0230 GMT February 28, 2010

• US gets it right on Hugo It's easy to bash the US on its failures, because like the Titanic, when the US fails, it fails big time. Less visible are its successes, because it is the nature of humans that they will ignore what goes right in their lives and focus on what goes wrong.
• George W. Bush took a lot of flak because he refused to actively oppose the rise of Hugo Chavez. But we said at the time he was doing the right thing, given the long and unfortunate history of American intervention in Latin America. Nothing would have strengthened Hugo more than US opposition. It is the same in Cuba, where communism remains powerful despite 48 years of American efforts to overthrow/change the government.
• The other day the OAU criticized Hugo for suppressing freedom in his country. The criticism has been long in coming, but we can bet it never would have come had the US tried to fight Hugo.
• True that Hugo is probably saying: Sticks and Stones May Break My Bones, but Harsh words Will Never Hurt Me. But you know, the weird thing about words is they sometimes can destroy much more efficiently than sticks and stones.
• The prime example of this is the US itself: its Constitution is only words, and it was these words that destroyed the political systems of the world, which were based on the right of kings. Indeed, Latin America is today ruled by democracies with a few exceptions. Who would have thought this possible 30 years ago, when it was the military juntas who ruled? Ditto Africa: democracy is spreading all over Africa and the US hasn't fired a shot.
• So no one says tomorrow Hugo will be overthrown. But as Americans now understand a little better after Iraq and Afghanistan,  democratic change has to come from within. The OAU condemnation is a first sign of the beginning of the end for Hugo, even if the end takes  20 years.
• Oh, America the invincible A Cuban dissident undertakes a hunger strike in jail, and he does. Raul Castro, dictator of Cuba, blames the death on America. So America, next time you wonder if you are still a first-time power, be encouraged by Raul. He obviously thinks the US can do anything.
• By the way, the other day WashPo had one of its usual inane editorials along the lines of: "Where has US openness to Cuba gotten us? Nowhere". First, what the Americans consider openness and the Cubans think is openness are different things. For 48 years the US has acted like a chained bull mastiff, snarling and pulling at its chains 24/7. Now  the mastiff shuts up for five minutes every day. But he is still snarling the other 1435 minutes.
• You can't expect 48 years of bad relations to be undone by a few minor good deeds, particularly since the US continues to loudly insist the dictatorship must resign.
• As to what good have the good deeds done us, we leave it to readers to judge. Raul issued a public statement of sorrow and regret at the death. Can anyone imagine, a year ago,  Cuba's dictator apologizing for the death of a political prisoner? We think his is a seismic shift.
• Letter from Ramganesh Iyengar on Pakistan, Afghanistan, and US You allege that Pakistan has taken US for a ride all these years.
• I beg to differ – for both sides it was, and is, a marriage of convenience all along. Do you think the CIA and NATO security forces are unaware of the ISI and Pakistan’s army’s links with the Taliban? Of course not. It was a marriage they willingly got into, knowing fully well the trade-offs involved. They had only 2 options:

· a) Go full hog into Pakistan’s NW as well, the way they have done in Afghanistan. This would be great from a purist’s viewpoint of cleaning the Taliban, but was impossible to sell to the American home audience and to the world. Afghanistan has been bad enough and they are looking for a face-saving exit – imagine digging their heels into Pakistani territory as well! The costs, energies and loss of US soldier lives would be completely unacceptable to the home audience. So comes the other option, the shortcut

· b) Write periodic cheques to Pak army, and get their ‘cooperation’ (to whatever limited extent) that enables American soldiers to keep off Pak soil. While the tradeoffs in terms of effectiveness and even intent are too apparent, this was still much better than the first alternative for the Americans. After all, the American original battle was against AQ, not so much the Taliban. Even if Taliban were to escape into Pakistan and resurface in Afghanistan post the NATO’s face-saving exit, the Americans couldn’t care less.

• They chose the obvious latter course of action.
• Thus, the Pak army is double-dealing for sure. But none of this is a shock to the Americans. They will salvage what they can, keep steadfastly out of Pak territory (except for the infamous drones), and look for the first window of opportunity to escape from the region. The ‘cooperation’ has only been a temporary marriage of convenience; and neither side is bothered about the long term impact (of not uprooting fundamentalism from the region entirely).
• Editor's comment Editor sometimes carries on a conversation without referencing past statements. We've noted many times that the CIA and CENTCOM are perfectly aware of the Pakistan-Taliban link, but back in Washington people think this is something that can be managed and the fall-out cost to the US minimized. Editor was venting bile at Washington, not at the Americans in the forward areas, and he should have made that clear.
• In reality, aside from a logistics route, Pakistan has contributed nothing to the war in Afghanistan. Instead, 90% of the war in Afghanistan is supplied, maintained, coordinated etc. by Pakistan. This is what we mean by saying Pakistan has taken the US for a ride. The US has not managed Pakistan, Pakistan has managed the US. The Americans may think they are getting something, the truth is, the Pakistanis are pretending to help stopping a war that they are waging. This is quite clever of them.
• In this marriage of convenience, Uncle Sam, thinking he has married a Pakistani bride who out of fear will be obedient to him, has instead ended up in bed with Pakistani generals dressed in drag who have endlessly cuckolded poor Sam.
• Sam has gone into this sham marriage with his eyes wide shut, and Editor for one rejoices that Sam has been taken for a ride. Had Sam been less arrogant, he might have understood what was being done to him. But Washington did not understand. It thought threatening Pakistan would make Pakistan back down on the Taliban.
• Instead, the Pakistanis have won. Sam will leave Afghanistan, Pakistan will dictate the future of that unhappy land. Mind you, we've been clear that in the end Pakistan will lose - and it already is losing, as the very militants it has nurtured turn against the Pakistan state. Editor's sole concern is that the impact of Pakistan's fall to the militants, when it comes, will hit India, which is happy wallowing in its nice mud hole and thinking of its next meal.

0230 GMT February 27, 2010

• When will they ever learn? asked the poet/singer Bob Dylan. In the case of Washington and the media, the short answer is "never".
• The Pakistanis have pulled another fast one on the Americans, and we congratulate the Pakistanis heartily because each time the Americans walk into a Pakistani trap with open-eyes thinking they are so smart and the Pakistanis are so stupid, and each time Pakistan gets what it wants from the Americans, and each time the Americans lose. You have to admire anyone who can so repeatedly take the Americans for a ride, because Washington Americans are so stuffed with arrogance, that they must find it hard to even walk.
• Pakistan, to get more money from the US, decided to "cooperate" - yes, please do think Austin Powers - on arresting Taliban. So the Pakistanis "arrested" the Taliban's Number 2, plus several senior officers. Washington and the tame media was glowing in their self-congratulation: at last those nasty Pakistanis had been turned around. A new era had dawned. The Holy Grail was within reach.
• Problemo Number One, Dudes. The Pakistanis would not let the Americans talk to the prisoners alone. The Americans demanded the prisoners be handed over to them, failing which, at least to the Afghanistan Government, in which case obviously the US Government would get final custody.
• Oh no no, said the Pakistanis. We have to first see if these gents have broken any Pakistan laws. If so, they would have to be tried in Pakistan. If not, the Pakistanis had no right to hold them.
• Uncle snarled and growled a good bit, and the Pakistanis "changed" their mind, saying they would hand over the men to the Americans.
• Problemo Number Two, Dudes. And so it came to pass in those days, a humble human rights petitioner appeared before the honorable justices of the Lahore High Court, and pleaded that these men could not be handed over to Afghanistan. Verily, the Lahore High Court listened with careful ears, and Lo! agreed with the humble petitioner.
• And who is this humble person? Well, we'll be a turkey's mama, but this humble "human rights" person is an agent of the Taliban and AQ in Pakistan! Very keen are the Taliban and AQ on human rights, as we all know.. http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2010/02/pakistani_court_bloc.phpn
• What are his grounds? You're not going to believe this: these men, he said, have not been accused of anything, no evidence has been put forward to say they are enemies of anyone, and actually - look at the cheek of this man - they were only representing the Afghanistan Government and doing their duty. In other words, what you and I think is the legitimate Government of Afghanistan is actually the illegal government, and the Taliban are the real government! He wants the men released.
• Now folks, anyone who thinks that the Pakistani courts will go against the Pakistan military on a national security matter has to more naive than were Adam and Eve in their garden. The reason the Lahore High Court barred handover of then men to Afghanistan was that the Government told the HC it had no objection to the petitioners writ. Do we know this for a fact? No, because we weren't in the court. But the Court has to give the Government lawyer a chance to object before making a ruling. All the Government lawyer has to say: "This is a deep and complex matter, the suspect has been in our custody only for X weeks, we need more time to trace all the links and continue his interrogation, plus national security is at stake." That's if in the first place the Pakistan civil courts have standing in the matter of a military prisoner, which we doubt.
• Now its time to bring up Problem Number Three. Given that Afghanistan is spiraling towards the endgame, and given that Pakistan is 100% determined it will dictate the outcome of talks, are we  cynical to suspect that the men being arrested one-two-three-four in a row, after Pakistan has denied for donkey's years that Taliban leaders are in Pakistan, is because Pakistan wants independent Taliban out of circulation leaving only friendly Talibanat the table? No, far from being cynical, we'd be the donkey's rear end if we thought anything different.
• And now for Problem Number Four Where is the independent evidence that these men are who Pakistan says they are? We leave you with that thought. And please don't bother Washington with these questions, because Washington is busy writing out the next one-billion-dollar check to the Pakistanis for their "cooperation".

0230 GMT February 26, 2010

• The assassinated Hamas leader also used multiple passports according to what a confidant told Reuters. (Story from Haaretz of Israel http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1152395.html)
• The passport he used to travel to Dubai was Palestinian and had a different family name. Occurs to us that the legitimate government of Palestine - as recognized by the west, at least - is in the West Bank. Is it likely to be issuing passports to a Hamas arms dealer, when Hamas is doing its best to overthrow the legitimate government?
• If we follow this train of reasoning, the gentleman entered Dubai on a false passport. The confidante said he used passports from different Arab nations. So those too are false.
• So, are we going to hear condemnations of the Hamas leader by the governments involved?  We aren't holding our breath.
• Afghans raise their flag over Marja Americans say its a historic day. So on and so forth. So now all we have to do is wait for the Marines to move on to their next target and the Taliban to move back in. The Marines plans to keep troops in Marja for some months. Unfortunately for everyone, the Taliban live there. The some months will make no difference. As for the Afghans taking over, dream on.
• BTW, we are told that 20% of the Afghan Army is unavailable because people have to go home to take of matters there, whether or not leave is granted. And one-third of the Army deserts or decides not to rejoin, annually. we've been harsh on the way the US has done its training mission, and we are justified. Still, anyone would find it difficult to train a professional army when you are losing so many people every year. Of course, in a draftee army, one-third annual loss is routine, if service is for three years.
• Government revenues, incidentally, are <$875-million. So the Afghans cannot sustain the type of army US/NATO is giving them. It has to be a draftee, bullets and beans kind of army. Everything else is unaffordable.
• This is why the much reviled - and correctly so - former SecDef Rumsfeld didn't want to expand the Afghan forces. Like most Americans, he was looking at the problem backward. The solution was not to hold the Army down to ineffective numbers, it was to build a different kind of army.
• In a letter on gays in the military,  Reader ridickhaus opines that the services and Pentagon are not-so-subtly disagreeing with the President. The president has said gays should have the right to serve in the military. The subordinates are "loyally" backing him. The "in my personal opinion" means that when asked to implement the policy, they will shake their heads and say "we couldn't get an agreement," while keeping themselves in the clear.

0230 GMT February 25, 2010

• Okay, okay, enough already! May we request the ever diligent chief of Dubai police to cool it before he makes a laughing stock of himself? He has come up with a new list of suspects in the Hamas leader's killing. It is now up to 26. Give us a break, please! This is getting absurd.
• BTW, three of the assassination team are supposed to have escaped Dubai by travelling to Iran. Is the Dubai police chief certain that a hundred additional suspects were not beamed up to an alien spaceship and escaped back to Israel via a wormhole?
• Also, BTW, turns out the son of Hamas's founder worked for Shin Bet for 10 years. Read the story at http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1151941.html This young man represents the most dangerous type of spy: he worked for the Israelis out of pure conviction, to save Israeli lives.
• Letter from a reader: A few weeks ago at the State of Union, President Obama says we will repeal the don't ask don't tell policy prohibiting gays from serving in the military.  No big surprise there.
• A few days after that, SecDef Gates who was testifying before Congress, said that "the commander in chief has given us marching orders and we will repeal don't ask don't tell."  Joint Chiefs Chairman Admiral Mullins, who was sitting next to SecDef Gates says "in my personal opinion" it is time that we allow gays and lesbians to serve in the military.  That was a fairly big surprise.
• At the time, I paid no heed to Mullins' circumlocution regarding the repeal of don't ask don't tell as being  "in my personal opinion".
• Two weeks later, Army Chief of Staff General George Casey and Secretary of the Army John McHugh, also testifying before Congress, both say "in my personal opinion" we should NOT repeal "don't ask don't tell".
• Can our Editor, or Orbat readers familiar with the inner workings of the Pentagon comment on this?  Why this split within the military, and more importantly, why is this split being played out in the open and under the guise of "in my personal opinion"? 
• Editor's response Editor does not have a clue to this. Readers, any thoughts?

