| Thursday,
July 29, 2004 Subject: SPACE OPERATIONS:
Power and Pain of Battlefield Electronics
http://www.strategypage.com//fyeo/howtomakewar/default.asp?target=HTSPACE.HTM
July 29, 2004: During the 2003 operations in Iraq,
satellite-based information systems provided great benefit to coalition
troops, but also had their share of glitches, according to a panel of junior
officers presenting at a recent space warfare symposium in Colorado. There
were several unexplained failures of the military’s GPS ground receivers
during the war. In one incident, vehicle-mounted Precision Lightweight GPS
Receivers (PLGR) used by a Marine Corps tank unit lost all GPS signals in
the middle of a “nasty” ambush from a mix of Republican Guards and irregular
forces. The lead company went too far into the ambush zone, but was able to
quickly regain their bearings using off-the-shelf civilian hand-held GPS
units. Army Armored Cavalry units also reported PLGR dropouts during raids
in urban environments.
A Navy SEAL described the use of a PLGR unit linked to
a laser rangefinder to direct close air support strikes, but stated a
preference for the smaller civilian GPS units when “running around in the
field.” He also thought there was a tendency to rely too much on satellite
imagery rather than “eyes on the target.” On one mission, his team had
“terrific imagery” around the target area but when they arrived, they
discovered what had appeared to be hard-packed ground turned out to be
waist-deep mud. A MH-53 helicopter packed with critical gear ended up stuck,
with mud reaching up to its windows and no way to get the equipment out.
B-2 bombers had problems with gaps in satellite
communications coverage of the Atlantic, but this was a failure of
commanders to tell the satellite managers that B-2 operational staff had
developed a way to update crews in flight using a pair of satcom radios to
deliver e-mail, Powerpoint slides, photographs, and spreadsheets in route.
Finally, some systems had a very steep learning curve.
An army captain received a Blue Force Tracking system just before going into
combat without any training. Until he got the hang of the unit, it was “a
big bulky thing” that got between him and his gunner. “I think I e-mailed
the door gunner on the space shuttle twice before I figured out how to use
it.” -- Doug Mohney
=============================
IRS Indicates US Incomes Have Shrunk
<
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/29/business/29tax.html?hp
> (requires registration)
-- Harry Erwin, PhD, Senior Lecturer of Computing,
University of Sunderland. Computational neuroscientist modeling bat
bioacoustics and behavior. http://osiris.sunderland.ac.uk/~cs0her
If you destroy your education system you must
expect this result. Up the NEA! Up ADA! Up PC in classes!
But see below
Dear Jerry:
I'm watching the convention of course. I have just
seen something very remarkable. Gen. Salikashveli, former Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs declared himself a New Democrat and came out very strongly for
Kerry. He was introduced by Lt. Gen Claudia Kennedy, former DCSINT and
afterwards was joined on stage by her and seven other retired Flag Rank
officers including Stansfield Turner and William Crowe. This is a sea change
in the way the American military addresses political issues. They've decided
that standing on the sidelines will not serve the nation. Not with this
administration. While I expect that active duty officers will maintain the
tradition of not speaking out on political issues at all, those on the
retired list will ,to protect the service members still serving and to
protect their families and all of the veterans. Oh, yeah, Wes Clark was one
of the seven but literally the last one out on stage. Didn't speak at all,
but he's had plenty to say. Before he was seemingly the only one. Now he's
part of a chorus of military dissent. This is a pretty complete repudiation
of Rumsfeld and the rest of the neocons.
Maybe the motto this year should be "it's the
soldiers. stupid."
Regards, Francis Hamit
But will they become just another of the gangs that
make up the Democratic Party, and learn to fight it out for goodies for
their teams?
Be afraid.
===============================================
Subject: Islamic Singers/Band? Or were they?
Syrian music star sings praise of suicide bombers <
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20040728-111758-3815r.htm >
Washington Times, DC, July 29, Audrey Hudson The Syrian singer of a band
that was detained by the FBI's Terrorism Task Force for suspicious activity
during a recent flight to Los Angeles has written about the "glorification"
of suicide bombers to liberate Palestine. Singer Nour Mehana's latest album
includes the song "Um El Shaheed," or "Mother of a Martyr," said Aluma
Dankowitz of the Middle East Media Research Institute. The song tells the
story of a woman who mourned her son's death until she realized that "he
died for a good cause and he should be glorified for what he did," said Miss
Dankowitz, who translated the song for The Washington Times. Mr. Mehana's 14
Syrian band members were detained by officials June 29 upon deplaning
Northwest Flight 327 from Detroit to Los Angeles, for acting in a suspicious
manner that concerned the flight crew and air marshals on board.
