10 New Messages
Digest #4441
Messages
Tue Jul 24, 2012 6:26 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://english.
Voice of Russia
July 22, 2011
US army shares responsibility with mercenaries
Yekaterina Kudashkina
Audio at URL above
"When we come to outsourcing, we find that this allows Americans to hire local people for money, of course, for very dirty work inside their own country. I think it is a dangerous thing and it really removes the barrier between the violation by American army and those people who work for American paramilitary institutions" Gennady Yevstafiev, retired Lieutenant General of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service, said in a Voice of Russia interview.
The American army is not participating in supply lines, for example, through Pakistan to Afghanistan. The protection of the supply lines is done by private military companies. What is this? This is a sort of institution which hires very qualified, very often retired people from the American armed forces and the CIA and it is keeping them as participators in American aggression all through the world. But they are not uniformed, they are paid in a different way. So, when it comes to casualties of the American army for example in Afghanistan it is about 4,000 people through these ten years. But the private paramilitary companies are not counted into these losses, whereas during these ten years American private paramilitary companies have lost almost a thousand people.
So, it is not counted into the overall number of American army losses. And the CIA in its turn is doing the same thing. For example, you remember Abu Ghraib in Iraq. The prisoners of Abu Ghraib were kept by private paramilitary forces and that’s why there was a tremendous excess in the violation of human rights. Not only the military of the American army violated but mostly the paramilitary private companies were violating the rights of the prisoners and they have inflicted so many insults on the national religion and character.
So, this development is taking a growing role in American military expeditions. The administration is in a position to minimize military losses. Various American institutions are using them for rather dirty work. You remember that there was a lot of discussion about the American secret prisons in Europe, including in Eastern Europe, and in other parts of the world, especially in Asian and Arab countries. They were kept by paramilitary forces and the representatives of the CIA only brought and left them there under the guard of the private paramilitary representatives.
And when we come to outsourcing, we find that this allows Americans to hire local people for money, of course, for very dirty work inside their own country. The natives are working for the Americans and in this sense they are considered to be part of the whole exercise. I think it is a dangerous thing and it really removes the barrier between the violation by the American army of the human rights of prisoners and POWs and so on and a simple and irresponsible.
And mind you, the American army has a manual of war operations and this manual of war operations prescribes what kind of behavior the American army should follow against the enemy, against POWs and what is allowed and what is not. And in this manual they are keeping the main elements of Geneva Convention.
But these private paramilitary institutions are not bound by these kinds of things and this allows the American administration and certain representatives to use them to carry out unprecedentedly dirty work with all kinds of violations of human rights. And somehow it has not yet become a certain problem which is being discussed. But the time will come and the Americans will be forced to explain what kind of thing it is this private paramilitary force, by which laws they operate and who is responsible for them in the long run. Let’s wait for this time when the international community will touch upon this very sensitive issue.
Mr. Yevstafiev, but is there any international regulation perhaps looking into the issue now? If we talk about, for example, the presence of the US, say in Iraq or in Afghanistan, the US is pledging to reduce their presence there to certain numbers, etc. Do I get it right that those private military contractors are not taken into account?
No, you see, the outsourcing goes further. It brings these private paramilitary institutions into the American foreign policy because it has been announced that some private paramilitary institutions are going to participate in the training of the Afghan army and Iraqi detachments and this allows Mr. Obama to claim that he is moving out American military people. Of course he is moving because he pledged to do this but nobody speaks about the fact that instead of this army with private contracts and agreements with the local governments they introduce private paramilitary institutions for defending the perimeter of very sensitive buildings, installations and so on.
And on the surface it appears that there already 10,000 Americans in Kabul, for example, but if you look into the matter you will see that there are thousands of people who are connected to the idea of making, as this was recently announced, of making Afghanistan their strategic ally.
I think it is a dangerous thing and it really removes the barrier between the violation by the American army of human rights of prisoners and POWs and so on and a simple and irresponsible, they are not committed to anybody except for their companies. I mean these people who work for American paramilitary institutions. And mind you, the American army has a manual of war operations and this manual of war operations prescribes what kind of behavior the American army should follow against the enemy, against POWs and what is allowed and what is not. And in this manual they are keeping the main elements of Geneva Convention.
