Hindustani78
BANNED
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 40,471
- Reaction score
- -47
- Country
- Location
Remains of Maj. Troy Gilbert on Oct 03 2016 , Gilbert was killed on Nov 27 2006 after his F16C crashed 20 miles from Baghdad.
US military news, discussions and history
- Thread starter SvenSvensonov
- Start date
^^^
The Big Picture is an American documentary television program which aired from 1951 to 1964. The series consisted of documentary films produced by the United States Army Signal Corps Army Pictorial Service.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Big_Picture_(TV_series)
The Big Picture is an American documentary television program which aired from 1951 to 1964. The series consisted of documentary films produced by the United States Army Signal Corps Army Pictorial Service.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Big_Picture_(TV_series)
Penguin
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2009
- Messages
- 13,047
- Reaction score
- 56
Yawn. What does any of this prove?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Russia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chinese_wars_and_battles
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_People's_Republic_of_China
Heck, even my dinky toy country has an arm-long list....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_Netherlands
And so does our dinky toy neighbour Belgium
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Belgium
Boeing Unveils Amazing, Slightly Terrifying New Electromagnetic Pulse Weapon
With pinpoint accuracy, this electronic warfare drone can black out opposing forces at will.
Rich Smith
(TMFDitty)
May 24, 2015 at 9:13AM
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2015/05/24/boeing-unveils-electromagnetic-pulse-weapon.aspx
Hindustani78
BANNED
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 40,471
- Reaction score
- -47
- Country
- Location
U.S. President Barack Obama participates in a wreath-laying ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at Arlington National Cemetery on Veterans Day in Arlington, Virginia.
Fenrir
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2015
- Messages
- 1,291
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Meet The Biggest And Baddest Ships In the US Army
The US Navy doesn’t have a monopoly on big boats.
When you think of the US Army, large seagoing vessels don’t come to mind. Maybe they should; the service has its own expansive fleet of boats and ships, and the USAV SSGT Robert T. Kuroda and its sister ship the USAV Major General Robert Smalls are the biggest of them all.
While the Marines have their own specialized high-end armada of Navy ships, sometimes referred to as the “Gator Navy,” to support their amphibious operations, the Army has no such luxury. But what the Army does have is a far more understated beach landing and logistics naval force that relies on a simpler sea-bound logistics concept.
At the heart of this concept are the Army’s largest class of ships, the Logistic Support Vessels (LSVs) of the General Frank S. Besson class. Eight of these ships are in service with Army, six of which were built between 1987 and 1994. Following the retirement of the Newport class Landing Ship Tank (LST), they are now the largest of their kind within the Pentagon's inventory and are reminiscent of Russia's massive amphibious landing ships.
These first six ships are 273 feet long, 60 feet wide, and displace 4,200 tons. They were designed to convey cargo and vehicles, and can be loaded and unloaded by crane right onto their decks, or by ramps on the stern and on the bow of each vessel. The bow ramp in particular is designed for direct beach/shoreline access, with ships pulling right into the surf for loading and offloading.
These ships are capable of carrying any of the Army’s land vehicles, including the massive M1 Abrams main battle tank. In fact, it can haul up to 15 of the Abrams at a time. It can also carry a maximum of 82 double-stacked 20-foot long ISO containers, a big tugboat—even a Boeing C-17 fuselage.
The maximum load for the early Besson class is 2,000 short tons spread over the vessel’s 10,500 square-feet of deck area. It's an extraordinary accomplishment for a ship with a draft of just 13 feet. Drawing so little water helps for expeditionary operations when docks are not available.
n the early 2000s a subclass of the type was launched consisting of two ships, USAV SSGT Robert T. Kuroda (LSV-7) and its sister ship USAV Major General Robert Smalls (LSV-8). These are the largest ships in the Army’s inventory, with 42 feet added to the earlier General Frank S. Besson class design.
This increased length is largely due to a modification of the ship’s bow. Instead of having the flat, shovel-like front dictated by the ship’s forward ramp, a “visor” is fitted that can lift up and down. When in the lowered position, this fairing makes the ship much more hydrodynamic, and capable of handling rougher seas than their predecessors.
