Liquid Death

American army and marine commanders are desperate to reduce fuel consumption. They point out that during World War II, the first war in which American forces were mechanized, each soldier required 4-5 liters (one gallon) of fuel per day. But by 2003, and the invasion of Iraq, fuel consumption was twenty times higher. By 2003, it was accepted that that turning a modern mechanized division loose meant supplying those troops at the rate of 80-120 liters (20-30 gallons) of fuel per man per day. As the 3rd Infantry Division moved from Kuwait to Baghdad in 2003, some 20,000 troops were involved. That required some 200 tanker loads of fuel per day. Initially, the vehicles in the division carry enough fuel to go 200-300 kilometers on internal fuel. But you don't want your vehicles to run until their tanks are dry, so at least once a day, you try to top everyone off. The route of the 3rd Infantry Division covered about 700 kilometers of road. In addition to fuel, you need about a 45-90 kg (100-200 pounds) of other supplies per man per day (mostly ammo, but also batteries, food and the like.) Once inside Baghdad, and no longer moving all the time, the fuel requirement came way down. But on the march, the advancing combat brigades were tethered by convoys of fuel trucks going back and forth to the supply bases in Kuwait. But once the U.S. began building bases for the combat brigades, it was found that the use of generators, especially for air conditioning, kept fuel requirements high (over 80 liters per man per day), which is why most of the supply trucks are still carrying fuel.

 

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htlog/articles/20111026.aspx

General: No Cutting to Guard End Strength

The Army is going to cut brigade combat teams as part of a plan to shrink the force by 50,000 soldiers, but one of the engineers behind the process says the Guard is not a target.

The Air National Guard may not be so lucky, however.

Maj. Gen. Anthony Ierardi, head of Force Management, Headquarters Army, told Defense News that the reserve component is too valuable to cut as the Army attempts to fall from 570,000 to 520,000 troops.

"There are not reductions in the end strength of the National Guard or Reserve at this point of the analysis," Ierardi told the publication in a story Monday.

"I would say that generally speaking, as the active component comes down, our reliance on the reserve component will be equal if not more important than it has been," he said.

No decision has been made regarding the cutting of the Army's 73 brigade combat teams, but the publication says analysts expect 10 to 15 to disappear.

Ierardi said the Army is looking at whether to cut Stryker, heavy or infantry brigade combat teams.

Meanwhile, word is spreading that the Air Force is considering retirement of a substantial number of Air Guard aircraft. During a recent hearing by the House Armed Services Committee's tactical air land subcommittee, Rep. Mark Critz, D-Pa., said he had "just learned" that the Air Force may retire all Guard C-5As, three F-16 wings and some C-130s and A-10s.

Lt. Gen. Harry "Bud" Wyatt III, the Air Guard director, told the congressman that it was too soon to make any conclusions, but added that if those aircraft are removed, "you would have the air being taken out of the Air National Guard."

What Evil Lurks In The Wagadou Forest

For the last four months, troops from Mauritania and Mali have been seeking out and killing al Qaeda members hiding in the Wagadou Forest (actually a thousand hectares/2,500 acres of brush and trees in a semi-desert area), which lies astride the border. Al Qaeda have apparently been there since early last year. The Wagadou Forest has become a way station for cocaine and hashish al Qaeda escorts from Guinea-Bissau to the Mediterranean coast. This is how al Qaeda finances itself in West Africa these days.

Two years ago Al Qaeda has proclaimed the formation of a new chapter south of Algeria, among tribal rebels and disaffected urbanites in Niger, Mali, Chad and Mauritania. This was more PR than reality. There are some Islamic terrorists in the region, and these pronouncements appear to be an attempt to unify pro-Islamic terrorist elements via the Internet and the mass media. So far, the many disaffected groups in the region have shown little interest in uniting. Too many different objectives and al Qaeda has a reputation for being a loser.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htterr/articles/20111024.aspx

Unfit For Duty

The U.S. Army has been ordered to reduce its strength over seven percent. This is bad news for a lot of good soldiers who have been diagnosed with physical or mental stress problems. That's because there's a growing shortage of troops fit for combat zone duty. Currently, 15 percent of the troops cannot be sent overseas because they have medical problems that render them incapable of handling the stress of a combat zone. Until last year, this was much less of a problem, because the army could keep people in service up to twelve more months. This "stop loss" rule enabled units to go overseas with all the troops it needed to get the job done. But now, with stop loss gone and a growing number of combat troops unfit for deployment, the army is having a hard time manning combat units fit for overseas duty. One solution will probably be to medically retire many of those unfit to deploy, and recruit new troops who are more fit. The reduction in strength makes this easier to do.

New recruits present another problem. Bad diet and lack of exercise has become a major problem with American children over the last two decades. Thus the army is getting recruits who are chubbier and less fit (low bone density and iron levels) than ever before. This results in more injuries during training, and while in combat. These troops are more prone to suffer physical injuries that will make them unfit for overseas service.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htatrit/articles/20111024.aspx

Syrian Security Forces Coming Apart

Nearly 20,000 soldiers have deserted in the last seven months, most of them in the last month. The number of deserters grows daily. The recent death of Libyan dictator Kaddafi did not help morale for the government, or its troops. The government is working its small force of loyal troops hard, and that raises growing concerns about the continued loyalty of the army. With at least half the Syrian 400,000 security forces (police and army) of uncertain reliability, the government is using the 100,000 or so reliable killers (mainly Republican Guard and secret police, plus Hezbollah gunmen from Lebanon and terror groups living in Syria) to terrorize (and, increasingly, slaughter) those civilians who continue to oppose the government. This is a risky strategy, because as more of the less reliable troops and police shoot back, it's a sign that the end of the dictatorship is looming. But the government hard-liners, led by the president's brother (Maher Assad), have won the argument over how to handle the unrest. There's no going back from this, even though Iran is no longer backing the hardline approach. The Assad clan apparently is ready for a fight to the death, but so are the Syrian people. The Assads know they can rely on the army officers and most of the intelligence agencies and secret police. These men are tainted by their association with the government, and are usually non-Sunni. So if the reformers win, and the Assads fall, all these guys are out of a job, or worse. The Assads are taking good care of these men, and assuring them that the government has the resources, and determination, to see this crisis through to a successful conclusion. But so are the reformers, who vastly outnumber the better armed minority supporting the Assads.

http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/pothot/articles/20111024.aspx

Did You Know Feds Will Temporarily Cut Off All TV and Radio Broadcasts on Nov. 9?

