Showing posts with label army. Show all posts
Showing posts with label army. Show all posts

Thursday, January 19, 2023

Militaries ➾ 2023

Taiwan - Xina
23-1-10 Did the Xinese military [PLAAF] reveal one major weakness? - Lei > .
23-1-13 Xina’s Military Actually Sucks - laowhy86 > .
Baltic, Nordic 
> I-P Coalition of the Willing >>
23-12-9 Does Japan Need a New Army? - Vis Pol > .
23-10-25 US & [I-P-CW] vs Xina: Preparations to Fight War - Real > .
23-9-18 South Korean Factory Churning Out Armaments for NATO | WSJ > .
MADness 
NATO militaries 
23-6-13 NATO IAMD | NATO Integrated Air and Missile Defence > .
Orcine Ineptitude 
> PLA >  PLAN, PLAAF 
23-8-2 Xi's Anti-Corruption Purge of PLA Rocket Force | PLA structure - Digging > .
23-8-31 Poland: powerhouse in the making - Caspian > .
Ruscia - Ukraine
23-8-19 US-Japan-Korea - Biden, Kishida, Yoon 23-8-18 Camp David - Update > .
23-7-23 South Korean Defence Strategy - Mass, Firepower, Industry - Perun > .
Ukraine's Military 
23-1-14 Ukraine's Heavy Infantry Explained (Squad to Brigade) - Battle > .
US Indo-Pacific 
23-6-11 US expanding presence in the Philippines = 9 bases - Binkov > .
22-1-13 Sea control and sea denial — naval vs land warfare - Anders > .
Wargaming
23-9-12 What Will It Take? - Modern Breaching Operations in R-U - Invicta > .
X vs Japan 
Weaponry 
West - Eurasia
Western Security 
Xina Geostrategy
Conflicts 2023

Military ➾ 2022 ..

Why military aid to Ukraine has a positive effect on Western economies:

Cargo 200 (Груз 200, Gruz dvésti) is a military code word used in the Soviet Union and the post-Soviet states referring to the transportation of military fatalities. Officially, the term Cargo 200 is military jargon to refer specifically to the corpses of soldiers contained in zinc-lined coffins for air transportation. Unofficially, Cargo 200 is used to refer to all bodies of the dead being transported away from the battlefield, and has also become a euphemism for irreversible losses of manpower in a conflict.

Cargo 100: ammunition .
Cargo 300: wounded .
Cargo 400: concussion or captured .
Cargo 500: medicines .
Cargo 600: oversized cargo .
Cargo 700: cash .
Cargo 800: "special" or chemical weapons .

Friday, October 23, 2020

Flikke, Colonel Julia

.42-3-13: Julia Flikke, Army Nurse Corps, 1st female Colonel in USA - HiPo > .

Flikke (1879-1965) was born in rural Wisconsin, but moved to Chicago following the death of her husband from tuberculosis in 1911. Here she trained at the Augustana Hospital School of Nursing, returning a few years later as assistant superintendent after post-graduate study at Columbia University’s Teachers College in New York.

Flikke enrolled in the Army Nurse Corps in March 1918, and traveled to France where she served as chief nurse. After a short period in the United States after the war, she completed tours of duty in places such as the Philippines and China before spending a number of years at the Walter Reed Hospital in Washington D.C. where she was promoted to the rank of captain and appointed Assistant Superintendent of the Army Nurse Corps.

In 1937 Flikke succeeded the highly respected Julia Stimson as Superintendent, and was promoted to the rank of major. This was the highest rank available to women at the time, although it was much lower than the men who headed up other parts of the Army.

As the advent of the Second World War saw the United States Army expand at a swift pace, Flikke oversaw the growth for the ANC from around 700 nurses in 1940 to tens of thousands by 1943. It was during this period that the government passed Public Law 828, which authorized commissions up to the rank of colonel for Army nurses.

Three months later, on 13 March 1942, Flikke became the first woman in the United States Army to hold the rank of colonel. Although her rating was only temporary, it marked in important step towards the Army-Navy Nurse Act of 1947 that made such appointments permanent.

Julia Otteson Flikke (March 16, 1879 in Viroqua, Wisconsin – February 23, 1965) was an American nurse. Her service to the United States Army Nurse Corps spanned both world wars and included overseas assignments in the Philippines and China. In 1927, she was appointed Assistant Superintendent of the ANC and was promoted to the relative rank of captain. In 1937, she succeeded Julia Stimson as Superintendent with the relative rank of major. She was the last superintendent to hold the office before the statutory limitation of four years was placed on the tenure. She was also the first woman to hold the rank of full colonel in the Army. Although the rating was temporary then (1942), it marked a step forward to granting of full military rank and privileges in 1947. She retired [age 65] due to disability in June 1943.