This modification, along with the ability to generate large quantities of fresh water, double the horsepower, and expanded internal volume for creature comforts, gives the subclass the ability to take on global missions better than its six forebeares. With a range of nearly 6,500 miles, these ships can reliably self-deploy to hotspots on short notice. These modifications come with the penalty of increased mass. The two $26 million ships displace an extra 1,800 tons each compared with the other ships in their class.
The General Frank S. Besson class of ships, like other US Army vessels, are crewed by a little-known cadre of soldier-sailors (they prefer the name Army Mariner). Each of these ships has roughly eight Warrant Officers, and between 14 and 24 enlisted crew. Unlike most other parts of the service, Army vessels don’t run on rank structure necessarily, instead they run on a license-type hierarchy.
In general, it seems that morale aboard these ships and crew retention is exceptionally high, and let’s face it, saying that you are assigned to a ship in the Army is a great conversation starter—so that’s one big perk. Also, these crews work as small, close-knit units, and many get to see exotic ports around the globe—some of which big Navy ships don’t even get to call on.
...
Continued Below.
The US Navy doesn’t have a monopoly on big boats.
When you think of the US Army, large seagoing vessels don’t come to mind. Maybe they should; the service has its own expansive fleet of boats and ships, and the USAV SSGT Robert T. Kuroda and its sister ship the USAV Major General Robert Smalls are the biggest of them all.
While the Marines have their own specialized high-end armada of Navy ships, sometimes referred to as the “Gator Navy,” to support their amphibious operations, the Army has no such luxury. But what the Army does have is a far more understated beach landing and logistics naval force that relies on a simpler sea-bound logistics concept.
At the heart of this concept are the Army’s largest class of ships, the Logistic Support Vessels (LSVs) of the General Frank S. Besson class. Eight of these ships are in service with Army, six of which were built between 1987 and 1994. Following the retirement of the Newport class Landing Ship Tank (LST), they are now the largest of their kind within the Pentagon's inventory and are reminiscent of Russia's massive amphibious landing ships.
These first six ships are 273 feet long, 60 feet wide, and displace 4,200 tons. They were designed to convey cargo and vehicles, and can be loaded and unloaded by crane right onto their decks, or by ramps on the stern and on the bow of each vessel. The bow ramp in particular is designed for direct beach/shoreline access, with ships pulling right into the surf for loading and offloading.
These ships are capable of carrying any of the Army’s land vehicles, including the massive M1 Abrams main battle tank. In fact, it can haul up to 15 of the Abrams at a time. It can also carry a maximum of 82 double-stacked 20-foot long ISO containers, a big tugboat—even a Boeing C-17 fuselage.
The maximum load for the early Besson class is 2,000 short tons spread over the vessel’s 10,500 square-feet of deck area. It's an extraordinary accomplishment for a ship with a draft of just 13 feet. Drawing so little water helps for expeditionary operations when docks are not available.
n the early 2000s a subclass of the type was launched consisting of two ships, USAV SSGT Robert T. Kuroda (LSV-7) and its sister ship USAV Major General Robert Smalls (LSV-8). These are the largest ships in the Army’s inventory, with 42 feet added to the earlier General Frank S. Besson class design.
This increased length is largely due to a modification of the ship’s bow. Instead of having the flat, shovel-like front dictated by the ship’s forward ramp, a “visor” is fitted that can lift up and down. When in the lowered position, this fairing makes the ship much more hydrodynamic, and capable of handling rougher seas than their predecessors.
This modification, along with the ability to generate large quantities of fresh water, double the horsepower, and expanded internal volume for creature comforts, gives the subclass the ability to take on global missions better than its six forebeares. With a range of nearly 6,500 miles, these ships can reliably self-deploy to hotspots on short notice. These modifications come with the penalty of increased mass. The two $26 million ships displace an extra 1,800 tons each compared with the other ships in their class.
The General Frank S. Besson class of ships, like other US Army vessels, are crewed by a little-known cadre of soldier-sailors (they prefer the name Army Mariner). Each of these ships has roughly eight Warrant Officers, and between 14 and 24 enlisted crew. Unlike most other parts of the service, Army vessels don’t run on rank structure necessarily, instead they run on a license-type hierarchy.