If you have ever wondered about the government's ability to control the civilian airwaves, you will have your answer on November 9th.

On that day, federal authorities are going to shut off all television and radio communications simultaneously at 2:00PM EST to complete the first ever test of the national Emergency Alert System (EAS).

This isn't a wild conspiracy theory. The upcoming test is posted on the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau website.

Only the President has the authority to activate EAS at the national level, and he has delegated that authority to the Director of FEMA.  The test will be conducted jointly by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) through  FEMA, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) National Weather Service (NWS).

In essence, the authority to seize control of all television and civilian communication has been asserted by the executive branch and handed to a government agency.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/did-you-know-feds-will-temporarily-cut-off-all-tv-and-radio-broadcasts-on-nov-9/comment-page-2/?corder=desc#comments

Behind The Iron Mask In China

Western analysts have two, quite different, opinions of Chinese military power. The more popular analysis is that most Chinese military developments of late have displayed a keen ability to design and build very modern weapons. This makes for scary (and profitable) headlines. Politicians and military leaders love it, because it provides a foreign threat. With that scary monster, the voters can be persuaded to pay for more weapons and troops. That means more jobs for the military and weapons manufacturers, and more ways to attract votes to reelect politicians.

Then there's the other view, usually obtained over drinks with Chinese, Japanese, South Korean or Taiwanese businessmen. All of these guys have experience with Chinese industry, and often some direct knowledge of military industries. All tell the same story. Chinese military procurement is as corrupt as they come, and the wonder weapons are much more impressive on paper than they are in reality. Western military people, especially those in the navy (who see their Chinese counterparts up close), or military intelligence (who collect all sorts of inside information on the Chinese armed forces) also tell the same story. The bottom line is that the Chinese military is much less than it appears to be, and it's been that way for a long time.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htmurph/articles/20111023.aspx

Monster Prediction From BofA: Another US Debt Downgrade Is Coming In Just A Few Weeks

We expect a moderate slowdown in the beginning of next year, as two small policy shocks—another debt downgrade and fiscal tightening—hit the economy. The "not-so-super" Deficit Commission is very unlikely to come up with a credible deficit-reduction plan. The committee is more divided than the overall Congress. Since the fall-back plan is sharp cuts in discretionary spending, the whole point of the Committee is to put taxes and entitlements on the table. However, all the Republican members have signed the Norquist "no taxes" pledge and with taxes off the table it is hard to imagine the liberal Democrats on the Committee agreeing to significant entitlement cuts. The credit rating agencies have strongly suggested that further rating cuts are likely if Congress does not come up with a credible long-run plan. Hence, we expect at least one credit downgrade in late November or early December when the super Committee crashes.

http://www.businessinsider.com/huge-prediction-from-bofa-another-us-debt-downgrade-is-coming-in-just-a-few-weeks-2011-10

Deal With The Devil

While Palestinians proclaimed this lop-sided swap as a great victory, it's actually another sign of continued Palestinian decline. Since 1985, or 1948 (when Israel was created), Palestinians in particular, and Arabs in general, have continually failed to deal with their inability to cope. Israelis, in contrast, have coped very well, and this only angers the Palestinians and Arabs in general, even more. Most Israelis believe that no Israeli should be abandoned to the enemy. The Arabs, in contrast, have sold out the Palestinians several times, and the corruption and double-dealing among the Palestinians is a growing source of unrest within the Palestinian community. It was this attitude that sparked the "Arab Spring" uprisings this year. But there was not much Arab Spring unrest among the Palestinians. There was some talk of eliminating corruption, but the fixation on the destruction of Israel remained center-stage.

http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/israel/articles/20111019.aspx

The Heavy Cost Of The Arab Spring

The "Arab Spring" uprisings this year led to the fall of several long time dictatorships, and a rush to reform (or give the appearance of such) by most other Arab governments. But this was not without cost, and it isn't over (especially in Syria, Yemen, Bahrain and Algeria). Over 25,000 have died so far, and many more were wounded, imprisoned or driven from their homes. The financial cost, so far, has been over $100 billion. About half of that is the destruction of buildings and possessions, or lost GDP. These lost wages have been particularly difficult for populations that were poor to begin with. The rest of the cost was money wealthier monarchies and dictatorship that have spent money (sometimes borrowed) to placate their restless populations.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htatrit/articles/20111020.aspx

Why Islamic Radicals Love Facebook

As smart phones, or cell phones that provide some access to the Internet, appear in less affluent nations, more people are using Twitter, blogs, FaceBook and other social media. This has proved a big boost for Islamic radicals and terrorists. This is because Islamic radicals preach a doctrine of violent defense of Islam, and the belief that infidels (non-Moslems) are actively waging war against Islam. This seems odd to Westerners, because most of the terrorist attacks, and religious based violence has been coming from Islamic radicals. No matter, the belief that "Islam is under attack" is widely accepted in the Islamic world. Because of that, any rumor that a specific attack has been made on Moslems is readily believed. Thus Twitter is the ideal tool for quickly organizing an attack on non-Moslems (or Moslems of some minority sect that is considered heretical). Such attacks often result in the victims fighting back, and this provides all the justification the Islamic radicals need for the initial attack. Yeah, that sounds ridiculous to Western ears, but it works all the time in Moslem countries with non-Moslem minorities. All this Twitter inspired violence helps the Islamic radicals recruit more Islamic terrorists.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htmurph/articles/20111021.aspx

We Are Serious This Time, Really We Are

American leaders are dismayed as they keep encountering Pakistani politicians and military officials who believe all their troubles are caused by Indian, American and Israeli conspiracies. Pakistan is full of this stuff, and those who believe it are not eager to consider alternatives. While the Pakistani fears are largely based on fiction, the growing number of Indians killed by Pakistani sponsored (and based) terrorism is very real. There are Pakistanis who understand the reality of all this and some of them are diplomats. But as long as most Pakistani leaders, and most of the Pakistani media, embrace the conspiracy theories, real peace is not likely. But at least the diplomats from each nation can discuss possibilities.

