EckerNet.Com

Earlier this year things were looking pretty bad for Republicans. Their base didn’t like them. The general public didn’t like them. Even on issues like national security, the public trusted the Democrats more than Republicans…..until the surge.

When Bush proposed the Surge, even Democrats from miles around sprinted to the nearest microphone to declare that it was never gonna work. Then reality set in and Democrats had to eat crow. What’s worse, now polls indicate that the public no longer trusts the Democrats on national security. And things were going so well!!!

Well apparently the Democrats can be taught new tricks, because they are making it clear they aren’t going to make the same mistake on the “quiet surge”.

Bush said the battalion, roughly 1,000 Marines, now headed to Afghanistan in November will be followed in January by an Army combat brigade. A brigade is 3,500-4,000 troops.

The move answers in part calls from Democrats to shift troops out of Iraq to a more sizable force in Afghanistan. Still, Democrats quickly shot back that Bush isn’t doing enough to get troops out of Iraq, and into Afghanistan, where violence is rising.

“The president’s plan to reduce force levels in Iraq may seem to signal movement in the right direction, but it really defers troop reductions until the next administration,” said House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton, D-Mo. “More significant troop reductions in Iraq are needed so that we can start to rebuild U.S. military readiness and provide the additional forces needed to finish the fight in Afghanistan.”

Said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid: “I am stunned that President Bush has decided to bring so few troops home from Iraq and send so few resources to Afghanistan.”

Even “The One” is getting in on the act…

Bush’s “plan comes up short,” Obama said. “It is not enough troops, and not enough resources, with not enough urgency.

“I am convinced that it is time to change our foreign policy,” he said, noting that he will withdraw troops from Iraq and create a “comprehensive strategy to finish the job in Afghanistan.”

Not enough troops for the Democrats?? Although I’m a little disappointed that Obama didn’t miracle a few thousands troops over there. Given his powers, it doesn’t seem like a daunting task.

But at least it shows that Democrats can learn. Previously they had everything going their way and 2008 was going to be a great year for them. Now they’ve slowly f-ed it up and watched it fade away. But at least they are attempting to salvage something of their reputation, if not their integrity.

I wrote previously that we had sent two aircraft carriers and their battle groups to join two battlegroups already in the Persian Gulf, and about the significance of this move. At the time I theorized that the move was related to a move against Iran, but then later thought that perhaps we have advance knowledge of the strike on Georgia. Turns out, not only was I right on both counts, but what I then termed as “not a trivial chess piece in a global chessboard” is just the tip of the iceberg.

There is a massive naval fleet heading for the gulf, most of which just completed Operation Brimstone, a joint US/UK/French/Brazil naval wargame. From descriptions of Operation Brimstone, it appears it concentrated on international cooperation to conduct military operations in littoral waters. All handy skills to have if one is planning a international naval blockade of another country.

Previously, I was aware of only the USS Theodore Roosevelt, the USS Ronald Reagan and their battle groups heading for the Gulf. Now it appears they are joined by the USS Iwo Jima, an amphibious assault ship (similar to the Peleliu), the UK Royal Navy HMS Ark Royal aircraft carrier, and her battle group, along with assorted French naval assets including the nuclear attack submarine Amethyste and French Naval Rafale fighter jets on-board the USS Theodore Roosevelt. By virtually any measure, that is a massive amount of firepower, especially combined with the forces already in the Gulf. Forces which include the USS Abraham Lincoln and her battlegroup, the USS Peleliu and her battle group, at least one US nuclear attack sub and miscellaneous other forces. This is the largest buildup of US allied naval forces in the Gulf since the invasion of Iraq.

There are several possible reasons for this buildup of forces:
1) The US and several allies have decided to enforce at least a partial naval blockade of Iran
2) The US and several allies are preparing for an Israeli and/or US strike on Iranian nuclear facilities
3) The US and several allies are preparing for an invasion of Iran.