In general, it seems that morale aboard these ships and crew retention is exceptionally high, and let’s face it, saying that you are assigned to a ship in the Army is a great conversation starter—so that’s one big perk. Also, these crews work as small, close-knit units, and many get to see exotic ports around the globe—some of which big Navy ships don’t even get to call on.
...
Continued Below.
Fenrir
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2015
- Messages
- 1,291
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Continued from above
...
A further two variants of the same class were built for the Philippine Navy in the early 1990s, and are configured as multi-role patrol ships. Dubbed the Bacolod City class, these vessels are adaptable to different mission sets and are very inconspicuous. A helicopter pad is fitted to the rear of the variant’s superstructure, and small boats can deploy from the ship’s rear ramp area. These vessels can also still be used in a material transport role when needed and are up-gunned with 20mm cannons and enhanced sensors.
The multi-role light helicopter carrier configuration—which the Bacolod City class is a version of—was one of a handful of alternative uses for the General Frank S. Besson class design. Semi-submersible and troop carrier variants were also put forward, but never fully developed.
The US Army’s small fleet of General Frank S. Besson class logistics vessels are gaining a whole new level of prominence as the Pentagon attempts to pivot away from sandy land warfare in the Middle East and towards the watery and remote challenges of Pacific.
While the Navy, Air Force, and Marines have a front row seat at the table when it comes to fighting in a combined manner over the vast distances in the Pacific Theatre, the Army has struggled to find its place in this new strategic order. These LSVs, especially the more deployable two latter ships in the class, could be just the bridge the service needs to make itself more relevant.
The Navy is spending big bucks on creating huge mobile sea bases, and even Special Operations Command is getting in on the action by creating their own afloat mobile staging base. It would only seem logical for the Army’s LSVs to play a strong role in this growing sea basing and Pacific theatre expeditionary fighting strategy. If anything else, they represent an affordable bridge between small and rudimentary landing craft with localized reach and the Joint High Speed Vessels that are growing in number within the Pentagon’s war-fighting portfolio.
With all this in mind, expect these little-known but capable and proud ships to become a much more “visible” Army capability,—and don’t be too surprised if the service decides to order more of them in the future.
...
A further two variants of the same class were built for the Philippine Navy in the early 1990s, and are configured as multi-role patrol ships. Dubbed the Bacolod City class, these vessels are adaptable to different mission sets and are very inconspicuous. A helicopter pad is fitted to the rear of the variant’s superstructure, and small boats can deploy from the ship’s rear ramp area. These vessels can also still be used in a material transport role when needed and are up-gunned with 20mm cannons and enhanced sensors.
The multi-role light helicopter carrier configuration—which the Bacolod City class is a version of—was one of a handful of alternative uses for the General Frank S. Besson class design. Semi-submersible and troop carrier variants were also put forward, but never fully developed.
The US Army’s small fleet of General Frank S. Besson class logistics vessels are gaining a whole new level of prominence as the Pentagon attempts to pivot away from sandy land warfare in the Middle East and towards the watery and remote challenges of Pacific.
While the Navy, Air Force, and Marines have a front row seat at the table when it comes to fighting in a combined manner over the vast distances in the Pacific Theatre, the Army has struggled to find its place in this new strategic order. These LSVs, especially the more deployable two latter ships in the class, could be just the bridge the service needs to make itself more relevant.
The Navy is spending big bucks on creating huge mobile sea bases, and even Special Operations Command is getting in on the action by creating their own afloat mobile staging base. It would only seem logical for the Army’s LSVs to play a strong role in this growing sea basing and Pacific theatre expeditionary fighting strategy. If anything else, they represent an affordable bridge between small and rudimentary landing craft with localized reach and the Joint High Speed Vessels that are growing in number within the Pentagon’s war-fighting portfolio.
With all this in mind, expect these little-known but capable and proud ships to become a much more “visible” Army capability,—and don’t be too surprised if the service decides to order more of them in the future.