The U.S. constantly points to the continuing presence of Islamic terror groups in Pakistani sanctuaries. That is difficult for the Pakistanis to deny. The major danger here is that if a big attack is made in the United States, and tracked back to a Pakistani sanctuary, this could trigger a public call for war with Pakistan. Even many senior Pakistanis recognize this danger and try to control the terrorists they host. This precarious situation won't go away as long as the terrorist sanctuaries (mainly North Waziristan and Quetta) are openly protected by Pakistani leaders. But without admitting anything to the Americans, Pakistan has apparently ordered some Haqqani personnel and bases out of North Waziristan. This might just be Haqqani fleeing an area that American intelligence knew too well, and that might have been under the advice of Pakistani intelligence. The movement of Haqqani personnel, to Afghanistan or elsewhere in the tribal territories, is making life difficult for the many foreign terrorists who find sanctuary (and work) with Haqqani. The desire to impose greater security on the new Haqqani bases means foreign recruits will take a lot longer to be led in.

http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/india/articles/20111021.aspx

Prosperity Returns To Southern Afghanistan

Afghan poppy farmers are getting over 40 percent more money this year, for the opium they produce (by scraping the latex from the poppy seed pods). All this is the result of a poppy plant disease that swept across Afghanistan last year and destroyed about half the crop. As a result, by the end of the year, farmers were getting 36 percent more for those poppy crops that survived. The poppy disease has caused great loss for about 100,000 farming families. This, however, is a small portion of the Afghan farming population. In fact, the opium and heroin produced from those poppies brings wealth to only about seven percent of Afghans, and misery and violence to the rest. But for the poppy farmers, times are good.

Farmers knew that the shortage would create more demand, and higher prices, this year, and the area planted with poppies increased about six percent. The drought conditions of last year were eased by heavier rains, and the crop disease abated. So yield per hectare (2.5 acres) increased by over 50 percent. This should have saturated the market, but it didn't. That's because NATO raids on drug gang operations destroyed tons of opium and refined heroin in the last year. The gangs had customers demanding product, so, despite the much larger supply, the price farmers got for their opium still went up over 40 percent. Income for poppy farmers has more than doubled.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htmurph/articles/20111019.aspx

Redistribution of Poverty

A question:  Name any one time, place, time or event, wherein the lives and conditions of poor people were materially improved by the redistribution of wealth form rich to poor?

A conjecture:  Perhaps the answer to poverty has been, and remains, the attempt, that has nowhere been so successful or pervasive as in the United States, where as an Afghan boy pointed out to me on my last deployment, even the poor people are fat, to raise the standards and condition of all people. 

An observation:  Certainly there will always be those who live at the bottom of the distribution curve and many through no fault of their own.  It is on the treatment such people receive from the better-off that those who have more will be judged one day, unless that treatment becomes mandatory, in which case its not laudable, not noble--it just...is, and no basis for determining the virtue of the "donor."  Voluntary giving is virtue.  Mandatory giving is theft, however well-intentioned.

Something For The Archeologists

Many World War II era inventions continue in use by the military. One of the more prosaic of these innovations are the perforated metal matting that is used to rapidly create all-weather airstrips that can handle jet fighters and helicopters. The original Marsden Mats of World War II were made of a rust-resistant steel alloy. The sheets of steel had holes in them (to allow for drainage) and slots by which they could easily be linked together. In less than two days, engineers could build an airstrip over a kilometer long (usually 1.3 kilometers, or about 4,000 feet) that could handle aircraft up to 28 tons. That meant four engine bombers like B-17s and B-24s (but not the 30 ton, when empty, B-29). Many of those World War II Marsden Mat airstrips, laid down in remote areas, are still there. In more settled areas, the Marsden Mat panels were used for fencing and building materials, and if you know what to look for, you can find them, usually on remote Pacific Islands.

The current version of Marsden Mats is called PSP (Perforated Steel Planking) and comes in three meter (10 foot) long, 38cm (15 inches), 20 kg (66 pound) panels. PSP can handle heavier loads, but not heavy bombers like the B-1/2/52.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htcbtsp/articles/20111016.aspx

Bad Boys And Indians

In the last decade, criminal activity has been greatly reduced, but not eliminated. In the last year, there have been 282 kidnappings, compared to 2,882 in 2002. But 282 is still a lot, and there are still many armed anti-social groups out there. The coalition of drug gangs and leftist rebels (mainly FARC and ELN) are being forced out of the country, or destroyed, by constant police and military action. Many of these guys are seeking new criminal activities that are not under so much pressure. Illegal gold mining is a favorite, as is smuggling and extortion. The criminal gangs go where the military and police presence is lightest. Too many men who spent some time as outlaws acquired bad habits they can never get rid of. Colombia is still a very violent place. It's not just that the police cannot suppress all of the violence; but that the courts often let criminals and killers go free (because of threats, bribes or overwork.)

Most of the violence is along the southern border and the eastern one with Venezuela. But people in "pacified" areas are demanding some attention be paid to all the bad guys that have gone from leftist rebellion and drug production to being local thugs.

http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/colombi/articles/20111014.aspx

An excellent example...

...of how to take a real person and their own words and still construct a strawman argument.  If you're into that sort of thing, anyway.

Geoffrey R. Stone at the Huffington Post begins by erecting a few mirrors:

To fully understand the practical importance of New York Times v. Sullivan, it is important to consider the historical context. At the time of the decision, the South was in the throes of the civil rights movement. Southerners were deeply concerned about public opinion in the rest of country. The more the national media covered civil rights protests in the South, the more public opinion turned against those who were seeking to preserve segregation. Strategic lawsuits for libel brought by public officials against the national media for technical misstatements in news reports about civil rights protests were intended to deter the national media from covering the civil rights movement. This strategy was made especially effective because Southern juries were inclined to grant excessive damage awards against those who were embarrassing the South. In 1964, there were many similar actions pending against the New York Times in the South. The Supreme Court was acutely aware of this state of affairs, and that awareness no doubt led the justices to give the case the attention it deserved.

The historical context is always interesting and needs to be understood, as a matter of history.  But in a courtroom, it should actually play little or no role.  That is, if we believe in such things as equal protection under the law and judicial restraint.  To achieve that, principles must be staked out and adhered to without regard to the persons, places or times. The point of this is not to give the reader any necessary information required to understand the case, but to invite the reader to join the Warren court in its justification for not upholding principles in order to serve the "needs" of the time.

