This is coolbert:
From Eurasian Review thanks to the tip from Freeper Japanese airborne forces participate in an island defensive military exercise in response to "aggression".
"Japan Holds Military Drill As South China Sea Islands Dispute Widens"
"Japanese paratroopers recaptured an island from an enemy in a war game as its Defense Minister vowed to defend a disputed East China Sea territory. China’s ships sailed near the contested islets as Beijing reportedly expanded its air defense zone."
"Tokyo’s military on Sunday held a military drill dubbed 'Island Defense,' in which the country’s elite airborne troops simulated the retaking of a remote island from an enemy nation."
"The plot for the annual drill, which took place at an exercise field east of Tokyo, stayed the same for the second year in a row as the dispute over the group of tiny islets in the East China Sea, claimed by China, Taiwan and Japan, showed no signs of resolution."
Those paratroopers dropped onto and assaulting NOT an actual island. A exercise field notionally described as an "island". NOT a drop on an island proper.
Also this now an ANNUAL EXERCISE and not in response to any particular crisis, the Senkaku/Daioyu islands for instance.
These Japanese elite troops reminiscent of the Special Naval Landing Forces from that era of the Second World War.
Capture islands, secure beachheads, the coup de main type of military operation.
Massed parachute assaults of this type historically NOT very successful. Mission often accomplished but with excessive and prohibitive casualties often the result. That number of non-effective during a massed drop often mostly from non-hostile action.
coolbert.
Monday, January 13, 2014
Sunday, January 12, 2014
Bulldozer.
This is coolbert:
Ariel Sharon has passed away.
"The Bulldozer". Sharon first and foremost military man not allowing obstacles to stand in the path of accomplishing the mission.
And in that sense a man often deemed and described as "controversial".
Also the FIGHTING JEW! A combat commander without [?] peer, a master and practitioner of maneuver warfare.
Also a military man considered on a number of occasions to be insubordinate and disobedient, almost to a fault, and yet TOLERATED!
From the book "The Red Wheel" by Alexander Solzhenitsyn as ascribed to that German general officer Von Francois:
"No natural gift brings nothing but joy. There is always some grief to go with it. But no one suffers more for his talent than a gifted [military] officer. The army serves a brilliant man enthusiastically - - once he has grasped his field marshal's baton. Before that, while he is only reaching for the baton, the army raps his fingers repeatedly. Discipline, on which the army is founded, is always hostile to a man of talent, and all that is pulsating in him and straining to break through must be contained, forced to conform and to submit. All those who are for the time being his superiors find such a self-will subordinate intolerable. As a result, he is promoted more slowly than the mediocrities."
The same can be said of Ariel Sharon? "Brilliant" "almost to a fault", "straining"?
From the much earlier Military Thoughts blog entries regarding General Sharon, his conflicts and disagreements with peers and those senior to him during the Yom Kippur/Ramadan War of 1973 see:
http://militarythoughts.blogspot.com/2006/07/this-is-coolbert-gonen-gorodish.html
http://militarythoughts.blogspot.com/2006/07/this-is-coolbert-gonen-ii-gorodish.html
coolbert.
Ariel Sharon has passed away.
"The Bulldozer". Sharon first and foremost military man not allowing obstacles to stand in the path of accomplishing the mission.
And in that sense a man often deemed and described as "controversial".
Also the FIGHTING JEW! A combat commander without [?] peer, a master and practitioner of maneuver warfare.
Also a military man considered on a number of occasions to be insubordinate and disobedient, almost to a fault, and yet TOLERATED!
From the book "The Red Wheel" by Alexander Solzhenitsyn as ascribed to that German general officer Von Francois:
"No natural gift brings nothing but joy. There is always some grief to go with it. But no one suffers more for his talent than a gifted [military] officer. The army serves a brilliant man enthusiastically - - once he has grasped his field marshal's baton. Before that, while he is only reaching for the baton, the army raps his fingers repeatedly. Discipline, on which the army is founded, is always hostile to a man of talent, and all that is pulsating in him and straining to break through must be contained, forced to conform and to submit. All those who are for the time being his superiors find such a self-will subordinate intolerable. As a result, he is promoted more slowly than the mediocrities."
The same can be said of Ariel Sharon? "Brilliant" "almost to a fault", "straining"?
From the much earlier Military Thoughts blog entries regarding General Sharon, his conflicts and disagreements with peers and those senior to him during the Yom Kippur/Ramadan War of 1973 see:
http://militarythoughts.blogspot.com/2006/07/this-is-coolbert-gonen-gorodish.html
http://militarythoughts.blogspot.com/2006/07/this-is-coolbert-gonen-ii-gorodish.html
coolbert.