Banglar Bir
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2006
- Messages
- 7,805
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
Pentagon is Now Deploying Reservists and Refusing to Pay Promised GI Bill Benefits
Jack Burns November 27, 2016 Leave a comment
October, the Pentagon recalled millions in reenlistment bonuses it paid to Gulf War veterans. The decades-old bonuses were paid to U.S. soldiers who would reenlist for the Iraq and Afghanistan war efforts. Understandably, many veterans felt betrayed upon learning they’d have to repay what they’d considered money owed to them for signing up to fight again. One of the reasons many potential servicemen join the armed forces, in the first place, is the promise of future educational benefits. Now, it seems, the government is at it again, and it appears many reservists are finding out the hard way that what they’ve been promised, they may never receive.
According to Task and Purpose, an “obscure deployment code, a measure the Pentagon created in 2014 to scale back spending on benefits,” deployed reservists have been prevented from earning credit towards their GI Bill educational benefits. In other words, the soldiers’ deployments won’t get them any educational benefits when they get home. “By law, reservists involuntarily mobilized under Title 10, section 12304b, do not receive credit for the GI Bill while they are activated,” Task and Purpose reported.
Marine Sgt. William Hubbard, currently deployed overseas in Honduras, isn’t just any reservist. He’s also a soldiers’ advocate and serves in his civilian role as the Vice President of Government Affairs at Student Veterans of America, a national veterans advocacy group focusing on education policy. Hubbard said, fellow Marines in Honduras are stunned as the word has slowly spread through the ranks. Most incorrectly believed they would receive seven to nine months’ worth of credit for GI Bill benefits, including Hubbard, a benefits legislation expert, Task and Purpose writes.
Hubbard said, “Reservists serve their country like any other component, and they have to balance civilian employment, education and the military…And to say they don’t rate the full benefit? It doesn’t add up.”
Under Title 10, section 12304b, at least 1,780 reservists have been deployed and will not receive GI Bill benefits for their service time overseas. A Marine reservist from Cleveland, Ohio, Sgt. Mark Wong, said he was frustrated after learning his service to his country did not deliver full benefits. He said, “Once I heard about the exemption, it blew my mind. We work the same hours as active duty people doing the same job. The government is saying our sacrifice isn’t worth as much as it is for those on active duty. But we leave behind families and our civilian careers too.”
Wong needed those benefits in his civilian role in criminal justice, explaining he’d planned on getting an advanced law degree to further his career and earn bonuses.
Hubbard, too, like Wong, had planned on earning an advanced degree, desiring to get an MBA. Now he says, “At this point, I have to take a step back to assess the financial viability. This would make the difference between doing it or not…Now I have to decide between starting a family or my education, and not both.”
Apparently, the Pentagon is attempting to tighten up its defense spending. According to Task and Purpose, the Pentagon’s 2017 budget called for doubling reserve mobilizations, in part to ease the strain of operations across the globe, from the fight against the Islamic State group to ramped-up deployments in Europe in the face of growing Russian aggression.
Some members of Congress are aware of the problem and have introduced bills to re-institute the stripped benefits. According to Task and Purpose, Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., proposed the National Guard 12304b Benefits Parity Act in May. The bill would grant GI Bill benefits to reservists along with health care and retirement benefits, according to Michael Dale-Stein, a spokesman for Franken. But it has not moved from the Senate’s Armed Services Committee since its introduction.
Franken reportedly issued the following statement to Stars and Stripes, “The men and women who serve our country lay everything on the line to protect us, and in return, they deserve access to the support and benefits that they’ve rightfully earned…But unfortunately, too many members of the National Guard in both Minnesota and across the country who served on active duty came home and couldn’t get important health care and education support.”
We at the Free Thought Project find the Pentagon’s demand of veterans repaying signing bonuses and deployment codes which deny GI Bill educational benefits to deployed reservists, quite incredulous. It’s even more astounding when one considers the recent revelation the Pentagon itself cannot account for 6.5 trillion dollars in missing taxpayer funds for which it was entrusted.
It’s one thing to misplace a few thousand, or even a few hundred thousand dollars, but when 6.5 trillion goes missing, and you ask your veterans to repay their signing bonuses, you’ve just stooped to a new low, and transformed yourself into a five-sided bucket of scum, no longer worthy of the respect your organization once enjoyed.
