or they’re used to exploit weaknesses in conventional forces. In a unique confluence of events though, British SAS and Royal Marine Commandos faced off against Argentine Special Forces during the Falklands War of 1982.
The fighting (neither side actually declared war) started on Apr. 2, 1982, when Argentina invaded the Falkland, South Georgia, and South Sandwich Islands. Argentina took this bold move due to a longer simmering dispute over the sovereignty of the islands.
The British response was swift and soon a naval task force was steaming towards the Falklands.
They landed in force on May 21, 1982, to retake the islands. The operation, codenamed Operation Corporate, was spearheaded by 3 Commando Brigade with paratroopers from 2 Para and 3 Para attached.
The elite 3 Commando Brigade consisted of 40, 42 and 45 Commando, the equivalent of three infantry battalions, along with Royal Marine artillery and engineer support. The British Special Forces contingent consisted of the 22nd Special Air Service Regiment as well as cadre from the Mountain and Arctic Warfare school.
Argentina had little in the way of Special Forces – just two companies: 601st National Genderarmie Special Forces Company and the 602nd Commando Company.
The first meeting of Special Operators from both sides occurred on the night of May 29 as both sides sought to stake claim to Mount Kent.
A patrol from 16 Air Troop, D Squadron, 22nd SAS encountered about 40 Argentine Commandos from the Third Assault Section of the 602nd. In a sharp clash, the British finally gained the upper hand and, despite being outnumbered, and drove off the Argentines at the expense of two wounded.
The next day, the 2nd Assault Section, 602nd Commandos, stumbled into Argentina’s 17 Boat Troop’s encampment while attempting to seize Bluff Cove Peak. The surprised Argentine Commandos were quickly overwhelmed. Soon after the battle started, they radioed for help, stating simply: “We are in trouble.” Less than an hour later they sent a second message, “There are English all around us, you better hurry up.” Two Argentine Commandos were killed before the section was able to withdraw.
On May 31, Argentina’s 1st Assault Section had been patrolling the area all day and decided to seek shelter in Top Malo House, an abandoned sheep herder’s house, as temperatures dropped to below freezing. Unbeknownst to the Argentines, they were spotted by an SAS observation post who called up Royal Marines from the Mountain and Arctic Warfare school to attack the house.
Nineteen Royal Marines, led by Capt. Rod Boswell, embarked by helicopter to the area and moved into position to assault the house. Boswell broke his group up into two sections. A fire support section took up positions on nearby high ground while a 12-man assault section prepared to attack the house.
The Argentine commandos, hearing the helicopters, made preparations to leave the house. But the British attack came before they could vacate the area. Boswell’s fire support section hit the house with two 66mm LAW rockets as the assault section stormed forward. When they came under fire from the trapped Argentines, the British assault section unleashed two of their own rockets.
This barrage of rockets killed Argentine Commando Lt. Espinosa who was covering the withdrawal from the second-floor window of the house. A second Argentine commando, Sgt. Mateo Sbert, was shot dead by the British while also attempting to cover the retreat of his comrades.
The LAW rockets set the house on fire and the smoke from the blaze ironically provided effective concealment for the men of the Argentines as the moved to a stream bed 200 meters away and set up a defense.
One Argentine, Lt. Horatio Losito, attempted to charge the British to drive them off. He was hit multiple times but continued fighting until he lost consciousness from blood loss.Eventually, the remaining members of the patrol, many of whom were wounded, ran out of ammunition and were forced to surrender. The British suffered two wounded in the attack.
The Argentine and British Commandos continued to clash as the war progressed.
On June 5, Argentina’s 3rd Assault Section, 602nd Commandos attacked the British 10 Troop, 42 Commando on Mount Wall. After a sharp fight the British were forced to withdraw. The next day the 601st got in the action and drove off two patrols of British paratroopers, capturing much of their equipment as they discarded it as they escaped.
The last engagement between the two sides Special Forces occurred on June 10.