0230 GMT February 24, 2010

• Argentina to take Falklands dispute to UN with our fave dictator Hugo Chavez rallying South American support behind Argentina.  US has given a limp-wristed/lacy hanky reaction to the crisis, saying it is not in a position to judge on validity of ether claim. This is probably wise.
• A British drillship that arrived in Falklands waters despite the nominal Argentine blockade will soon start more exploration work.
• A Royal Navy SSN is headed for the Falklands, and HMS York, a missile destroyer, will likely remain indefinitely. We still haven't figured out if the 4 Typhoons that arrived in the area are a rotation for the 4 Tornadoes or if the latter are being held over. UK has one infantry company in the area.
• Times London says Latin diplomats believe Argentine president is stirring the pot for domestic reasons. Meanwhile, she has ruled out force to enforce the blockade.
• For an excellent analysis of Britain's legal position read http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/bronwen_maddox/article7038368.ece
• New US embassy in London to cost - gulp - $1-billion The Baghdad Embassy held the previous record for most expensive: $700-million. The US will leave the building at Grosvenor Square for a new location in the Battersea district in 2016. This is making Mayfair residents very happy because they hate the blast barriers and security measures.
• At the new embassy, a 100-foot-wide moat will provide security. The Brits say the Americans should pay the UK 17.5% VAT, but the Americans say they have diplomatic immunity and thus exemption from taxation.
• Now, before you get all worked up about the price tag - as we did - here's the plus side: since the US owns the present embassy, it has agreed to a sale to a Qatar hotel group for - $1-billion. Of course, 2016 is a long way off, and the cost will surely escalate. Still, not a bad deal at all.
• What's the point of an N-warhead on an ABM? asks one of our young reader, seeing as space is a near vacuum. Excellent question. The N-warhead causes damage by radiation, not by blast. The radiation makes electronics go crazy, and physically weakens the mechanisms of the incoming warhead.
• We keep asking ourselves, why is the US trying to shoot a bullet moving at 17,500 mph with another bullet, because that's what it amounts to with the Kinetic Energy warheads US missile interceptors use. Much simpler to use N-warheads, and we'd be surprised if the US doesn't plan to do that. Nothing you want to talk about, because of treaties and bans on N-weapons and so on.
• But wouldn't exploding a bunch of N-warheads in space kill ground electronics? Let's put it this way. What's better, having ground electronics in the US fried or having New York, Washington, Los Angeles and Chicago fried? A no-contest, we think. Besides which, the electronics the US needs to operate its missile defense shield are hardened as are many military networks.

0230 GMT February 23, 2010

• Turkish security forces arrest several former and serving officers for plotting a coup against the Islamic government.
• What makes no sense is that the coup dates back from 2002-2003. So either you believe that eight years later people are still planning the coup. Or you believe the government has known of this ancient, aborted plan and is arresting people for its own political gains, perhaps to gain more power or to silence dissenters within its own ranks.
• Also not making sense is that the government claims to have recovered 5000 pages (five thousand pages) of coup plans. Were the officers plotting a coup or writing a multi-volume thriller?
• US forces close in on last remaining Marja stronghold Approximately 40 Taliban are still holding out in a 2-square-mile area. Eight Marines have died so far, including in roadside bombings. No count for Taliban casualties has been given, except for a generalized "several hundred" killed.
• Ironically, while the Marines are doing their very best to avoid killing civilians and increasing the risk to themselves, NATO has capped a week of ignominy by killing 60 civilians in several air strikes. The latest is 27 civilians dead from a convoy NATO thought were insurgents.
• Meanwhile, while the West is expending lives and money to bring democracy to Afghanistan, its chosen vessel, President Hamid Karzai, has just seized control of the last independent elections office left in Afghanistan, the Election Complaints Commission. He has given himself the right to nominate all five members from now onward.
• To add further to the smell of rotting fish arising from the Presidential Palace yesterday's Washington Post details the rampant crony capitalism with the President at its center. And let's not even mention his brother the Election Fixer, Drug Lord, Business Fixer, Patron of Official Posts, and so on.
• Dutch government collapses over troops in Afghanistan The Dutch originally planned to bring their 2000-troop contingent home at the end of 2010. After US lobbying, the Prime Minister agreed to try and get his electoral allies to stay longer. Instead his major supporter, Labor, pulled out of the government causing its collapse and paving the way for new elections. This makes a pull-out of Dutch troops certain.
• US doubles military aid to Yemen to $150-million; Reuters says this is additional to covert aid.

0230 GMT February 22, 2010

• Afghan Army not ready says the New York Times with reference to the Marja operation. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/21/world/asia/21afghan.html?ref=world In a squad level, when mingled with US forces, the Afghans do okay. And they are a big help in searching houses. But that's about it. The troops sent to Marja and their officers seem to have no clue as to what to do. For starters, they have no indirect support weapons. The officers seem indifferent. Executing anything other than the most basic unit maneuvers is beyond the Afghans. Etc etc. The article has the details.
•  The point here is simple. If the US has spent 8 years training the Afghan Army - and its tiny compared to the Iraq forces - and the best it can get is squads or occasionally a platoon to perform basic stuff in combat, then shouldn't the Americans be looking into how they train foreign forces?
• In our humble opinion, three things are wrong. First, the US military works at an unbelievable level of complexity. Americans always make any job as hard as possible, not as simple as possible. This goes for every aspect of American life. We read, for example, of a manual the Americans were preparing for the Afghans on some incredibly simple matter, such as in the Indian Army might be taught verbally. The manual was 65 pages, the bidding process to prepare the manual almost as complicated as the bidding for the Space Shuttle, and several hundred thousand dollars in costs.
• When you are training the Afghans, there should be NO manual that exceeds 10-20 pages and nothing for the NCOs and enlisted should be manualized. And when we say 10-20 pages should be a limit, we don't mean that there should be one hundred or five hundred manuals of 10-20 pages each. For a platoon leader, 10 pages suffice.
• What we are saying will make no sense to the US military because it cannot imagine such a universe. We've pointed out elsewhere that the manual for a US tank platoon leader commanding 4 tanks extends to 400 pages. One of these days we'll look at some more manuals and let you know how many pages they run.
• The second thing that's wrong is that the Americans are so lavishly equipped and expend material so extravagantly that they (a) create a culture of dependency, and (b) they create a culture of envy. The Afghan Army is going through exactly what the Iraqis did: "you give us 1-percent of the resources and you expect us to fight like you do? Why should we take risks you don't take?" Do the Americans have any answer to this? Everything they do makes the Afghans feel like fifth class soldiers, why do they assume the Afghans will have either pride or self-respect left?
• The third thing that's wrong is that the Americans have answered a basic question. Why should the typical Afghan soldier fight? Suppose the man is a Pushtoon. Why should he fight fellow Pushtoons in the Taliban? And suppose he is from a western province. Why should he risk his life fighting in the East or South so that the Pushtoons benefit?
• Its okay for the Americans to grandly declare: "You are fighting for Afghanistan," but except when coerced, for example through a draft, when has the typical tribesman fought for Afghanistan?
• The last time the Americans succeeded in very effectively training a foreign army was with the Koreans. They not only have a fierce nationalistic pride, they saw the communists as total enemies. In Korea, the difference in equipment between an American GI and a ROK soldier was marginal compared to the gap between an American and an Afghan soldier today. Sure, even in Korea the Americans were lavishly supplied, by the standards of the day. But if the Koreans resented that, they kept it to themselves or accepted it because they were ignorant dirt poor peasants and the Americans were the kings of the world.
• By the time Vietnam rolled around, the Americans were still doing a reasonably good job of training, but the culture of dependency had set in. The Americans provided the logistics, they provided the equipment, they provided the firepower, they provided the helicopters and so on. Nonetheless, we should remember that the South hated and feared the communists and despite all the government corruption and shortcomings, the ARVN did what it could. In 1972, with American air support, the ARVN defeated the PAVN - despite the latter being among the best infantry the world has ever seen. So whatever the French and the Americans taught the South Vietnamese, they taught it well - and they had willing learners.
• Be that as it may, if the Americans have been unable to train the Afghans in nine years, they are not going to succeed in another two years, or five, or even ten. Particularly when the Americans have made it all too clear that the end game has arrived, and that the end game seems to focus more on giving the Americans an out with honor rather than on focusing on fighting. Once you say: "we're willing to negotiate with the enemy", the training effort is over. No Afghan soldier is going to risk his life from now on, if he can help it.
• Letter from reader Sanjith Menon Mullah Ghani Baradar was trying to talk to
  Karzai administration directly, about some form of an  accommodation, between these two powers in Afghanistan. They are increasingly getting tired and weary about
  Pakistani army and want to chart their own course. But Pakistan will not let any solution in Afghanistan  emerge without its involvement.
  

0230 GMT February 21, 2010

• US wants custody of Taliban No. 2 says Dawn of Karachi. We'd mentioned the Times of India said that the Pakistanis will try the Number 2 in Pakistan if he has broken laws, and will deport him to Afghanistan if not. http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/front-page/06-cia-wants-baradar-sent-to-afghanistan-120-rs-05
• US is saying it doesn't want to take the man to the US, they're happy to have custody at Bagram. US will take him to Afghanistan - snicker snicker. But if you read the Dawn article, the Pakistanis are saying he will not be handed over to the US. To us, in plain English, means - imagine that - he will not be handed to the US. Doesn't seem terribly complicated to us.
• Of course, the US is not going to take a "no" for an answer. So we cannot say what will happen.
• Why does the US want the Number 2? Because - you will be shocked, shocked to learn the Americans feel the Pakistani interrogation is going nowhere. The man is not providing information. The Pakistanis insist on being in the room when the Americans interrogate him.
• Now let's not beat about the bush. Pakistani interrogation is not associated with blushing brides, if you get our meaning. The Pakistanis are free to beat the man to an inch of his life, repeatedly, pull out his nails, knock out his teeth, break his bones, attach electrodes to his testicles, hang him from the ceiling, sodomize him with rods covered with chilli powder, bust his kidneys, feed him ground glass, and so on. They can find his wives and children and physically abuse them in front of the man.  American interrogation is a puddy tat affair by comparison. We're not trying to alarm anyone, but this sort of interrogation is quite normal in the Indian subcontinent if a suspect is being uncooperative.
• If the man is not giving information, its because the Pakistanis are being solicitous of his welfare. And why might they be solicitous of his welfare? The only reason we can think of is that the Pakistanis made a show arrest to get American money. Incidentally, the Pakistanis had the man in custody for two weeks before they let the Americans near him. Plenty of time to brief the man that he had nothing to fear from the Americans.
• UK's top civil servant tells Prime Minister to curb his temper Could this ever happen in America? We think not. The admonition came after reports that the PM was being verbally abusive to his staff. In UK, of course, the civil service is independent and the Cabinet Secretary can tell off any politician without fear of consequences. Maybe America would be better off with such a system. Its worth thinking about.
• http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1252584/Gordon-Brown-told-You-abuse-Downing-Street-staff.html
• Taliban two suicide attacks in Manshera District, Pakistan says www.longwarjournal.org. Manshera is adjacent to Kashmir. The Taliban first penetrated the area last year but have remained relatively quiet. One attack was defeated, the second killed a police chief.
• India, are you paying attention? Probably not.
• White phosphorous Readers will recall the widespread condemnation of Israeli in the 2008 Gaza war for its use of white phosphorous. Though we were second to none in blasting Israel for a strategy that was overtly directed toward punishing civilians - Israel made no secret of this - we had to defend Israel's use of white phosphorus. This is a legitimate weapon of war and essential to illuminate targets for artillery. 
• US has been using white phosphorous in Marja. When combatants are fighting from among civilians, you are going to get civilian burn cases. US is fighting an insurgency, so it makes perfect sense to go out of its way to avoid harming civilians. Israel was fighting an external enemy. That still doesn't justify the strategy of punishing civilians.
• Marja US Marines report "intense" fighting. We do not in any way want to minimize anyone's war, especially given Editor's propensity for avoiding risk and his requirement for four pillows and his Teddy Bears - also number four - before he can go to sleep.
• But honestly, people, intense firing is not the same thing as intense fighting. By all accounts there seems to be a great deal of lead going both ways. But the Taliban have gotten no better at causing casualties with their fire. They have neither mortars nor artillery nor gunships nor close air support. Intense fighting means serious casualties. On the US side, casualties have been astonishingly light.
• Partly this is because of the enormous technological superiority the US enjoys, for example, the ability to look around corners and behind buildings. Partly this is because for once the Marines are not treating a battle as if it were a repeat of Okinawa. At Okinawa in 1944, one American died for every foot of runway that was built so that B-29s could directly hit Japan. The Americans lost 12,000 men KIA and missing and 38,000 wounded. The Japanese lost 107,000 KIA plus 100,000 civilian dead. US population was less than half of what it is today. if you want intense, that is intense.
• Editor's father once saw US Marines in action, in the Dominican Republic in 1965, and he said it was the most frightening thing he'd every witnessed. And Dad was no stranger to war: he spent almost five years in the Mideast, North Africa, and Italy, plus a year in the first Indo-Pakistan War. What he found frightening was the complete disregard of Marine commanders for the lives of their men, indeed, of the men for their own lives. He witnessed straight-up-the-middle assaults, where the minute the man leading an attack was shot down, the next man would take over, and when he was shot down, the next man would take over, but the attack had to keep moving forward at all costs.
• Anyone who is familiar with Vietnam - and the Editor thanks his stars he escaped that mess entirely - will recognize what Editor's father was saying. Casualties were a secondary consideration  if at all they were a consideration, and in any case why would anyone expect it to be otherwise. The Marines are first and foremost an elite assault force, it is given that opposition will be very heavy, and so will casualties.
• Incidentally, we have the Washington Post telling us how difficult is the physical environment for the Americans, how they have to hump their supplies through water and how they are suffering from hypothermia and how they are not getting showers and hot meals. Can the WashPo please show the Americans some respect? Every Marine the correspondents talk to says this is why he joined the Marines, how he welcomes the hardship. And by the standards of war, Marja is no hardship. You want hardship and hypothermia? WashPo should reread the Battle of Chosin Reservoir. It should remind itself about Khesan if you want to know hardship and the sheer filth of war. It's not for nothing they say that when the 1st Air Cavalry linked up with Khesan, its troopers gagged. The Marines were puzzled. They couldn't figure out why The Cav found their base and their condition so disgusting. For them it was just another day and another battle.
• The biggest problem - if you can call it that - that the Marines have faced is a handful of expert snipers. Two days ago two dozen recon Marines were dropped behind the enemy snipers and we can be reasonably sure that problem is resolved. Its more than likely the enemy snipers are foreigners - Tajiks and Uzbeks.
• The latest on Marja is that the Taliban seem to be running out of ammunition.