1589.
This is coolbert:
Until just the other day, this historical event with a definite military dimension being totally unknown to me. Perhaps you too?
The English Armada.
Most students of history, especially those living in the English speaking sphere of influence, are keenly aware of the Spanish Armada.
That Spanish fleet [1588] deemed as "Invincible". The Spanish invasion, conquest and subjugation of Elizabethan England almost in advance considered as a done-deal.
That defeat of the Spanish Armada, resoundingly so, often considered as a critical and crucial event of history.
Again, as recorded by histories written in the English language, a victory not only for England but for the entire cultural domain of the Protestant and northern European nations during that period of the Renaissance/Reformation.
Protestant and northern Europe ascendant, autocratic Catholic and southern Europe as on the decline, and good for it too. So as reported, so as perceived.
That English Armada, however, not even ordinarily a footnote to history? Not even mentioned in the conventional histories?
"The English Armada, also known as the Counter Armada or the Drake-Norris Expedition, was a fleet of warships sent to the Iberian Coast by Queen Elizabeth I of England in 1589, during the Anglo-Spanish War (1585–1604) and the Eighty Years' War. It was led by Sir Francis Drake as admiral and Sir John Norreys as general, and failed to drive home the advantage England had won upon the dispersal of the Spanish Armada in the previous year. The campaign resulted in the defeat of the English fleet and eventually to a withdrawal with heavy losses both in lives and ships."
Those English in 1589 as markedly unsuccessful as the Spanish had been the previous year!
Loss of life heavy, many deaths due to sickness, disease, non-battlefield casualties, the Spanish relatively unscathed:
"11,000–15,000 killed, wounded or died of disease [English]. 900 dead or wounded [Spanish]."
These losses not entirely attributable to BATTLE LOSSES, warship versus warship, mano-a-mano style warfare on the high seas.
Perhaps even more significant, these losses at sea Spanish and English both in addition disastrous from the economic standpoint, treasuries depleted in an unseemly manner:
"With the opportunity to strike a decisive blow against the weakened Spanish navy lost, the failure of the expedition further depleted the crown treasury [English] that had been so carefully restored during the long reign of Elizabeth I. The Anglo-Spanish war was very costly to both sides, and Spain . . . had to default on its debt repayments in 1596"
War contrary to popular opinion is now, has been, and always will be, bad for the economy.
coolbert.
Until just the other day, this historical event with a definite military dimension being totally unknown to me. Perhaps you too?
The English Armada.
Most students of history, especially those living in the English speaking sphere of influence, are keenly aware of the Spanish Armada.
That Spanish fleet [1588] deemed as "Invincible". The Spanish invasion, conquest and subjugation of Elizabethan England almost in advance considered as a done-deal.
That defeat of the Spanish Armada, resoundingly so, often considered as a critical and crucial event of history.
Again, as recorded by histories written in the English language, a victory not only for England but for the entire cultural domain of the Protestant and northern European nations during that period of the Renaissance/Reformation.
Protestant and northern Europe ascendant, autocratic Catholic and southern Europe as on the decline, and good for it too. So as reported, so as perceived.
That English Armada, however, not even ordinarily a footnote to history? Not even mentioned in the conventional histories?
"The English Armada, also known as the Counter Armada or the Drake-Norris Expedition, was a fleet of warships sent to the Iberian Coast by Queen Elizabeth I of England in 1589, during the Anglo-Spanish War (1585–1604) and the Eighty Years' War. It was led by Sir Francis Drake as admiral and Sir John Norreys as general, and failed to drive home the advantage England had won upon the dispersal of the Spanish Armada in the previous year. The campaign resulted in the defeat of the English fleet and eventually to a withdrawal with heavy losses both in lives and ships."
Those English in 1589 as markedly unsuccessful as the Spanish had been the previous year!
Loss of life heavy, many deaths due to sickness, disease, non-battlefield casualties, the Spanish relatively unscathed:
"11,000–15,000 killed, wounded or died of disease [English]. 900 dead or wounded [Spanish]."
These losses not entirely attributable to BATTLE LOSSES, warship versus warship, mano-a-mano style warfare on the high seas.
Perhaps even more significant, these losses at sea Spanish and English both in addition disastrous from the economic standpoint, treasuries depleted in an unseemly manner:
"With the opportunity to strike a decisive blow against the weakened Spanish navy lost, the failure of the expedition further depleted the crown treasury [English] that had been so carefully restored during the long reign of Elizabeth I. The Anglo-Spanish war was very costly to both sides, and Spain . . . had to default on its debt repayments in 1596"
War contrary to popular opinion is now, has been, and always will be, bad for the economy.
coolbert.
