Tag Archives: pentagon

Once Again, American Weapons-Makers Are Making a Killing in Iraq

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

This story first appeared on the TomDispatch website.

The current American war in Iraq is a struggle in search of a goal. It began in August as a humanitarian intervention, morphed into a campaign to protect Americans in-country, became a plan to defend the Kurds, followed by a full-on crusade to defeat the new Islamic State (IS, aka ISIS, aka ISIL), and then… well, something in Syria to be determined at a later date.

At the moment, Iraq War 3.0 simply drones on, part bombing campaign, part mission to train the collapsed army the US military created for Iraq War 2.0, all amid a miasma of incoherent mainstream media coverage. American troops are tiptoeing closer to combat (assuming you don’t count defensive operations, getting mortared, and flying ground attack helicopters as “combat”), even as they act like archaeologists of America’s warring past, exploring the ruins of abandoned US bases. Meanwhile, Shia militias are using the conflict for the ethnic cleansing of Sunnis and Iran has become an ever-more significant player in Iraq’s affairs. Key issues of the previous American occupation of the country—corruption, representative government, oil revenue-sharing—remain largely unresolved. The Kurds still keep “winning” against the militants of IS in the city of Kobani on the Turkish border without having “won.”

In the meantime, Washington’s rallying cry now seems to be: “Wait for the spring offensive!” In translation that means: wait for the Iraqi army to get enough newly American-trained and -armed troops into action to make a move on Mosul. That city is, of course, the country’s second largest and still ruled by the new “caliphate” proclaimed by Islamic State head Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. All in all, not exactly inspiring stuff.

You can’t have victory if you have no idea where the finish line is. But there is one bright side to the situation. If you can’t create Victory in Iraq for future VI Day parades, you can at least make a profit from the disintegrating situation there.

Team America’s Arms Sales Force

In the midst of the December holiday news-dumping zone, the US Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) quietly notified Congress of several pending arms deals for Iraq. DSCA is the Pentagon office responsible for coordinating arms agreements between American defense contractors and foreign buyers.

Before those thousands of not-boots-on-the-ground troops started hemorrhaging back into Iraq late last year, DSCA personnel made up a significant portion of all US military personnel still there. Its staff members are, in fact, common in US embassies in general. This shouldn’t be surprising, since the sales of weaponry and other kinds of war equipment are big business for a range of American companies, and the US government is more than happy to assist. In fact, there is even a handbook to guide foreign governments through the buying process.

The DSCA operates under a mission statement which says the “US may sell defense articles and services to foreign countries and international organizations when the President formally finds that to do so will strengthen the security of the US and promote world peace.” While the Pentagon carries out the heavy lifting, actual recommendations on which countries can buy US gear are made by the secretary of state, and then rubber-stamped by Congress.

As for countries that can’t afford US weaponry, Washington has the Foreign Military Finance program up its sleeve. This opens the way for the US government to pay for weapons for other countries—only to “promote world peace,” of course—using your tax dollars, which are then recycled into the hands of military-industrial-complex corporations.

Iraq’s Shopping List

Here’s part of what the US is getting ready to sell to Iraq right now:

* 175 M1A1 Abrams main battle tanks;

* 15 Hercules tank recovery vehicles (you can’t have a tank without the tow truck);

* 55,000 rounds of main gun ammunition for the tanks (the ammo needed to get the biggest bang for your bucks)

And what will all that firepower cost? Just under $3 billion.

Keep in mind that these are only the most recent proposed sales when it comes to tanks. In July, for example, General Dynamics received a $65.3 million contract to support the existing Iraq M1A1 Abrams program. In October, the US approved the sale of $600 million in M1 tank ammunition to that country. There have also been sales of all sorts of other weaponry, from $579 million worth of Humvees and $600 million in howitzers and trucks to $700 million worth of Hellfire missiles. There are many more examples. Business is good.

