Today is the 10th Anniversary of the attacks on September 11, 2001, attacks that resulted in an attack on the Pentagon, the downing of Flight 93, and the collapsoe of the Twin Towers at the World Trade Center.  It is an event similar to the events at Pearl Harbor, but more horrific in that the events were directed at non-combatants, ordinary citizens who were unaware a war had been declared upon them.  A war that was unleashed in response by the angry citizens of a country in grief, a war on terror.  And the victims were not solely Americans, but were of many faiths, races, and nationalities.

But if we are to property remember the victims lost on that day, we must remember that the lesson is not necessarily that we need only declare war on enemies abroad, but also the enemy within ourselves.  Because the events of 9/11 were the result of ignorance, the ignorance of men and women who believed they were serving a greater purpose for their god through killing.

And in recognizing that, we must never allow ourselves to walk that same path, to allow ignorance to blind us and guide us in our actions and/or through violence to hurt others, physically or verbally, because of their beliefs or because they are different.  It is often forgotten that the other innocent victims of 9/11 are the American Muslims (and in many cases, Sikhs in the Indian American communities, who were targeted because of their turbans), who suffered through 9/11 as the targets of anger for crimes committed by those who dishonored their religion.

In the end, many of them have demonstrated their loyalty and love for this country through military service abroad fighting our enemies, helping to dig out survivors at Ground Zero, and who have remained supportive of our mission to combat terrorism.  Many have died in support of our war on terror.  And we must not forget those who serve with American soldiers abroad, as guides, interpreters, and do so under the threat of death towards themselves and their families, because they also abhor the actions of the terrorists.

To all who have lost someone, know someone who has lost someone, or were witness to the horrific tragedy of 9/11, may we never forget those events, and live in remembrance of the victims, and the brave policemen, firefighters, and ordinary citizens who sacrificed themselves unselfishly in the effort to rescue them.

In recognition of those lost, those who survive and continue to grief, and those who continue to fight the wars against those who perpetuated this violence, I offer this quote from Abraham Lincoln, which he delivered in his second inaugural speech, which truly sums up the strength and resolve of the greatest nation on earth:

“With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation’s wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.”

Interesting news  coming out of China about Chinese ambitions to build on their existing aircraft carrier by building another two more.  While India and Thailand have aircraft carriers, none will be the match of the Chinese ones, which are true flap top designs, not the V/STOL carriers used by the Indian and Thai navies.  One has to wonder which enemy China is preparing for, and whether the carriers are truly defensive in nature, or meant to be part of a naval blockade against the US Navy if they decide to respond to crises in Taiwan, South Korea, or other areas in Asia.  Only time will tell.

 China defends carrier plans, neighbors fret over buildup

Please join us for an online chat on Saturday, July 23rd at 8pm Eastern / 5pm Pacific.

We will be using the chatroom at our website, www.Military-Discussion.com, so please make sure you register before the chat begins, then click “Chatroom” in the upper right to join the chat.

This chat will be a general chat, although future chats will be more topic specific depending on interest and popularity. See you guys Saturday!

News is coming out that Pakistan has arrested five informants who assisted the CIA and the US in finding Bin Laden. This after Pakistan’s own “cooperation” resulted in several “near” captures, which may have been due to the Pakistani’s tipping off Bin Laden before each attempt to capture him. This has to bring up more questions about our relationship with Pakistan, and if we should continue our relationship with them, considering they recently were offered 50 jet fighters from China. One has to wonder if China was just being generous, or if China was really giving the jet fighters as payment for access to the stealth helicoptor wreckage from the raid to kill Bin Laden. Is Pakistan truly a friend of the US, or just playing games?

From The New York TImes:

Pakistan Arrests C.I.A. Informants in Bin Laden Raid

 Interesting that the internet and news are buzzing with rumors that a stealth helicoptor may have been used to insert our troops without being detected. 

One has to wonder if this is a modified Blackhawk, or a passenger carrying helicopter based on the Comanche stealth helicoptor.

 See the ABC News article below.

From http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/top-secret-stealth-helicopter-program-revealed-osama-bin/story?id=13530693&page=2

Top Secret Stealth Helicopter Program Revealed in Osama Bin Laden Raid: Experts

Before an elite team of U.S. Navy SEALs executed a daring raid that took down Osama bin Laden, the commandos were able to silently sneak up on their elusive target thanks to what aviation analysts said were top secret, never-before-seen stealth-modified helicopters.