But these private paramilitary institutions are not bound by this kind of things and this allows the American administrations and certain representatives to use them to carry unprecedentedly dirty work with all kinds of violations of human rights.
Sir, thank you so much. And just to remind you our guest speaker this time was our expert Gennady Yevstafiev, retired Lieutenant General of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Voice of Russia
July 22, 2011
US army shares responsibility with mercenaries
Yekaterina Kudashkina
Audio at URL above
"When we come to outsourcing, we find that this allows Americans to hire local people for money, of course, for very dirty work inside their own country. I think it is a dangerous thing and it really removes the barrier between the violation by American army and those people who work for American paramilitary institutions" Gennady Yevstafiev, retired Lieutenant General of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service, said in a Voice of Russia interview.
The American army is not participating in supply lines, for example, through Pakistan to Afghanistan. The protection of the supply lines is done by private military companies. What is this? This is a sort of institution which hires very qualified, very often retired people from the American armed forces and the CIA and it is keeping them as participators in American aggression all through the world. But they are not uniformed, they are paid in a different way. So, when it comes to casualties of the American army for example in Afghanistan it is about 4,000 people through these ten years. But the private paramilitary companies are not counted into these losses, whereas during these ten years American private paramilitary companies have lost almost a thousand people.
So, it is not counted into the overall number of American army losses. And the CIA in its turn is doing the same thing. For example, you remember Abu Ghraib in Iraq. The prisoners of Abu Ghraib were kept by private paramilitary forces and that’s why there was a tremendous excess in the violation of human rights. Not only the military of the American army violated but mostly the paramilitary private companies were violating the rights of the prisoners and they have inflicted so many insults on the national religion and character.
So, this development is taking a growing role in American military expeditions. The administration is in a position to minimize military losses. Various American institutions are using them for rather dirty work. You remember that there was a lot of discussion about the American secret prisons in Europe, including in Eastern Europe, and in other parts of the world, especially in Asian and Arab countries. They were kept by paramilitary forces and the representatives of the CIA only brought and left them there under the guard of the private paramilitary representatives.
And when we come to outsourcing, we find that this allows Americans to hire local people for money, of course, for very dirty work inside their own country. The natives are working for the Americans and in this sense they are considered to be part of the whole exercise. I think it is a dangerous thing and it really removes the barrier between the violation by the American army of the human rights of prisoners and POWs and so on and a simple and irresponsible.
And mind you, the American army has a manual of war operations and this manual of war operations prescribes what kind of behavior the American army should follow against the enemy, against POWs and what is allowed and what is not. And in this manual they are keeping the main elements of Geneva Convention.
But these private paramilitary institutions are not bound by these kinds of things and this allows the American administration and certain representatives to use them to carry out unprecedentedly dirty work with all kinds of violations of human rights. And somehow it has not yet become a certain problem which is being discussed. But the time will come and the Americans will be forced to explain what kind of thing it is this private paramilitary force, by which laws they operate and who is responsible for them in the long run. Let’s wait for this time when the international community will touch upon this very sensitive issue.
Mr. Yevstafiev, but is there any international regulation perhaps looking into the issue now? If we talk about, for example, the presence of the US, say in Iraq or in Afghanistan, the US is pledging to reduce their presence there to certain numbers, etc. Do I get it right that those private military contractors are not taken into account?
No, you see, the outsourcing goes further. It brings these private paramilitary institutions into the American foreign policy because it has been announced that some private paramilitary institutions are going to participate in the training of the Afghan army and Iraqi detachments and this allows Mr. Obama to claim that he is moving out American military people. Of course he is moving because he pledged to do this but nobody speaks about the fact that instead of this army with private contracts and agreements with the local governments they introduce private paramilitary institutions for defending the perimeter of very sensitive buildings, installations and so on.
And on the surface it appears that there already 10,000 Americans in Kabul, for example, but if you look into the matter you will see that there are thousands of people who are connected to the idea of making, as this was recently announced, of making Afghanistan their strategic ally.
I think it is a dangerous thing and it really removes the barrier between the violation by the American army of human rights of prisoners and POWs and so on and a simple and irresponsible, they are not committed to anybody except for their companies. I mean these people who work for American paramilitary institutions. And mind you, the American army has a manual of war operations and this manual of war operations prescribes what kind of behavior the American army should follow against the enemy, against POWs and what is allowed and what is not. And in this manual they are keeping the main elements of Geneva Convention.