The Pentagon’s financial accountability problems go way back, even to just before 9/11/01, when then Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said 2.3 million Pentagon funds went missing. More recently, lawmakers on Capitol Hill have decided to apply proverbial screws to the Pentagon.
Lawmakers on Capitol Hill have introduced legislation to impose penalties on the Pentagon if it fails to meet the legally mandated goal of being ready for a full audit by September 30, 2017, CNN reported.
But here’s a stupid question. Why would it take almost a year for the Pentagon to find out where the money is? Could it be that the missing monies are funding the “moderate rebel” proxy war against Syria’s Bashar al Assad? At any rate, it appears the Pentagon is all too willing to balance its trillion dollar budget shortfalls on the backs of American servicemen, many of whom are not from the same wealthy backgrounds as some of the nation’s congressional members.
Breitbart and 60 Minutes helped expose how lavishly congressmen and congresswomen can live, simply by using certain loopholes regarding how they choose to spend their reelection and PAC campaign funds.
A 60 Minutes investigative report by veteran CBS reporter Steve Kroft and Government Accountability Institute (GAI) President and Breitbart News Senior Editor-at-Large Peter Schweizer revealed how leadership PAC loopholes allow members of Congress to convert campaign cash into lavish lifestyle upgrades for themselves and their family members. “It’s another example, unfortunately, where the rules that apply to the rest of us, don’t really apply to the members of Congress,” said Schweizer on 60 Minutes. The report, which contained selected material from Schweizer’s forthcoming book Extortion: How Politicians Extract Your Money, Buy Votes, and Line Their Own Pockets, revealed embarrassing and outlandish instances of cronyism and self-enrichment by members of Congress. Despite the fact that funds from leadership PACs are supposed to go to help elect fellow members of one’s own political party, lax campaign laws allow lawmakers to turn their leadership PACs into private slush funds to fund just about anything.
Taken as a whole, the request for veterans to repay enlistment bonuses, the refusal to pay GI Bill benefits for deployed reservists, the decades-old mismanagement of Pentagon funds, and the lavish spending by lawmakers, may lead some to believe the warmongers will not answer to anyone and will extort money from those who most likely cannot afford to pay.
All the while, the very same lawmakers who’ve been sent to Washington to hold accountable government entities (like the Pentagon), are living it up by lavishly spending slush funds meant to help get them reelected. What a jacked up, indulgent, oppressive regime this nation’s government has become! Let’s change it up a bit and demand that when funds go missing in the State Department or in the Pentagon, then all the members of Congress, the Supreme Court justices, the president and his cabinet won’t get their paychecks. Only then will 6.5 trillion dollars not simply vanish from government coffers. That makes more sense than balancing the government’s budget on the backs of soldiers and denying them benefits to which they’ve traditionally been entitled.
Read more at http://thefreethoughtproject.com/u-s-military-reservists-pentagon-gi-bill/#Ae6jyFXceOTJv8Fq.99
Jack Burns November 27, 2016 Leave a comment
October, the Pentagon recalled millions in reenlistment bonuses it paid to Gulf War veterans. The decades-old bonuses were paid to U.S. soldiers who would reenlist for the Iraq and Afghanistan war efforts. Understandably, many veterans felt betrayed upon learning they’d have to repay what they’d considered money owed to them for signing up to fight again. One of the reasons many potential servicemen join the armed forces, in the first place, is the promise of future educational benefits. Now, it seems, the government is at it again, and it appears many reservists are finding out the hard way that what they’ve been promised, they may never receive.
According to Task and Purpose, an “obscure deployment code, a measure the Pentagon created in 2014 to scale back spending on benefits,” deployed reservists have been prevented from earning credit towards their GI Bill educational benefits. In other words, the soldiers’ deployments won’t get them any educational benefits when they get home. “By law, reservists involuntarily mobilized under Title 10, section 12304b, do not receive credit for the GI Bill while they are activated,” Task and Purpose reported.