Saturday, January 11, 2014
COLA.
This is coolbert:
COLA = Cost Of Living Adjustment.
An update and clarification regarding that contentious subject, veterans benefits and proposed "cuts".
"Disabled Veterans to Be Exempted From Pension Cuts"
Those veterans DISABLED FROM MILITARY SERVICE the COLA to remain intact as is.
For RETIRED VETERANS BUT NOT DISABLED THAT COLA TO BE DECREASED.
"A massive spending bill taking shape on Capitol Hill is likely to repeal a recently enacted pension cut for disabled veterans."
"Capitol Hill aides said Wednesday that the $1 trillion-plus omnibus spending bill measure will reverse a 1 percentage point cut to annual cost-of-living increases that was inadvertently applied to more than 63,000 veterans who have left the military due to injury or disability."
"But the controversial pension cut included in last month's budget agreement would continue to apply to other military retirees. It would save about $6 billion over the coming decade, money that's being used to ease cuts to the Pentagon budget this year."
That "cut" properly understood as A LESSENING OF PENSION INCREASE AND NOT A REDUCTION OF PENSION PERIOD!
ALL SPENDING BILLS ORIGINATING FROM CONGRESS ARE "MASSIVE"!
That COLA too as with Social Security based on an equation ORIGINALLY WRITTEN IN 1950? That equation no longer valid, a more correct equation having been proposed to determine the yearly COLA but that equation ALWAYS resulting in a smaller amount of INCREASE as given to the recipient.
Also understand that a DISABLED veteran cannot be expected to fairly support himself with civilian employment. A retired but NOT DISABLED veteran can be expected to enter the civilian sector and be employed gainfully for at least twenty years subsequent.
The compromise verdict and decision is a GO!
At least for now.
coolbert.
COLA = Cost Of Living Adjustment.
An update and clarification regarding that contentious subject, veterans benefits and proposed "cuts".
"Disabled Veterans to Be Exempted From Pension Cuts"
Those veterans DISABLED FROM MILITARY SERVICE the COLA to remain intact as is.
For RETIRED VETERANS BUT NOT DISABLED THAT COLA TO BE DECREASED.
"A massive spending bill taking shape on Capitol Hill is likely to repeal a recently enacted pension cut for disabled veterans."
"Capitol Hill aides said Wednesday that the $1 trillion-plus omnibus spending bill measure will reverse a 1 percentage point cut to annual cost-of-living increases that was inadvertently applied to more than 63,000 veterans who have left the military due to injury or disability."
"But the controversial pension cut included in last month's budget agreement would continue to apply to other military retirees. It would save about $6 billion over the coming decade, money that's being used to ease cuts to the Pentagon budget this year."
That "cut" properly understood as A LESSENING OF PENSION INCREASE AND NOT A REDUCTION OF PENSION PERIOD!
ALL SPENDING BILLS ORIGINATING FROM CONGRESS ARE "MASSIVE"!
That COLA too as with Social Security based on an equation ORIGINALLY WRITTEN IN 1950? That equation no longer valid, a more correct equation having been proposed to determine the yearly COLA but that equation ALWAYS resulting in a smaller amount of INCREASE as given to the recipient.
Also understand that a DISABLED veteran cannot be expected to fairly support himself with civilian employment. A retired but NOT DISABLED veteran can be expected to enter the civilian sector and be employed gainfully for at least twenty years subsequent.
The compromise verdict and decision is a GO!
At least for now.
coolbert.
Thursday, January 9, 2014
KIA.
This is coolbert:
From the public television historical broadcast "Ottomans Versus Christians" this amazing assertion is made.
More killed-in-action [KIA] during the Battle of Lepanto than in any other naval engagement, BEFORE OR AFTER.
Massed fleet of the Holy League versus the massed fleet of the Ottoman Empire. At least at sea a "highwater" mark for the Ottomans. After Lepanto the Ottoman naval forces no longer so predominantly superior within the Mediterranean.
Combined KIA about 30,000. Those losses incurred during a very intense and hard fought four hours of naval combat.
From the wiki entry regarding Lepanto, these casualty figures given:
7,500 dead [Christian] + 20,000 dead, wounded or captured [Ottoman].
About 30,000!