Then for the smoke, he focuses on an error of fact in Justice Scalia's statement.  The Justice refers to New York law and the New York legislature in describing why he believes the finding of the Court in New York Times v. Sullivan was incorrect.  The case was in regards to Alabama law.  Knowing that, one simply need substitute "Alabama" for "New York" in the statement in order to get the actual point. 

New York Times v. Sullivan just cast [the traditional common law of libel] aside because the Court thought in modern society, it'd be a good idea if the press could say a lot of stuff about public figures without having to worry. And that may be correct, that may be right, but if it was right it should have been adopted by the people. It should have been debated in the New York Legislature and the New York Legislature could have said, 'Yes, we're going to change our libel law.' But the living constitutionalists on the Supreme Court, the Warren Court, simply decided, 'Yes, it used to be that ... George Washington could sue somebody that libeled him, but we don't think that's a good idea any more.'

But the actual point is not what interests Mr. Stone.

In Justice Scalia's view, then, the critical question is whether the Framers of the First Amendment at the time understood the provision as embracing the rule of New York Times v. Sullivan. If not - and clearly they did not understand the Amendment in that way in 1790 - then that ends the matter. The Constitution has nothing to say about the issue in New York Times v. Sullivan and it's up to the people of New York to change their law, if they want to do so.

There are many things wrong with this argument, and with originalism generally, ..., but I want to focus on one point in particular. Justice Scalia suggests that the solution to the problem in New York Times was for the New York legislature to change its libel law. But the New York legislature had absolutely nothing to do with this situation. This was a lawsuit in Alabama, decided under Alabama law by an Alabama jury. The New York legislature was completely powerless to affect the matter in any way.

He then takes that last statement and uses it to justify the Warren Court's finding.  Understand this; an error in the statement of the facts, and an apprehension of that that may or may not be willful, can be used to justify a decision 47 years after the fact?

It was precisely this fact that made a constitutional decision necessary. It's bad enough that Alabama wants to censor what its own citizens can read, but what the situation in New York Times v. Sullivan demonstrated was that the nation cannot constitutionally allow each state to censor speech on its own, because in a national marketplace of ideas censorship in one state effectively precludes the press from distributing news to people nationally. Although only a few hundred copies of that issue of the New York Times actually found their way into Alabama, that gave Alabama sufficient leverage to impose a huge penalty on the Times that was designed to deter it from writing negative stories about the South generally.

But all of that completely aside, the most egregious error in Stones' analysis, is the deliberate misstatement of J. Scalia's position on the matter.  Despite accurately quoting the Justice above; "New York Times v. Sullivan just cast [the traditional common law of libel] aside because the Court thought in modern society, it'd be a good idea if the press could say a lot of stuff about public figures without having to worry. And that may be correct, that may be right, but if it was right it should have been adopted by the people," 

In Justice Scalia's world, the New York legislature could do nothing to protect the right of its citizens to be informed, the national government could do nothing to protect the New York Times (and all other national news outlets) from such censorship, and as a result citizens throughout the nation would have their capacity to learn and to understand their own nation squelched by the State of Alabama. The Supreme Court in New York Times quite correctly concluded that such an outcome was profoundly inconsistent with what the Framers of the First Amendment had in mind. 

Nowhere did J. Scalia say that the legislature (of whichever state) could do nothing.  Only that they had done nothing.  The Justice also never states any opinion as to hwo he, if writing for the court in 1964, would have found--he may have found an argument that would have been judicially correct and still achieved the same or similar result, he may have dissented, or abstained.  Stone, unjustifiably, presumes the dissent.

In order to avoid Stone's primary and most visible error, again, we have to replace "New York" with "Alabama." This makes the statement false on it's face (ignoring also that this legislative action would protect the rights of citizens to be misinformed albeit with regard to "technical misstatements") even if 1964 Alabama would likely have been loathe to take such legislative steps--and that's the crux of the Warren Court's justification--to act legislatively where the legislature would not and the conclusion that Mr. Stone really wants us to accept.

45th Infantry Brigade Combat Team Unit Helping Clearing Sangar Valley of Insurgents and Bomb Making Materials

Not mentioned in the article but the 45th BSTB, despite not being a traditional maneuver element, was a big part of this:

More than 600 soldiers, including several Oklahoma National Guard troops, recently made another big push to secure the Laghman Province's Sangar Valley.  The troops were tasked with locating insurgents, weapons caches, and material used to make homemade explosives.

The successful joint operation included soldiers from 1st Brigade, 201st Corp, Afghan National Army (ANA) and the Oklahoma National Guard's 45th Infantry Brigade Combat Team.

 While U.S. and Afghan forces faced some resistance in the mountains surrounding the Sangar Valley, no friendly forces were injured during the engagements with the enemy.  

Part of the mission was to demonstrate to the Afghan population the viability of the Afghan National Army.

  "We are trying to disrupt insurgent activities in the Sangar Valley," said Capt. Morgan Ashworth, commander of Company C., 1st Battalion, 179 Infantry, a 45th IBCT unit, based in Edmond, Okla. "The ANA is increasing their interaction with the people, showing the people that their forces can protect them and they know how to conduct large scale operations like these against their enemies."  To help secure the confidence of villagers in the valley, an Afghan led patrol base was set up nearby to provide a quicker response to insurgent activity.

http://mcalesternews.com/local/x1372394462/45th-Infantry-Brigade-Combat-Team-Unit-Helping-Clearing-Sangar-Valley-of-Insurgents-and-Bomb-Making-Materials

A War Like No Other

The ten year (and counting) War On Terror has been unique among American wars of the last century. It has lasted longer and killed fewer Americans than any other major war since 1911.

During the last decade, about eight million American served in the armed forces, about the same number that served during the eight year Vietnam War. But twice as many troops served in a combat zone during Vietnam, and more than nine times as many troops were killed. Five times as many Americans were killed in Vietnam, if you count the civilian dead lost on September 11, 2001. But the big difference was that more people went to war during Vietnam, and many more were killed. Thus during Vietnam, about 1.2 percent of Americans served in the combat zone, compared to about .5 percent during the War On Terror.