Marine Sgt. William Hubbard, currently deployed overseas in Honduras, isn’t just any reservist. He’s also a soldiers’ advocate and serves in his civilian role as the Vice President of Government Affairs at Student Veterans of America, a national veterans advocacy group focusing on education policy. Hubbard said, fellow Marines in Honduras are stunned as the word has slowly spread through the ranks. Most incorrectly believed they would receive seven to nine months’ worth of credit for GI Bill benefits, including Hubbard, a benefits legislation expert, Task and Purpose writes.
Hubbard said, “Reservists serve their country like any other component, and they have to balance civilian employment, education and the military…And to say they don’t rate the full benefit? It doesn’t add up.”
Under Title 10, section 12304b, at least 1,780 reservists have been deployed and will not receive GI Bill benefits for their service time overseas. A Marine reservist from Cleveland, Ohio, Sgt. Mark Wong, said he was frustrated after learning his service to his country did not deliver full benefits. He said, “Once I heard about the exemption, it blew my mind. We work the same hours as active duty people doing the same job. The government is saying our sacrifice isn’t worth as much as it is for those on active duty. But we leave behind families and our civilian careers too.”
Wong needed those benefits in his civilian role in criminal justice, explaining he’d planned on getting an advanced law degree to further his career and earn bonuses.
Hubbard, too, like Wong, had planned on earning an advanced degree, desiring to get an MBA. Now he says, “At this point, I have to take a step back to assess the financial viability. This would make the difference between doing it or not…Now I have to decide between starting a family or my education, and not both.”
Apparently, the Pentagon is attempting to tighten up its defense spending. According to Task and Purpose, the Pentagon’s 2017 budget called for doubling reserve mobilizations, in part to ease the strain of operations across the globe, from the fight against the Islamic State group to ramped-up deployments in Europe in the face of growing Russian aggression.
Some members of Congress are aware of the problem and have introduced bills to re-institute the stripped benefits. According to Task and Purpose, Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., proposed the National Guard 12304b Benefits Parity Act in May. The bill would grant GI Bill benefits to reservists along with health care and retirement benefits, according to Michael Dale-Stein, a spokesman for Franken. But it has not moved from the Senate’s Armed Services Committee since its introduction.
Franken reportedly issued the following statement to Stars and Stripes, “The men and women who serve our country lay everything on the line to protect us, and in return, they deserve access to the support and benefits that they’ve rightfully earned…But unfortunately, too many members of the National Guard in both Minnesota and across the country who served on active duty came home and couldn’t get important health care and education support.”
We at the Free Thought Project find the Pentagon’s demand of veterans repaying signing bonuses and deployment codes which deny GI Bill educational benefits to deployed reservists, quite incredulous. It’s even more astounding when one considers the recent revelation the Pentagon itself cannot account for 6.5 trillion dollars in missing taxpayer funds for which it was entrusted.
It’s one thing to misplace a few thousand, or even a few hundred thousand dollars, but when 6.5 trillion goes missing, and you ask your veterans to repay their signing bonuses, you’ve just stooped to a new low, and transformed yourself into a five-sided bucket of scum, no longer worthy of the respect your organization once enjoyed.
The Pentagon’s financial accountability problems go way back, even to just before 9/11/01, when then Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said 2.3 million Pentagon funds went missing. More recently, lawmakers on Capitol Hill have decided to apply proverbial screws to the Pentagon.
Lawmakers on Capitol Hill have introduced legislation to impose penalties on the Pentagon if it fails to meet the legally mandated goal of being ready for a full audit by September 30, 2017, CNN reported.
But here’s a stupid question. Why would it take almost a year for the Pentagon to find out where the money is? Could it be that the missing monies are funding the “moderate rebel” proxy war against Syria’s Bashar al Assad? At any rate, it appears the Pentagon is all too willing to balance its trillion dollar budget shortfalls on the backs of American servicemen, many of whom are not from the same wealthy backgrounds as some of the nation’s congressional members.
Breitbart and 60 Minutes helped expose how lavishly congressmen and congresswomen can live, simply by using certain loopholes regarding how they choose to spend their reelection and PAC campaign funds.
