The Front Page Cover
2016 The turth is the gold of today
Featuring:
'We don't have the gear':
How the Pentagon is struggling
with electronic warfare
Thomas Gibbons-Neff
.
~~~
.
Former nObama Defense Intel Chief Says
Hilly Should ‘Step Down’
RICHARD POLLOCK .
.
Hilly Clinton Is Now Tied To At Least
Four Investigations By Federal Agencies
Chuck Ross.
.
'Top secret' Clinton emails
shared by dozens of people
SARAH WESTWOOD.
.
Ferguson Won’t Submit – So Lynch’s Federal Boots Stomping Down Hard
Rick Wells.
{constitutionrising.com} ~ Everything that has gone on in Ferguson has been a deliberate, orchestrated effort to federalize the police, to eliminate their independence through strong armed “consent” and to send a message to other police departments around the country... that the same thing can and will happen to them if they don’t submit to federalization. This is the creation of the nObama “civilian national security force” that he called for in July of 2008. nObama and Eric Holder selected the target of Ferguson and created the racism wedge, and now it is their handpicked henchman, Loretta Lynch, who is following through with the browbeating and DOJ “civil rights” hammer. Last March Holder unveiled a plan which utilized six cities as test locations, called “pilot cities,” for federalization. More will be coming and for those who resist, the model of Ferguson is intended to prove that resistance is futile. http://constitutionrising.com/archives/25941
.
BDS Undermines the Very
Values of American Universities
Alexandra Markus.
.
One-pager | Jabhat al Nusra and ISIS:
Sources of strength
Katherine Zimmerman.
{aei.org} ~ American strategy toward ISIS has misidentified the group’s center of gravity and is inadvertently strengthening Syrian al Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al Nusra... The US approach presumes that regaining Mosul in Iraq and ar Raqqa in Syria will cause ISIS to collapse, and it is not operating against Jabhat al Nusra in any meaningful way. It underestimates the resilience of both groups and the need to pressure both simultaneously to prevent Jabhat al Nusra from benefiting from ISIS losses. AEI’s Critical Threats Project and the Institute for the Study of War engaged in a planning effort to develop and evaluate possible courses of action that the United States could pursue to defeat the threat from ISIS and al Qaeda in Iraq and Syria. The findings are part of a series of reports; the third report, “Jabhat al Nusra and ISIS: Sources of Strength,” assesses the capabilities of global Salafi-jihadi groups operating in Syria and Iraq and serves as a basis for developing a strategy to defeat them..
Guess Where Iran's Uranium is
Stored-go Ahead Take a Guess
Jeff Dunetz
.
.
The Myth of slump-Trump the Winner
(How He Treats Those He's Hurt)
Jeff Dunetz
.
.
Donald slump-Trump the Candidate:
Fact-Checking Supporter
and Media Misinformation
JODI GIDDINGS
.
.
Tantaros erupts over Iran’s
mockery of US soldiers
Frieda Powers
.
Andrea Tantaros
.
{bizpacreview.com} ~ Fox News’ Andrea Tantaros is apparently asking the question no one else in the media will. When discussing why Iran continues to mock the U.S. with behavior that seems aimed at provoking a response... Tantaros asked why American sailors so readily gave up their weapons and surrendered to Iranians last month. “We were not outgunned. They left their weapons and they surrendered on their knees,” she said. “Somebody had to give a stand-down order. This is the question everyone in the media should be asking and no one’s asking it. Who gave the order to abandon their weapons?” Members of the military, Tantaros noted, have said “someone in authority” would have to have given an order to surrender. However, she questioned whether there was a motive to use the incident for propaganda by the Iranians. http://www.bizpacreview.com/2016/02/12/tantaros-erupts-over-irans-mockery-of-us-soldiers-this-is-the-question-no-ones-asking-305038
.
.
'We don't have the gear':
How the Pentagon is struggling
with electronic warfare
Thomas Gibbons-Neff
.
.
This realm of fighting is called electronic warfare, and since the 9/11 attacks it's been relegated to a lower priority than fighting insurgent groups with precision guided munitions and drones. Now, defense officials say they're worried that the U.S. military's ability to counter and wage electronic warfare has atrophied and is lagging behind countries such as Russia and China.
This realm of fighting is called electronic warfare, and since the 9/11 attacks it's been relegated to a lower priority than fighting insurgent groups with precision guided munitions and drones. Now, defense officials say they're worried that the U.S. military's ability to counter and wage electronic warfare has atrophied and is lagging behind countries such as Russia and China.
.
"We don't have the gear," Col. Jeffrey Church, the head of the Army's electronic warfare division, said in a recent interview. "We're working on getting it, but we're talking years down the road, when our adversaries are doing this right now."