While the collapse of the Iraqi army and the abandonment of piles of its American weaponry, including at least 40 M1s, to IS militants, helped create this new business opportunity for weapons-makers like General Dynamics, the plan to cash in on Iraq can be traced back to America’s occupation of that country. Forward Operating Base Hammer, where both Private Chelsea Manning (she collecting State Department cables for WikiLeaks) and I (supervising State Department reconstruction efforts) lived for a year or so, was built across the street from the Besmaya Firing Range. That testing grounds was US-outfitted not just for the live firing of artillery, but for—you guessed it—M1 tanks. It was to be part of the pipeline that would keep an expensive weapons system heading into Iraq forever. In 2011, as US troops left the country, both facilities were “gifted” to the Iraqis to serve as logistics bases for training in, and the repair of, US-sold weapons.

As I write this, American contractors still live on the remnants of Hammer, supporting the Iraqi army’s use of whatever M1 tanks they didn’t turn over to the Islamic State. On a contractor job-review site, “job work/life balance” at the base gets an acceptable 3.5 stars from those working there and one American trainer even praises the fact that work starts and ends before the heat of the day (even if another complains that the only toilets available are still port-a-potties).

Continue Reading »

Original post: 

Once Again, American Weapons-Makers Are Making a Killing in Iraq

Posted in Abrams, alo, Anchor, Citizen, Everyone, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, oven, Prepara, PUR, Radius, Ultima, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Once Again, American Weapons-Makers Are Making a Killing in Iraq

You Probably Had No Idea the US Military Is Obsessed With Giant Cakes

Mother Jones

Yesterday was the United States Marine Corps’ 239th birthday. Jarheads and leathernecks celebrated as they long have—with big-ass cakes like the one above, which commemorated the Corps’ 233rd birthday in 2008.

The Marines’ big birthday cake bashes date back to at least 1935. They’re such a part of Marine tradition that there’s even a protocol for cake serving, including the ceremonial use of the Mameluke sword (below) and who gets the first slices (the guest of honor, followed by the eldest and youngest Marines present).

National Archives

And it’s not just Marines who love their cake. The entire military appears to be preparing for the day when the Pentagon has to hold a bake sale. That means plenty of sheet cake with white frosting—but also some more elaborate creations like the ones collected here.

(How much of the Pentagon’s $600 billion budget goes to cakes? It’s not clear, though this 2010 Marines memo notes that there are strict rules for pastry funding: Only three to four slices of each cake may be paid for with appropriated funds.)

Now, 10 delicious deployments of military cake:

1. For the Army’s 237th birthday in 2013, a cupcake tank rolled into the Pentagon. The confection included 5,000 cupcakes, more than 200 pounds of camouflage fondant, and a functioning “cupcake cannon.” It also came in massively over budget at a total cost of $1.2 billion. (Not really.)

US Army

2. The 40th anniversary of the Air Force Defense Support Program is observed with a cake shaped like a missile-detecting satellite. (According to the after-action report, “an anomaly prevented the cake from entering the ballroom as planned.”)

Manisha Vasquez/US Air Force

3. To welcome the USS Theodore Roosevelt in March 2002, the commissary at the Naval Air Station in Virginia Beach, Virginia, baked this 750-pound, 12-foot cake, complete with “an edible aircraft carrier layer on top.”

DoD News

4. Last year, three Marines spent five days making this 500-pound cake to commemorate the Marine Corps’ 238th birthday.

US Marines

5. The 150,000th safe arrested landing on the aircraft carrier George Washington was celebrated with a cake shaped like an aircraft carrier.

William Pittman/US Navy

6. In 2007, the Food Network’s Ace of Cakes wheeled out an M-1 Abrams cake for the Army’s 232nd birthday.

US Army

7. A cake resembling the painted rocks at the Fort Irwin National Training Center, California, made for the Army’s 239th birthday in June.

Gustavo Bahena/US Army

8. An enormous, creepy George Washington hovered behind Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno (third from left) as he engaged in a show of symbolic bureaucratic redundancy at the Army’s 239th birthday party.

Eboni Everson Myart/US Army

9. Two Air Force service members slice an otherwise ho-hum cake with an airplane propeller to commemorate the 59th anniversary of Special Operations Command Europe (whose acronym, SOCEUR, is clearly meant to test the loyalty of our European allies).