My two cents:
We might have known, this again only makes the
activities more suspicous.
What if? Yes, the TSA needs to be more aggressive and
use the tools that the other DHS agencies (Border Patrol, Customs, and
Immigration, to name a few) possess for tracking and warning of potential
terrorists. The DHS and FBI (which is DOJ) both have databases, including
one on which their Visas would have been noted as outdated - as noted in the
article above. That would focus their efforts more on those who might be
terrorists, rather than searching by whatever random process they use, or
every 7th person, which would have about an 86% probability of MISSING a
true single suicide-terrorist.
Yes, the TSA can learn from foreign government
processes such as the Israeli one or the one used by the UK. The Air
Marshals could also use some improved ability to communicate and investigate
people while in flight - though that is a last resort - anyone that might be
a foreign terrorist should not have been on the plane in the first place.
That investigation should have been done before boarding the plane when
passenger information is already available, either from the airline or
booking agency.
The US does reserve the right to detain and remove
anyone via deportation, that is not already a citizen, and that is deemed a
threat. Can we not revoke a visa or implied visa if they are not a citizen
and send them home post-haste?
Remember that Minetta is not DHS and so his rule about
not using profiling does not apply to DHS-TSA. In fact, if followed this may
only hinder DHS by forcing TSA to search people randomly and not have time
to look for risky behaviors, and not have time to subject people to
pre-screening via their DHS terrorist lookout databases. Which it appears is
what they are doing... Oh, I am being sarcastic...
As you have asked/said repeatedly, where is the
rational adult supervision of this whole process? The tools are in place but
not used in an operations research - systems analysis way.
Ah well keep up the good work. -- Oliver Richter
orichter@att.net
Rules are more important than results. That's the
second law of bureaucracy. Follow the rules and you are safe, even if the
plane is hijacked or the building is blown up.
And it is of a piece with
Subject: Woman arrested, cuffed for eating candy bar
in subway station
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/a/2004/07/29/national1416EDT0614.DTL
I give up
Mark
It is called anarcho=tyranny. It is far easier to
arrest a middle class scientist than to risk arguing with a gang member, and
a good collar is a good collar. But see below.
Subject: Electronic voting records lost/destroyed in Florida - buffy
willow
Dr. P,
Found this story about some new ballot fiascos in
Florida (are we surprised?). Shouldn't it be possible to make electronic
voting machines at least as reliable as our ATMs? ("I'm sorry, we don't seem
to have any record of your last deposit...." ;-) ATMs seem to use circa-1985
technology (have they changed much in 20 yrs?) that is tried and true --
perhaps trying to develop electronic voting machines is succumbing to the
latest/greatest craze (a little too much technology) and not enough common
sense (don't make it more difficult than it needs to be).
best, -J
-----------------------
http://arstechnica.com/news/posts/20040728-4050.html
Florida voting records filed under /dev/null
Posted July 28, 2004 @ 4:47 PM by Fred "zAmboni" Locklear
Imagine results for this year's presidential
election race in Florida mirroring those from 2000. Citizens groups call for
a manual recount of ballots, but because of computer problems, all voting
records from several districts are missing. There are concerns this scenario
could unfold after two computer system crashes destroyed electronic voting
machine records (registration required) for the 2002 gubernatorial primary
in Miami-Dade County. The data loss was uncovered when a citizens group
requested all audit data from the 2002 election. This action followed an
ACLU study of the 2002 primary that found 1544 votes (8 percent) were "lost"
on e-voting machines in Miami-Dade County. Election officials say they have
since instituted daily backup procedures so audit records would not be lost
in the future. CD backups or paper ballot receipts anyone?
But some voters are too stupid to use punch card
ballots, you see. So their opinions must count too. Me, I'd make it
mandatory to be able to read and write and have a $10 poll tax; if it ain't
worth ten bucks to vote then you shouldn't, and if you can't read you
sure shouldn't. But that's just me.
Maybe the DC Metro police can take over
Dr. Pournelle,
The loudly reported drop in income is completely bogus
where it concerns the "average" American. Hidden at the bottom of the
article (at least the CNN version) is the actual breakout of the income
levels. The large drops in income are only for people who make in excess of
2 million dollars a year. For people with income levels between $25,000 and
around $100,000, the average income varied from -0.1% to +0.2% depending on
income bracket.