"We don't have the gear," Col. Jeffrey Church, the head of the Army's electronic warfare division, said in a recent interview. "We're working on getting it, but we're talking years down the road, when our adversaries are doing this right now."
.
One place where the United States' adversaries have displayed their proficiency in electronic warfare is in east Ukraine, where the Pentagon has watched Russian forces there with a wary eye, gleaning what they can from the country's reinvigorated military.
One place where the United States' adversaries have displayed their proficiency in electronic warfare is in east Ukraine, where the Pentagon has watched Russian forces there with a wary eye, gleaning what they can from the country's reinvigorated military.
.
"The Russians have worked hard in recent years" in electronic warfare, Gen. Ben Hodges, the commanding general for the Army's forces in Europe, said during a recent interview. "What they've done in east Ukraine and in Crimea has allowed us to study the challenge."
"The Russians have worked hard in recent years" in electronic warfare, Gen. Ben Hodges, the commanding general for the Army's forces in Europe, said during a recent interview. "What they've done in east Ukraine and in Crimea has allowed us to study the challenge."
.
One Ukrainian special-forces colonel fighting outside of the war-torn city of Donetsk said his men were targeted by an artillery strike after Russian-backed forces located his troops solely by his radio transmissions. The colonel, who for security reasons would identify himself only by his first name, Andrei, said in a recent interview that the radio they had was an American-brand Harris radio.
One Ukrainian special-forces colonel fighting outside of the war-torn city of Donetsk said his men were targeted by an artillery strike after Russian-backed forces located his troops solely by his radio transmissions. The colonel, who for security reasons would identify himself only by his first name, Andrei, said in a recent interview that the radio they had was an American-brand Harris radio.
.
The radio was capable of encrypted communication, but since its output was so much more powerful than the smaller handheld radios the regular Ukrainian troops often carry, the Russian-backed separatists were able to locate the American radio and attack its broadcast site with artillery.
The radio was capable of encrypted communication, but since its output was so much more powerful than the smaller handheld radios the regular Ukrainian troops often carry, the Russian-backed separatists were able to locate the American radio and attack its broadcast site with artillery.
.
The U.S. Army has a potential tool that would counter the Russians' techniques, according to Church. Called the Integrated Electronic Warfare system, the three-piece program is meant to be a sort of one-stop shop for the Army's electronic warfare division. The system is essentially a collection of software, sensors and devices that can be mounted to ground vehicles and drones and carried in troops' rucksacks and will be able to jam, detect and identify enemy interference. The catch? It isn't completely funded and has no set year when it will be completely ready, though one component of the system is slotted to be fielded by the end of 2016, with another due in 2023.
The U.S. Army has a potential tool that would counter the Russians' techniques, according to Church. Called the Integrated Electronic Warfare system, the three-piece program is meant to be a sort of one-stop shop for the Army's electronic warfare division. The system is essentially a collection of software, sensors and devices that can be mounted to ground vehicles and drones and carried in troops' rucksacks and will be able to jam, detect and identify enemy interference. The catch? It isn't completely funded and has no set year when it will be completely ready, though one component of the system is slotted to be fielded by the end of 2016, with another due in 2023.
.
"We've been talking about this since 2005," Church said, referring to one component of the Integrated Electronic Warfare system that was supposed to be ready in 2009 but won't be in the field until later this year. "There's these guys that have been looking at really neat pictures of really neat capabilities for years and we still don't have it."
"We've been talking about this since 2005," Church said, referring to one component of the Integrated Electronic Warfare system that was supposed to be ready in 2009 but won't be in the field until later this year. "There's these guys that have been looking at really neat pictures of really neat capabilities for years and we still don't have it."
.
During the Cold War, with the Soviet Union as the United States' biggest threat, Army units trained knowing that their enemy would attack them with some element of electronic warfare. But once the Cold War ended, the Army shuttered its units that focused solely on electronic combat.
During the Cold War, with the Soviet Union as the United States' biggest threat, Army units trained knowing that their enemy would attack them with some element of electronic warfare. But once the Cold War ended, the Army shuttered its units that focused solely on electronic combat.
.
The Army and Marine Corps renewed their interest in the area around 2005, when they needed something to combat remote-controlled roadside bombs, which were killing and wounding troops by the dozens. Even then, however, U.S. forces had almost no concern about adversaries jamming their navigation equipment or radios and focused solely on countering the threat at hand.
The Army and Marine Corps renewed their interest in the area around 2005, when they needed something to combat remote-controlled roadside bombs, which were killing and wounding troops by the dozens. Even then, however, U.S. forces had almost no concern about adversaries jamming their navigation equipment or radios and focused solely on countering the threat at hand.
.
Now, Church is fighting for funding and the prioritization of the Army's electronic warfare in the Pentagon's upcoming budget. To do this, he has to lobby the Pentagon's new electronic warfare committee.