Julia O. Flikke was born in Viroqua, Wisconsin, on March 16, 1879. She would receive her early education there. Flikke married in 1901, but her husband died ten years later. The following year, she entered the School of Nursing of the Augustana Hospital in Chicago. She graduated in 1915, and, after several months of postgraduate education, Flikke accepted a post as assistant principal of her old school. She would stay there until entering the United States Army Nurse Corps on March 11, 1918, and (after being promoted to chief nurse) serving in Lakewood Township, New Jersey as well as Staten Island. Flick moved to Base Camp No. 11, in France in 1918, serving in several hospitals before returning to the United States in 1919. She first worked at Camp Upton, and subsequently travelled around the country, before setting in Walter Reed General Hospital, where she would work for twelve years.

Wednesday, October 21, 2020

Hello Girls - WW1


When the first members of the American Expeditionary Force arrived in France in 1917 they found that the telephone lines already in operation were overloaded. To solve the problem, John J Pershing called for experienced, bilingual switchboard operators, which meant women. Hundreds would don the uniform and answer the call as “Hello Girls”, serving in the Signal Corps.

The St. Francis Dam was a curved concrete gravity dam, built to create a large regulating and storage reservoir for the city of Los Angeles, California. The reservoir was an integral part of the city's Los Angeles Aqueduct water supply infrastructure. It was located in San Francisquito Canyon of the Sierra Pelona Mountains, about 40 miles (64 km) northwest of downtown Los Angeles, and approximately 10 miles (16 km) north of the present day city of Santa Clarita.

The dam was designed and built between 1924 and 1926 by the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, then named the Bureau of Water Works and Supply. The department was under the direction of its general manager and chief engineer, William Mulholland.

At 11:57 p.m. on March 12, 1928, the dam catastrophically failed, and the resulting flood killed at least 431 people. The collapse of the St. Francis Dam is considered to be one of the worst American civil engineering disasters of the 20th century and remains the second-greatest loss of life in California's history, after the 1906 San Francisco earthquake and fire. The disaster marked the end of Mulholland's career.

Tuesday, October 6, 2020

Women in Combat - UK

.

Flight Lieutenant Julie Ann Gibson was the first full-time female pilot for the Royal Air Force when she graduated in 1991. Previously a ground-based officer, she learnt to fly while attending City, University of London. She was subsequently assigned to No. 32 Squadron RAF flying Hawker Siddeley Andovers, and following her promotion to Captain, Lockheed C-130 Hercules at RAF Lyneham.

She attended the City, University of London, where she graduated in 1983 with a Bachelor of Science degree in aeronautical engineering. While at University, she had learnt to fly and had joined the associated University Air Squadron.

Gibson joined the Royal Air Force College in 1984, and following her officer training, she was posted to RAF Honington in Suffolk. She was initially in charge of 75 engineers. In the following assignment, she commanded 160 men in the McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II tactical weapons unit. Alongside fellow female pilot Sally Cox, Gibson took her first solo flights in 1990 at RAF Linton-on-Ouse. She successfully applied for pilot training, going on to train in the Advanced Flying Training Wing. She graduated as the first female pilot in the RAF on 14 June 1991 at No. 6 Flying Training School RAF, within RAF Finningley. She was assigned to No. 32 Squadron RAF, where she flew Hawker Siddeley Andovers out of RAF Northolt. She was subsequently promoted to Flight Lieutenant, and assigned to fly Lockheed C-130 Hercules at RAF Lyneham.

Joanna Mary Salter (born 27 August 1968, in Bournemouth) was Britain's first female fast jet pilot flying the Panavia Tornado ground attack aircraft with 617 Squadron, she later became an inspirational speaker.

Salter joined the Royal Air Force at the age of 18 with the intention of becoming an engineering officer but she went on to train as a pilot after the British government announced that women would be allowed to fly jet aircraft in 1992. As part of her engineering training she had studied at the Royal Military College of Science. Salter was awarded her wings on 3 April 1992 and at the end of 1992 she finished her fast jet training at RAF Brawdy with Dawn Hadlow (nee Bradley), who became Britain's first RAF female flight instructor.

In August 1994 Salter joined 617 Squadron at RAF Lossiemouth in August 1994 as a flight lieutenant, and was declared "combat ready" by the RAF on 21 February 1995. Salter was the first woman to be an operational Tornado pilot and she later flew from both Turkey and Saudi Arabia in protection of the no-fly zone over Iraq. Whilst flying ground attack Tornados, Salter started an MBA course with the Open University in 1996, being sponsored by the MoD, she completed the course in 1999.