Option #3 is the least likely, as this buildup is happening absent any major redeployment of air and ground forces. Both of these would be necessary for an invasion. Also with it’s easily deployed ground forces already committed in Iraq and Afghanistan, and with the potential of action in Georgia. The timing of this, make option #3 severely unlikely.

Option #2 while possible, has become increasingly unlikely. Israel certainly has the capability. And if they feel the US isn’t gonna do it, then they may feel the need to step up. And they may very well be at that stage. However, the US just rejected a request from Israel for military equipment necessary to make a strike on Iran. So clearly the Israelis lack some equipment necessary to make a strike. Even if they could manufacture it themselves, they are clearly not at a stage were a strike on Iran is imminent hence no need for a force buildup.

Which leaves us option #3, which I think it increasingly likely, especially considering that a majority of the forces involved just participated in a training exercise practicing precisely this. Plus a naval blockade would be a likely next step in the escalation of force to get Iran to comply with UN demands. While Iran is rich in oil, it has limited domestic refining capability. Which means while it exports lots of oil, it also has to import benzene in massive quantities. So a naval blockade would cripple their economy and that tends to draw attention.

Now certainly a much smaller force would certainly be capable of a naval blockade. The fact that such a large force is being arrayed also says quite a bit about the operational planning that went into this, and tends to imply two different possibilities.

First that it was considered possible that such a blockade would be resisted either by Iran or others (i.e. Russia). In the latter case, this formidable force would likely be intended to make intervention seem futile, or at least impractical. While Russia does have forces in the area, most notably the carrier Admiral Kuznetsov, in the Mediterranean, it’s aircraft would have to pass over Iraq, and the US forces deployed there, in order to reach this flotilla.

Almost certainly the Iranians would attempt to resist as well, through quite a few different methods. Air attacks from land based aircraft would seemingly be met by aircraft from the four different carriers. Helicopters from the amphibious assault ships would likely be tasked to anti-sub detail. And the numerous warships in the battlegroups would fend of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard high-speed boats, functioning as suicide boats, similar to the attack on the USS Cole.

Almost certainly there would be an attempt by Iran to close the oil route chokepoint (only 21 miles wide) of the Strait of Hormuz, since one side is controlled by Iran, and the other by US allies United Arab Emirates and Oman. With the forces currently being positioned in the Gulf, it seems very likely that the US would be able to keep this route open, and prevent any attempts by Iran to break through the blockade.

Of course, a naval blockade is generally considered an act of war. So it’s unlikely that everything will be just this simple. The board is set, the chess pieces are moving. This game is about to get interesting.

With a ceasefire declared and an uneasy peace sort of being maintained, it appears that the conflict between Georgia and Russia, at least this chapter of it, may be over. Although admittedly with conflicting reports of further Russian military movements, it’s likely to not be the last chapter. But there are possibly other reason, which I’ll address later on.

So who won…..or at least as far as one can “win” a conflict like this?

On the surface, Russia appears to have won. After all their military moved with impunity wherever they wanted. But what did they achieve?

Russian leaders made it clear that one of their primary goals was the removal of Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili. This they failed to achieve. Not only is Saakashvili still in power, and enormously popular with his people, leaders around the world have rallied to his side

[Ukranian President] Yushchenko, 54, yesterday flew to the Georgian capital Tbilisi to show solidarity with Saakashvili along with the leaders of four ex-Communist eastern European nations that joined NATO as a bulwark against Russia.

In addition, Condi Rice has flown to Georgia to show support for the Georgians. Russia even asked the US to chose between Russia or Georgia. Rice indicated the US choses the democracy of Georgia. In their quest to remove Saakashvili from power, the Russians utterly failed.

Russians also made attempts to destroy the oil pipeline running through Georgia. They failed. It remains intact and for the most part functional.