A patrol from the British 19 Mountain Troop, D Squadron, 22nd SAS was ambushed by elements of the 601st Commando Company. The four man group split up and as the commander, Capt. Gavin Hamilton, and his signaler, Cpl. Charlie Fonseca, provided covering fire, the other two men escaped. In their attempt to cover the retreat, Capt. Hamilton was killed and Fonseca was captured.
The war ended just four days later after the Battle of Two Sisters. British Royal Marines of 45 Commando stormed the peaks and drove off the remnants of the Argentine forces, including men from 602nd Commando.
In the end, the Argentine and British Special Forces went toe-to-toe on numerous occasions and the result was often very close and hotly contested.
We’ve all see the Avengers movie featuring SHIELD’s massive flying aircraft carrier — you know, the one with the gigantic fans and stealth cloaking?
But what you may not know is that the concept of an actual flying carrier isn’t really anything new, and the US military has investigated it time and time again throughout its history. The most recent proposal for such a vehicle came in the form of a highly modified Boeing 747 called the Airborne Aircraft Carrier.
While oceangoing aircraft carriers can bring their complements of fighter and attack aircraft quite literally anywhere around the seven seas, areas deeper inland are far less accessible and sometimes require the use of larger numbers of support assets like refueling tankers, which aren’t always available for a variety of reasons.
The AAC concept tried to solve that problem by using a larger aircraft to fly smaller aircraft above or near deployment zones, where it would release its fighters to carry out their missions.
In the 1930s, the US Navy first began exploring the idea of an airborne carrier by outfitting two dirigible airships, the USS Akron and the USS Macon, with a trapeze mechanism for recovering and launching small propeller fighter planes, along with an internal hangar for storage.
Both the Akron and Macon were lost in storms that decade, but not before they were able to successfully demonstrate that with enough practice and patience, aircraft could be deployed from airbases in the sky.
The onset of World War II made the Navy forget about this idea. But during the Cold War, the notion of having an airborne carrier was resurrected — this time by the Air Force.
At first, the Fighter Conveyor project attempted to put a Republic F-84 “parasite” fighter in the belly of a B-36 Peacemaker nuclear bomber, launched in-flight for reconnaissance operations. The creation of the U-2 Dragon Lady spy plane made the FICON project a moot point, sending it to the graveyard after four years of testing.
Later on, famed defense contractor Lockheed proposed a gigantic nuclear-powered flying mothership with a crew of over 850 and an aerial endurance of 40+ days. The Air Force, by 1973, decided to go a slightly more conventional route instead.
At the time, the Boeing 747 was easily the largest civilian aircraft in the world, serving as a long-range passenger airliner and a cargo transport for a number of freight companies. It wasn’t wholly unreasonable to suggest that such an aircraft could be converted for use as an airborne carrier, fielding a small group of aircraft inside its cavernous interior.
The Air Force’s Flight Dynamics Laboratory, based out of Wright-Patterson AFB, was put on the case to determine the feasibility of such an experiment.
The AAC project called for a Boeing 747-200 to be hollowed out and refitted with a two-level internal hangar that would hold “micro fighters”, small short-range fighter aircraft that could fight air-to-air and air-to-ground sorties after being dropped out of the underside of the jumbo jet. Should the fighters need an extension on their range, the AAC mothership could refuel them as needed from a rotating boom on its rear. Upon concluding their sorties, the micro fighters would simply fly underneath the AAC and be picked up by a mechanism, bringing them back into the hangar.
The AAC would also contain storage for extra fuel, spares and parts, as well as a magazine for missiles and bombs for the microfighters. In addition, sleeping quarters for the crew and pilots, and a small crew lounge for breaks in-between missions was also to be part of the hypothetical flying carrier.
All in all, the concept seemed to be absolutely doable and certainly something the Air Force seemed interested in pursuing, given that the report also projected that conventional Navy aircraft carriers would apparently be obsolete by the year 2000.
However, the project was stalled when research into the design and development of the AAC’s necessary microfighters went nowhere. An airborne warning and control version of the AAC was also proposed, replete with a pair of reconnaissance micro aircraft for surveillance missions; this was also shot down.
Eventually, the Air Force shelved the concept altogether not long after the Flight Dynamics Laboratory claimed it was possible.