But these private paramilitary institutions are not bound by this kind of things and this allows the American administrations and certain representatives to use them to carry unprecedentedly dirty work with all kinds of violations of human rights.
Sir, thank you so much. And just to remind you our guest speaker this time was our expert Gennady Yevstafiev, retired Lieutenant General of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Tue Jul 24, 2012 6:55 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://www.usaraf.
U.S. Army Africa
July 24, 2012
Botswana Defence Force, U.S. conducts joint military exercise
GABARONE, Botswana: The Botswana Defence Force and the U.S. Embassy announce that Botswana will host a joint military exercise known as Southern Accord 12, August 1-17.
The exercise will involve approximately 700 BDF members and 700 American military personnel, and will take place on and around the Thebephatshwa Air Base. Joint exercise activities conducted during Southern Accord 12 will enhance the capabilities of military personnel for both countries in a variety of areas, including humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, anti-poaching, peacekeeping, and convoy operations, as well as aero-medical evacuation.
The U.S. has in the past two years conducted similar joint military exercises with African countries such as South Africa, Mozambique, Tunisia, Uganda, Mali and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
In partnership with the Botswana Defence Force, U.S. Air Forces Africa will take part in MEDLITE 12.
U.S. Air Forces Africa, headquartered at Ramstein Air Base, Germany, is the Air Force component to the United States Africa Command, the U.S. regional command that oversees and coordinates U.S. military activities in Africa.
MEDLITE 12 is the latest in a series of exercises involving U.S. military forces and partner militaries in Africa with the aim to establish and develop military interoperability, regional relationships, synchronization of effort...
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
U.S. Army Africa
July 24, 2012
Botswana Defence Force, U.S. conducts joint military exercise
GABARONE, Botswana: The Botswana Defence Force and the U.S. Embassy announce that Botswana will host a joint military exercise known as Southern Accord 12, August 1-17.
The exercise will involve approximately 700 BDF members and 700 American military personnel, and will take place on and around the Thebephatshwa Air Base. Joint exercise activities conducted during Southern Accord 12 will enhance the capabilities of military personnel for both countries in a variety of areas, including humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, anti-poaching, peacekeeping, and convoy operations, as well as aero-medical evacuation.
The U.S. has in the past two years conducted similar joint military exercises with African countries such as South Africa, Mozambique, Tunisia, Uganda, Mali and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
In partnership with the Botswana Defence Force, U.S. Air Forces Africa will take part in MEDLITE 12.
U.S. Air Forces Africa, headquartered at Ramstein Air Base, Germany, is the Air Force component to the United States Africa Command, the U.S. regional command that oversees and coordinates U.S. military activities in Africa.
MEDLITE 12 is the latest in a series of exercises involving U.S. military forces and partner militaries in Africa with the aim to establish and develop military interoperability, regional relationships, synchronization of effort...
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Tue Jul 24, 2012 6:55 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://en.trend.
Trend News Agency
July 24, 2012
11 killed in U.S. drone strike in NW Pakistan
At least 11 people were killed and several others got injured when U.S. drones launched a missile strike at a house suspected of a militant hideout in Pakistan's northwest tribal area of North Waziristan on Monday evening.
The missile strikes came at about 9:20 p.m. (local time) when an unknown number of U.S. drones fired eight missiles at a house in Shawal area of North Waziristan, a tribal area on Pakistan- Afghanistan border, Xinhua quoted local Urdu TV channel Dunya as reporting.
The identities of the killed and injured people have not been determined yet.
U.S. drones often launch missile strikes at the suspected safe- havens of militants in the dense mountainous area along the Pakistan-Afghanista
To date, at least 207 Pakistani people have reportedly been killed in such strikes since this year.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Trend News Agency
July 24, 2012
11 killed in U.S. drone strike in NW Pakistan
At least 11 people were killed and several others got injured when U.S. drones launched a missile strike at a house suspected of a militant hideout in Pakistan's northwest tribal area of North Waziristan on Monday evening.
The missile strikes came at about 9:20 p.m. (local time) when an unknown number of U.S. drones fired eight missiles at a house in Shawal area of North Waziristan, a tribal area on Pakistan- Afghanistan border, Xinhua quoted local Urdu TV channel Dunya as reporting.