World War II was much more different still, with six percent of Americans serving in a combat zone. Over all, during World War II four percent of the eight million men and women who served overseas were killed in action (291,557), .7 percent died from other causes, such as accidents and disease (113,842). In Vietnam, 1.8 percent of those in the combat zone died, while during the War On Terror, one half of one percent of those in the combat zone died.

But there was a downside to the lower death rate during the War On Terror. It meant that more troops spent more time in combat. During World War II, most troops spent less than a year in combat. While the war had been going on since 1939, most American troops did not get into combat until June 1944, and the war in Europe was over by the following May. The fighting in the Pacific was more sporadic, with many months of no contact between periods of intense combat. In Vietnam (and Korea) there was a 13 month "tour of duty" policy, and most troops served only one tour. But during the War On Terror, multiple tours were more common, because, unlike Korea and Vietnam, there were no conscripts. All the troops were volunteers, and most served at least two tours. This increased the incidence of combat fatigue (to PTSD, for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder).

The War On Terror is not a unique experience in American military history. Several multi-decade conflicts against irregulars have occurred in the past (Haiti in the early 20^th century and the Indian Wars of the late 19^th century, for example). Both of these conflicts resulted in lower American (and enemy) casualties than the War On Terror. The religious radical angle was absent in these earlier wars, which is why there have been more deaths in the War On Terror. But as with those earlier conflicts, U.S. troops developed new weapons and tactics to deal with the situation. It should be noted that, although the U.S. Marines were in Haiti for nearly 30 years (from 1914), the country still reverted to dictatorship and poverty when the marines left. This exposes a truth that many refuse to acknowledge. Fixing countries isn't easy. The "civil society" that we in the West take for granted, cannot just be conjured up. The harmonious relationships that enable some democracies to work, are not a given. Those relationships often require a lot of bad habits to be changed. This is not easy. Just check a history book. Winning wars is a lot easier than making lasting change is dysfunctional cultures.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htwin/articles/20111013.aspx

The Swarming Of The Combat Aviation Brigades

Over the last two years, the United States has sent over the largest helicopter force ever seen in Afghanistan. Most of the aircraft in Afghanistan are helicopters, and most of these belong to the U.S. Army. By itself, U.S. Army aviation would be one of the largest air forces in the world. The U.S. Army has 20 CABs (Combat Aviation Brigades). Twelve are active duty units, and eight are from the reserves. Another active duty CAB is being formed. A CAB contains, on average, 2,700 troops and 120 aircraft (nearly all OH-58 scout, AH-64 gunship and UH-60 and CH-47 transport helicopters). The CABs sent to Afghanistan are worked very hard. In Afghanistan, American helicopter pilots fly about 63 hours a month each. This is five times the number of hours they would fly back at their home base. The CABs are spending more time overseas than the (ground) combat brigades.

Even with the withdrawal of troops from Iraq, a record number of CABs are staying overseas. That's because helicopters are more vital, and numerous, in Afghanistan than in Iraq. There are only about 60 percent as many U.S. troops in Afghanistan, compared to peak strength in Iraq. Thus from last year to 2014, about a third of the CABs will be overseas at one time. That's fifty percent more than in the last few years. To help support that, two additional CABs were formed in the last year. One was assembled from existing helicopters not assigned to CABs, and is already in service. The other one is being built from scratch, and will be ready by the end of the year. Forming these two new CABs cost $6.6 billion. In addition to this, hundreds of heavy (1.5 ton Sky Warrior) UAVs are being added to the CABs. The army is also reorganizing the CABs, which currently come in three types; light, medium and heavy, into "Full Spectrum" units that contain a mix of different helicopter types.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairfo/articles/20111013.aspx

Feet On Fire

The U.S. Army recently completed a very quick competition to select a hot-weather combat boot for troops in Afghanistan. This search took only a few months. The last such selection, which ended ten months ago, took two years and resulted in a splendid new combat boot for combat troops in Afghanistan. There was one problem. The boot was built with cold weather in mind. But it turned out that during Afghanistan's very hot Summers, this boot left feet too hot, and quite uncomfortable. Thus the race to find a hot weather boot. Now troops will go off two Afghanistan with two pair of boots, one for each of Afghanistan's two seasons (one is very hot, the other is very cold, and in between each of these main seasons there is a few weeks of deceptively mild weather for which either boot will do.)
But for most of this year, there was only one choice. Earlier this year, the U.S. Army selected the Belleville 950 Combat Mountain Hiker as the new combat boot for troops in Afghanistan. The Belleville 950 has a stiffer and 20 percent thicker sole, designed to ease foot strain, and increase traction for troops crossing broken (often rocky) terrain while carrying typical heavy combat loads (over 30 kg/66 pounds). The upper portion of the Belleville 950 is water resistant leather. The Belleville 950 is not suitable for full time use, because of the stiffness. So troops will continue to use their current, less stiff and more padded, combat boots. But when they are heading out into the hills, they were to wear their Belleville 950s. 

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htinf/articles/20111012.aspx

USS George Washington Gains Attn as Possible Budget Casualty

Could the USS George Washington be sunk by budget cuts?

A report in Defense News last week, citing anonymous sources, said naval officials are considering decommissioning the nuclear aircraft carrier decades before the end of its scheduled lifespan.

That's the second time in a week the 25-year-old behemoth has been mentioned as a potential fiscal casualty. In budget analysis released Tuesday, officials from the Center for New American Security, a Washington, D.C., think tank with close ties to President Obama, listed the early decommissioning of the ship as a way to save up to $7 billion over the next decade.

Navy officials refused to directly comment on the idea.

http://www.military.com/news/article/uss-george-washington-gains-attn-as-possible-budget-casualty.html?ESRC=eb.nl

Explosive Career Opportunities In Afghanistan

Many victories in Afghanistan go unreported. Good news isn't considered news, unless you are among those few people who benefitted. Hundreds of American troops avoided death or injury in the last year because of better tools and techniques for dealing with roadside bombs and mines.