In recent years, Russia has protested the arms building of the Georgian military. No doubt part of their objective was to smash the Georgian military and eliminate it as a functional force. Once again they failed. The Georgian military, either by chance or design, essentially fought a rearguard delaying fight. They made a few token hits, but for the most part appears to have evaded any major confrontation with Russian forces. As a result, they remain relatively intact, and perhaps even slightly improved having had the experience and learned the lessons of how a battle with Russians might go.

In addition, while Georgian is to be the subject of massive international aid, Russia stands to lose significant standing on the world stage. US leaders have hardly been shy with their criticism. G-8 is threatening to make itself G-7, with Russia being the odd man out. This may only be the start of things, as the world is clearly still adjusting to the shock and details are still sketchy from battlezone.

Probably the single success Russia has accomplished is to insert a feeling of doubt into formerly eastern bloc countries in their relations with the United States. In fact, all US allies will no doubt be re-evaluating if they can depend on the United States in a time of need. While Georgia wasn’t a NATO member, nor had it signed a security assurance agreement with the US, it was clearly an ally. Despite having a military of only 37,000 soldiers, they had contributed 2,000 to the efforts in Iraq. This puts them as one of the largest contributors to the Iraqi peacekeeping efforts. They had applied for NATO membership and was clearly a friend of the West. Yet when their time of need came, the West and the US in particular did not respond. Georgians supported the US in their time of need, but the favor was not returned.

Clearly Russia failed to achieve many of it’s objectives and this may be the reason why there are conflicting reports of what the Russian military is doing. They themselves may not be quite certain. So, militarily, this may have been an overwhelming failure. But politically this might soon be seen as a resounding success. Time will tell.

Late last week I saw an article that the US was sending two aircraft carriers, and their battle groups, to the Gulf. The US routinely maintains a carrier presence in the Gulf and it’s common for carriers to rotate in their position. However, the current US carrier in the gulf, the USS Abraham Lincoln, arrived in March of 2008, and is scheduled for a seven month deployment, making her departure date October of 2008. This makes it highly unlikely that the USS Theodore Roosevelt and the USS Ronald Reagan are heading to the gulf to relieve the Lincoln of her station.

In addition, the Lincoln is not alone either, along with her own battle group, there is also a battle group centered around the USS Peleliu. The Peleliu is an amphibious assault ship, the home of lots of helicopters, Harrier jets and a few tons of Marines. And apparently a US nuclear sub just entered the gulf as well.

A large shift in the distribution of forces is enough to peak my interest, especially when it involves a relatively large number of a very finite set of a particular unit. Carriers are by their very nature very expensive, and very valuable. They are not a trivial chess piece in a global chessboard. A US carrier entering any area instantly become one of the largest cities, most advanced hospital and most powerful military asset in the area.

They are also machinery, which means they take maintenance. It’s one of the reasons why the threat of China building an aircraft carrier is less than an immediate danger. To be truly a factor they would need three of them. Because at that point it becomes possible to always have one deployed. The US maintains a force of eleven carriers. And there are always at least a few down for maintenance and others that are busy with training and trials of new equipment. This leaves a relatively few available for action.

So I took a look at our carrier force and what they’re up to….

USS Kitty Hawk - With it’s home port in Japan, it is the ever present thorn in China’s side and one of the biggest trump cards in any hostile intentions China has towards Taiwan. With the Olympics also going on, it is pretty much unavailable for anything short of a foreign invasion of the United States.

USS Enterprise - The Big E is most definitely out of action. She’s in drydock for an much needed overhaul.

USS Nimitz - The Nimitz is down for planned incremental availability until December. While she could set sail if needed, really she’s down for repairs, upgrades and other miscellaneous maintenance.

USS Dwight D. Eisenhower - She’s somewhere in the Atlantic doing qualifications. She’s be easy to pull into action. However, it’s also nice to maintain a presence in the Atlantic, it being a pretty big ass pond and all that.