Monday, July 27, 2020

Budgets (Military)

2021 Why Does the US Spend So Much On Defense? - CoCa > .
24-11-10 Ranking USA's Most Important Military Bases - Aaron Watson > .
24-9-8 Ruscian War Economy 2024: sanctions, inflation, mounting risks - Perun > .
24-8-13 Economics of War - CNBC I > .
24-5-14 USA+NATO: MIC & Strategic Power vs XIR - OBF > . 
24-4-14 US Arms Production - Strategy to Restore Arsenal of Democracy? - Perun > .
24-1-20 Can Ruscia win the military production race? - Anders > .
23-12-5 Most Dangerous [XIR] Moment: America’s Role in the Pacific | Hoover > . 
23-10-28 Poland's military dream: A tank too far? - Geo Perspective > .
23-10-6 Poland orders US HIMARS & SK Chunmoo systems - Binkov > .
23-9-18 South Korean Factories Churning Out Armaments for NATO | WSJ > .
23-9-10 Industrial Competition & Consolidation, Military Procurement - Perun > .
23-9-5 Strategic Autonomy: Will Europe Ever Be Able to Defend Itself? | Waro > .
23-8-31 Poland: powerhouse in the making - Caspian > .
23-8-20 NATO's Rearmament & Spending - NATO's R-U Response - Perun > .
23-8-13 Game Theory Of Military Spending | EcEx > .
23-7-31 Ruscia Cannibalizing Its Economy - Still Not Enough - gtbt > . skip > .
23-7-28 Why America Needs a Space Force - McBeth > .
23-7-25 Can Germany Really Become Europe's Great Military Power? - Waro > .
23-7-18 Futureproofing for changing threats; Defence Command Paper - Forces > .
23-7-9 How Wars End - Negotiations, Coercion, War Termination Theory - Perun > .
23-6-18 Procurement vs Efficacy - Requirements, R&D pitfalls - Perun > .
23-3-19 Britain's Shrinking Military - Cold War to Cash-Strapped Shadow - mfp > .
23-2-20 Military spending: UK may offer some insights - CNBC > .
23-1-26 Germany's military in dire state. Fix? | DW > .
23-1-22 Politics Can Destroy Armies: Factionalism & R-U War - Perun > .
23-1-13 No more doubts for the West | Ukraine weaponized (subs) - Katz > .
23-1-8 War Economies - Russia and Ukraine won't collapse tomorrow - Perun > .
22-11-27 Polish military modernisation & buying Korean kit - Perun > .
22-10-5 US Military’s Massive Global Transportation System - Wendover > .
22-9-4 6 Months of Ukraine War - Economics, Endurance, Energy War - Perun > .
22-8-6 How Many BCTs can the US Army Form for a Large Scale War? - CoCa > .
22-7-22 Poland could become strongest land force in the EU - Binkov > .
22-7-21 How the economy of Russia is dying (English subtitles) - Максим Кац > .
22-12-29 German Rearmament: Is it going wrong? - mah > .
22-6-29 2022 adjusted MoD's Military Budget - UK > .
22-6-23 Germany's $100 Billion Military Upgrade - CaspianReport > .
22-6-19 Economics of war - Russia vs Ukraine - sanctions, shelling - Perun > .
22-5-11 Lend Lease 2.0 - Ukraine's 'Arsenal of Democracy?' - Perun > .
22-4-14 Lithuanian Army Ready For War? Task & Purpose > .
22-3-31 Germany: Where did the 100 billion go? - mah > .
22-3-30 How will Germany spend its massive €100 billion military budget? | DW > .
22-3-24 Ukraine's War Economy - Into Europe > .
22-3-14 How the Ukraine invasion drives military spending worldwide | DW > .
2022 Defense Budgets by Country 2022 - Military Spending - Mega 3D > .
21-12-25 Economics of War - Learn Economics > .
2022 Fort Bragg: Largest Military Base in the World - Megaprojects > . skip ad > .
24-4-14 US Arms Production - Strategy to Restore Arsenal of Democracy? - Perun > .
exercitus pecūnia - pro libertate >> .


Geostrategic Projection

On 22-3-1 Germany announced €100 billion for the Armed Forces and an increase to +2% GDP on military spending one month ago.