But of course the *%#&ing media has to portray this as
some huge revelation about how there are indicators that the country is in
deep trouble and the little guy is paying for it. Utter BS. It's the wealthy
who have heavily invested their money in companies (ie. the ones who are
putting money into the economy and creating jobs with their investment
dollars) who took it in the shorts over the last few years due to the
massive drop in stock prices and the many tech companies that went under
when the tech bubble burst.
Ironically, these wealthy taxpayers also pay the bulk
of income taxes collected in the US so the huge deficits in the last couple
of years is explained even better knowing that the top percent recently lost
a huge amount of income. Whether they're paying their fair share becomes a
moot question, because when that top one percent experiences that big of a
drop in income, tax revenues are going to drop.
So the headline should have been "Consumer incomes
remain level but big investors see heavy drop in average income".
A misleading presentation of truthful facts is just as
bad as outright lying, and CNN (plus some others) laid a whopper on us
today.
Sean Long
SOOOPRISE...
===========================
[regarding
view]
First, perhaps the attempts at unity on-going are
legitimate attempts to return the Democratic party to actual political party
status. Probably not, but why not hope?
Second, your hope that the 'pubs aren't similarly
situated has no more basis than the hope in the first point above, and
hasn't had for many years. The Republicans are simply the party of wealth
and corporate interests. Sure, the dems have wealth too, but they tend to
cater to different interests, as you noted. Of course, the 'pubs are
increasingly the party of social, racial and religious intolerance as well,
which is why I cannot support them. I personally support the idea of gay
marriage, but wouldn't amend the constitution to force it, and don't think
it should be amended to forbid it either. I'm not the biggest advocate of
state's rights, but this seems to be a no brainer.
There truly needs to be a party that actually tries to
achieve the ostensible goals of the dems and pubs, but there isn't one.
Small government? Who is for that now? Conservative fiscal policy? Who
argues for that? Reasonable social programs, with definable, achievable
goals? No one. A policy of environmental stewardship based on science? Nope,
not a party in sight.
I was astonished at the acceptance given Al Sharpton
(racial intolerance and violence are rampant in his past actions) by the
Dems, but it is matched by the 'pubs embrace of Jerry Falwell (AIDS is god's
punishment of gays and societies who tolerate them and abortionists must
take some of the blame for 9/11). Of course, the 'pubs embrace of Falwell's
ideals is more pervasive than the Dems of Sharpton, but it's a matter only
of degree.
As I said before, I can't give Mr. Bush four more
years, because he didn't keep his word on the first four and he didn't
respond to unforeseen challenges very well. I really don't want him to
appoint a Supreme Court justice. Fortunately, kerry will be even more
constrained by the Senate in that regard, so I fear less there. The best we
can hope for in governance now is a Democrat in the White House and a
republican senate. I'd prefer the opposite, but it ain't gonna happen.
bryan
Mr Fallwell mostly seeks to be left alone; he and
his people know they can't impose their views on the rest of us, they want
now mostly to be left to hold some small place without federal interference.
As to AIDS, it gets all the research money it warrants plus a lot more to
the neglect of some other problems of importance. I think you need
fear Fallwell little, but the TSA and various other security forces are very
much in keeping with the Left. The Democrats remain the Party of War, and
compound this by insisting that the wars be ones in which the US has no
discernable interest in the stakes or outcomes. Doing Good is the goal, and
the results are generally awful.
But I agree: there appears to be no party
representing my views. But I think the Republicans are less likely to
appoint judicial legislators to the Supreme Court than the Democrats; and
the rule of the Judiciary has been the engine for much of the demise
of the Constitution and the end of the Federal Republic I was born in.
Eisenhower appointed the egregious Earl Warren, though, so it's not a
certainty.
As to Kerry, couldn't they find a real Kennedy?
===========================
AND ON IRAQ
Subject: If they want it that bad, they can have it.
We're abandoning an increasing fraction of Iraq to the
rebels. That's about what I expected, and we all know where that ends.
I've occasionally mentioned my disapproval of those
who made the decison to invade Iraq, but I would also like to curse the
idiots who keep telling us that things are really going a lot better than
you'd think from reading the papers. They were wrong - what a surprise!