The identities of the killed and injured people have not been determined yet.
U.S. drones often launch missile strikes at the suspected safe- havens of militants in the dense mountainous area along the Pakistan-Afghanista
To date, at least 207 Pakistani people have reportedly been killed in such strikes since this year.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Tue Jul 24, 2012 6:55 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
Friends: Hello.—
Edward S. Herman and I have just completed a 39,000-word critique of Steven Pinker’s 2011 book, The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined (Viking).
Two versions of the document now exist online: The first, at ColdType, is a 148-page e-book in readily printable PDF format; and the second, a richly hyperlinked version of the same document, posted to ZNet.
Edward S. Herman and David Peterson, Reality Denial: Steven Pinker’s Apologetics for Western-Imperial Violence, ColdType, July 24, 2012.http://coldtype.
Edward S. Herman and David Peterson, “Reality Denial: Steven Pinker’s Apologetics for Western-Imperial Violence,” ZNet, July 24, 2012.http://www.zcommuni
If you think it worthwhile, please share our critique with colleagues and friends.
Thanks.
David Peterson
Chicago, USA
davidepet@comcast.
Edward S. Herman and I have just completed a 39,000-word critique of Steven Pinker’s 2011 book, The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined (Viking).
Two versions of the document now exist online: The first, at ColdType, is a 148-page e-book in readily printable PDF format; and the second, a richly hyperlinked version of the same document, posted to ZNet.
Edward S. Herman and David Peterson, Reality Denial: Steven Pinker’s Apologetics for Western-Imperial Violence, ColdType, July 24, 2012.http://coldtype.
Edward S. Herman and David Peterson, “Reality Denial: Steven Pinker’s Apologetics for Western-Imperial Violence,” ZNet, July 24, 2012.http://www.zcommuni
If you think it worthwhile, please share our critique with colleagues and friends.
Thanks.
David Peterson
Chicago, USA
davidepet@comcast.
Tue Jul 24, 2012 6:55 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://www.pajhwok.
Pajhwok Afghan News
July 24, 2012
2 ISAF soldiers killed in east
KABUL: Two more International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) soldiers were killed following an insurgent attack in eastern Afghanistan, the alliance said on Tuesday.
The deaths were announced in a brief statement from the NATO-led force that neither revealed the victims’ nationalities nor the exact location of the incident. But mostly, US troops are stationed in the Taliban’s eastern heartland.
So far during the current year, 255 international soldiers, including 189 Americans, have been killed across the country. Last year, 566 NATO soldiers were killed in Afghanistan.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Pajhwok Afghan News
July 24, 2012
2 ISAF soldiers killed in east
KABUL: Two more International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) soldiers were killed following an insurgent attack in eastern Afghanistan, the alliance said on Tuesday.
The deaths were announced in a brief statement from the NATO-led force that neither revealed the victims’ nationalities nor the exact location of the incident. But mostly, US troops are stationed in the Taliban’s eastern heartland.
So far during the current year, 255 international soldiers, including 189 Americans, have been killed across the country. Last year, 566 NATO soldiers were killed in Afghanistan.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Tue Jul 24, 2012 7:03 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://en.apa.
Azeri Press Agency
July 24, 2012
Turkey to develop intermediate-
Rashad Suleymanov
Baku: Turkey started to realize a program on development of ballistic missiles. APA reports quoting Turkish media that the relevant decision was adopted at the Defense Industry Executive Committee’s meeting last week after the task by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoganon for the creation of intermediate-
At first it was planned to increase the destructive force of SOM missiles, developed by TUBITAK and having a 300-km action range to 1500, but then to 2500 km within the program.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Azeri Press Agency
July 24, 2012
Turkey to develop intermediate-
Rashad Suleymanov
Baku: Turkey started to realize a program on development of ballistic missiles. APA reports quoting Turkish media that the relevant decision was adopted at the Defense Industry Executive Committee’s meeting last week after the task by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoganon for the creation of intermediate-
At first it was planned to increase the destructive force of SOM missiles, developed by TUBITAK and having a 300-km action range to 1500, but then to 2500 km within the program.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Tue Jul 24, 2012 7:03 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://en.apa.