00:00 - Intro (22-3-31)
00:45 - Topics of this video
01:33 - German F-35
05:37 - Defense planning announcement
07:09 - Germany's shopping list
11:36 - €100bn: Setup
13:49 - €100bn: Analysis
20:01 - Outro


The DoD is prioritizing China as the top pacing priority, as it remains the only U.S. competitor able to combine its economic, diplomatic, military, and technologic power to mount a sustained challenge to the international system. The rapid development and operational focus of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) constitutes a significant and long-term security threat to the United States and to our allies and partners. This threat is a consequence of nearly two decades of intense effort by China to modernize and reform the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and other forces into an increasingly capable joint force able to conduct the full range of military operations across every warfighting domain.

In addition to a significant buildup and modernization of its strategic forces, the PLA is advancing its capabilities and concepts for conducting information, cyber, space, and counterspace operations. China is also mobilizing vast resources to become a global leader in emerging technologies and is leveraging those advances in support of its military modernization.

China has made clear that it expects the PLA to be a global military actor capable of securing China’s growing overseas interests and advancing other PRC objectives abroad. These changes are accompanied by aggressive and at times coercive activities that seek to expand the PRC’s military influence by forging closer ties with foreign militaries, developing overseas military bases, and expanding the PLA’s presence worldwide.

China’s robust military modernization activities have, in recent decades, sought to erode the ability of U.S. forces to project power in the region, and China has continued to accelerate the development of capabilities specifically designed to counter key U.S. strategic and operational advantages. The continued erosion of U.S. military advantages relative to China remains the most significant risk to U.S. security interests. If left unimpeded, this continued erosion could fundamentally challenge our ability to achieve U.S. defense objectives and to defend the sovereignty of our allies, the consequence of which would be to limit DoD’s ability to underpin other U.S. instruments of power.


Why military aid to Ukraine has a positive effect on Western economies: In the short term, the increase in military spending due to the war in Ukraine has a stimulating effect on the GDP of the Western allies’ countries. This was reported by Ukrainian media, quoting the National Bank of Ukraine’s Inflation Report (July 2023). Various factors have been mentioned in the report.

According to the report, one US dollar spent by donor governments on military needs generates $0.79-0.87 of GDP in these countries within one to two years, and the overall positive effect does not disappear even after five years. 

There are several additional positive effects for nations providing military aid to Ukraine, such as the possibility of sharing military experience, more efficient allocation of defence resources, a boost for arms exporters, and increased productivity due to additional investment in research and development.


Sunday, July 26, 2020

CCS - Combined Chiefs of Staff

Friendship Between Britain & USA | Warlords: Churchill vs Roosevelt - Time > .

Following the German declaration of war on America on the 11th of December 1941, Britain gained an invaluable ally. Securing a joint military command between the new partnership was central to its success.

42-1-1 Arcadia Conference & Declaration of the United Nations ..

The Combined Chiefs of Staff (CCS) was the supreme military staff for the United States and Britain during World War II. It set all the major policy decisions for the two nations, subject to the approvals of British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

The CCS emerged from the meetings of the Arcadia Conference in Washington, from December 22, 1941 to January 14, 1942. Shortly after Pearl Harbor, Prime Minister Churchill and his senior military staff used Arcadia as an opportunity to lay out the general strategy for the war. The American Army Chief of Staff George Marshall came up with the idea of a combined board, and sold it to Roosevelt and together the two sold the idea to Churchill. Churchill's military aides were much less favorable, and General Alan Brooke, the chief of the British Army, was strongly opposed. However, Brooke was left behind in London to handle the daily details of running the British war effort, and was not consulted. As part of Marshall's plan, Roosevelt also set up a Joint Chiefs of Staff on the American side. The combined board was permanently stationed in Washington, where Field Marshal John Dill represented the British half.

The responsibilities of the Combined Chiefs of Staff were set out as follows: Under the direction of the heads of the United Nations, the Combined Chiefs of Staff will collaborate in the formulation and execution of policies and plans concerning:
(a) the strategic conduct of the war;
(b) the broad programme of war requirements based on approved strategic policy;
(c) the direction of munition resources based on strategic needs and the availability of means of transportation; and
(d) the requirements for overseas transportation for the fighting services of the United Nations, based on approved strategic priority.

In the report of the Arcadia Conference, it is noted, to avoid confusion, that the word 'Combined' applied to the Combined Staffs of, or combined action by two or more of the united nations, whilst the word 'Joint' signified inter- service planning by one of the 'united nations.'

The CCS was constituted from the British Chiefs of Staff Committee and the American Joint Chiefs of Staff, The American unit was created in part to present a common front to the British Chiefs of Staff. It held its first formal meeting on 9 February 1942 to coordinate U.S. military operations between War and Navy Departments.