Within the context of strictly combat deaths during a naval action we have from the historical record: [thanks to the wiki in all instances]
1. Actium.
About 2,500 killed [Octavian]. Over 5,000 killed [Marc Antony & Cleopatra].
2. Spanish Armada.
50–100 dead [English]. Over 600 dead [Spanish].
Tens of thousands dead from that combination of disease and storm BUT THAT NOT BATTLE DEATHS.
3. Trafalgar.
458 dead [English]. 2,218 dead [French]. 1,025 dead [Spanish].
Thousands drowning the aftermath of the battle during a storm but that NOT battle deaths!
4. Jutland.
6,094 killed [English]. 2,551 killed [German].
5. Midway.
307 killed [American]. 3,057 killed [Japanese]
6. Salamis.
Losses stated merely in number of ships lost.
40 ships [Greek] 200–300 ships [Persians]
One Greek trireme the normal contingent of about 160 sailors [crew and rowers] plus 40 marines.
You do the calculations however with regard to Salamis unable to determine battle deaths, ships sunk not always indicative of a total loss of personnel!
7. Red Cliffs.
Chinese records totally lacking with regard to ships engaged or casualties. Major naval battle given the prolific use of manpower by the Chinese the number of KIA perhaps significant but again no record existing.
"More killed-in-action [KIA] during the Battle of Lepanto than in any other naval engagement, BEFORE OR AFTER."
And ALWAYS WILL BE! Massed fleets in battle with other massed fleets a thing of the past, an anachronism never to be seen again, no one can afford those massive contingents of warships.
coolbert.
From the public television historical broadcast "Ottomans Versus Christians" this amazing assertion is made.
More killed-in-action [KIA] during the Battle of Lepanto than in any other naval engagement, BEFORE OR AFTER.
Massed fleet of the Holy League versus the massed fleet of the Ottoman Empire. At least at sea a "highwater" mark for the Ottomans. After Lepanto the Ottoman naval forces no longer so predominantly superior within the Mediterranean.
Combined KIA about 30,000. Those losses incurred during a very intense and hard fought four hours of naval combat.
From the wiki entry regarding Lepanto, these casualty figures given:
7,500 dead [Christian] + 20,000 dead, wounded or captured [Ottoman].
About 30,000!
Within the context of strictly combat deaths during a naval action we have from the historical record: [thanks to the wiki in all instances]
1. Actium.
About 2,500 killed [Octavian]. Over 5,000 killed [Marc Antony & Cleopatra].
2. Spanish Armada.
50–100 dead [English]. Over 600 dead [Spanish].
Tens of thousands dead from that combination of disease and storm BUT THAT NOT BATTLE DEATHS.
3. Trafalgar.
458 dead [English]. 2,218 dead [French]. 1,025 dead [Spanish].
Thousands drowning the aftermath of the battle during a storm but that NOT battle deaths!
4. Jutland.
6,094 killed [English]. 2,551 killed [German].
5. Midway.
307 killed [American]. 3,057 killed [Japanese]
6. Salamis.
Losses stated merely in number of ships lost.
40 ships [Greek] 200–300 ships [Persians]
One Greek trireme the normal contingent of about 160 sailors [crew and rowers] plus 40 marines.
You do the calculations however with regard to Salamis unable to determine battle deaths, ships sunk not always indicative of a total loss of personnel!
7. Red Cliffs.
Chinese records totally lacking with regard to ships engaged or casualties. Major naval battle given the prolific use of manpower by the Chinese the number of KIA perhaps significant but again no record existing.
"More killed-in-action [KIA] during the Battle of Lepanto than in any other naval engagement, BEFORE OR AFTER."
And ALWAYS WILL BE! Massed fleets in battle with other massed fleets a thing of the past, an anachronism never to be seen again, no one can afford those massive contingents of warships.
coolbert.
Germans.
This is coolbert:
Those deadly Syrian chemical munitions as we speak being loaded onto merchant vessels. En route to a rendezvous at sea with the American Cape Ray.
Destruction [neutralization more appropriate?] of the deadly chemicals that industrial process rendering the poisons inactive and non-lethal.
That combined flotilla of American/Chinese/Russian/Scandinavian vessels doing yeoman work of the most difficult and hazardous variety.
And now too Germany enters the fray.
Chemicals in the aftermath of the process to a degree still toxic to an extent, the residue to be subjected to further processing, inert "by-products" what they are called the result,.
"Also Thursday, Germany said it would help destroy Syria’s stockpile of chemicals used as the raw materials for poison gas and nerve agents. The government said German experts at a site in Munster will get rid of the byproducts created when the chemicals are destroyed — which is currently slated to be done aboard a U.S. ship at sea."