Azeri Press Agency
July 25, 2012
Azerbaijani and The U.S. officials meet for the dialogue on security cooperation
Baku: The U.S. Department of State hosted Deputy Foreign Minister Araz Azimov and other representatives from the Azerbaijani government for the U.S.–Azerbaijan Security Dialogue, which met today in Washington, D.C., APA reports.
Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs Andrew J. Shapiro led the U.S. delegation, which included participation from Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Eric Rubin, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Celeste Wallander, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Energy William Bryan, and other senior U.S. government officials.
The Azerbaijani delegation headed by Deputy Foreign Minister Araz Azimov was represented by the ambassador of Azerbaijan in the U.S. Elin Suleymanov, Deputy National Security Minister Ali Shafiyev, Deputy Minister of Emergency Situations Rahim Latifov, Deputy Head of Department of State Border Service Farhad Taghizadeh, Head of the Department at the Defense Ministry Ramiz Najafov, Head of the State Customs Committee’s Main Directorate Guloglan Muradli and other senior officials.
The sides welcomed the current level of bilateral security cooperation, and agreed on the importance of further developing this cooperation.
Building on the success of the previous Security Dialogue held in 2011 in Baku, Azerbaijan, officials focused on a wide range of political-military issues, including cooperation in maritime security, counterterrorism, border security, and countering nuclear smuggling and other aspects of nonproliferation, as well as Azerbaijan’s contributions to the Northern Distribution Network and other initiatives supporting international security efforts in Afghanistan.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Azeri Press Agency
July 25, 2012
Azerbaijani and The U.S. officials meet for the dialogue on security cooperation
Baku: The U.S. Department of State hosted Deputy Foreign Minister Araz Azimov and other representatives from the Azerbaijani government for the U.S.–Azerbaijan Security Dialogue, which met today in Washington, D.C., APA reports.
Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs Andrew J. Shapiro led the U.S. delegation, which included participation from Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Eric Rubin, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Celeste Wallander, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Energy William Bryan, and other senior U.S. government officials.
The Azerbaijani delegation headed by Deputy Foreign Minister Araz Azimov was represented by the ambassador of Azerbaijan in the U.S. Elin Suleymanov, Deputy National Security Minister Ali Shafiyev, Deputy Minister of Emergency Situations Rahim Latifov, Deputy Head of Department of State Border Service Farhad Taghizadeh, Head of the Department at the Defense Ministry Ramiz Najafov, Head of the State Customs Committee’s Main Directorate Guloglan Muradli and other senior officials.
The sides welcomed the current level of bilateral security cooperation, and agreed on the importance of further developing this cooperation.
Building on the success of the previous Security Dialogue held in 2011 in Baku, Azerbaijan, officials focused on a wide range of political-military issues, including cooperation in maritime security, counterterrorism, border security, and countering nuclear smuggling and other aspects of nonproliferation, as well as Azerbaijan’s contributions to the Northern Distribution Network and other initiatives supporting international security efforts in Afghanistan.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Tue Jul 24, 2012 7:16 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://www.upi.
United Press International
July 23, 2012
Finland seeks U.S. missiles
WASHINGTON: The U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency reports that Finland is seeking the purchase of tactical missiles and related equipment.
The sales package, unless halted by Congress, would be worth an estimated $132 million.
"Finland intends to use these defense articles and services to expand its existing army architecture and improve its self-defense capabilities,
The complete package under the U.S. Foreign Military Sales program includes: 70 M57 Army Tactical Missile System T2K Unitary Missiles; Missile Common Test Device software; ATACMS quality assurance team support; spare and repair parts; tools and test equipment; and support equipment.
Training of personnel would also be included as well as U.S. government and contractor engineering and logistics support.
The prime contractor would be Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control in Dallas.
The agency said the proposed sale replaces an earlier proposed transaction for M39 missiles.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
United Press International
July 23, 2012
Finland seeks U.S. missiles
WASHINGTON: The U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency reports that Finland is seeking the purchase of tactical missiles and related equipment.
The sales package, unless halted by Congress, would be worth an estimated $132 million.