The CCS charter was approved by President Roosevelt 21 April 1942. The American members of the CCS were General George C. Marshall, the United States Army chief of staff, the Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Harold R. Stark (replaced early in 1942 by Admiral Ernest J. King); and the Chief (later Commanding General) of the Army Air Forces, Lt. Gen. Henry H. Arnold. In July 1942 a fourth member was added, the President's personal Chief of Staff, Admiral William D. Leahy.

On the British side the Chiefs of Staff only normally attended during the heads of states' conferences. Instead the British Joint Staff Mission was permanently situated in Washington, D.C. to represent British interests. The British members were a representative of the Prime Minister, in his capacity as Minister of Defence, and the Chiefs of Staff Committee, which consisted of the First Sea Lord, the Chief of the Imperial General Staff, and the Chief of the Air Staff, or the Washington representative of each. The representative of the Prime Minister was Field Marshal Sir John Dill and after his death Field Marshal Sir Henry Maitland Wilson. The Washington representatives of the Chiefs of Staff Committee, who normally met with the United States members in place of their principals, were the senior officers from their respective services on the British Joint Staff Mission in Washington. In the course of the war, the First Sea Lord was represented by Admiral Sir Charles Little, Admiral Sir Andrew Cunningham, Admiral Sir Percy Noble, and Admiral Sir James Somerville; the Chief of the Imperial General Staff was represented by Lt. Gen. Sir Colville Wemyss and Lt. Gen. G. N. Macready; and the Chief of the Air Staff was represented by Air Marshal D. C. S. Evill, Air Marshal Sir William L. Welsh, and Air Marshal Douglas Colyer. Dill, a close friend of Marshall, often took the American position and prevented a polarizations that would undermine effectiveness.

The Combined Chiefs of Staff organization included the Combined Secretariat and a supporting organisation of combined committees and sub-committees to deal with specific subjects. Of these, the Combined Planning Staff were the body of officers appointed by the Combined Chiefs of Staff to make studies, draft plans, and perform such other work as placed on the Combined Chiefs of Staff agenda and delegated to them by the Combined Planning Staff. Officers attached to the British Joint Staff Mission provided the British element in the secretariat for these combined committees. Their authority did not extend to operations controlled directly by the Admiralty and the US Navy Department.


In the Northern hemisphere spring of 1942, Britain and the United States agreed on a worldwide division of strategic responsibility. On 24 March 1942, the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff were designated as primarily responsible for the war in the Pacific, and the British Chiefs for the Middle East-Indian Ocean region, while the European-Mediterranean-Atlantic area would be a combined responsibility of both staffs. China was designated a separate theater commanded by its chief of state, Chiang Kai-shek, though within the United States' sphere of responsibility. Six days later the Joint Chiefs of Staff divided the Pacific theater into three areas: the Pacific Ocean Areas (POA), the South West Pacific Area (SWPA), and the Southeast Pacific Area. The Pacific Ocean Area command formally became operational on 8 May.

The CCS usually held its meetings in Washington. The full CCS usually met only during the great wartime conferences on grand strategy, such as at Casablanca (see List of WW2 conferences). The British Chiefs of Staff took their place on the Combined Chiefs of Staff Committee at the international conferences (at which Roosevelt and Churchill settled the main lines of allied strategy). For the conferences at Tehran (December 1943), Yalta (February 1945) and Potsdam (July-August 1945), the British and Americans were joined by the Russian Chiefs of Staff. The meetings of heads of government at those conferences were designed to reach formal agreement on issues thoroughly staffed by the CCS. At the Casablanca Conference in January 1943, General Frank Maxwell Andrews was appointed commander of all United States forces in the European Theater of Operations.

Although it was responsible to both the British and American governments, the CCS controlled forces from many different countries in all theaters, including the Pacific, India and North Africa. The existence of the Combined Chiefs of Staff enabled forces to be effectively placed under a commander of a different nationality without breaking the chain of responsibility to their home government, as commanders were responsible to the Combined Chiefs who respectively continued to remain responsible to their own governments. This responsibility was both advisory (in terms of the settlement between governments of the overall strategy) and executive (in terms of formulating and issuing directives to implement that strategy). Representatives of allied nations were not members of the CCS but accepted procedure included consultation with "Military Representatives of Associated Powers" on strategic issues. Much cooperation continued between the British and American militaries after the war including the Combined Chiefs of Staff structure, and it was used again during the Berlin Blockade of 1948 even as negotiations began that resulted in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

sī vīs pācem, parā bellum

igitur quī dēsīderat pācem praeparet bellum    therefore, he who desires peace, let him prepare for war sī vīs pācem, parā bellum if you wan...