In Afghanistan, during June, July and August a record number of IEDs (improvised explosive devices, usually roadside bombs) were used by the drug gangs, the Taliban and other Islamic terrorists against U.S. troops. These caused 1,297 casualties (4.9 percent of them fatal). It took 5,088 IEDs to cause those casualties, which means it took 76 IEDs to kill one U.S. soldier or marine, or 3.9 IEDs to cause one casualty. Last year it took three IEDs to cause one casualty, and about 30 IEDs to kill one foreign soldier. As happened in Iraq, the IED campaign is being defeated.

The high number of IEDs encountered is due to the fact for over a year, the foreign troops have been on the offensive, and more exposed to IED attacks in areas where there has not been time to clear out the IEDs. This is especially true with land mines, which are easier to plant and more difficult to avoid. The mines end up causing more civilian casualties as well, because the Taliban often don't remove the ones that did not go off, or mark the areas where they are.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htwin/articles/20111010.aspx

Armor For Smart Phones

Although the U.S. Army has not adopted a battlefield cell phone yet, many troops take their iPhone and Android phones to war with them anyway. Even without cell service, the smart phones act as hand held computers, providing all sorts of useful capabilities (including entertainment via music and games, plus pictures and vids of friends and family). In recognition of this, Magpul  has developed a protective case for the iPhone. Magpul makes higher quality rifle magazines (which many troops eagerly buy with their own money) and other weapons accessories. Magpul thrives by detecting what the troops want, and getting it too them. The $10 iPhone Field Case is another example of that, although in addition to being available in Black, Flat Dark Earth, Foliage Green or OD Green, the case can also be had Pink or Orange.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htmurph/articles/20111008.aspx

Computer Virus Hits U.S. Drone Fleet

A computer virus has infected the cockpits of America's Predator and Reaper drones, logging pilots' every keystroke as they remotely fly missions over Afghanistan and other warzones.

The virus, first detected nearly two weeks ago by the military's Host-Based Security System, has not prevented pilots at Creech Air Force Base in Nevada from flying their missions overseas. Nor have there been any confirmed incidents of classified information being lost or sent to an outside source. But the virus has resisted multiple efforts to remove it from Creech's computers, network security specialists say. And the infection underscores the ongoing security risks in what has become the U.S. military's most important weapons system.

"We keep wiping it off, and it keeps coming back," says a source familiar with the network infection, one of three that told Danger Room about the virus. "We think it's benign. But we just don't know."

Military network security specialists aren't sure whether the virus and its so-called "keylogger" payload were introduced intentionally or by accident; it may be a common piece of malware that just happened to make its way into these sensitive networks. The specialists don't know exactly how far the virus has spread. But they're sure that the infection has hit both classified and unclassified machines at Creech. That raises the possibility, at least, that secret data may have been captured by the keylogger, and then transmitted over the public internet to someone outside the military chain of command.

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/10/virus-hits-drone-fleet/

Surviving The Space Satellite Apocalypse

America sees long (up to five years) endurance UAVs as salvation in the event of a space satellite apocalypse. The U.S. military is concerned about American dependence on space satellites, particularly the GPS birds. The U.S. Navy is particularly disturbed about this, because their warships depend on satellite communications while at sea. They can get by with the older wireless communications, but this form of transmission is very slow, and the navy has to move a lot more data these days in order to operate effectively.

The U.S. Air Force believes China is developing the ability to carry out a major attack on American military satellites (the "satellite apocalypse"). Their proposed solution is to take GPS out of orbit, and make it portable. High flying aircraft, UAVs or blimps would take over satellite communications, surveillance and navigation (GPS) chores, although for smaller areas. This would make GPS, and other satellite functions, more resilient to attack.

This where the navy and the long endurance UAVs come in. There are several models in development. They all are similar in concept. They are lightweight, use solar panels to drive the electric motors day and night and power the communications relay or sensors (cameras and such) and fly at high altitudes (20,000-30,000 meters, above the weather).

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htspace/articles/20111006.aspx

Brain Conditioning

The U.S. Army and the U.S. Marine Corps continue seeking ways to deal with PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder). One of the latest efforts is a marine program that uses a civilian program called Mind Fitness. This is a series of mental exercises developed to reverse the ill effects of stress. When the marines came across Mind Fitness, the program had already treated 35,000 people, with an 85 percent success rate. Initial tests with marines showed a similar rate of effectiveness. Now the marines are rolling out the program (20 hours of training spread over two months) on a wider scale, and the other services are looking into it.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htatrit/articles/20111007.aspx

Army Looks to Smart Phone for Nett Warrior

The Army has abandoned its decades-long effort to pack nearly 20 pounds of batteries, computer processors and displays on future Soldiers in favor of a simpler solution that uses technology already in many Joes' pockets.

Officials with Fort Belvoir, Va.-based PEO Soldier told reporters Oct. 6 that they had decided to configure the so-called "Nett Warrior" system to use a commercially available smart phone plugged into a secure tactical radio.

"There's significant cost and weight savings in this approach," said Nett Warrior deputy program manager Bill Brower. "We took out about 70 percent of the weight" from the original system.

In August, the Army said it was evaluating the future of Nett Warrior -- which included a wearable computer, GPS tracking unit, power supply and helmet-mounted head's up display -- to see if engineers could "infuse commercial devices and existing government devices into the program."

That effort coincided with the service's push to digitize its training and doctrine manuals and hand every new recruit a smart phone, such as an iPhone, to use for everything from navigation to professional education.

http://www.military.com/news/article/army-looks-to-smart-phone-for-nett-warrior.html?ESRC=eb.nl

Sounds To Die For

Sometimes Information Warfare must use bombs and bullets, as well as words. An example of this can be seen in South Korea, where the government prepares to resume using huge propaganda loudspeakers along the 253 kilometer DMZ (DeMilitarized Zone). The five kilometer wide DMZ that separates the two countries has long been the scene of exotic propaganda efforts. For many years, South Korea had large loudspeakers on their side of the DMZ. But in a peace gesture in 2004, the speakers were shut down and removed. The peace gesture didn't work, so last year, the speakers were reinstalled at 14 locations along the DMZ. At that point, North Korea threatened to open fire if the speakers were used again. At night, the speakers can be heard some 20 kilometers into North Korea. The speakers deliver a combination of music and news. It's the news that bothers North Korea, especially accurate reporting about what is going on inside North Korea.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htiw/articles/20111004.aspx

Print The Myth

[I usually only post excerpts, but this one's too good to pass on less than all of it:--RTO Trainer]

In the last decade, the mass media has been covering military matters much more intensively than they had in the previous decade. It showed, in the amount of misinformation and bad analysis that flowed from so many media outlets. As the old saying goes, when presented with the truth and the myth, print the myth. It gets more attention. These are some of the more misleading, but profitable, ones.