"Finland intends to use these defense articles and services to expand its existing army architecture and improve its self-defense capabilities,
The complete package under the U.S. Foreign Military Sales program includes: 70 M57 Army Tactical Missile System T2K Unitary Missiles; Missile Common Test Device software; ATACMS quality assurance team support; spare and repair parts; tools and test equipment; and support equipment.
Training of personnel would also be included as well as U.S. government and contractor engineering and logistics support.
The prime contractor would be Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control in Dallas.
The agency said the proposed sale replaces an earlier proposed transaction for M39 missiles.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Tue Jul 24, 2012 7:16 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://defense-
Defense Update
July 24, 2012
Singapore navy Tests Barak Missiles at the South China Sea
Tamir Eshel
The Republic of Singapore Navy (RSN) conducted a live-firing of the Rafael Barak anti-missile missile in the South China Sea yesterday, as part of the 18th annual Cooperation Afloat Readiness and Training (CARAT) exercise which Singapore is conducting with the United States. The missile was fired by the upgraded RSN missile corvette RSS Victory against an aerial target drone simulating an attacking profile. The target was successfully destroyed.
Commanding Officer RSS Victory Lieutenant Colonel (LTC) Eric Tan Wei Hong said that the exercise was professionally valuable to both the RSN and the United States Navy. “The CARAT exercise allows personnel from both navies to work and interact closely with each other and this has also deepened our friendship and mutual understanding”, said LTC Tan. Commenting on the success of the missile firing, Weapon Systems (Control) Supervisor Military Expert 2 Jeyabal Sundaraju, who fired the Barak missile said, “the realism and tempo of the exercise has been a fruitful experience for me and my team onboard RSS Victory. Our training and preparation ensured that we were ready and we are glad that we have hit the target and achieved mission success.”
The firing was witnessed by Chief of Navy Rear-Admiral Ng Chee Peng. Similar missile firings have been conducted in previous CARAT exercises. The exercise is presently ongoing and will conclude on 27 Jul 2012.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Defense Update
July 24, 2012
Singapore navy Tests Barak Missiles at the South China Sea
Tamir Eshel
The Republic of Singapore Navy (RSN) conducted a live-firing of the Rafael Barak anti-missile missile in the South China Sea yesterday, as part of the 18th annual Cooperation Afloat Readiness and Training (CARAT) exercise which Singapore is conducting with the United States. The missile was fired by the upgraded RSN missile corvette RSS Victory against an aerial target drone simulating an attacking profile. The target was successfully destroyed.
Commanding Officer RSS Victory Lieutenant Colonel (LTC) Eric Tan Wei Hong said that the exercise was professionally valuable to both the RSN and the United States Navy. “The CARAT exercise allows personnel from both navies to work and interact closely with each other and this has also deepened our friendship and mutual understanding”, said LTC Tan. Commenting on the success of the missile firing, Weapon Systems (Control) Supervisor Military Expert 2 Jeyabal Sundaraju, who fired the Barak missile said, “the realism and tempo of the exercise has been a fruitful experience for me and my team onboard RSS Victory. Our training and preparation ensured that we were ready and we are glad that we have hit the target and achieved mission success.”
The firing was witnessed by Chief of Navy Rear-Admiral Ng Chee Peng. Similar missile firings have been conducted in previous CARAT exercises. The exercise is presently ongoing and will conclude on 27 Jul 2012.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Tue Jul 24, 2012 7:32 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://www.frontlin
Frontline
July 28-August 10, 2012
Ponce in place
Vijay Prashad
====
A friendly international media enabled the U.S. to paint Iran as the deterrent to the democratic ambitions of the Arab peoples, given Iran’s links to the Bashar al-Assad regime in Damascus. A military build-up, in this context, appears not as the authoritarian hand of U.S. power but as a mechanism to ensure “democracy” against “Iran’s regional hegemonic ambitions”. The monarchical Gulf Cooperation Council, the so-called Arab NATO, has expanded military ties with the U.S., and its six members, along with 11 other countries, will join the U.S. in a massive military exercise off the Iranian coast in September.
The oil blockade is in place, the “kinetic actions” (computer worms, sabotage, assassinations) are ongoing, and the show of force is now in the Strait of Hormuz as USS Ponce drops anchor. “We believe a military strike is a feasible option,” says the 2008 report, “and must remain a last resort to retard Iran’s nuclear programme.” The time of the “last resort” seems to have presented itself.