In the course of the operation that cost the al Qaeda leader his life, one of the two Blackhawk helicopters that carried the SEALs into bin Laden’s Pakistani compound grazed one of the compound’s wall and was forced to make a hard landing. With the chopper inoperable, at the end of the mission the SEALs destroyed it with explosives.

But photos of what survived the explosion — the tail section of the craft with curious modifications — has sent military analysts buzzing about a stealth helicopter program that was only rumored to exist. From a modified tail boom to a noise reducing covering on the rear rotors and a special high-tech material similar to that used in stealth fighters, former Department of Defense official and vice president of the Lexington Institute Dan Goure said the bird is like nothing he’s ever seen before.

European PressPhoto Agency

Photographs taken after a Navy SEAL team raided Osama bin Laden?s compound in Pakistan show the wreckage of one helicopter that clipped a rotor on a compound wall, was abandoned and destroyed.

“This is a first,” he said. “You wouldn’t know that it was coming right at you. And that’s what’s important, because these are coming in fast and low, and if they aren’t sounding like they’re coming right at you, you might not even react until it’s too late… That was clearly part of the success.”

In addition to the noise-reducing modifications, a former special operations aviator told The Army Times the general shape of what was left of the craft — the harsh angles and flat surfaces more common to stealth jets — was further evidence it was a modified variant of the Blackhawk.

A senior Pentagon official told ABC News the Defense Department would “absolutely not” comment on anything relating to the destroyed bird.

Neighbors of bin Laden in Abbottabad, Pakistan, told ABC News they didn’t hear the helicopters the night of the Sunday raid until they were directly overhead. The rotor covering, along with a special rotor design, suppressed the choppers noise while inbound, Bill Sweetman, editor and chief of Defense Technology International, said.

“Helicopters make a very distinctive percussive rotor sound which is caused by their rotor blades and if you can blend that down, of course that makes a noise that is much less likely to be heard and much more likely to blend into any background noise that there is,” Sweetman said.

Parts of Helicopter Taken From Crash Site

The U.S. has attempted to use stealth helicopters before. In the mid-90s, the Army developed several prototypes of the Comanche helicopter, a reconnaissance helicopter that was at the time a revolutionary step in stealth technology. But in 2004 the Department of Defense scrapped the program and promised to used technology developed for the Comanche on other crafts.

Since, the government has been working to silence the Army’s Blackhawk helicopters but an official program for the stealth choppers was never publicized. The wreckage, Sweetman said, is the first the public has ever seen of an operational stealth-modified helicopter.

Goure said he believes the stealthy Blackhawks have been in use for years without the public’s knowledge.

European PressPhoto Agency

Photographs taken after a Navy SEAL team raided Osama bin Laden?s compound in Pakistan show the wreckage of one helicopter that clipped a rotor on a compound wall, was abandoned and destroyed.

But now that one went down and photographs emerged of large sections being taken from the crash site under a tarp, former White House counterterrorism advisor and ABC News consultant Richard Clarke said U.S. officials may have reason to worry about where those parts end up.

“There are probably people in the Pentagon tonight who are very concerned that pieces of the helicopter may be, even now, on their way to China, because we know that China is trying to make stealth aircraft,” he said. The Chinese military is known to have a close relationship with the Pakistani military.

With the leader of al Qaeda confirmed dead only a few minutes ago, many conspiracy theories are flying around about whether or not Osama Bin Laden is actually dead.  The official US government position is that he is dead, and they are planning to release photos to prove that he is dead, but it isn’t hard to doctor a photo to prove he is dead.  This begs the question, why would you kill Bin Laden rather than try to capture him?  While the government will claim it was impossible to do  so, it is known the government will go to extraordinary means to secure something if they believe it is worthwhile, even if it costs lives and monetary resources.

What is the greatest benefit of capturing Bin Laden?  He is likely a wealth of information of al Qaeda’s activites worldwide.  Getting him to sing like a canary would allow the US to shut down entire swaths of terrorist networks much quickly, and prevent them from sprouting up again when you can take out the entire network, leaving no one experienced behind to restart it.  Of course it would likely be costly.  Terrorist groups worldwide would begin attacks and taking hostages in order to secure his release.  The amount of terrorist activity could be staggering if he was alive.