U.S. European Command

10. If a propeller isn’t handy to make your cake ceremony more exciting, there’s always a guest appearance by Vice President Joe Biden, who popped up at Camp Liberty in Baghdad in January 2010 just to make Dick Cheney jealous that he’d found the missing Iraqi yellow cake.

Kristina Scott/US Army

Source:  

You Probably Had No Idea the US Military Is Obsessed With Giant Cakes

Posted in Abrams, alo, Anchor, Bunn, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, solar, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on You Probably Had No Idea the US Military Is Obsessed With Giant Cakes

What Is Khorasan and Why Did the US Just Bomb It?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

On Monday night, a US-led coalition launched air strikes in Syria against members of ISIS, the extremist Islamic group occupying territory in Iraq and Syria. As a “last-minute add-on,” NBC reports, the US also targeted a different terrorist group: A little-known outfit called Khorasan. This al-Qaeda affiliate gained some public attention earlier this month after US officials reported that the extremists were plotting to sneak bombs on to US airplanes. Last week, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper noted that the group “perhaps” posed as great a threat to the United States as ISIS. On Tuesday morning, Pentagon spokesperson Rear Admiral John Kirby maintained that strikes on ISIS and Khorasan were “very successful.” The US targeted Khorasan’s “training camps, an explosives and munitions production facility, a communications building and command and control facilities,” the Pentagon told the Washington Post.

News of these air strikes raised an obvious question: who and what is Khorasan? The group is led by Muhsin al-Fadhli, a 33-year-old senior Al Qaeda operative who was privy to Osama bin Laden’s 9/11 plans prior to the attacks, according to the New York Times. US officials have tracked Fadhli for years, and the State Department refers to him as a “senior facilitator and financier” for Al Qaeda. In 2012, the State Department was offering up to $7 million for information about his whereabouts. Born in Kuwait, he has operated in Chechnya, fighting Russian soldiers, according to the United Nations, and has been wanted in connection to Al Qaeda attacks in Saudi Arabia.

In a conference call with reporters after the air strikes, several senior administration officials, speaking on background, said that Khorasan had established a safe haven within the chaos of Syria to plot attacks against the United States and other Western nations. One official reported that this planning was “nearing the execution phase.” A senior administration official also said that Khorasan—described as a band of experienced Al Qaeda veterans—was recruiting Westerners fighting in Syria for “external operations,” and that Khorasan plotting had prompted the United States to beef up aviation security measures a few months ago. One administration official noted that President Obama had been contemplating strikes against Khorasan for months “separate and apart from the growing threat from ISIL.”

On Monday, prior to the strikes, Brian Forst, a professor at American University and a counterterrorism expert, told Mother Jones, “If we can find al-Fadhli and take him out, Khorasan will be largely neutered.” Brian Michael Jenkins, a senior terrorism expert with the RAND Corporation, contends that leaders can always be replaced, referring to both Al Qaeda and ISIS, which have cycled through different leaders. “It doesn’t end their operations,” Jenkins says. “It has a disruptive effect.”

Khorasan, according to press reports, has about 50 jihadist fighters, mostly from Afghanistan and Pakistan. US officials told the AP earlier this month that the group was sent to Syria by Al Qaeda top dog Ayman al-Zawahari to link up with another al-Qaeda affiliated group, the Nusra Front, and “recruit Europeans and Americans whose passports allow them to board a US-bound airliner with less scrutiny from security officials.”

Aki Peritz, a former counter-terrorism analyst with the CIA, says, “It’s much easier to recruit people—especially those with foreign passports—in Syria than in Pakistan for operations abroad.” He adds, “Given that there are several thousand foreigners in Syria today, it’s probably much easier for Al Qaeda to spot, assess, develop, recruit and train willing individuals there than anywhere else in the world.”

Jenkins compared the fighting in Syria and Iraq to a “talent show” that Khorasan was watching and judging, looking for recruits. Khorasan is “scarier” than ISIS, he argues, because it is focused primarily on attacking the West. Forst also notes that Khorasan focuses “more on the West than Syria,”while ISIS is “focusing on Middle Eastern targets.”