A 60 Minutes investigative report by veteran CBS reporter Steve Kroft and Government Accountability Institute (GAI) President and Breitbart News Senior Editor-at-Large Peter Schweizer revealed how leadership PAC loopholes allow members of Congress to convert campaign cash into lavish lifestyle upgrades for themselves and their family members. “It’s another example, unfortunately, where the rules that apply to the rest of us, don’t really apply to the members of Congress,” said Schweizer on 60 Minutes. The report, which contained selected material from Schweizer’s forthcoming book Extortion: How Politicians Extract Your Money, Buy Votes, and Line Their Own Pockets, revealed embarrassing and outlandish instances of cronyism and self-enrichment by members of Congress. Despite the fact that funds from leadership PACs are supposed to go to help elect fellow members of one’s own political party, lax campaign laws allow lawmakers to turn their leadership PACs into private slush funds to fund just about anything.
Taken as a whole, the request for veterans to repay enlistment bonuses, the refusal to pay GI Bill benefits for deployed reservists, the decades-old mismanagement of Pentagon funds, and the lavish spending by lawmakers, may lead some to believe the warmongers will not answer to anyone and will extort money from those who most likely cannot afford to pay.
All the while, the very same lawmakers who’ve been sent to Washington to hold accountable government entities (like the Pentagon), are living it up by lavishly spending slush funds meant to help get them reelected. What a jacked up, indulgent, oppressive regime this nation’s government has become! Let’s change it up a bit and demand that when funds go missing in the State Department or in the Pentagon, then all the members of Congress, the Supreme Court justices, the president and his cabinet won’t get their paychecks. Only then will 6.5 trillion dollars not simply vanish from government coffers. That makes more sense than balancing the government’s budget on the backs of soldiers and denying them benefits to which they’ve traditionally been entitled.
Read more at http://thefreethoughtproject.com/u-s-military-reservists-pentagon-gi-bill/#Ae6jyFXceOTJv8Fq.99
خره مينه لګته وي
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2014
- Messages
- 1,767
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Artist's illustration of Raytheon's Standard Missile 3, a current defensive weapon system designed to destroy short- to intermediate-range ballistic missiles.
Credit: Raytheon
Defensive weapons that can intercept and destroy enemy missiles before they can harm the United States or its allies have been a key part of military strategy for decades, but the rules of the game are changing.
More countries have or are developing long-range missile technology, including systems that can carry multiple warheads, known as Multiple Independently Targetable Re-entry Vehicles (MIRVs) and/or decoys.
"Both China and Russia possess the MIRV capability for their ballistic missiles. In 2014, reports confirmed that Iran too had developed Multiple Re-entry Vehicles (MRVs) for their ballistic missiles. Cold War literature suggests that MIRVs are first strike weapons and could be strategically destabilizing," independent consultant Debalina Ghoshal wrote in a June 2016 report for the Federation of American Scientists.
"The United States realizes these threats and is working towards a robust missile defense system," she said.
RELATED: The Outer Space Treaty Promised Peace In Space
Last year, the U.S. Missile Defense Agency awarded contracts to Raytheon, Lockheed-Martin and Boeing to begin designing what is known as a "Multi-Object Kill Vehicle" or MOKV, which could destroy several objects in space with a single launch.
"Ten years ago, we had a single kill vehicle on a single interceptor. Kill vehicles today are the size of a toaster … This MOKV program is the latest iteration," John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org, told Seeker.
Raytheon's plan, which is scheduled for a concept review in December, is to load multiple MOKVs onto a single missile for launch. Each MOKV would be outfitted with sensors, a steering and propulsion system and communications equipment that will allow them to zero in on an individual target and hit it, destroying the object by sheer kinetic forces.
The impacts would take place beyond Earth's atmosphere, but on a trajectory that would send the resulting cloud of debris back into the atmosphere, where it burn up, Pike said.
RELATED: Is Russian Mystery Object a Space Weapon?
A major technological challenge is figuring out how to differentiate between bombs and decoys, such as balloons that look like they might have a hydrogen bomb aboard.
The military hopes to begin proof-of-concept demonstrations late next year and a non-intercept flight test in 2018. If successful, the Missile Defense Agency would conduct an intercept test in 2019.
Originally published on Seeker.
shared on space
Similar threads