0230 GMT February 20, 2010

• Pakistan says the recently arrested Taliban - the Number 2 commander and two shadow governors of Afghanistan provinces will not be handed to the US. The Interior Minister says if they have committed crimes in Pakistan, they will be tried and punished by Pakistan. If they have committed no crimes in Pakistan, they will be deported to their country of origin, Afghanistan.
• Now, of course, in Pakistan officials say one thing one day and another the next day. But we find it interesting that the Interior Minister, the top internal security official, should so openly defy the US. Particularly in light of all the American editorials praising the Pakistanis for cooperating with the US and finally seeing sense.
• http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/pakistan/Pakistan-will-not-hand-Taliban-suspects-to-US/articleshow/5593188.cms
• Israel Reader Luxembourg has been sending daily articles on the killing of the Hamas leader in the UAE. The only new angle we see is that some Palestinians have been arrested, and they might belong to Fatah. None of this is confirmed in any way. If they are Fatah, that the Israelis and Fatah are working together against Hamas should not be news to anyone. As for the "pressure" that the Euros are bringing against Israel to explain why their passports were used, please ignore that. Nothing can, or will, come of it. For all the denunciations, the Euros don't like Hamas any more than do the Israelis. And this is hardly the first time Israel has used foreign passports in its assassinations.
• Haaretz of Israel says a Hamas official has accused the two arrested Palestinians of working for Dalhan, the notorious Fatah security chief.
• UK denies reinforcing Falklands it says that four Typhoon strike fighters sent a couple of days ago were merely a replacement for four Tornado air defense fighters that are stationed permanently in the area. As for the dispatch of a survey ship and a Royal Fleet Auxiliary, Britain says this is simply a routine rotation.

0230 GMT February 19, 2010

Pakistan extremists have at each other in Khyber Agency

Read http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2010/02/36_killed_in_bombing.php

• Why do you need 18 people on an assassination team? We aren't going to comment on the story of Israel's said killing of a Hamas leader in Dubai because we know nothing about what really happened. One point we thought we should make. In the novels, you normally have a lone assassin doing the dirty. So why does Mossad need 18 people? Has Mossad lost it?
• We do not know if Mossad has lost it, but one thing we do know. Yes, you do need a big team otherwise you cannot keep the target under 24-hour surveillance. You need that surveillance to be certain the target is where you need him to be when you pull the trigger.
• Notice that for all the criticism the Israelis are getting about the amateur nature of the kill, they got everyone out of Dubai right quick.
• As for this business of why the team did not concern itself with the surveillance cameras which are a fact of everyday life, in the novels you have a super-nerd who parks a van outside the hotel and hacks into the security system and overrides the cameras with a tape showing all is normal. In real life this is quite hard to do. So what you do do, knowing the cameras are filming away, is to use them to create diversions and lay false trails.
• Again, we have idea if this is what Israel was doing, and even the best agencies often mess up so badly that you have to smack yourself upside your head and ask: "What were they thinking?" We just wanted to note there is an explanation other than gross incompetence.
• Somalia government preparing Mogadishu offensive says the Wall Street Journal. Right now the government's rule in Mogadishu is counted as handful of city blocks. With the help of the African Union force, the government plans to expand its secure perimeter.
• We've been unable to get any decent figures on the new Somalia Army, but doubt it has more than 1-2 effective battalions. Al Jazeera says that fresh Ethiopian troops have rotated in. We thought the Ethiopians had all withdrawn, but Al Jaz says only two-thirds left. If a couple of Ethiopian battalions join with the AU force, it should suffice to clear a significant part of the city, near the port at least. http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2007/04/2008525135130701274.html
• ANSA ( www.ansa.it ) has excellent coverage of the Horn, but we did not see any reference to the planned offensive. 
• Arrest of Taliban number 2 in Karachi Times London presents alternative theories as to what is happening. Meanwhile, we believe the man was not hiding in Karachi but living and going about his business openly. The one thing you can be sure of: if Pakistan hands in anyone in the Taliban, it is because that person has become dangerous to Pakistan. Rawalpindi has adamantly refused to hand over others to the US, such as the Haqqanis who are a super-duper pain in the American fundament in Afghanistan. The military action against the Mesuds has been desultory despite immense US pressure - and the threat the Mesuds pose to Pakistan, because Rawalpindi still see them as assets.
• http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article7029653.ece

0230 GMT February 18, 2010

• How to win and still lose Washington Post February 17, 2010 Page A7 has a story on how the Marines are operating in Marja. This kind of operation, we can confidentially wager, has never been undertaken by US military forces.
• The first priority is to avoid civilian casualties. So if armed Taliban are seen entering a house, but there is no certainty there are no civilians in the house, the Marines cannot open fire. If the Taliban put women and children as human shields atop houses from which they are firing at the Marines, the Marines cannot fire back. The Marines have said endlessly that they are not in Marja to kill Taliban, they are there to protect the civilians. If you thought you would never even dream of a day when the Marines are conducting an offensive against a ruthless enemy while saying they are not there to kill the enemy, your amazement matches the Editor's. Particularly as the US/Afghans warned local residents for weeks that an offensive was coming. Civilians were given every chance to leave, many took the chance, and as far as we are concerned, the law of warfare has been followed. Its open season after that, but the Marines have chosen not to make it so, but continue watching out for civilians.
• We offer the Marines our congratulations. They have done a Very Good Thing, even if many of the civilians left behind are culpable. For example, there have been cases where women have been seen scurrying between houses, carrying bundles. Supplies, weapons, and ammunition are likely being carried, not pink blankies and bunny slippers. But the Marines still will not shoot. Their restraint is astonishing.
• The Marines are winning in Marja - not the way we thought they'd win, we were anticipating Fallujah Version 2. But every day they are taking more buildings and pushing the Taliban into a tighter perimeter. There is but one outcome possible, as we have said at another time: the Marines will win. The Taliban will lose.
• But when you read the WashPo story two things will immediately strike you. First, the Afghans are to leave 400 paramilitary forces in Marja till a local police force capable of taking on the Taliban is formed. This effort is doomed before it has begun, because no matter what the US does, the local police are going to be local police elsewhere in Afghan. They will extort money and abuse the residents, and they will make their peace with the Taliban. If they don't, the Taliban will kill the police. The paramilitary troops will behave just like the police.
• But perhaps the Afghan army will leave a battalion behind to back the paramilitary. Well, if the battalion is composed of Pushtuns, they will not fight the Taliban. If it is composed of ant-Pushtun tribes, you can see we're heading for trouble. More to the point, the Afghan soldiers will want to go home - and very soon. If they are not allowed, they will desert. The Afghan Army does not automatically say "no" to out of area operations the way it used to. So they'll stick around for weeks, maybe even for months. But they will go home, because 8 years into this war, the Army doesn't want to fight - and we cannot blame them, if for no other reason than that the Taliban are a formidable foe. These men have signed on to feed their families. If they get killed, that's it for the families. You cannot blame the men for not fighting.
• Key as the first aspect of post-offensive Marja is, more important is the second aspect. WashPo says there has never been a government in Marja. It is not a question of restoring the government. Its a question of bringing a government to the town for the first time in heaven knows how many centuries.
• There is no way, short of spending decades in the place, the US can create a stable, functioning government, on top of creating a truly nationalist army - even if that army wasn't riven by 30 or more ethnicities.
• It was very different in Iraq because Iraq was a very closely governed country. There was no part of the country that's the government's writ did not reach. Cross the government, and a division or two would roll in and kill everyone in sight. That's what happened when the Shia rose up in the south after 1991. That's what happened to the Kurds. Saddam ruled Anbar lightly because the Sunnis were in power, he gave them money and guns, and in return they followed Saddam.
• But Afghanistan has never been ruled by anything you and I consider a government. Sure a government can be constructed from scratch. But you and I know the Americans are not hang around for more than a few years at most. And that's not going to be enough.
• So the Marines will win, but America will still lose.
• Iraq sectarian violence feared All the signs are there:  Shias are again threatening Sunnis, and forcing them to leave the homes they came back to under US protection. If you get the hint you're not wanted, you get killed. AQ in Iraq is working to reconstitute its networks. And most dangerous of all, the Mahadi Army is recruiting again - openly. And though it proclaimed itself as a peace-and-love movement when it lost favor with the government and after being soundly thrashed numerous times by the Americans, it never laid down its arms.
• So what should the US do? Nothing. It's not our business anymore. We overthrew Saddam, we overthrew the 20% minority Sunnis who terrorized the other 80% of the population, we built an effective army and paramilitary force to replace's Saddam's war machine, we brought democracy to Iraq, we labored mightily on issues of human rights.
• The Iraqis are grateful, they've asked us to leave, we've agreed, and that's the end of that.
• And it should be the end of it. Mission accomplished. Goodbye, Iraq. We wont miss you. We know you'll sort it out yourselves. It will be a bloody, messy sorting out. But it was never our fight, and now it is especially not our fight.
• Yankee, come home.

0230 GMT February 17, 2010

Why has Pakistan helped US capture the Taliban Number 2?