"The OPCW said in a statement that Germany will incinerate 370 metric tons of waste generated when Syria’s mustard gas is destroyed on the U.S. vessel the Cape Ray."
"The first batch of Syria’s toxic chemicals was loaded onto a Danish cargo ship in the Syrian port of Latakia and shipped Tuesday toward international waters."
This is a worthwhile and unprecedented effort of the international community of an extraordinary nature. HOW OFTEN DOES SOMETHING LIKE THAT EVER HAPPEN?
Mustard agent at this point being destroyed. Nerve agents a much more difficult and laborious task. Nonetheless, high marks for all concerned.
coolbert.
Those deadly Syrian chemical munitions as we speak being loaded onto merchant vessels. En route to a rendezvous at sea with the American Cape Ray.
Destruction [neutralization more appropriate?] of the deadly chemicals that industrial process rendering the poisons inactive and non-lethal.
That combined flotilla of American/Chinese/Russian/Scandinavian vessels doing yeoman work of the most difficult and hazardous variety.
And now too Germany enters the fray.
Chemicals in the aftermath of the process to a degree still toxic to an extent, the residue to be subjected to further processing, inert "by-products" what they are called the result,.
"Also Thursday, Germany said it would help destroy Syria’s stockpile of chemicals used as the raw materials for poison gas and nerve agents. The government said German experts at a site in Munster will get rid of the byproducts created when the chemicals are destroyed — which is currently slated to be done aboard a U.S. ship at sea."
"The OPCW said in a statement that Germany will incinerate 370 metric tons of waste generated when Syria’s mustard gas is destroyed on the U.S. vessel the Cape Ray."
"The first batch of Syria’s toxic chemicals was loaded onto a Danish cargo ship in the Syrian port of Latakia and shipped Tuesday toward international waters."
This is a worthwhile and unprecedented effort of the international community of an extraordinary nature. HOW OFTEN DOES SOMETHING LIKE THAT EVER HAPPEN?
Mustard agent at this point being destroyed. Nerve agents a much more difficult and laborious task. Nonetheless, high marks for all concerned.
coolbert.
Tuesday, January 7, 2014
Shock & Awe?
This is coolbert:
Within the context of cyber-warfare this article is worth reading but not so totally inclusive.
"Cyberwar: What People Keep Missing About The Threat"
“'Cyber' is the buzzword of the decade in the defense world, so overhyped and overused it has lost almost all meaning. Intelligent discussion of cyber threats is a rare gem indeed. But even experts who shed real light on the dark corners of cyberspace consistently miss a crucial dimension of both the threats and the opportunities it holds for the US military."
This particular article does contain an "intelligent discussion" of cyber-warfare and cyber-security?
Deals with the threat and the potential from strictly the military stand-point.
Does not discuss the civilian aspect of cyber-attack for instance.
A power plant disabled by cyber-warfare and not able to transmit power to consumers, or rendering the power grid ineffective is the SAME as a conventional military attack with conventional weaponry, explosives, bombs, etc.
Attack and defense two-sides of the same coin with regard to cyber-warfare. When an attack is found to be effective, you look at your own systems to find if they are vulnerable to the same methodology and develop techniques to prevent similar disruption.
coolbert.
Within the context of cyber-warfare this article is worth reading but not so totally inclusive.
"Cyberwar: What People Keep Missing About The Threat"
“'Cyber' is the buzzword of the decade in the defense world, so overhyped and overused it has lost almost all meaning. Intelligent discussion of cyber threats is a rare gem indeed. But even experts who shed real light on the dark corners of cyberspace consistently miss a crucial dimension of both the threats and the opportunities it holds for the US military."
This image shows an actual Chinese "hacker" army unit at work? NOTE there are no keyboards. This maybe merely Chinese military students learning how to USE a computer?
Or this is a carefully posed photograph the intent of which is to shock and awe?
This particular article does contain an "intelligent discussion" of cyber-warfare and cyber-security?
Deals with the threat and the potential from strictly the military stand-point.
Does not discuss the civilian aspect of cyber-attack for instance.
A power plant disabled by cyber-warfare and not able to transmit power to consumers, or rendering the power grid ineffective is the SAME as a conventional military attack with conventional weaponry, explosives, bombs, etc.
Attack and defense two-sides of the same coin with regard to cyber-warfare. When an attack is found to be effective, you look at your own systems to find if they are vulnerable to the same methodology and develop techniques to prevent similar disruption.
coolbert.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