Now, Church is fighting for funding and the prioritization of the Army's electronic warfare in the Pentagon's upcoming budget. To do this, he has to lobby the Pentagon's new electronic warfare committee.
.
"What I haven't been able to just drive home is something I can't demonstrate," Church said. "We can see an artillery round explode. . . . We can see the effect that those combat arms guys have. . . . I can't see any of that in the electromagnetic spectrum."
"What I haven't been able to just drive home is something I can't demonstrate," Church said. "We can see an artillery round explode. . . . We can see the effect that those combat arms guys have. . . . I can't see any of that in the electromagnetic spectrum."
.
"It's hard to prove this stuff works," he added.
"It's hard to prove this stuff works," he added.
.
Church says the Pentagon brass has acknowledged to him that ideally there would be 3,200 electronic-warfare soldiers spread throughout the Army. Instead, he has 800.
Church says the Pentagon brass has acknowledged to him that ideally there would be 3,200 electronic-warfare soldiers spread throughout the Army. Instead, he has 800.
.
"The joke in the field is that EW electronic warfare stands for extra workers," Church said. "Because they have no gear, we have hardly any equipment to do our job."
"The joke in the field is that EW electronic warfare stands for extra workers," Church said. "Because they have no gear, we have hardly any equipment to do our job."
.
In the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps, conventional electronic warfare has been mostly relegated to certain aircraft with the purpose of jamming and defeating enemy air defenses and radar along with gathering signals intelligence. The Navy has the EA-18G Growler, while the Marines last year retired their aging EA-6B Prowler, a jet specifically designed for electronic warfare. With the Prowler gone, the Marines, in the past two years, have been using a system of pods that can be mounted to various aircraft and will soon be able to be attached to ground vehicles and carried by individual Marines - the same capability the Army is seeking.
In the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps, conventional electronic warfare has been mostly relegated to certain aircraft with the purpose of jamming and defeating enemy air defenses and radar along with gathering signals intelligence. The Navy has the EA-18G Growler, while the Marines last year retired their aging EA-6B Prowler, a jet specifically designed for electronic warfare. With the Prowler gone, the Marines, in the past two years, have been using a system of pods that can be mounted to various aircraft and will soon be able to be attached to ground vehicles and carried by individual Marines - the same capability the Army is seeking.
.
"This is significant for the Marine Corps, and we've moved out in front of everyone else," said Col. Gregory Breazile, director of the Marines' Cyber and Electronic Warfare Integration Division.
"This is significant for the Marine Corps, and we've moved out in front of everyone else," said Col. Gregory Breazile, director of the Marines' Cyber and Electronic Warfare Integration Division.
.
Yet, despite various advancements by certain branches, the U.S. military is at a critical point in determining which priorities to fund and how it will wage its future wars.
Yet, despite various advancements by certain branches, the U.S. military is at a critical point in determining which priorities to fund and how it will wage its future wars.
.
"The battle of the electromagnetic spectrum could very well determine a win or loss in a future war," said Peter Singer, a Senior Fellow and Strategist at New America who focuses on future conflicts. "The worry for the United States in electronic warfare is that we're seeing nations like Russia and China invest deeply in the hope that it will nullify our advantages in other realms."
"The battle of the electromagnetic spectrum could very well determine a win or loss in a future war," said Peter Singer, a Senior Fellow and Strategist at New America who focuses on future conflicts. "The worry for the United States in electronic warfare is that we're seeing nations like Russia and China invest deeply in the hope that it will nullify our advantages in other realms."
.
With the rollout of the 2017 defense budget Tuesday, it is unclear how many resources will be devoted to electronic warfare, though Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter stressed its importance in an address to the Economic Club in Washington during an early preview of the upcoming request last week.
With the rollout of the 2017 defense budget Tuesday, it is unclear how many resources will be devoted to electronic warfare, though Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter stressed its importance in an address to the Economic Club in Washington during an early preview of the upcoming request last week.
.
Two days later, Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., introduced a bill that would allow the Pentagon to fund electronic warfare programs more quickly, in hopes of keeping pace with advancing technology and the United States' adversaries.
Two days later, Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., introduced a bill that would allow the Pentagon to fund electronic warfare programs more quickly, in hopes of keeping pace with advancing technology and the United States' adversaries.
.
"It is critical our military dominate the offensive and defensive ends of electronic warfare," Kirk, a former naval intelligence officer, said in a statement. "The need for enhanced electronic capabilities is even more pronounced on today's battlefield."
"It is critical our military dominate the offensive and defensive ends of electronic warfare," Kirk, a former naval intelligence officer, said in a statement. "The need for enhanced electronic capabilities is even more pronounced on today's battlefield."
.
Comments