See www.longwarjournal.org for this and related stories

http://www.longwarjournal.org/threat-matrix/archives/2010/02/why_would_pakistan_arrest_bara.php

For another perspective, also saying there's more to this than meets the eye, read

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article7029653.ece

• A fossil star 300-times the size of the sun recently went supernova in a dwarf galaxy 1.6-billion years ago. This is creating problems for scientists. Till now the maximum size a star could attain was thought to be 150 solar masses. A further problem is that giant stars have very short lives, just millions or tens of millions of years, and they are thought to have died out in the early years of the universe.  So why is this fellow, SN2007bi, still around, billions of years later - at least, was around, its blown up now.
• What makes astrophysics so fascinating is that every discovery seems to open up 10 new questions, and every discovery seems to indicate that the universe is far stranger a place than we can believe.
• http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20527470.900-primordial-giant-the-star-that-time-forgot.html?full=true
• Argentina declares defacto blockade of Falklands/Malvinas by insisting that all ships sailing to/from Argentina ports to the Falklands must get permits.
• We're disappointed, because the last time we looked at what was happening in that part of the world, UK/Argentina seemed to be amicably discussing sharing oil rights to Falklands' estimated 60-billion barrels worth of oil.
• Not to expect that this oil will be available tomorrow, or cheaply. The drilling is possibly the toughest worldwide. But still, as a future resource this is a Very Big Cheese indeed, and there's enough to share without getting into fights.
• http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7029609.ece

0230 GMT February 16, 2010

• What is it we propose by way of extra forces for the US to fight GWOT? This was asked by a reader referring to our editorial yesterday. It cannot be for us outsiders to make any detailed prescription, but that doesn't mean we can't make suggestions. A proper study will require more time than we've got. But to our mind two sets of increases have to be made.
• First, reactivate 5th Marine Division, make 4th Brigade an independent Anti-Terrorist unit not to be counted in infantry battalions, and properly fill out three existing Marine divisions. Add a fourth rifle company to all infantry regiments. With 12 regiments, 4 can deploy at a time. This might take 50,000 Marines.
• For the Army, add six companies to each brigade: two reconnaissance companies to the cavalry "squadron", two companies to each of the other two battalions. Plus add 29 brigades, giving 72 brigades, of which 24 can be deployed at a time. This might require the addition of 120,000 troops.
• The extra troops - all infantry - are likely to cost no more than $5-billion for the Marines and $25-billion for the Army. Extra costs for fuel, ammunition, etc. will rise.
• so what can you do with 28 reinforced brigade equivalent? You could send 20 to Afghanistan and have 8 left for other global theatres. The bulk of the troops would be on the border and unseen to the majority of Afghans. Give people time, and a solid anti-infiltration barrier can be built even if it has to extend over 2000-km. Remember, its insufficient to just infiltrate: Pakistan based insurgents/Pakistan forces will need to infiltrate AND exfiltrate. We can argue about what efficacy of intercept will be needed to give infiltrators second thoughts. We think 33% for each cycle would discourage anyone. You'd have to kill one in five infiltrating, and one in five exfiltrating.
• You will notice our great subtlety in saying "kill". Not detain, not arrest, not try, not jail. Kill.
• You can come up with your own figures, but we think a rifle company every 10-kms with one reaction company for every five forward, backed by all the amazing gadgetry the US can deploy, should do the job. Watching the entire Pakistan border from the air, 24-hours, all weather, is quite easily achievable. Creating a 5-km deep auto-kill zone by removing civilians is easily done. Sure, civilians will wander in, even if you have a second set of proper fencing. But after a few hundred get killed, they'll stop.
• These are engineering matters. if someone wants to bring up politics, that's another matter. But don't say an infiltration proof barrier cannot be built. Our scheme doesn't even require an infiltration proof barrier. It needs to catch only one in five coming in, one in five going out.
• Just a thought. Please send us your thoughts.
• Throw the bums out seems to be the German battle cry when it comes to aiding Greece. Literally. A majority of Germans want Greece to be tossed out of the Euro zone. They don't want to give aid to Greece. The crisis there is the result of profligate spending brought about by very low interests rates (sounds familiar?), and the Germans - rather reasonably to our mind - don't see why they should have to pay anything.
• Global warming Before we bring to your attention an article forwarded by Reader Flymike, we'd like to make clear the Editor is not ipso facto a global warming denier. Human impact on Earth has steadily grown since 1950, and we are quite prepared to believe, with evidence, that this is the case. We'd like to see the US phase out all coal that causes environmental damage - in Appalachia, for example, and we'd like to see the cut oil consumption by at least half for national security reasons. We are 100% behind N-power, wind-power, solar-power, reduced energy consumption and so on for the foregoing reasons.
• Readers are well aware of Climategate. We were even prepared to go as far as say that so far the Climategate errors shouldn't lead us to toss out all evidence of human-caused climate change. Conversely, we believed that the evidence against human-caused climate change should be considered, particularly when the matter is so complex.
• But now Climategate has reached a new peak (bad pun, but unintended). The UK Daily Mail http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html says that:
• Professor Phil Jones, whose data is central to the global warming theses, says he can't find the data on which he based his research. Apparently he allows he is neither neat nor organized. Rebuttal: Editor is an academic, he deals with tens of thousands of data points every year, he is absolutely not neat, and re. his organization, let's just say Editor usually has no clue what day of the week it is, or the day, or the hour, or where he put important documents, or where that scrap of paper on which he took notes fifteen years ago is lying. But that is absolutely no excuse whatsoever for losing your data, and then continuing to write as if you had that data. You darn well reconstruct the data, no matter how long it takes, or you stop claiming the thesis for which you used that data is true. This business of not being organized as an excuse for not having the data is absolutely, 100% unacceptable in academics. Professor Jones should be ashamed of himself for even mentioning this.
• Professor Jones "...agreed that there had been two periods which experienced similar warming, from 1910 to 1940 and from 1975 to 1998, but said these could be explained by natural phenomena whereas more recent warming could not." This statement assumes that we know everything there is to know about long-range climate, and this is completely untrue. Further, we do not know if recent warming cannot be explained because Prof. Jones and his chums, among others, seemed to have helped create an atmosphere where dissenters are either not listen to or marginalized as deniers.
• The good professor also agrees there is no statistical evidence of warming in the last 15 years.
• He further agrees that "...the debate over whether the world could have been even warmer than now during the medieval period, when there is evidence of high temperatures in northern countries, was far from settled." The reference is to the Medieval Warm Period 800-1300 AD. Human generated climate change people have been saying there is no evidence that the MWP was global, and that Prof. Jones of all people should admit the issue is not settled is heretical.
• Now here's what we suggest Lets forget this debate and focus on recovering the data - the famous "hockey stick" graph which shows a more-or-less steady climate till of a sudden the graph curves sharply up, like a hockey stick. Lets recover the data and then put it out to debate as to if it is reliable, what does it mean and so on. We suggest those who say climate change is not being driven by humans should also aid in the search, or at least come up with their own information to show the hockey stick does not apply.
• But in the meanwhile, we all should resolve to be careful about demanding trillions of dollars in future spending when we don't understand everything we need to understand about climate change. Why not set up a special global research fund - say $100-billion over 10 years - and dig deeper into the issue of global climate.
• The other day we cited an article where an American scientist said that Himalayan >glacier melt and China's recent extreme weather is not caused by CO2, but by black carbon, i.e., good old soot. And, she said, getting the soot down is much cheaper and simpler - and with results showing up within weeks - than the CO2 which we want to remove. This shows again that we don't know as much as we need to.

· Belching Indian Cows By the way, we have to mention in all fairness: Those on the other side of this debate get quite irate when Professor Rajendra Pachuri refuses to mention the role that Indian cows - hundreds of millions of them - play in methane production. They say he's from India and doesn't dare. Both Prof. Pachuri and his detractors are a bit off the point. No Indian is going to get the least upset if told Indian cows are a major methane source. They'll get upset if you say that the cows have to be killed. They wont get upset if someone suggests birth control for cows. But before anyone goes there, we'd better warn that there are people who say India's cows are unproductive are way off the mark.

0230 GMT February 15, 2010

The Military Strategy in Afghanistan

CJ Radin

http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2010/02/the_military_strateg.php

• The very detailed article above provides an insightful view into the US strategy for Afghanistan. Indeed, the article articulates the strategy a lot better than the government has done.
• Our first reaction was pure rage, as Afghanistan is a victory that the Americans threw away from arrogance and an inability to understand what they were doing.
• Our second reaction was: if you're going to withdraw because you've lost, then this is a politically sound strategy. It provides the US with political cover to start withdrawing.
• Our third reaction: pure rage. The US has lost, it understands that for all the brave whistling it is doing. Okay, so maybe the retards in Washington don't understand we've lost, but everyone else does, and the reason for defeat from this point on is going to be simple. The Afghans will not build an effective national army and police in time - perhaps never - and the minute US/NATO forces start withdrawing, the Taliban+ are going to come down like a pack of starving hyenas.
• Perhaps Afghanistan could fight off the Taliban. Its hard to say for reasons we wont go into. But that plus sign we put next to "Taliban" is a type. That represents the Pakistan Army, which will be fighting alongside the Taliban.
• Now, you all have gotten a bad impression of the Pakistan Army's fighting abilities, and please listen when the Editor says your impression is wrong. There is a vast difference fighting your own people when 90% of your army sympathizes with the Taliban, and near impossible to fight when you are doing best NOT to destroy the Taliban but trying to keep the Americans happy and the flow of $$$$ proceeding smoothly. The Pakistan Taliban is the fourth arm of the Pakistan military, why would the Pakistanis gnaw off their own arm just to keep the Americans happy?
• No one with any clarity of thought in India is assuming the Pakistanis will be less than a formidable foe if it comes to war between the two countries. Nor should you assume that the Pakistan Army will be highly effective when it comes to defeating Hamid Karzai and all symbols of the Afghan state created by the Americans.
• This is why American plans for Afghanistan make zero sense.
• That being the case, why is the US Government continuing to make a show of fighting the Taliban and looking for political solutions. There are NO political solutions that will stand once the US starts withdrawing its forces. Neither are there any military solutions that will stand.
• We are NOT going to say: why waste American lives when the game is over. The number of Americans killed in Afghanistan - yes, even in Iraq - is so low as to be hardly worth mention. We despise those who make an issue of Iraq or Afghanistan by weeping fake tears over American casualties, which in the GWOT are insignificant.
• Our point is straightforward. The game is over, why are wasting time and money? Bring the troops home, lets get back to training and reequipment, and lets see if we can't get the next war right.
• OK, we know some of our readers are rolling on the floor hooting with laughter. Get the next one right? Editor, you are a riot. To get anything right, you have to admit you were wrong. Do you see any introspection going on about why we lost Afghanistan?
• Others might say: Editor, you're all full of criticism here, we haven't heard you give your plan for winning. Well, we haven't pushed our plan because politically it is impossible: Americans are NOT willing to fight any war any more that causes real pain. They don't mind fighting wars on a credit card and they have no objection to wars as long as they don't have to fight.
• We'll repeat our plan: add several divisions to the Army and Marine Corps, use th draft if you have to, and make those divisions very strong in infantry. Shut down the Pakistan-Afghanistan border the way all rough borders are shut down: patrols, patrols, patrols, thousands if not tens of thousands every day. Use your extreme high tech to back the patrols, not to supplant them. Provide security for the villages. If this means stationing 100 Americans in every village for the next 50 years, so be it.
• But you know, if the US did the above, it wouldn't be 50 years. The bulk of US forces would have to stay no more than 20 years.
• OK people, you can get off the floor now and stop hooting and jeering. We said this was not politically feasible, didn't we?
• If effective war is not an option to win the GWOT, then change tracks. Use other methods, starting by co-opting the Taliban. We've been through this. The US for many decades after 1776 was feared as a fundamentalist (the democracy part), revolutionary, fanatic state heck bent on destroying the civilized world. May be its time to stop being a reactionary power and go back to our true roots as revolutionaries. That would leave the Islamists looking stupid - and irrelevant.