The Invasion of Iraq Was Illegal and Misguided. This was based on the failure to find Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) in Iraq. Actually, several hundred chemical weapons were found, and Saddam had all his WMD scientists and technicians ready to produce more. Just end the sanctions and add money, and the weapons would be back in production within a year. At the time of the invasion, all intelligence agencies, world-wide, believed Saddam still had a functioning WMD program. Saddam had actually shut them down because of the cost, but created the illusion that the program was still operating in order to fool the Iranians. The Iranians wanted revenge on Saddam because of the Iraq invasion of Iran in 1980, and the eight year war that followed. Saddam himself admitted all this after he was captured. As for legality, the 2003 invasion was illegal only according to some in the UN. By that standard, the invasion of Kosovo and bombing of Serbia in 1999 was also illegal. Saddam was already at war with the U.S. and Britain, because Iraq had not carried out the terms of the 1991 ceasefire, and was trying to shoot down coalition aircraft patrolling the no-fly zone.

The Invasion Was a Failure. This was a popular theme right up until the moment (three years ago), when it was obvious that it wasn't. Success came early and often. In 2003 Saddam's police state was overthrown and a democracy established, which was the objective of the operation. Peace did not ensue because Saddam's supporters, the Sunni Arab minority, were not willing to deal with majority rule, and war crimes trials. A terror campaign followed. Few expected the Sunni Arabs to be so stupid. There's a lesson to be learned there, but the mass media rarely discussed it. Another problem with this doom and gloom spin was a lack of analysis. If the war in Iraq was lost, by what measure was it lost? Saddam and his Baath party were out of power. There was a democratically elected government. Part of the Sunni Arab minority continued to support terror attacks, in an attempt to restore the Sunni Arab dictatorship. In response, extremist Shia Arabs formed vigilante death squads to expel all Sunni Arabs. Given the history of democracy in the Middle East, Iraq is working through its problems. Otherwise, one is to believe that the Arabs are incapable of democracy and only a tyrant like Saddam can make Iraq "work." If democracy were easy, the Arab states would all have it. There are problems, and solutions have to be found and implemented. That takes time, but Americans have, since the 18th century, grown weary of wars after a few years. If the war goes on longer, the politicians have to scramble to survive the bad press and opinion polls. Opposition politicians take advantage of the situation, but this has nothing to do with Iraq, and everything to do with local politics in the United States.

The U.S. Needed More Soldiers. Not according to the generals, who knew that in the time it took to recruit and train a lot of new troops, you could fight smart (the preferred way by the professionals) and win the war. Moreover, most journalists, in addition to ignoring (or being ignorant of) the years it takes to produce capable troops, played down the fact that the army lost a third of its strength in the 1990s, as part of the peace dividend from the end of the Cold War. The media also ignored the army and marine doctrine of training and using locals to maintain order. Trying to use Americans to do it is very inefficient. The troops knew that, the reporters ignored it. The media also played down the logistical problems of supporting troops in landlocked (and generally roadless) Afghanistan. The Russians were unable to maintain more than 150,000 troops in Afghanistan, and the U.S. is up against the same constraints. At the same time, Afghanistan has never been a country, as the concept is understood in the West. The army Special Forces understood this, as did the generals they worked for. But the media hardly ever touched this issue.

The Invasion Helped Al Qaeda. Compared to what? Al Qaeda was a growing movement before 2003, and before 2001. But after the Iraq invasion, and especially the Sunni Arab terrorism, al Qaeda fell in popularity throughout the Moslem world. Arab countries cracked down on al Qaeda operations more than ever before. Without the Iraq invasion, al Qaeda would still have safe havens all over the Arab world. Another angle here was that the Iraq War caused Islamic terrorism to increase in Europe. The Moslem unrest in Europe was there before 2001, and 2003. Interviews of Islamic radicals in Europe reveals that the hatred is not motivated by Iraq, but by daily encounters with hostile natives. Blaming this Islamic terrorism on Iraq is another attempt to avoid dealing with a homegrown problem.

The U.S. Did Not Work With Locals. American troops went into Iraq and Afghanistan with a centuries old tradition of "working with the locals." The U.S. Army had over 20,000 Special Forces and Civil Affairs troops, whose primary job was to work with the locals. The marines were still using their "Small Wars Manual", which was written in 1940, based on four decades of marine peacekeeping operations. Soldiers, and even State Department officials, used this manual, to good effect. But the way the news business works, problems in this area gets much more attention than the more numerous successes. In both Iraq and Afghanistan, the basic idea was what it has always been. That is, help the locals establish a new government and create a new security force. In Iraq, you first had to defeat the Saddam and Islamic terrorists who were desperate to return the country to dictatorship (either secular, in the case of the Saddam supporters, or religious, in the case of al Qaeda and their ilk.)

Iraqis Were Better Off Under Saddam. Most Iraqis disagree. Check election results and opinion polls. Reporters tend to ask Iraqi Sunni Arabs this question, but they were the only ones who benefited from Saddam's rule.

Too Many Contractors In The Combat Zone. [RTO Trainer--Can't agree with this one--it lays out the facts well enough, but still kicks off with a naked assertion in the first sentence.  When I'm no longer deployed, I'll address this topic in depth.]  There weren't. The large number of contractors was the product of several trends. First, there was a lot more technology in use, and it had to be maintained. Second, conscription had eliminated a major source of cheap labor for a lot of these support jobs. So, over the last half century, there have been a growing number of civilian contractors. In 2008, there was one civilian contractor for each member of the U.S. military in Iraq. Thus half the American force was civilians. This is not the first time this has happened. In the 1990s, half the American peacekeeping force in the Balkans was civilian contractors. In past wars, the percentage varied. During the 1991 Gulf war, contractors were only about two percent of the force. That was because the U.S. troops came to liberate Kuwait and leave. Moreover, Saudi Arabia, and other Gulf States, had bases they allowed U.S. forces to use for the operation. The American troops basically lived "in the field" as they would in a conventional war. In the Vietnam War, where U.S. troops were there for a long time, contractors were 16 percent of the force. In the Korean War, civilians were 28 percent of the force. During World War II it was 12 percent, it was 4 percent in World War I. During the U.S. Civil War it was 17 percent, during the Mexican-American War it was 15 percent and during the Revolutionary War, it was 18 percent. Another misreported contractor story had to do with the 15 percent of them who were used for security chores. These guys were often described as "out of control." They weren't. Nearly all of them were former military or police, and the ones accused of being the most trigger happy were the ones who had to go into the most dangerous areas. Blackwater recruited most of these. One of the Blackwater contracts was for the U.S. State Department. This was very successful, as not a single State Department employee was killed, no matter how dangerous was the area Blackwater escorted them through, and how energetically terrorists tried to kill the diplomatic personnel.