USS Carl Vinson - Most certainly down, as she is down for refueling. Which for a nuclear powered carrier means she’s pretty much in pieces in a drydock. She’s unavailable even if the fate of the free world depending on her sailing tomorrow.

USS Theodore Roosevelt - Just set sail for the gulf, for unknown reasons.

USS Abraham Lincoln - Already in the gulf supporting the war in Afghanistan.

USS George Washington - In dock for repairs following a onboard fire while enroute to permanently relieve the Kitty Hawk in Japan. Not available for action until the end of August.

USS John C Stennis - Prepping for her next deployment in the Pacific. Once again, it’s nice to maintain a presence in a pond the size of the Pacific. Currently the Kitty Hawk in Japan, is the closest we got.

USS Ronald Reagan - She was in the Pacific, now steaming for the Gulf.

When you break it down, our carrier force while not exactly stretched thin, does exactly have carriers to spare either. So committing at least two and potentially three carriers to one region is a significant statement. Originally, when seeing the story, I thought perhaps the United States was either worried about, or preparing for an Israeli strike on Iran, which they’ve been threatening to do.

Now with the sudden war between Russia and Georgia, I have to wonder if perhaps the US had advanced warning of it and decided they needed more assets in field in case we had to make a move to protect US interests. Either way, this move is worthy of notice and certainly warrants keeping an eye on the region because something big is either happening or about to happen.

Quite a bit.

Many were disturbed and a bit miffed recently to find out that Iraq currently has a $79 billion dollar budget surplus. To be fair, that budget surplus mostly exists because the process to approve spending is unbelievable difficult, in order to prevent corruption. And to be perfectly frank, a government that has problems spending money sounds pretty good to me (Congress are you listening??)!!

Also the United States hasn’t begun any new construction projects since 2004 and the Iraqi government is getting better and better at spending their money. Obama was just over there, perhaps he offered some pointers.

However, it looks like perhaps we don’t have to be too concerned with the Iraqi budget surplus because it appears that a very large chunk of it will be coming to the United States in the form of military equipment purchases. In the last two weeks alone, Iraq has made purchase requests totaling $10.9 billion.

And now comes a purchase request coming in at $2.16 billion. So just what does $2.16 billion buy us theses days?? Well according to the Defense Security Cooperation Agency:

• 140 M1A1 Abrams tanks modified and upgraded to the M1A1M Abrams configuration
• 8 M88A2 Tank Recovery Vehicles
• 64 M1151A1B1 Armored High Mobility Multi-Purpose Wheeled Vehicles (HMMWV)
• 92 M1152 Shelter Carriers
• 12 M577A2 Command Post Carriers
• 16 M548A1 Tracked Logistics Vehicles
• 8 M113A2 Armored Ambulances
• 420 AN/VRC-92 Vehicular Receiver Transmitters
• 35 M1070 Heavy Equipment Transporter (HET) Truck Tractors
• 40 M978A2 Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck (HEMTT) Tankers
• 36 M985A2 HEMTT Cargo Trucks
• 4 M984A2 HEMTT Wrecker Trucks
• 140 M1085A1 5-ton Cargo Trucks
• 8 HMMWV Ambulances w/ Shelter
• 8 Contact Maintenance Trucks
• 32 500 gal Water Tank Trailers
• 16 2500 gal Water Tank Trucks
• 16 Motorcycles
• 80 8 ton Heavy/Medium Trailers
• 16 Sedans
• 92 M1102 Light Tactical trailers
• 92 635NL Semi-Trailers
• 4 5,500 lb Rough Terrain Forklifts
• 20 M1A1 engines
• 20 M1A1 Full Up Power Packs
• 3 spare M88A2 engines
• 10 M1070 engines
• 20 HEMTT engines
• 4 M577A2 spare engines
• 2 5-ton truck engines
• 20 spare HMMWV engines
• ammunition, spare and repair parts, maintenance, support equipment, publications and documentation, personnel training and equipment, U.S. Government and contractor engineering and logistics support services, and other related elements of logistics support

Wow….that’s a lot of bang for your buck (pun intended).