Those reports usually came originated with people who
did not speak Arabic a huge disadvantage in understanding the locals. Many
were on officially guided tours of Iraq, which have a natural tendency to
visit only Potemkin villages. Worst of all, people believed this because
they wanted to believe it, and I almost think that is the root of all evil.
If you want to achieve real goals, adjusting your actions to the real world
improves your chances of success - and believing things because you want to,
instead of letting evidence and logic take you where _they_ want to go, is a
recipe for disaster.
Gregory Cochran
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/9199668.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp
In the face of stubborn insurgency, troops
scale back Anbar patrols
By Tom Lasseter Knight Ridder Newspapers
RAMADI, Iraq - After more than a year of
fighting, U.S. troops have stopped patrolling large swaths of Iraq's restive
Anbar province, according to the top American military intelligence officer
in the area.
Most U.S. Army officers interviewed this week
said the patrols in and around the province's capital, Ramadi - home to many
Iraqi military and intelligence officers under Saddam Hussein - have stopped
largely because the soldiers and commanders there were tired of being shot
at by insurgents who've refused to back down under heavy American military
pressure.
Asked for comment, officials from the Marine
battalion in Ramadi - which makes up about one-fifth of the forces there -
provided a 21-year-old corporal, who confirmed that the Marines have
discontinued patrols, but said it was because of the hand-over of
sovereignty to the interim Iraqi government.
While American officials in Ramadi wouldn't
provide exact figures for the change in numbers of patrols, there's
obviously been a significant drop.
After losing dozens of men to a "voiceless,
faceless mass of people" with no clear leadership or political aim other
than killing American soldiers, the U.S. military has had to re-evaluate the
situation, said Maj. Thomas Neemeyer, the head American intelligence officer
for the 1st Brigade of the 1st Infantry Division, the main military force in
the Ramadi area and from there to Fallujah.
"They cannot militarily overwhelm us, but we
cannot deliver a knockout blow, either," he said. "It creates a form of
stalemate."
In the wreckage of the security situation, U.S.
officials have all but given up on plans to install a democratic government
in the city, and are hoping instead that Islamic extremists and other
insurgent groups don't overrun the province in the same way that they've
seized the region's most infamous town, Fallujah.
"Since Ramadi is the seat of the governate, we
worry that if they could unsettle the government center here they could
destabilize the al Anbar province," said Capt. Joe Jasper, a spokesman for
the 1st Brigade.
The apparent failure of a long line of Army and
Marine units to bring peace to the province, which makes up about 40 percent
of Iraq's landmass, will be a major challenge for Iraq's new government and
could prove to be a tipping point for the nation as a whole. Increasingly,
Iraq is a place in which cities or part of cities have been taken over by
insurgents and radicals.
U.S. officers in Ramadi openly acknowledge that
the Iraqi security force trained to take over the hunt for insurgents, the
national guard, has become a site-protection service that so far is
incapable and unwilling to conduct offensive operations.
When the governor of Anbar left town last
month, the head of the national guard, who since has been replaced, took
part in an attempt to overthrow him. National guardsmen in town have refused
to go on patrols either alone or with the Americans. The 2,886 national
guardsmen in Ramadi so far have detained just one person.
To show how operations in Anbar have changed,
Jasper sketched a map on a piece of paper.
Pointing to a neighborhood outside the town
of Habbaniyah, between Fallujah and Ramadi, he said, "We've lost a lot of
Marines there and we don't ever go in anymore. If they want it that bad,
they can have it."
And then to a spot on the western edge of
Fallujah: "We find that if we don't go there, they won't shoot us."
Marine Cpl. Charles Laversdorf, who works in
his battalion's intelligence unit, said the Marines averaged just five raids
a month and no longer were running any patrols other than those to
observation posts.
The sharp reduction in patrols flies in the
face of comments made recently by a top military official in Baghdad, who
spoke on condition of anonymity.
"Any insurgent that ... somehow thinks that
after June 28 we'll be pulling back into base camps will be disappointed,"
he said. "This is a long-term program of handing over responsibility. ...
It's not going to take days nor weeks, it's going to be months and years."
More than 124 U.S. troops have died in Anbar
since President Bush declared major combat operations over in Iraq on May 1,
2003.
Between the 1st Brigade's 4,000 soldiers, who
arrived in Ramadi last September, and a battalion of 1,000 Marines, who came
in February, more than 80 have been killed and more than 450 injured.
Since the hand-over of sovereignty June 28, 25
U.S. soldiers have been killed. Fifteen of them were in Anbar.