While the US military hasn’t done much, if anything at all, to investigate flying aircraft carriers in the four and a half decades since, this seems to be an idea that just won’t go away. Maybe, just maybe, we might see these bizarre vehicles in the not-so-distant future, as technology advances and mission types evolve!
When veterans of World War II returned home to McMinn County, Tennessee, they probably weren’t surprised to find that many of the same politicians from before the war were still running the place. A local political machine run by Paul Cantrell had been suspected of running the county and committing election fraud since 1936.
However, when the sheriff’s deputies began targeting the veterans with fines for minor arrests, the vets suspected they were being taken advantage of. One veteran, Bill White, later told American Heritage magazine:
“There were several beer joints and honky-tonks around Athens; we were pretty wild; we started having trouble with the law enforcement at that time because they started making a habit of picking up GIs and fining them heavily for most anything—they were kind of making a racket out of it.
“After long hard years of service—most of us were hard-core veterans of World War II—we were used to drinking our liquor and our beer without being molested. When these things happened, the GIs got madder—the more GIs they arrested, the more they beat up, the madder we got …”
By early 1946, the vets and the townspeople were tired of what they saw as corrupt practices by Paul Cantrell and his lackeys. The vets started their own political party with candidates for five offices. The focus of the contest was the race for sheriff between Paul Cantrell and Henry Knox, a veteran of North Africa.
Everyone knew that the election could turn violent. Veterans in nearby Blount County promised 450 men who could assist in any need that McMinn County had on election day. In response, Cantrell hired two hundred “deputies” from outside the county to guard polling places.
What happened next would go down as the “Battle of Athens,” or the “McMinn County War.”
Tensions built on election day as the veterans faced off with the special deputies. By 3 p.m., an hour before the polls closed, violence broke out. Deputies beat and shot a black farmer who tried to vote and arrested two veterans who were then held hostage in the Athens Water Works. Other veterans responded by taking hostage deputies who were sent to arrest them. Still, Cantrell was able to fill most of the ballot boxes with purchased votes and get them to the jail, ensuring he would win the election.
While the sheriff and his lackeys counted the votes in the jail, White and the other veterans were getting angry. Finally, sometime after 6 p.m., White led a raid on the National Guard armory to get guns.
White said in a 1969 interview that they “broke down the armory doors and took all the rifles, two Thompson sub-machine guns, and all the ammunition we could carry, loaded it up in the two-ton truck and went back to GI headquarters and passed out seventy high-powered rifles and two bandoleers of ammunition with each one.”
The veterans set siege to the jail, firing on deputies that were outside the jail when they arrived. One deputy fell wounded into the building while another crawled under a car after he was hit in his leg. But, Cantrell and others were safely locked behind the brick walls of the jail. The veterans needed to get through before other police or the National Guard arrived.
Molotov cocktails proved ineffective but at 2:30 in the morning, someone arrived with dynamite. At about the same time, an ambulance arrived and the veterans let it through, assuming it was there for the wounded. Instead, Paul Cantrell and one of his men escaped in it.
A few minutes later, the vets started throwing dynamite. The first bundle was used to blow up a deputy’s cruiser, flipping it over. Then, three more bundles were thrown. One landed on the porch roof, one under another car, and one against the jail wall. The nearly simultaneous explosions destroyed the wall and car and threw the jail porch off of its foundation.
The deputies in the jail, as well as some hiding out in the courthouse, surrendered immediately. The veterans were then forced to protect the deputies as local townspeople attempted to kill them. At least one deputy had his throat slit and another of Cantrell’s men was shot in the jaw.
The veterans established a patrol to keep the peace. To prevent a counterattack by Cantrell, the vets placed machine guns at all the approaches to Athens, where the jail and courthouse were located.
The rest of the incident played out without violence. Henry Knox took over as sheriff Aug. 4, 1946 and future elections dismantled what was left of Cantrell’s machine.
Feature image: Screen capture from YouTube/ Hallmark Hall of Fame Productions
No, we’re not talking about the 1985 Brat Pack classic of the same name. This St. Elmo’s Fire is more akin to the phenomenon of the green flash at sunset or sunrise. It appears as an eerie blue or violet glow, usually accompanied by bursts of what appear to be lightning.