0230 GMT February 14, 2010

Marja, Helmand

http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2010/02/assault_on_taliban_s.php

Includes a detailed orbat of Allied forces

• Okay, so we have to eat our words and we'll do it without salt and pepper - in New England those used to be reckoned as spices when Editor was growing up.
• Many times we have suggested that if the US were serious about the GWOT it would increase its forces and spend 6% of GDP on defense.
• Sorry about that: looks like we already spend $1-trillion, or 6.7%. Before you start going: "What on earth is Editor ranting about now?", please remember, from the declared 2011 DOD budget of $744-billion including  "Overseas Contingency Operations" to $1-trillion is really not that much of a leap.
• Add the National Intelligence Budget, Home Land Security, nuclear weapons, Veterans Affairs, Foreign military assistance etc and you almost hit one trillion smackers.
• Sure, there is overlap: Coast Guard also performs civil duties, but it is a uniformed military service; there was a US Immigration and National service and a FEMA before 9/11 and so on, but nonetheless, the point stands: we are at one trillion dollars a year for national defense.
• At this point we hear raucous laughter from Euro think tanks and left/liberal analysts etc because they already know what the true US expenditure is. But folks, they have to give Editor a break: we're orbat people, not budget people. And against the five billion here and ten billion there that you may deduct because many agency budgets cover non-Homeland security, please remember that US is not transparently allowing for stuff like equipment replacement costs. And don't forget a lot of the civilian aid budget goes to strengthen military allies.
• That said, we read that we should consider Secretary Gates a hero because his are the first budgets that are reasonably transparent
• China puts worlds fastest train into commercial service The train covers the 1100-km distance between Wuhan and Guangzhou in three hours. China has approximately 40 high-speed lines under construction or in service.
• Meanwhile, back in Old America we can only look on with envy.
• BTW, did we forget to mention that the Maglev line between Southern California and Las Vegas will be built with loans from China's Export-Import Bank? American capitalists have no shame left.
• US takes baby steps towards revival of N-power US Government has provided financial guarantees for for funding for 2 x 1150-MW N-reactors in Georgia. Construction licenses may take till 2012, after which - given the pace at which the US works nowadays, expect another 6-8 years before operationality. Still, it's a start. If we recall our coal statistics accurately, the two plants should replace 7-million tons of coal/year.
• This British Army cook deserves a medal After the base's civilian helicopter resupply sortie was shot down, the cook kept everyone alive on Spam cooked in many different ways.
• Question to UK MOD - no, not "Sir, may I have more?", but are you losers so pathetic you couldn't get another helicopter to the base for six weeks? Why do the British soldiers and public put up with you? Its not the fact of the hardship - Editor eats pasta with 20 grams of cheese and 30 grams of sauce every single day of every week of every month of every year, since Mrs. R IV took off, and he has no complaints. But if the Brits at the base could not get a few hundred kilos of food, just something to break the monotony, it suggests that no supplies of any sort were arriving.
• Of course, in all fairness, we have to ask US DOD: "US Army has over 1500 transport helicopters and you all could not find the sorties to evacuate the exposed post that was recently overrun by the Taliban?"
• Bye-bye Kennedy dynasty Edward Kennedy's son says he will not seek reelection. For the first time in 63 years there will be no Kennedy in Congress.
• Reader James W. Petersen a former Marine,  reminds us the Marines used the M-60 after the M-48 and before the M-1.

0230 GMT February 13, 2010

Marja, Helmand offensive begins

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8513665.stm

• Marja and Americans apparently have a history. Read http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/12/marja-50-years-ago-model-villages-and-american-money/
• New York Times says Marja is the new model in the Afghan war. Why? Because this time the allies plan to hold the ground. First, may the Good Person Above help us is it has taken the Americans ten years to figure out CI requires you to stay. Second, may the Good Person Above help us some more if Americans call a few months, or even a year, "staying". http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/13/world/asia/13kabul.html?ref=asia
• There is again fighting in Mogadishu, with 8000 people fleeting. Since Wednesday there have been 65 casualties including wounded.
• There is also fighting in Ingushetia as Russian forces chase down a Chechen warlord. 20 insurgents are said to be killed.
• The EU has agreed on a bail-out for Greece. The 12% of GDP deficit must be cut by 4% and the rest by the end of 2012. While Greece has a powerful trade union movement, some reports say the Greeks realize they are in a mess and are resigned to tough fiscal measures.
• Genes that cause stammering discovered. One percent of the world's adult population stammers, says BBC. This includes Editor. So its a physical disability, not a mental one. Too bad. Editor is proud of his multiple mental disorders. Not to worry, though. The Americans come up with dozens of new mental disorders a year - takes one to know one, no? Doubtless with a little fiddling Editor can add 2-3 to his inventory. Editor's theory is American psychiatrists want to make sure every single person on earth is labeled as mentally ill. That will make the shrinks feel less bad about their own illnesses. To a hammer, they say, everything is a nail. To a shrink everything is a mental illness.
• BTW, apparently taking a hard knock on the head can make a victim believe people are saying things to him, and that might be the reason people have visions and hear voices. The last Catholic school Editor worked for had genuine nuns, and to this day he hears the principal calling out "Mr. Ravi! What are you doing! Stop that immediately!". This particularly happens when the Editor is - er - making eyes at attractive ladies. You don't have to be a psychiatrist to figure this one out, once you know the school had an inordinate proportion of attractive moms. Editor is still cross-eyed, trying to look ten ways at the same time.
• The US Marines AFP, a French news agency, has a picture titled: "U.S. marines and an Army Black Hawk helicopter preparing for a military offensive in Marjah, southern Afghanistan on Friday." (See http://haaretz.com/ ) All we see by way of helicopters is a big fat CH-53, which is reasonable, as the Marines use it for heavy lift, and don't use Blackhawks. BTW, add this to your Ripley's Believe It Or Not: the 2011 Budget for Marine helicopters includes new UH-1s and AH-1s. We thought the US had stopped making these guys decades ago. We remember from Vietnam War days that the Marines used to consider the Army soft and over-equipped, and were proud that the equipment they used was bought from a gypsy scrap dealer and refurbished with baling wire and chewing gum, but we didn't know the Marines still held to that ethos. Guess we got fooled because the Marines bought the M-1 and ditched their M48s. Seriously, people, would it kill you to buy Apaches and Blackhawks?
• Good heavens. We took a quick look at the history of the UH-1Y and learned that in 2005 were considering upgrading their UH-1Ns to Y configuration. Somehow they were persuaded to buy new old stuff. We thought we were being ironic about the gypsy scrap dealer and the Marines' love for the old things of life. Okay, 'fession time: Editor still has some clothes, mainly sweaters and ties and tweed jackets from the middle 60s, and he still wears them, but good grief, wearing your 45 year tweed coat has to be a little different from going to war with antiques.
• Please note: US Marine budget for FY 2011 is $21-billion. For this they give America three active divisions, together with a substantial number of combat aircraft and helicopters. US Army's base budget for 10 active divisions is $143-billion. The Army's active manpower is about 3.5 times the Marines. On that basis, Army would need to spend no more than $65-billion and provide its own air defense/CAS fighters. In both case extra money for Iraq/Afghanistan is excluded.
• Does America appreciate the bargain it is getting with the USMC? And does it realize if you're going to fight a 50-year war, you should be paying $7-billion a division per year basic and not $12-billion (army has proportionately greater number of reserve divisions, so we've adjusted for that.)
• India pays - very roughly - somewhere around $300-million a year for a division-equivalent..

0230 GMT February 12, 2010

• Marja, Helmand Apparently a Stryker battalion from US 2nd Infantry Division has joined the Marines in preparation for the Marja operation.
• A minister met with 350 tribal elders from the area. The elders "... voiced support for the military operation to clear the Taliban from Marja... Some of the elders said they would help persuade the Taliban to leave before the battle started and identify hidden bombs for the Afghan and American soldiers as they came through. But while Marja’s leaders said they had no love for the Taliban, many expressed deep skepticism that Afghanistan’s leaders would make good on their promises to protect them from insurgents." Quote from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/12/world/asia/12afghan.html?ref=world
• We don't want to sound bloodthirsty, but we are looking forward to this operations. It will show the American armed forces at their best. You will see a very high level of competency, unlike the ultra-depressing CI operations we have been seeing for so many years.
• Please be clear: we are not saying American troops are useless at CI. These are highly trained and highly disciplined troops. They will do exactly what it is they are told to do.
• The problem lies at higher level where there is neither realism nor strategy nor a willingness to stick it out for the 20, 30, 40, 50 years that the CI game takes.
• The mismatch between the realities of American domestic politics and the requirements for CI strategy is so extreme, if Editor had the money, he'd petition the US Supreme Court for an injunction on US government conducting CI ops on grounds of sheer incompetence. The Court would, of course, say that nowhere in the Constitution or the body of law over 235 years does it say anything about forbidding incompetence. The Court would say: if petitioner has a problem with USG's competence, he is free to use the electoral process to get a change of government.
• And the point would be what, given the new set of politicians and "experts" would be just as incompetent? Not our problem, the Court would say.
• But such a petition would get Americans to think, wouldn't it? Well, wouldn't it? Someone say something positive here and please stop the jeering laughter....
• Not tonight dear, I have a headache If you want an excuse to avoid your - er - manly duties, read this article from Berkeley Labs. It will give you a real, legitimate, super-incapacitating headache.
• The article says CO2 is NOT responsible for the melting of Himalayan glaciers. As much as 90% is due to a combination of aerosols and "black carbon" (soot), which is the product left over after incomplete burning of fossil fuels. Apparently black carbon has been increasing by leaps and bounds in India and China. In India, between 1990 and 2010 its has more than doubled. In China black carbon has led to extremes of weather.
• The article says that black carbon and aerosol emissions, if cut, will show results within weeks.
• http://newscenter.lbl.gov/feature-stories/2010/02/03/black-carbon-himalayan-glaciers/
• Reader Jayant comments on India's talk offer to Pakistan According to the Indian press, the Minister for Defense has said that infiltration into Kashmir is increasing, and Pakistan has not dismantled any of the 42 terror groups causing India much grief. But at a think tank, the good minister said that he doesn't see this as an obstacle to talks.

· Have  you have been reading the articles by Ajai Shukla on Indian defense in his blog ajaishukla.blogspot.com?  They make for a depressing read that in spite of the immense talent pool available in India, we cant seem to get our act together.  Absolutely no 'strategic' thinking and we cant handle power except to intimidate the small people and feel good.  Perversely, the Pakistanis in spite of holding out a begging bowl are able to force the Americans to do their bidding. 

· I have no idea how we can get leaders who have the courage to withstand pressure and take the consequences whatever the outcome.

· Reader David comments on Editor's analysis on future of Afghanistan and Pakistan I agree with your analysis of February 11, 2010, yet am puzzled why so many Pakistan Punjabis think that they will be able to hold off the Taliban and similar Islamic militants
once Pakistan becomes the objective for conquest/assimilation.

· Between reading Pakistani dominated web sites and what Pakistanis commenters write at the Long War Journal, they think that everything will work out fine and they will have
"Strategic Depth"  with a Taliban  dominated regime in Afghanistan.

· From a review of  historical events involving Pakistan, they seem to consistently make the wrong choices when faced with key decisions.   Why do they think that they have now
become "wiser" than in the past is a mystery to me. 

0230 GMT February 11, 2010

Pakistanis acting weird again; US is so completely out of ideas on Afghanistan they are actually listening to the Pakistanis!

Read Bill Roggio

http://www.longwarjournal.org/threat-matrix/archives/2010/02/pakistan_plays_lets_make_a_dea.php

We are not commenting on the revelations in the article because clearly the Americans have gone mental. You cannot write rationally about crazy people's crazy thoughts/beliefs/actions.

• Argus's Eye Argus was the Greek giant with a hundred eyes and so was all-seeing. The Americans have been testing a sensor called Argus. It has a 1.8-gigapixel capacity, and can simultaneously look at 65 targets with Predator like resolution. We have to concede that's quite mind-boggling. The Americans have the weight down so that a Blackhawk can carry the system. They're working on an IR version for night use.
• We've always admired America's ability to create new weaponry. They likely spend more on military RDTE than any other country's defense budget. It's also easy to see how their amazing prowess with weapons leads them astray when it comes to low-tech warfare which has to be fought on the ground, no matter how advanced the hardware.
• Read the Ares Blog at http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp, February 10, 2010 post by Graham Warwick "ARGUS - DARPA's all seeing eye". There are great photographs avialable.
• Assault Breecher Vehicle Here's something that's relatively low-tech, and extremely useful against the Taliban. The latter love to build up their defensive positions with very large numbers of IEDs. The ABV is a mine-clearing vehicle using the M-1 chassis. It can throw a line charge of 1750-lbs of C4 explosive 100-meters, which makes a big mess of any mines/IEDs. The vehicle has already been tested in combat, where in one battle it fired 24 line charges capable of breeching 11.5-kilometers worth of passages. You will see it in action again when the Marines attack Marja in Helmand, a major point of fortified resistance.
• You have to wonder why it's taken the Americans near 10 years to put this weapon into the field.
• That the Marines will defeat the Taliban at Marja is hardly in doubt. The Marines in particular are first-rate at battles that require the reduction of fixed urban defenses. Readers will remember Fallujah in Iraq, which Iraqi insurgents were billing as the next Grozny because they had trapped every street and every house. Well, the Americans leveled Falluja with the lost of 53 KIA if we remember rightly. The Marines responded to the traps with a simple tactic: they blew up every house on every street, as well as every vehicle on every street.
• They avoided civilian casualties by another simple expedient: for months the warned the civilians they were coming and everyone who didn't want martyrdom simply left. Sure, many insurgents also left. But enough stayed behind to make the battle worthwhile, and the insurgents never got back inside again.
• Once you understand this, you'll understand why the Marines are yelling at the tops of their voices that they are coming for Marja. The civilians can flee - and are. The Taliban can also leave - and some are. But by clearing Marja the Americans will destroy the Taliban's toughest strong-hold in Helmand.
• After Marja falls, what then? Then the Marines will occupy Marja for a couple of years before going home. In theory that time will be used to build-up Afghan security forces. Even if the forces are really built up with the required degree of effectiveness, they will not be able to face the Taliban when the Americans go. As happened in the 1990s in Afghanistan, the Taliban will attack with Pakistan Army artillery and armor backing them, as well as complete battalions and even brigades of Pakistan infantry.
• Afghanistan will fall - at least the East, Center, and South, and large parts of the West. As happened years ago. The North will hold, because they are not Pushtuns and they will fight the Taliban to the end. This time the North will have massive and overt support from the Russians and the Indians.
• Nonetheless, Pakistan is not particularly interested in the whole of Afghanistan. Its strategic purposes are sufficiently served by taking even 60%.
• Once Afghanistan is settled, there will be a major deviation from the scenario of the 1990s. The Pushtun Afghanistan Taliban will fight Pakistan for the NWFP, and the Pakistan Taliban will join in to fight for the Punjab.
• At this stage, the Taliban do not have a significant presence in Sindh Province. The danger is not that Sindh will fall to the Taliban, but that it will become ungovernable - it is halfway there already.
• The Taliban will also advance into Pakistan Kashmir and declare war on Indian Kashmir. Here they will get nowhere, but until they learn that, India could have another 20-year war on its hands.
• Anyone who says they can tell you what exactly will happen when the US leaves Afghanistan is lying. History repeats itself in its broad themes, but each time a theme is played out differently.
• We can make four generalizations. (a) Much of Afghanistan will fall to the Taliban - it already has. (b) Unlike 1990, where after the Red Army left Afghanistan Pakistan was united, this time the blow-back will rock Pakistan to its foundations. It will be a bigger mess than we can imagine. (c) The Indians will remain Clueless. They will founder, they will be confused, they will flail about, but  like all God's retarded children, they will emerge safe. But the pressures they will be put into, on top of all the other internal pressures India faces, will not do any good.
• Last, (d) The Americans will sit snug at home, forget they were ever in Afghanistan, and be happily messing up another part of the world. Never underestimate the happy circumstance that gave America a 9000-mile buffer to the west and a 3000-mile buffer to the east, the Pacific and the Atlantic. The Americans can mess up the world endlessly, without ever having to bear the consequences. Its not fair, but there it is. if you want to complain, don't come to the Editor. Go complain to the Upstairs Person.