What are some of the benefits of killing Bin Laden over capturing him?   You avoid a large scale response of terrorist incidents worldwide trying to secure his release.  It’s inevitable you will still get retaliation, but it would not be as wide spread since there would be no hope of securing the release of a dead man.  Not to mention, someone officially “declared” dead would be easier to dispose of without a trial and executed, than someone alive who would require interrogation, a trial, and massive security forces to protect the location where he was being held, and protecting his tranport to and from trial.

The most likely scenario is that he was captured, and his death faked to avoid the worldwide terrorist response of seeking his release, and avoiding having to provide a trial.  It is far more likely the US government is seeking to use him for information, after they manage to break him, which is inevitable, since no one can withstand continuous torture indefinitely.  Not to mention, a “dead” man can be tortured, because there will be no need to ensure his bruises and brutality was not visible during trial.

Regardless of whether he is alive or not, the news that his DNA is virtually confirmed, and whether he is dead or tucked away in the deepest hole in the planet, his capture is a victory for the free world.  Below is the article from Fox News regarding the DNA testing to identify Bin Laden.

From http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/05/02/dna-proves-bin-ladens-death-obama-officials-say/

DNA Proves Usama Bin Laden’s Death, Obama Officials Say

Intereting news today about Leon Panetta selected to head up the Pentagon.  Could this signal budgetary cuts in defense spending?  Could General David Petraeus’ selection for CIA Director signal we’re preparing to withdraw from Afghanistan in spite of the fact that the fighting isn’t completely over?  Share your thoughts on the forum at http://www.military-discussion.com/forum/index.php?topic=3071.0

From http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/27/us-usa-pentagon-cia-idUSTRE73Q2ZX20110427

Obama to shake up security team, Leon Panetta to Pentagon

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama will on Thursday name CIA Director Leon Panetta to become U.S. defense secretary and nominate General David Petraeus, who is running the war in Afghanistan, to take over the spy agency.

The long-anticipated shakeup could have broad implications for the Obama administration, which is seeking deeper Pentagon spending cuts and aims to start drawing down U.S. forces from Afghanistan in July.

Panetta, a Democratic Party insider and former White House budget chief, is expected to oversee steady declines in Pentagon spending that diverts weapons dollars to the Treasury Department to help reduce the U.S. deficit.

The departure of Petraeus, considered one of the top U.S. commanders, mixing political savvy with military know-how, also raises big questions about the future of the unpopular, nearly decade-old war effort in Afghanistan.

Analysts fear his departure could derail momentum and undermine efforts to improve U.S. ties with Pakistan.

The White House declined formal comment on the changes, but a senior Obama administration official said Petraeus would retire from the military to take the CIA job.

Details of the changes were confirmed on Wednesday by several U.S. officials.

The shakeup will also include Obama’s nomination of the trouble-shooting diplomat Ryan Crocker — who has served as ambassador to Iraq, Pakistan, Syria, Kuwait and Lebanon — as the U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan.

Lieutenant General John Allen, deputy commander of U.S. Central Command, will succeed Petraeus as head of the Afghan war effort, U.S. officials said.

The White House hopes Panetta will be able to assume his post on July 1, pending Senate confirmation. Petraeus would take his job at CIA headquarters by the beginning of September.

READ MY LIPS

Veteran Defense Secretary Robert Gates, a holdover from the Bush administration who planned to step down this year, has voiced concerns in the past about Pentagon budget cuts.

Loren Thompson, a prominent industry consultant with close ties to the Department of Defense, said substituting Gates with Panetta, 72, “would undoubtedly result in a faster pace of cuts to the defense budget in future years.”

Although it will be difficult, analysts believe Panetta — a former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton — has the experience and clout needed to brave the budget battle.

As chairman of the House Budget Committee, he was one of the Democratic House members who negotiated with President George H.W. Bush’s White House chief of staff, John Sununu, to reach a 1990 budget agreement to cut the deficit.