The numbers grow more striking at smaller unit
levels.
Capt. Mike Taylor, for example, commands a
company of men in nearby Khaldiya. Out of his 76 troops, 18 now have purple
hearts, awarded for combat wounds.
The Marines' Echo company, with 185 soldiers,
has had 22 killed.
"There's a possibility that we'll say we'll
protect the government and keep travel routes open, and for the rest of
them, to hell with 'em," said Neemeyer, the intelligence officer. "To a
certain degree we've already done it; we've reduced our presence."
Neemeyer continued: "I'm sure they are beating
their chests and saying they drove us out, but what have they driven us out
of? Rural farmland that's not tactically important. ... If they want to call
that victory, that's fine."
Looking up at a map on the wall, Neemeyer
flicked his laser pointer across a large piece of land between Ramadi and
Fallujah. "We don't go into that area anymore," he said. "Why go there when
all that happens is we get hit?"
The U.S. military has poured about $18 million
into reconstruction projects in Ramadi, but Neemeyer said the projects
hadn't done much in the way of winning people over.
"The only way to stomp out the insurgency of
the mind," he said, "would be to kill the entire population."
The commander of one of the local national
guard battalions, Col. Adnan Allawi, said he thought the security situation
in Ramadi and Anbar in general would only get worse.
"If the Americans stay here, the same thing
that happened in Fallujah will happen in Ramadi," he said. "If the situation
stays the way it is now, the Americans will begin losing one city after the
next."
Residents in Ramadi had long said the U.S.
military underestimated the resolve of fighters in the area. Also, residents
said, soldiers made community support for the resistance stronger with each
cultural misstep, such as brusque house raids and cultural slights toward
important tribal sheiks.
Many of those interviewed in Ramadi recently
said they'd welcome a Fallujah-like rule by insurgents.
Bashar Hamid, a stationery store owner, said
"only the mujahedeen (holy warriors) can provide stability."
Muhanad Muhammed, a pharmacist, agreed: "The
Americans misbehave ... that's why I do not blame the mujahedeen when they
attack them."
Capt. John Mountford, who oversees a central
command office in Ramadi for local police, national guard and U.S. military
officials, said that in retrospect the military should've paid more
attention to what the Iraqis were saying.
"We should have worked with the tribal
leaders earlier," he said. "I just wonder what would have happened if we had
worked a little more with the locals."
(Emphasis mine)
Dear Mr. Frum: I told you so. But you would not
listen.
But we can provide stability: the Turks knew how.
No better friends, no worse enemies. But do we want soldiers who know how to
rule without the consent of the governed?
If Halliburton and the Marines can't pump oil, who
can?
But see below
Subject: GI Insurance
"What in the world? $100/month is a stiff insurance
premium for anyone, and certainly needless for a young soldier. Does anyone
know more?"
One of our Iraq blogger soldiers has been covering
this issue (Iraq Now).
See http://iraqnow.blogspot.com/2004/02/finance-tip-fire-your-first-command..html
http://iraqnow.blogspot.com/2004/07/first-command-strikes-back.html
http://airforcetruth.tripod.com/Farcecommand.htm
He had one post (which I can't find) that suggested
that any military or former military officer recommending financial
instruments to servicemen be held to have a fiduciary responsibility because
of ability for undue influence. Needless to say this is not current policy
or law.
And beware the fury of the legions.
Subject: Iraq 'should-ah' buffy willow
Dr. Pournelle,
I *really* like your proposal on how we should have
delt with the Iraq situation, but I'm certainly not the first to point out
that it was politically impossible...
The Democrats (and every other non-Republican) would
have been "Shocked! Shocked I Tell You!" that we would free the Iraqi people
only to hand them back over to the very same evil generals that had
oppressed them for so long. No amount of reasonable explaination of the
coercive nature of the senior command would have been heeded. And tightly
linking the oil production issue to our actions would give rise to the
"Blood for Oil" posturing that we've seen so often in the past. I'm sure
there would be an outcry that lowering oil prices would enrich Cheney...
logic has nothing to do with it.
I am sad to say that we're 20 years too late to
succeed in the market place of ideas with logic and reason - emotion and
freebees seem to be the currency of today's America.
Clint Ellis Salina, Kansas
The point being that the time to discover all this
was before the invasion.
x
TOP
CURRENT
VIEW Thursday |
CLICK HERE for
a Special Request. 