The Three Year Rule. In all of America's wars, popular support for the war effort sharply declined after three years. Even though the U.S. government said, from late September, 2001 on, that the war on terror would be a long one, this has not changed the impact of the Three Year War. If you can't get it over with within three years, you are going to face more and more voter opposition to the war effort. Go back and look at the history of all of America's long (over three years) wars and you will see this play out. It happened in the war on terror, and the various theaters of conflict (notably Afghanistan and Iraq.) This led ambitious politicians to declare deadlines, which makes life a lot more difficult for American combat commanders, and encourages the enemy no end.

Peace As A Weapon

The PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization) run by Fatah (the Palestinian group that controls the West Bank) has agreed to resume negotiations with Israel. According to Fatah's Arab language media, these negotiations are all a sham, just a tactic to weaken Israel enough so that Palestinians can destroy the Jewish state and drive all Jews from the Middle East. Then Fatah can deal with Hamas and reunite all Palestinians in a "Greater Palestine" (Israel, the West Bank and Gaza.) Most Palestinian maps show this area as Palestine. No mention is made of Israel, except in cases where maps show Palestinian land and cities illegally (and temporarily) occupied by Jews. The West tends to ignore this Fatah view of the situation, and believe that the Palestinians are interested in a peace deal with Israel. In Palestinian media, such "peace deals" are described as temporary truces, so that Palestinians can build up their strength for the next major assault on Israel. These tactics have been remarkably unsuccessful for decades, but the younger generation of Palestinians buys into it. Hamas is more forthcoming about these goals, and is actually in agreement about the ultimate fate of Israel.

http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/israel/articles/20111004.aspx

And Live Islamically Ever After II

The UN and NATO got into a war of words over how to interpret data on the fighting this year. A week ago, the UN announced that, by its count, violence in Afghanistan was up (for the first eight months of the year) 39 percent compared to last years. A few days later, NATO issued its own report, which pointed out that terrorist violence was actually down two percent, and the increase the UN was touting was increased NATO operations against the Taliban, Haqqani and the drug gangs. NATO also pointed out that the enemy was less able to fight back this year. Thus gun battles with the Taliban were down 30 percent this year, and the Taliban/Haqqani use of roadside and suicide bombs were up 25 percent. Moreover, 15 percent fewer foreign troops were killed this year versus last for the simple reason that foreign and Afghan troops are winning. The UN agreed that both sides were using the same numbers, but were presenting them differently. For example, while the UN made much of an increase in civilian deaths (up 14 percent, to 79), the fact remains that over 80 percent of the civilian deaths are caused by the Taliban.

http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/afghan/articles/20111003.aspx

And Live Islamically Ever After

NATO operations in the last year have greatly reduced the fighting strength of the Taliban and the drug gangs, leaving the Pakistan based Haqqani Network as the most powerful Islamic terror group in the region. Haqqani has been around since the 1980s, and has survived because of the strong leadership of the Haqqani clan. It's basically a family business, and most of the business is criminal. Kidnapping, extortion, smuggling and whatever else is available has kept the organization going. During the 1980s war with the Russians, Haqqani adopted the "Islamic warrior" tag and never abandoned it. Like most anti-Russian Afghan groups, Haqqani received money, instructions and protection from Pakistan (largely from ISI, the Pakistani version of the CIA). When the ISI needed a terror attack, kidnapping or assassination carried out, Haqqani was often used. Haqqani was reliable and effective and that was important for the generals running ISI. But this year, Haqqani has been under unprecedented attack by NATO forces. That means over 1,600 suspected Haqqani men (including 300 local leaders) have been arrested during over 500 raids this year. These operations killed or captured dozens of known Haqqani officials, often key people who were difficult to replace. Haqqani is being forced to risk its lucrative operations (and personnel) in eastern Afghanistan in order to carry out Pakistan ordered terror attacks in Kabul and elsewhere. While Haqqani has a sanctuary in Pakistan (North Waziristan, an area the Pakistani army refuses to enter), that area is subject to constant patrols by CIA UAVs, and missile attacks on terrorist leaders and other key personnel. The area is monitored by electronic surveillance and a network of informers. In eastern Afghanistan, the growing number of NATO raids have cost Haqqani a lot of money, and made it more expensive to carry out terrorist attacks.  Pakistan fears that the U.S. will extend these raids into North Waziristan, and has openly warned the U.S. against this. But the U.S., and the Afghans, want Haqqani gone.

http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/afghan/articles/20111003.aspx

The Decline Of The IED

In Afghanistan...IEDs are more frequently used against troops on foot patrol. These, more than attacks on vehicles, tend to cause multiple fatalities. In Afghanistan, the enemy also uses more land mines, both against troops and larger ones against vehicles travelling the numerous dirt roads.

The Taliban, unable to withstand foreign troops in a gun battle, have put most of their resources into an IED campaign. Thus the number of IEDs encountered went from 2,678 in 2007 to than 12,000 last year. This year, the number is declining.

In Afghanistan foreign troops have been on the offensive this year, and more exposed to IED attacks in areas where there has not been time to clear out the IEDs. This is especially true with land mines, which are easier to plant and more difficult to avoid. The mines end up causing more civilian casualties as well, because the Taliban often don't remove the ones that did not go off, or mark the areas where they are. If foreign troops do not encounter mines, and thus have an opportunity to clear them, civilians will eventually encounter them and get hurt.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htatrit/articles/20111002.aspx