So does the Obama administration have the legal authority to hit Khorasan? Under the post-9/11 authorization provided by Congress in 2001, the president is allowed to use force against “those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.” And senior administration officials contend that this authorization covers Khorasan, given its connection to Al Qaeda.

In in a statement on Tuesday morning, President Obama referred to Khorasan as “seasoned Al Qaeda operatives”—and he seemed to this group with ISIS, as he vowed to “do what’s necessary to take the fight to this terrorist group.” He added, “Once again, it must be clear to anyone who would plot against America and try to do Americans harm that we will not tolerate safe havens for terrorists who threaten our people.” But as the president spoke, there was not sufficient public information to judge the nature and seriousness of the threat posed by a group most Americans had not yet heard of.

Read More – 

What Is Khorasan and Why Did the US Just Bomb It?

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on What Is Khorasan and Why Did the US Just Bomb It?

Pentagon and Other Agencies Slammed for Police Militarization at Senate Hearing

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In a Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing Tuesday, Democratic and Republican lawmakers slammed officials from the Department of Defense, Homeland Security, and the Department of Justice for their handling of federal programs that help provide military grade vehicles, equipment, and weapons to local police departments across the country. The hearing was called in response to the events that took place in Ferguson, Missouri, after an unarmed black teenager, Michael Brown, was shot and killed by a white police officer, and peaceful protests were met by a heavily militarized police force. “Aggressive police actions were being used under the umbrella of ‘crowd control,'” noted Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.).

The panel grilled Alan Estevez, a Department of Defense agent dealing with logistics and acquisition of military equipment; Brian Kamoie, a federal grant regulator at the Department of Homeland Security; and Karol Mason, an attorney from the Department of Justice.

Senators questioned why certain military equipment was on the Pentagon’s list of acceptable items for local police departments. Senator Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) declared that police militarization gives him “real heartburn” and wondered “how did we get to the point where we think states needs MRAPS”—that is, mine-resistant ambush protected vehicles, which have been acquired by a large number of small police departments across the country. In Texas, McCaskill noted, police departments have more than 70 MRAPS, while the state National Guard has just six.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) questioned what police departments could possibly do with the 1,200 bayonets that have been issued in recent years. The Pentagon’s Alan Estevez replied that he was unsure. Throughout the hearing, members of the panel underscored the point that police officers are often not adequately trained in how (and when) to use the military-grade equipment their departments acquire. The Pentagon doesn’t require police departments to undergo any training before supplying them MRAPS and other military equipment.

Estevez testified that the Pentagon would reevaluate its list of acceptable equipment for police departments. But Brian Kamoie, the Homeland Security official, and the Justice Department’s Karol Mason, both acknowledged that their agencies don’t do much to regulate how police departments use the grant money they dole out to local law enforcement.

McCaskill condemned the Department of Defense and the other agencies for their lack of oversight over the use of military equipment by local police. “None of them know how it’s being utilized,” McCaskill said. She pointed out that a police department in Lake Angelus, Michigan, which employs only one police officer, has received 13 military grade assault weapons since 2011. “I think we need to get to the bottom of that,” McCaskill said.

Watch the hearing here:

Link: 

Pentagon and Other Agencies Slammed for Police Militarization at Senate Hearing

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Pentagon and Other Agencies Slammed for Police Militarization at Senate Hearing

Green Zones: A Map of the US Military’s Golf Courses

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The United States military is undeniably massive. In 2012, the Pentagon spent 4.4% of our GDP on defense, with hundreds of billions going to contractors for assorted weapons, equipment, and essentials. What is not known is exactly how much money funds the military’s international golf habit. Mother Jones has found that the Pentagon currently operates at least 194 golf courses and 2,874 holes of golf worldwide. Hover over any flag to tee up more information about the location, name, and size of these courses.

Source: See all data

Continue Reading »

Link:  

Green Zones: A Map of the US Military’s Golf Courses

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Green Zones: A Map of the US Military’s Golf Courses