The agreement led Bush to violate his “read my lips, no new taxes” pledge, which disappointed Republicans and helped Clinton win the presidency in 1992.

Petraeus, 58, is credited with pulling Iraq from the brink of civil war and has trumpeted battlefield successes in Afghanistan after a surge of 30,000 additional troops ordered in by Obama in late 2009.

“We’re just starting to see some momentum, some shifts, and now we’re swapping out the Afghanistan commander,” said Rick “Ozzie” Nelson, an Afghanistan veteran and a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Petraeus will find a somewhat less optimistic view of the Afghan campaign from inside CIA headquarters, where analysts have advanced a more cautious outlook about the war in the face of rampant corruption and a still-resilient Taliban.

Before word of the reshuffle broke, some Washington insiders had said the White House wanted to find a high-profile position for Petraeus to ensure he would not be recruited by Republicans to challenge Obama next year, perhaps as a vice-presidential candidate.

Thursday’s announcement is not expected to be Obama’s final change to his national security team.

Obama is also expected to soon announce the successor to the top U.S. military officer, Admiral Mike Mullen, whose term as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff expires at the end of September.

The presumptive candidate to replace him had long been General James Cartwright. But the failure of the White House to announce a nomination for Mullen’s job raised questions about whether Obama was ready to commit to a decision just yet.

It didn’t seem so long ago that a court ruled that gay marriages be allowed.  It was in August to be exact.   The presiding judge wrote on simple sentence that will hopefully someday have profound impact upon America.

“The evidence presented at trial and the position of representatives of the state of California show that an injunction against enforcement of Proposition 8 is in the public’s interest.”

In many ways, it is a reminder of a line from the January 1, 1863 Emancipation Proclamation address by President Abraham Lincoln:

“And by virtue of the power, and for the purpose aforesaid, I do order and declare that all persons held as slaves within said designated States, and parts of States, are, and henceforward shall be free; and that the Executive government of the United States, including the military and naval authorities thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of said persons.”

The gay community is no longer an unknown or a mystery, with many well known celebrities that have shown their pride, including Ellen DeGeneres, Elton John, and Rosie O’Donnell.  They are human beings like us, and do not deserve to be treated as second class citizens, much like minorities were treated in the ’60s.

It seems fitting that the line from the Emancipation Proclamation refers to a military necessity for the proclamation.  The military of today faces a crisis in terms of meeting recruitment quotas to fill the needs of the military, with more young men and women disillusioned by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Others have become aware that enjoying a free education while serving in the National Guard requires payment, the price being active duty service as needed.

With a need to fill recruitment goals, why are a segment of the population being turned away, on the basis of sexual orientation.  Men and women in the military are about as likely, if not more likely, to be assaulted sexual by the opposite sex than they are to be assaulted by someone of the opposite sex.

Ultimately, gay soldiers are not going to climb into your bunk or foxhole and rape you.  Can it happen?  Of course, it has happened to heterosexuals. Does that mean we need to ban heterosexual men and women from the service?  When people, irrespective of their sexual orientation or race, are willing to put their lives at risk to defense our country, what right have we to take that privilege away from them?

It reminds me of a quote from Glory, where Denzel Washington’s character, a soldier in the 54th Massachusetts Regiment , states “A black soldier can stop a bullet as good as a white soldier…”  The same truth goes for a gay soldier.  Soldiering is not for the faint of heart, and if a gay soldier has the courage and fortitude to risk life and limb to protect a country that won’t accept them, they deserve our respect.

(Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6AT4RW20101130)

A recent study conducted by the Pentagon found that most in the military do not mind gays serving amonst them, and that they do not feel threatened.

The Pentagon unveiled a study on Tuesday that predicted little impact if the U.S. military ended its ban on gays, bolstering President Barack Obama’s push to get Congress to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” by year-end….At least 13,000 men and women have been expelled from the military since “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” which allows gays to serve in the armed forces as long as they keep their sexual orientation private, came into force in 1993….The study dismissed as exaggerated notions that ending the ban would lead to overt promiscuity, widespread “effeminacy” among men and “unwelcome advances.” It also opposed separate living quarters or bathrooms for gay or lesbian troops, a possibility raised in the past by some in the U.S. military.