0230 GMT February 10, 2010

• India's proposal for talks with Pakistan Major AH Amin, who occasionally writes for us, sends his opinion that the proposed India-Pakistan talks will get nowhere as the Pakistan military has absolutely no interest in normalizing relations with India. The generals have kept their grip on Pakistan from 1947 to the present, whether they ruled in the own name or being a civilian facade, and have used India as the justification. We have to agree with Major Amin: what advantage do the Pakistan Army get from normalizing relations? None, because normalizing will weaken their power.
• From our side we are completely baffled why India has made this completely unnecessary and dangerous move. Indians love to believe they are oh-so-clever in diplomatic and political maneuvering; in reality they are so bad a six year old could take away their lollipops.
• It's possible negotiations are a cover for India's real intentions, which V. Kradiac yesterday thought might include the destabilization of Karachi. If the negotiations are intended to sow confusion, then that is smart.
• But what if the negotiations are the result of US pressure? Then the situation can be fatal.
• A quick lesson in how Indians think. Suppose someone is putting great pressure on them, they will beyond a point not stand firm and say" No." They will start saying: "Hey, we arent going to agree to the pressure, so what's the harm in getting America off our back by agreeing to negotiate? Nothing will come of it anyway." But once the Indians start negotiating, the American camel not only gets his nose under the tent, he stands with his rear end over you, and convinces you the poop is actually pearls. The Indians make a little concession so as not to get into an argument with the Americans, then the Americans want more, and you give them a little bit more and so it goes.
• Very wrong and naive and stupid, my countrypersons. You have not seen perfidy, double-dealing, stabs in the back, outright lies the way the Americans do these things. They give the world the impression they are straight-shooters, and this was true till perhaps the 1960s. After that the Americans would beat poor Machiavelli leaving him the impression he was the winner when in reality the Americans would have robbed him of everything and left him naked and without his horse. The top grades for deviousness go not to Chinese or Iranian diplomacy, which in our humble opinion is absurdly simplistic. The top grades go to the Americans.
• Do you doubt us? Why not ask the Iraqis and the Afghans as starters? Why not ask the Russians? Why not ask just about anyone, including - please do hold your breath in sheer amazement - the Pakistanis? The Pakistanis have been outfoxed by the Americans on every single occasion since 1954. The Americans are master lawyers: they leave with the impression they have agree to meet you half way; when push comes to shove, and you deconstruct their language, it inevitably turns out that "What is yours is mine, what is mine is also mine, and here, you signed this document agreeing to be cheated out of everything you own."
• The Americans have already befuddled India  several times by saying they will take care of Pakistani terrorism, but we have to agree to hold back. Well, we have held back to the point laugh and jeer at us. And as for US help in restraining Pakistani terrorism, the less said the better.
• He loves America, and if he could, he would even consider becoming an American citizen because after all, he has spent thirty years in the country, and unless the Americans kick him out, he has no intention of returning to India. During his 20 years in India, he constantly fought the lies Indian leftist, Indian xenophobic, and Russian propaganda used to make Indians fear America. For his efforts he was labeled an American agent and barred from the benefits his skills and knowledge entitled. All the time he kept arguing that America and India were natural friends, and the Soviets natural enemies.
• But when Editor wanted India and America should be friends, he did not mean for India to play the one-anna whore. If these negotiations are taking place because the Americans want them to, India should stop thinking there is no harm in it. There is every harm in just agreeing because we have nothing, absolutely nothing to negotiate with Pakistan regarding terrorism and Kashmir and national security. Simply agreeing completely undercuts our long held positions, shows us to be fools because Pakistan has never conceded a thing, and makes us into an American puppet, all the while thinking we have the better of the Americans.
• Yes, we should amiable, even close relations with the US. But why are we American allies? Why are American troops and fighter aircraft and warships exercising with/in India? Why do we have unrevealed alliances in the event of war with China? Why have we let the Americans into our N-program, something they tried and tried and tried for decades without success? We need nothing from America beyond what it will give itself in the interests of trade. Sure we should work with America on issues like intellectual property because we need to do it for our own sake, not to keep the Americans happy. We need to have competition in our financial sector for the same reasons we needed to let in foreign companies on stuff like telecom, which has in a few short years brought India from the 19th Century into the 21st. We should cooperate - intelligently, as equals - on terrorism because that is the discourse of civilized nations.
• As for the Americans selling us weapons. Let's get real people: every aircraft or radar or missile we buy from them creates jobs for Americans. They are doing us no favors, and neither are we doing them favors. They have good weapons at reasonable prices, we should trade just as we buy their technology and send them our software programmers.
• But that should be it. We do not need America to protect us against China, we do not need America to advocate for us with Pakistan, we do not need  Americans to protect our sea lanes. By the way, we also do not need the Americans to "help" us with our N-program, and more than we need to "help" a pickpocket by obligingly putting his hand inside our jacket.
• Pride: Indians have more than their fair share of the false kind. Of the real kind...the less said the better.

0230 GMT February 9, 2010

Karachi

• As readers might know, Karachi has for some weeks now been experiencing a series of targeted killings, one after another. Please be assured that anything to do with Pakistani internal politics is not just extremely complicated, it is complexity squared. We asked reader V. Kradiac if he had any light to throw on the situation. Who is killing whom, and why are people trying to destabilize Karachi? These targeted killings are ominous, and dangerous, because if Karachi explodes into inter-factional violence, there is nothing any law-enforcement agency, perhaps even the Army. can do about it because this is a huge metropolis of about 14-million, with more fault-lines than could be detailed in a long book.
• Below is Kradiac's thesis, which he says is based partly on his knowledge of the city, partly on news reports, and partly on informed speculation to bridge gaps.
• Karachi situation Mysterious violence and targeted assassinations has been plaguing Karachi for some weeks now, since the Ashura attack and subsequent "pre-meditated" reprisal destroying 3000+ shops.
• [Today, February 8,  a former minister in Musharraf's government and a leader of the PML-Q (a Pakistani political party backed by the ISI), was attacked outside his party headquarters in Rawalpindi. Sheikh Rasheed had left the PML-Q on losing his seat in Pakistan's post-Musharraf elections and had started his own political party. He survived the attack, though two bodyguards and two by slanderers  died. This is being called by some as a targeted attempted assassination designed to bring unrest to Rawalpindi.]
• Karachi's importance Karachi city contributes 45% to GDP of Pakistan. Apart from being Pakistan's jugular, Karachi port the cheapest interface for routing US/NATO logistics to Afghanistan. As a metro it is an explosive mixture of migrant communities For extra-territorial actors hostile to Pakistan state like say Al Qaeda/TTP (the anti-government Taliban), Iran, India, or even US elements working with authorization at cross purposes with official Washington policy, lighting the tinderbox that is Karachi would serve two purposes: bring Pakistan to its knees; and make the Karachi route unviable/impossible for US/NATO. The purpose of this would be to force US/NATO to explore other options, reducing - or ideally eliminating - dependency on Pakistan.

· Over to India – India's lack of leverage India is restarting dialogue process with Pakistan contrary to its earlier position that talks wont start without a visible irreversible steps towards shutting down India-centric terror groups which are openly training, recruiting and camping with full blessing of its military-political-clerical structure.

· Back in November 2008 soon after the terror attack, all India had in its collective diplomatic-military-intelligence arsenal as a leverage to demand shutting down anti-India activities, was a full fledged conventional attack on Pakistan proper. This can be checkmated by Pak's qualitatively superior amour force and its deadly arsenal of conventional MRBMs/LACMs not to mention its nuclear arsenal. Tellingly Pakistan COAS Kayani didn't even mention nuclear options in post-Mumbai attack confrontation. He instead subtly threatened critical Indian infrastructure with missiles as possible immediate reprisal options.

· Indian land forces are minimum a decade away from acquiring tools to activate its pro-active strategy (Cold Start). In an unprecedented manner, FICCI (India's Chamber of Commerce) constituted a fact finding task force soon after Mumbai 2008 terror attack and submitted its report to Home Minister which openly calls for “inflicting economic pain” on Pakistan, deniable covert ops among other things.

· The only reason for India now to come to negotiations is if it has since developed some leverage as its demands are far from being met.

• Editor's comment Sadly, Kradiac's assessment of India being many years from its Cold Start strategy is something the Editor shares. If the conventional option is unavailable to India, it might well have decided to use the covert option, hitting Pakistan where it really hurts. It also may be that India, wary of US and international opinion, does not want to use the conventional option, and is returning Pakistan's favors in Kashmir with its own favors, in Karachi.
• India's conventional option Cold Start is one of those ideas that sounds great in theory, until one realizes that India neither has the force structure to conduct CS, nor has Pakistan remained idle. It is prepared to counter CS thanks to moves it initiated even before CS was mooted.
• Does this mean India cannot retaliate against Pakistan conventionally? Of course not. India can only not retaliate cheaply. The option of a drag-down, knock-out strategy very much exists, and Editor at least is encouraged that at least the Army Chief himself has stated the obvious: an Indian conventional option is real, despite the N-weapons on both sides.
• If you doubt that, ask yourself why then did NATO and the Warsaw Pact maintain very large conventional forces that they constantly upgraded. After all, they needed to do no more than have armies of a single soldier each, facing each other at a point along the Inner German Border. If either soldier as much as took a step forward, East or West, it would mean war - a nuclear war, and both sides would lose within hours.
• Both sides maintained colossal conventional forces because, as everyone recognized, N-weapons were useless. Mutual nuclear suicide was never an option. It is the same in South Asia, which is hardly the most dangerous place in the world as western academics never fail to tell us.
• On the Editor's whim, he has persuaded Mandeep Bajwa to join him in writing a short paper for India's Director General Mechanized Forces on how the shortcomings of Cold Start can be remedied within 36-months. This is the Editor's conceit: the measures India needs to take are so simple, the Editor has to show his brilliance by writing a paper. But neither Mandeep nor he is under illusion that the paper will be seriously read, let alone acted on.
• That's because India is India. India has been around for 30 centuries through good times and bad. It's geographic arrangement has changed many times in each century. But India has endured, and though the end of the world may come, India will still exist, in some form, as long as humans exist. This is because as Sunil Khilani has said, India is not a place with fixed map boundaries, it is an idea.
• And India does not hurry for anyone. The last time the Indian military exerted itself with some urgency was in 1963-66, after the China war. In line with India's perfectly defensive nature, the Indian military spends most of its time explaining why something can NOT be done, rather than working on what CAN be done. Yes, there is 1971. But even the great Mrs. Indira Gandhi, within a month of the outbreak of war, began worrying about her own brashness, and she pulled back. 1971 was a blip. The passivity of India 1999, in 2002, in 2008 is more typical. Attack us and we will hit back - maybe. As for us take the initiative? Forget it.