Let’s also consider that Iraq purchasing American made weapons means that not only are they likely to purchase the next generation from us. But the United States also gets the added benefit of the sale of ongoing maintenance parts/equipment.

Not exactly a bad added side benefit to having a stable US-allied democracy in the Middle East, that sells oil.

The US Navy today announced that the next Virginia-class nuclear attack submarine will be designated the USS Minnesota (SNN 783). The Virgina class subs are a huge advance over the aging Los Angeles class and cold war era Seawolf class. They are designed with littoral operations in mind and incorporate fly-by-wire technology that not only allows more efficient/effective structuring of the ship but also improves handling. It also is designed with the possibility of “special operations” in mind. For other subs/ships, it sports the Mark-48 torpedo. For land based targets it sports the UGM-109 Tomahawk.

The USS Minnesota is expected to be delivered in 2014, and will be the last of the Virginia class Block II.

Of course, they also announced the first submarine for the Block III class of subs, the USS North Dakota (SNN 784). The Block III submarines have a revised bow and will incorporate additional technology from the Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines.

Naming that submarine the North Dakota seems pretty unfair to me. I mean North Dakota is already the world’s third strongest nuclear power. Do they really also need a submarine after them?? Can’t they just be happy with being able to destroy the entire human race?? Greedy bastards.

Unbeliveable….a soldier in Afghanistan accidentally calls his parent’s house while he’s in the middle of a firefight.  Leaves a three minute message on their answering machine filled with gunfire, requests for ammo and a new barrel and then ends with a warning of an incoming RPG.

Fortunately, he wasn’t hurt, as his parents found out when they got in touch with him later on.

He’s still got a month left on his tour, but I can guarantee episodes like this aren’t making it any shorter for his family.

How do you know your excuse for a military has officially reached the pathetic point??

When you get outperformed by Canada and France…

Parliament voted Thursday to extend Canada’s mission in Afghanistan to 2011, provided NATO supplies more troops and equipment to back up its forces in the volatile south.

Harper has reached out to several key NATO allies to get more soldiers for the south, but the refusal by some major European allies to send a significant number of troops has opened a rift within NATO.

France is considering a Canadian request for more troops to reinforce its position in the south, though previous French policy is to keep its forces in more peaceful regions of the country.

France has said it will either send troops to Afghanistan’s east or south. President Nicolas Sarkozy is expected to make his position clear at the NATO leaders summit in Bucharest, Romania in early April.

Good to know all those resources we put into defending Europe for half a century was appreciated. I mean I’d hate to think that if relatively minor requests like this were not honored, what would happen if we really needed help from our allies one day. Not that they have much to offer any more.

Things like this probably shouldn’t need to be said, but if you are building a massive new military command-and-control system, you should NOT name it “SkyNet“.

Just a minor PR lesson for you there. Generally naming your product after something guaranteed to invoke images of destruction, death and war is probably not a good thing.

…

…

…then again….they are a defense contractor. Rainbows and puppy dogs probably aren’t a huge seller for them.

Nevermind, as you were….I’m sure that whole SkyNet turning on and killing it’s creators was just a Hollywood exaggeration.

Ok every defense contractor has it’s “Area 51″ type facility. These facilities are were all the “we could tell you, but we’d have to kill you” type stuff happens. Lockheed Martin’s facility is called Skunk Works and is argueably one of the most successful. Amongst their most well-known (at least publicly) successes are the U-2, SR-71 and the F-117, for which they basically invented the modern interpretation of “stealth”.

More recently the F-22 and F-35 are in their “win” column.

Now I have to put their new UAV high in the running for their latest “win”.

Why? It friggin morphs. It. Friggin. MORPHS.

How much cooler do you want??

I think they only way they could improve it is to have it morph into the international symbol for “F U” as it flies away from it’s smoldering target.