 The Pentagon report continued discussing concerns and implications of repealing the ban, and citing concerns:

(Reuters) – A majority of the U.S. military does not object to lifting the ban on gays serving openly in uniform, except for predominantly male combat units which show greater resistance to repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” a Pentagon study said Tuesday.

It could have a significant impact on President Barack Obama’s push for Congress to repeal the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy by year-end.  The policy, adopted in 1993, bars gays from openly serving in the military, but allows them to serve as long as they keep their sexual orientation private.  Following are some of the report’s key recommendations:

STANDARDS OF CONDUCT
Service members expressed concerns about conduct such as public displays of affection, dress, appearance, and violence, harassment, or disrespect between homosexual and heterosexual members.
“We do recommend … that the Department of Defense issue generalized guidance to the Services that all standards of personal and professional conduct must apply uniformly without regard to sexual orientation.”

MORAL AND RELIGIOUS CONCERNS
A large number of service members raised religious and moral objections to homosexuality and some of the “most intense and sharpest divergence of views” were among the roughly 3,000 military chaplains.
The report concluded that Service members already co-exist, work and fight together, despite sharply different religious convictions and values such as on abortion.

UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE
“We recommend modification to the prohibition on sodomy in Article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), and a corresponding change to the Manual for Courts-Martial (which implements the UCMJ and provides rules, policies, and procedures for UCMJ prosecutions).”
“Article 125 of the UCMJ treats all acts of sodomy, heterosexual, homosexual, consensual, or otherwise, as punishable conduct.”

PRIVACY and COHABITATION
A number of Service members were uncomfortable about sharing bathroom facilities or living quarters with someone known to be gay or lesbian.

 A copy of the s can be found here in PDF format, Report on the Comprehensive Review of the Issues Associated with a Repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.

A poll of the American public also found greater tolerence in their willingness to accept gays in the mliitary.

 Most Americans favor allowing gay men and women to serve openly in the U.S. military, a poll released on Monday by the Pew Research Center showed.   The poll findings are the latest to indicate public support for a repeal of the 17-year-old “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy banning gays from openly serving in the U.S. military and come a day before a long-awaited Pentagon report on the matter.

Of course, some in the government are not so eager to embrace a change that is long due.  Even Arizona Senator John McCain advocated caution, that the military may not be ready for this change.

A top Republican warned on Thursday it might be too soon to end the U.S. military’s ban on gays, as the party geared up to block President Barack Obama’s bid to repeal the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy this year.  “I am not saying this law should never change. I am simply saying that it may be premature to make such a change at this time, and in this manner,” said Senator John McCain, addressing the U.S. defense secretary and top military officer as they appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee.  McCain and some fellow Republicans on the committee also caste doubt on the conclusions and methodology of a Pentagon study released two days ago that predicted little impact if the 17-year-old policy were ended.

Is this true?  Are we truly not ready to show tolerence for those who are different?  After all, isn’t this country founded on the principle of tolerence?  Then again, the United States was virtually last in freeing slaves.  It should come as no surprise that other nations openly embrace gay soldiers amongst their ranks.   Some of the nations that allow gays to serve are Taiwan, Philippines, and South Korea, to name a few.

NEFF: The Defence Department working group report which was just released on Tuesday here, showed as well the republic of Korea, that South Korea was among the nations that also allowed openly gay service, and this is the Defence Department’s report on foreign military that it used to provide input to members of Congress about the way forward for the US.

LAM: What about Japan? I understand Japan has no rules applying to gay personnel, is that right?

NEFF: Japan and Singapore also fell into sort of an indeterminate or undetermined category for the Defence Department’s review and I think they are seeking further clarification there.

 Only time will tell if society and the military have reached a point where we can now accept gays equally within the Armed Forces. 

This article was simultaneously published with permission on both www.Military-Discussion.com and www.Issues-Today.com, as the topic is relevant to both websites.

At Military-Discussion.com, we are happy to announce that the website has gotten a much needed facelift.

With an increase in membership, and visits (we recently passed the 120,000 visitors mark),  we wanted to have the website be more functional.  As a result, we have set up the site to be more interactive, and to offer more to our loyal followers and contributors.

If you have any suggestions to help us improve our website and offerings, please feel free to let us know.

Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1034386/The-day-I-met-Waterloo.html