0230 GMT February 8, 2010

· "Jamaat-ud-Dawah chief Hafiz Mohammad Saeed, accused of masterminding the Mumbai attacks, said the only solution to problems between India and Pakistan is the "liberation of Jammu and Kashmir, failing which radical groups would resort to the option of jehad."" This is from a Times of India dispatch from Lahore.

· Sigh. When will they ever learn? Pakistan has four times tries to snatch Jammu and Kashmir from India, each time using jihadi tactics, and it hasn't worked, 1947-48, 1965 - where the jihadi tactics led to war between the countries; 1987-2005; and 1999. The last was a mock jihad, as the Pakistan GHQ, never known for the depth of its thought processes, decided to launch the paramilitary Northern Light Infantry against India, and blandly said it was not involved because these were jihadis,

· How does the the good Saeed propose to snatch Jammu and Kashmir from India? Has he bothered to read his history or to assess the military balance between the two countries? Has he understood any direct Pakistan attack on Kashmir would give India its long-sought excuse to launch its forces across the international border?

· And as for the jihad part, first, Pakistan has relaunched its jihadis already. The real infiltration will begin in the late spring when the high mountain passes are snow-free, but small-scale infiltration and skirmishes have taken place all last year, so which option is he talking about? The difference this time is that the Indian Army has learned its lessons - and so has the Indian Government. The Army has spent the last five years preparing for a restart to the insurgency. What have the jihadis learned? Do they think the inability of the Pakistanis to defeat them (which it in any case they don't want to do) translates into an equal incompetence and unwillingness to kill on the Indian Army's side.

· With this kind of bad attitude, the Saeed will have to learn - again - the hard way: the Indians will be absolutely merciless with the jihadis, as they have always been. The jihadis are not even insurgents: they are Pakistanis, aided and abetted by Pakistan for its own strategic purposes, and they will be attacking a sovereign state from bases within another sovereign state. Their ISI and GHQ masters will not claim them when they are caught, and the Indians will execute them all because these are men completely outside of ambit of international law.

· Does the Saeed think the Pakistan Army will help these men as it has helped them in the past, laying down artillery barrages to cover their ingress and egress? If he thinks it will, he must be even more foolish than we think, because unless Pakistan wants to commit suicide, why at this time would it want to activate a front where it is outnumbered and outgunned?

· While the Saeed is amusing, the real question is what will the US do if the Pakistanis reactivate the insurgency? Will the US live up to its word and obligations to India as a friend, ally, and victim of terrorism and sanction Pakistan? Or will it again play a double game as it has for years?

· We at Orbat.com are happy to tell you exactly how it will play out. The Americans will play their double game and not sanction Pakistan in any way, any more than they did earlier. The Americans will flatter the Indians with words and morsels, and the Indian leaders will fall for it, as they always do when shown "honor" and "deference" by the white man. The Americans will loudly proclaim the "statesmanship" of the Indian leaders who will refrain from retaliating, and the Indians will preen more.

· Will any Indian ask the Americans: "And please tell us what statesmanship did you show when you were attacked by terrorists? Please show us how restrained you were?" Of course not. Will anyone in the Indian Parliament question, criticize, attack the US for its double standards on terrorism? No, aside from a handful of discredited, brain damaged leftists.

· In the end, one person will not criticize the Americans for the double-dealing, and that is the Editor. If the Indians want to be masochistically abused by the Americans, how can we blame the Americans? There will be only one side to blame, and that is the Indians themselves. 

0230 GMT February 7, 2010

• Denmark special forces free merchant ship during hijack This was possible because the ship was registered with the authorities and it was travelling in a group in a protected corridor. This seems to suggest that convoying is underway, probably not a tight convoy but a spread out one. Once the Danes confirmed that the crew was in a safe compartment, they launched dinghies and boarded the vessel to search for the hijackers. The Indian Weapons class missile frigate Tabr deployed in the Gulf of Aden played a small role: it was the first to pick up the merchantman's distress signal, which it passed to a French patrol plane. The French visually confirmed that hijackers were on the deck of the ship and notified the Danes, who took over the operation.
• Now, while we must congratulate all for an excellent job of coordination and the Dane's in particular, please do not be surprised if the Danes make sure the pirates have their pink blankies and bunny slippers before they are released to try again.
• The only time this pirate business is worth noting is when the boarding forces kill the pirates. Anything else is plainly futile.
• Reader Luxemborg sends links to two articles One is amusing. A Federation of American Scientists blog http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2010/02/kleinebrogel.php claims that Danish peace activists entered a area of the Belgian Air Force base at Kleine Brogel where US N-weapons are stored, wandered around for an hour before a single security guard with an unloaded weapon approached them to find out what they were doing. The implication is that US N-weapons can easily be snatch by terrorists.
• Now, of course the US Government does not see it neccessary to inform the Editor where it stores its N-weapons, but since when has a lone Belgian sentry with an unarmed weapon been set to protect a US N-weapons storage site - one without dogs and open gates, no less? And why would the US have N-weapons in Europe anyway? This is not 1960, 1970, 1980, or even 1990. If any N-weapons are left in the theatre, they are likely to be in the UK. The FAS story clearly suggests that the activists entered an abandoned area of the 4.5 square-kilometer base.
• As their punishment the activists were made to kneel in the snow - after reinforcements showed up - and lectured on how they would get into trouble if they returned, before being released.
• The other story is nothing short of alarming. It is a Bloomberg story datelined February 5

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aJhBD4AeX8WA which says that China has "trillions and trillions" yuan worth of bad loans which are already in default. Last year alone - admittedly atypical because of a large stimulus package - Chinese banks lent $1.4-trillion worth of money, a lot of which went into fuelling the already way overheated real-estate and stock markets. Real GDP figures of China - as opposed to the official figures - are hard to come by, but even if we assume the GDP is $3-trillion, that's like US banks handing out $6-trillion worth of loans in a single year without the least financial transparency. This sounds like a disaster in the making.

• China and its $123-Trillion GDP Someone noted the other day that at one time people used to assume that the Japanese had found the secret to perennial growth and would overtake the US in GDP in a matter of years. This didn't anywhere near happen, and most are agreed it will never happen.

· So why did we yesterday talk of China's per capita soon being twice that of the US

and total GDP being 40% of the world GDP?

· Well, that was a bit tongue in cheek. If you want to extrapolate current trends into the future, you can confuse yourself a bit. India's "natural"  growth at this time is about 8%, which means the GDP is doubling every nine years. You could just as well say that in 50 years India will have a GDP of around $60-trillion, about total world GDP at this time. But do you hear anyone saying that? No, because it has an air of the ridiculous.

· Both India and China have such high growth rates because their base was so small to begin with. As their economies grow, their growth rates will fall. And with Chinese statistics you have to in any case be very careful.

· Nonetheless, our point was valid: if China really does grow to $123-trillion GDP, someone will have to supply them with manufactured goods and agricultural that could well be the US.

· You can read the original article at http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/01/04/123000000000000 The rebuttal is at http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/01/07/a_123_trillion_china_not_likely

0230 GMT February 6, 2010

• Case closed on the 3 Americans killed in Pakistan. Or not. Reader Greyson sent an article that identifies the three men killed in a suicide bombing attack in Pakistan's tribal areas. Two belong to a civil affairs brigade, and one to a psychological operations group.
• At first we though this closes the case: these are the sorts of units engaged in reconstruction work; we were wrong, the official story they were on their way for a school-reopening ceremony adequately explains their presence.
• But then we thought some more. (a) Given how sensitive is the matter of stationing Americans in region is, why would Pakistan agree to let US soldiers participate in reconstruction work? This is not a mission that can be conducted covertly, and the sight of Americans wandering around fixing up schools and such would bring out the xenophobia typical of the region. (b) The US embassy said the men were training the Frontier Corps. As far as we know, military training is imparted by the Special Forces, unless you have the big, overt training missions like US/NATO has in Afghanistan. Fort Bragg, where the units to which the men belonged, is also home to US Special Forces.
• Overall, this is hardly a big mystery. Someone has to be locating/calling in strikes for the UAVs, and logically it would be US troops. You don't want the drones attacking targets exclusively designated/controlled by the Pakistanis because the latter will be up to all kinds of tricks and mischief.
• Iraq violence no cause for worry In recent weeks it seems as if the Shias and Sunnis in Iraq are again busy killing each other. But this is neither cause for worry or for American concern.
• First, Iraq belongs to the Iraqis, not to the Americans. The Americans have overthrown Iraq's  hated dictator, built a democratic political structure, and now - really - its up to the Iraqis to do things their way.
• Second, its seldom wars of any sort, leave alone civil wars, end with negotiated settlements. One side or the other wins - as for example in Sri Lanka. The US of all people should know this: after all, it has fought three civil wars and each ended with one side decisively defeating the other.
• The US has fought three wars? you will ask. What alternative universe is this? Its just our usual universe. The War of the American Revolution was a civil war: Americans rose up against their legal government, and that war went on and on till the legal government conceded defeat. The War Between the States was a civil war, no disagreement. But so were the Indian Wars, and we know how those ended.
• The Balkans are a bit different because you have six or seven small states split from the FRY, some with populations scarcely more than a single US metropolis. NATO was/is able to exert enough force to keep people from each other's throats because the countries are so small. Plus EU has a fat enough wallet to pay people not to fight each other. Iraq is way too big for the US to dominate.
• Third, US hope was that the fissures in Iraq could be resolved through the ballot box rather than the gun. To some extent it is happening. To some extent, it is not, because the fissures are too deep. There is an election coming up in Iraq, people are staking out their positions, some by campaigning, others with guns. This is the way of the world.
• But however it comes out, it's not our business anymore. US said it was not invading Iraq to colonize the country, we have proven that is true by turning over the country to its inhabitants, and also proven it true by the pathetic inability to get oil contracts, which cynical people swore was the real reason for Gulf II. The best way to prove the cynics wrong is by leaving, and the US is so fed up of the place that there is no way it will reverse its departure.
• As for the 30-50,000 troops Americans wants to leave behind indefinitely: don't worry about it, because that's the American plan, not the Iraqi. And the Iraqis are running the place, not the Americans. Those troops will leave the day the Iraqis demand it, and its likely to be pretty darn soon. And a good thing too. We need to get out of Iraq so we have troops to mess up somewhere else.
• We're not being cynical when we say that. Just realistic.
• Hope for America in China's rise someone has come up with the idea that China's GDP will grow to $123-billion by 30 or 40 (or however many) years and that will be 40% of the GDP of the world. When the US Colossus ruled the years immediately after World War II, the US had between 40-45% of the world's GDP, if not 50% - but that isn't our point.
• If China's GDP really goes to $123-trillion, its per capita  income will be near $100,000 as opposed to the US's current ~$45,000 or so. we noted the other day that for non-professional/non-supervisory workers, US wages have gone down by 9% in the last 30-years, and this trend will, we think, continue. Its possible then that in future money, China's per capita will be twice that of the US. And there is simply no way China will be able to compete with the US on manufacturing or anything that requires labor. US will become a great manufacturing and export again. Of course, Editor will long since have gone Downstairs to his un-heavenly reward, but what the heck: he got to see the US when the country was at its zenith, and he is confident 30-60 years from now the US will return.
• Wont be the same US, most likely: possibly a North American confederation with 500-million Americans, 200-million Mexicans, and 50-million Canadians. But with the rise of China and India, to have equal status the US will pretty much have to have a population as close to those countries as possible.
• Just a thought.

0230 GMT February 5, 2010

Long War Journal on suicide attack on US troops in Dir, Pakistan

http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2010/02/suicide_bomber_carri.php

Apologies - couldn't do a full update tonight due to errands.

• Indian armor in shambles according to military blogger Ajai Shukla. http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/ 80% of Indian tanks lack night fighting capability, 800+ T-72 (about half the inventory) is waiting engine rebuild and other refurbishment due to age, the Ministry of Defense has deliberately understated the cost of the T-90 by leaving out critical systems that will be separately sourced later. And the T-90's thermal sights don't work in Indian summer temperatures.
• The Pakistanis must be laughing themselves sick.