As with many meteorological mysteries, St. Elmo’s Fire was named by sailors of old. They couldn’t understand what caused the glow around their ship that looked like a sort of divine fire and named it for St. Erasmus. Also known as St. Elmo, he is the patron saint of sailors. The appearance of the mysterious glow was said to be a good omen of the saint watching over the crew, scary though it may be. However, we now know that there’s a scientific explanation behind the strange lights.
St. Elmo’s Fire is a luminous plasma discharge from a pointed object. This is why it usually emanates from the nose of a plane or the mast of a ship. The glow and subsequent discharge typically occur when a plane or ship comes near a thunderstorm or volcanic activity. It can also occur on the tops of buildings and electrical towers.
When the electrical field around a pointed object builds a sufficient charge, it ionizes the air around it. This turns it into plasma. The blue/violet color is the result of nitrogen and oxygen, which make up the majority of the atmosphere. Although the glow and discharge bursts can sometimes make a hiss or buzz, St. Elmo’s Fire itself is completely harmless.
Flying near or through a thunderstorm or volcanic activity is generally inadvisable. Lightning strikes and reduced visibility pose great dangers to safe navigation. In the case of British Airways Flight 9, volcanic ash can cause engine flameout. While St. Elmo’s Fire is associated with flying in these conditions, the plasma discharge itself has no effect on an aircraft’s safe flight.
If a flight or cruise ever takes you near a thunderstorm or volcanic activity, keep an eye on a pointed object like the plane’s wingtip or the ship’s mast. You just might be able to spot this fascinating phenomenon for yourself.
We’ve all poked fun of the U.S. Coast Guard. We get it. They’re like the red-headed stepchild of the Armed Forces. The very mention of their existence is almost always met by other troops spouting off the same, “yeah, well, they’re not always DoD!” Once you put your jokes about them aside, however, you’ll realize that they’re every bit as badass as the next troop.
For instance, the Coast Guard maintains their very own specialized forces that are on par, in terms of training and mission capacity, with the rest of the SOCOM units. And this isn’t an exaggeration, considering the fact that they’re constantly training with the SEAL teams.
They’re called the Maritime Security Response Team, or MSRT.
If they walk like a duck, dress like a duck, and operate like a duck…
(U.S Coast Guard photo by Petty Officer Robert Nash)
The MSRT is the full-time counter-terrorism assault arm of maritime law enforcement. They’re tasked with being the first responders to terrorist situations that require boarding and securing hostile vessels — in all waters, both domestic and abroad.
Originally a part of the Coast Guard’s Deployable Operations Group — or DOG, before it was dissolved in 2013 — the MSRT remains the go-to team in responding to piracy the world over.
Just to throw it out there, aiming a rifle from one of these is a headache, but these guys have mastered the art.
(U.S. Coast Guard photo by Petty Officer 3rd Class Ross Ruddell)
Each assault element is broken down into several teams. The Direct Action Section is the main group of vessel-boarding operators that are extensively trained in close-quarters combat. Then, the Precision Marksmen Observer Team provides rear support through the lens of a high-powered sniper rifle, which is often aimed from moving aircraft or boats. Finally, the Tactical Delivery Teams bring the rest of their MSRT comrades into the fold.
The teams also include personnel that are specifically trained in handling chemical, biological, radioactive, nuclear, and high-yield explosive environments, mixing the talents of EOD and bomb squad units with CBRN capabilities.
Go ahead and sh*t talk the Coast Guard to the face of an MSRT… I’ll wait.
(U.S. Coast Guard photo by Petty Officer 3rd Class Ross Ruddell)
The MSRT is called in for situations that involve neutralizing terrorists or pirates. The scope of their mission is huge — if it’s in the interest of America to neutralize a threat at sea, they will. Their area of operations includes the often-misunderstood international waters.
As with most Special Operations, their movements are not often discussed in the news — but they go everywhere. Recently, one of their known areas of operations has been off the coast of Syria in the Mediterranean Sea and all around the coast of Africa.