0230 GMT February 4, 2010

Russians kill AQ in Caucuses co-founder

http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2010/02/russian_police_kill.php

• In what may be a harbinger, the Taliban killed three US soldiers inside Pakistan. Supposedly they were part of a convoy going to open a school that had been destroyed by the Taliban and rebuilt. The Pakistan press called the soldiers "international aid workers", but supposedly they were in Pakistan to train the paramilitary.
• Okay, you say, whats with these "supposedlys?"
• But does it make sense that three US soldiers in Pakistan's NWFP for any reason should be going to a school opening ceremony, which presumably is held amongst the local civilian population? Why would Pakistan be paranoid enough to refer to them as international aid workers and not identify them for what they are, and still have them appear in public ceremonies?
• Apparently civilians were killed at a school - six rooms blown out where the Taliban struck.
• The Americans were in the first car - according to the Pakistanis - when a remote bomb was detonated. Makes perfect sense: American soldiers travelling openly in the NWFP, leading the celebratory convoy. A second version says the Americans were travelling in an armored vehicle equipped with jammers so it couldn't have been a road-side bomb. It was a vehicle-borne suicide bomber.
• The Taliban say the Americans belonged to Xe. But would Xe employees be opening a school?
• The article refers to the alleged trainer as part of a little-known program. Really? The US and British media seem to know all about it. Heck, even we know about it. The Pakistan media carefully peruses the western media. It's doubtful they'd miss a story like this.
• The Dawn story (second version)  http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/provinces/04-explosion-lower-dir-qs-01 identifies the dead as three sergeants and one wounded as a major.
• Pardon us if this is not making sense to us.
• The BBC repeats the convoy travelling to inaugurate a school version. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8494890.stm
• US Embassy says the men were trainers. Would the embassy say anything else?
• The truth remains an elusive commodity in the NWFP.
• Incidentally from the Pakistan press we learn that the Taliban inside the town that was targeted by UAVs the other day used AA guns mounted on trucks to try and shoot down the UAVs.

0230 GMT February 3, 2010

Long War Journal on latest in the US UAV assault on Pakistani Taliban

http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2010/02/predators_pound_terr.php

• Pakistan Army mounts battalion-sized operation in Baijur we get totally confused because one day the Pakistan Army says it has cleared an area, and the next thing you know either the Taliban have struck back or the area is in Taliban hands. So if anyone can figure out what's going on in Baijur, please let us know.
• http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/03-militants-stage-comeback-in-bajaur-region-ss-02
• US steps up anti-missile defense in the Gulf Aegis warships are to be permanently stationed in the Persian Gulf. Four Gulf states, Bahrain, UAE, Qatar, and Kuwait are getting US Patriot PAC 3 and THAAD anti-missile systems. It appears US  will also station its own missile interceptor units in some or all the four countries.
• For a quick summary of the Navy and Air Force 30-year plans submitted by the DOD, read http://defensenews.com/story.php?i=4482716&c=AME&s=SEA
• If you want to get an industrial strength migraine read up on any aspect of Indian weapons production - except naval, which is a success. In 1983 India formulated a requirement for a new light fighter to replace the ubiquitous MiG-21. The plane will enter squadron service in 2012 - unless there are further delays; a mere 29 years after the requirement.
• US Defense budget We'd noted yesterday that re. the US defense, two sets of figures were being given: $708 and $744-billion for FY 2011. The latter figure includes the extra for the Afghan surge.
• we've been complaining about the huge sums of money the US spends tp get a pathetic number of people on the ground for the CI mission. It seems the problem is far more complex than the Editor imagined. Editor has always steered clear of US defense politics as being too complicated for mere mortals to understand. If you want to see just really how complicated they are, read the below quick letter from Shawn Dudley. We had no clue things were that dysfunctional.
• From Shawn Dudley I agree it's irritating to see the US have to resort to such numbers games because they didn't consistently support their procurement. To some extent I have to sympathize with the uniformed services on this, as they went through a period ('79-'92) where they were very well supported by various Administrations. When Clinton got into town they cut the heart out of procurement and perversely forced the services into big-ticket programs such as Comanche and Crusader (many of which were canceled after billions spent).  Bush II was supposed to change all of that but then we got an actual war instead and money needed for the next generation of weapons gets spent on re-fighting the Vietnam war.  So in the end we have to scrape together whatever leftovers from the 1980s we have left.
• I spent a few months on Capital Hill as a staffer and immediately saw the problem on the Congressional side. Typically, Republicans never met a weapons system they didn't like but most had no idea how they fit into building a good military (needless to say none of them had prior service or studied war seriously). On the Democratic side there were the "moderates" who were convinced that the military was scamming congress on every weapon system to max on profit, and the "liberals" who would be against any weapon system that wasn't built in their district.  Keep in mind that these guys are the ones that fight over the defense budget every year, but nearly none of them know what they're fighting for or what system would be better than another.  As a result the Defense Industry often dominates the debate, except when the GAO butts in and tries to prove it knows more than the Army does about how to fight wars.
  
  

0230 GMT February 2, 2010

• US DOD budget 2011 at $708-billion. $159-billion is for war costs, but excludes the costs of the Afghan surge, apparently. That will be requested separately O & M takes $200-billion; equipment $112-billion. Missile defense gets $10-billion. We haven't seen a separate breakout for R  &D, other possible items, and pay & allowances. That comes out of the $227-billion left.
• On top of the $709-billion, you have to aid the intelligence and homeland security spending and the additional Afghanistan spending yet to come. $800-billion is probably a reasonable total.
• In 1944, at the peak of the war, the defense budget was $80-billion, ~$800-billion in today's money.
• US fielded ~100 army/Marine divisions in World War II. Now it has 13 divisions.
• The budget figures are from Wall Street Journal http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704107204575039223181876584.html?mod=WSJ-hpp-LEADNewsCollection . 
• But in another place, WSJ gives the defense budget as $744-billion http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704107204575039223181876584.html?mod=WSJ-hpp-LEADNewsCollection#project%3DBUDGET1001%26articleTabs%3Dinteractive  So the total may well end up at $850-billion.
• How the Taliban are adapting to the US Marines in Helmand Read this story from the New York Times and weep. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/02/world/asia/02taliban.html?ref=world We all make the error of thinking that a threat is static: figure out how to defeat it and you're home free. Except you're not, because the other side adapts. This article shows how the Taliban, using the most primitive means of surveillance and warning, evade US Marines who come looking for them. Hate these guys, but as guerillas, they're good. Long way from the Viet Cong and NVA - the latter used many guerilla tactics, but then those guys were really, really good. 
• Israel operationalizes first C-RAM battalion here's a new acronym for you: Counter Rocket Artillery Mortar. In Israel the system is named Iron Dome. The interceptor part looks to be a lightweight 12-round towed launcher using a missile called Tamir. The developer says Tamir will cost $40,000/round; of course, we don't know under what assumptions.  The 947th Battalion, a former Stinger unit is posted on the northern border to defend against rocket attacks from Gaza. Presumably the unit will get plenty of real life exercise so that Israel can work out kinks.
• For outline details, read http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/RAM082709.xml
• Presumably Iron Dome's early problems - it was near useless at stopping rockets over very short ranges - have been worked out. See the 2008 story at http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/956859.html
• Aviation Week says the US is developing its own systems for a 2012 fire-off for the Army between competitors. This system uses VLS missiles. A system deployed in Iraq, Centurion, using Phalanx Gatling guns and is credited with defeating 110 mortar attacks.
• All this is interesting stuff, because these systems also work against medium artillery shells and rockets. Currently, if you're under attack by artillery and rockets, you simply have to grin and bear it, dig deep and pray a lot. Artillery is traditionally the big killer on the battlefield, and any system that can counter it could change a lot of things.
• At least until the artillery comes up with a counter to the counter.

0230 GMT February 1, 2010

• An increasingly assertive China Apparently the Indians are not the only ones beset by an increasingly assertive China. Yesterday's Washington Post said that this pushiness is being exerted on everyone around the world, and people are figuring out how to react. As an example of this pushiness - this is not a joke - an American diplomat planning a dinner for a Chinese official received a phone call from an aide to the Chinese official, wanting to know what was for dinner. Fish, he was told. Fish is not healthy, said the aide. He eats steak.
• What we find baffling is: why is anyone surprised that China is becoming increasing assertive? For one thing, everyone around the world rushes to kiss China's rear on the assumption huge sums of money are to be made. How is China expected to react? If people come and abase themselves, aren't the Chinese entitled to sneer? Shouldn't they think everyone else is weak? When no one dares censor China for its massive and continual human rights violations, its absurd mercantilist export policies which involve China getting rich and everyone else getting poor, etc etc, what are the Chinese to assume but that people are frightened of China?
• Don't blame the Chinese for their assertiveness. Blame yourselves for your wimpiness. And - haha - if you think the Chinese are assertive now, wait for 10 years. You're in for a surprise, but only because you have deliberately remained ignorant of how the Chinese operate. Opening your eyes to the real China has consequences, such as realizing the Chinese play by their own rules, not yours, and if they act tough, you have return the compliment in spades, not try and read meaning into a Chinese official's demand for steak.
• It it was an imperial demand to begin with. Maybe the man is allergic to fish. Maybe he was looking forward to dining on a nice, thick, juicy steak.
• A minor scandal brewed in Pakistan's Parliament when it was stated that Indian made items were being transported through Pakistan as part of ISAF-NATO supply effort.
• On thinking about it, we're not sure there is any scandal. It seems to us ISAF-NATO supply contractors are simply buying widely available Indian made goods from local markets in the Gulf states.
• Accordingly, we don't think this is a per se violation of Pakistan's ban on the shipment of Indian goods through Afghanistan. Once the goods are shipped to the Gulf they become local property, and once purchased in the Gulf, they become ISAF-NATO property. India is not trading with Afghanistan directly or indirectly because it is not as if the goods are being sold in Afghanistan.
• In the Give US A Break department Osama says global warming is the fault of the western countries, and after donkey's years he's gotten around to mentioning he backs the Palestinian struggle against Israel. Oh please. Does he think he's going to attract new followers because of his pedestrian views on global warming? Does he really believe anyone will be fooled by his sudden love of Palestine?
• Personally we think these pronouncements prove the man is dead. What's next? Is he going to denounce high-calorie foods and the MMR vaccine and the high US teenage birthrate?
• The allotment of the new US guns to Indian mountain divisions. Mandeep Bajwa corrected us today: the reequiped mountain artillery regiments are not for general support. They will each replace one 105mm regiment for direct support. We asked Mandeep how did it make sense to have one infantry brigade supported by a 155mm regiment while the others were supported by 105mm regiments: shouldn't the medium guns to a new general support regiment? He replied that since all 105mm guns are to be replaced with 155s, this is just the start of the process.
• We still think this is foolish. Why not have ordered 800 guns outright for 10 divisions and obtained a better price than for a bunch of smaller orders, and why not convert the entire division artillery brigades one by one?
• Mandeep's answer was that if Editor wanted logic, he should not concern himself with the Indian Army.
• As we are moaning, whining, and complaining, here's a gripe we forgot to mention the other day. We'd mentioned US ROAD divisions had 101 helicopters as opposed to the 88-116 the current "Combat Aviation Brigades" have. In the old days, the 101 helicopters were simply a divisional aviation battalion. Lift elements are now called "assault" helicopter whatevers. The good old Huey company had 25 helicopters, today the assault helicopter battalion has 30 helicopters. CH-47 battalions had 48 helicopters, now they have 12. If you look at the support brigades, its title inflation all the way. An artillery or engineer group, for instance, was composed of several battalions, and several groups made up a brigade. Nowadays you have no more groups, but you have "brigades" with a couple of battalions.
• At this point you can well shake your head and say that you didn't know the Editor was so whacked out, but what attracted him to the study of the military was the systematic presence of order and method.
• Shawn Dudley adds to his comments on US Army aviation He says the 4th Infantry (actually mechanized) Division does not have an integral Combat Aviation Brigade. Instead, the 12th CAB supports the four brigades in Germany. The new CAB will go to the 4th ID. Further, it looks like the CAB TO will change so that all CABs have one attack battalion with AH-64s and an armed scout battalion with 30 helicopters. So despite the huge amounts of money the US spends on defense, we cannot even give each division a decent punch of 48 AH-64s. Mumble grumble complain whine. The end of the world is definitely near.
• An odd story The Indian press reports that the Army Chief, General Deepak Kapoor, is eligible to retire on grounds of disability because he severely damaged his hearing while firing artillery guns on a visit to the United States. As a gunner, his interest in actually firing guns is understandable. But did he disdain protective gear? Perhaps things have changed now, but the Indian Artillery do not use protective gear. Which raises the question: shouldn't someone do a study on how this affects gun crews? Perhaps as an older person the general was more vulnerable to noise than he might have been in his younger days.
• The general will, of course, retire on schedule this year. It would have been pointless to create confusion by leaving early. He is entitled to an additional 20% on his pension as he is considered physically handicapped.
• We wonder if there are other cases of heads of armies being eligible on account of a disability incurred while they were army chiefs.