====
In early July, the United States Navy moved a converted transport ship, USS Ponce, into the Persian Gulf to its temporary home off Bahrain’s waters. The Ponce is a floating forward base for military operations in the region. This ship, originally built in 1966 but now retrofitted, is a platform for U.S. Special Forces in the region. It uses an array of helicopters as well as marine divers whose putative work is to assist minesweeping ships but whose other purpose is underwater sabotage.
The Ponce joins USS Enterprise and USS Lincoln, both first class warships that are supported by a considerable battle group. Alongside these vessels are the U.S. Air Force’s quotient of F-22 bombers and F-15C warplanes and the various marine and amphibious Task Forces of the U.S. Fifth Fleet based at the Naval Support Activity station in Manama, Bahrain.
There is a traffic jam of American power in the Persian Gulf. The arrival of the Ponce, the first of a number of “afloat forward staging bases”, raises the capacity of the U.S. forces in the region. It can hover in international waters, housing hundreds of Special Forces troops who can be taken anywhere in the region in helicopters or on fast boats. If the al-Khalifa regime in Bahrain or the Nouri al-Maliki government in Iraq decides that it will not sanction a U.S. attack from its territory, the Ponce will become crucial. It allows the U.S. government freedom to decide when and where it will launch its next assault.
The military build-up in the Gulf comes in the context of a stalemate in the diplomatic effort and an intensified U.S.-European sanctions regime on Iran. The P5+1 (the U.S., United Kingdom, France, China, Russia and Germany) meetings with Iran have largely collapsed through an impossible agenda: the U.S. wants maximum concessions (ending uranium enrichment to the 20 per cent level), which Iran finds unreasonable.
Meanwhile, on July 1, the U.S.-European intensified sanctions went into effect. Its immediate outcome has been a catastrophic decline of up to 40 per cent of Iran’s oil exports. Pressure on India to curtail its import of Iranian oil, if successful, would reduce Iran’s exports further. That India’s General Insurance Corporation has agreed to provide limited cover to tankers carrying Iranian oil to India is an indication that this pipeline may not be secure.
It was always going to be tough to have a genuine dialogue about Iran’s nuclear programme when the U.S. and Europe ramped up their belligerent rhetoric and consolidated their plans to isolate Iran economically. The use of various computer worms (Stuxnet and the Flame malware) combined with the assassination of Iranian scientists reduced the possibility of trust in diplomatic negotiations.
The arrival of the Ponce in the Persian Gulf is not simply about Iran’s nuclear programme. When asked to explain the endgame, a senior Defence Department official told The New York Times, “This is not about Iranian nuclear ambitions, but about Iran’s regional hegemonic ambitions.” The military cognate of this statement is in a 2008 report, which notes that a U.S. military strike “would have to target not only Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, but also its conventional military infrastructure in order to suppress an Iranian response”.
The Obama administration has erased U.S. complicity with the Hosni Mubarak and Zine El Abidine Ben Ali regimes, using the Arab Spring to its advantage and positioning itself as the champion of democracy, mainly through the Syrian theatre. A friendly international media enabled the U.S. to paint Iran as the deterrent to the democratic ambitions of the Arab peoples, given Iran’s links to the Bashar al-Assad regime in Damascus. A military build-up, in this context, appears not as the authoritarian hand of U.S. power but as a mechanism to ensure “democracy” against “Iran’s regional hegemonic ambitions”. The monarchical Gulf Cooperation Council, the so-called Arab NATO, has expanded military ties with the U.S., and its six members, along with 11 other countries, will join the U.S. in a massive military exercise off the Iranian coast in September.
Ajax, part 2
Diplomacy was fated to fail. In the U.S., there is a bipartisan consensus that Iran is beyond conversation. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad provides the caricature of the Oriental despot, and Israel’s siege mentality enables grotesque exaggerations of Iranian intentions to stifle reasonable debate on U.S. policy towards Iran. Like conjoined twins, the Republicans and the Democrats battle each other to appear tougher in the fight against Iran. With the domestic economy in the doldrums, President Barack Obama is running for re-election as the more sane political choice who is tough on foreign policy (illustrated by the drones and the extrajudicial assassinations)
The Gulf of Hormuz provides a theatre for U.S. power in the absence of any discomfort among the U.S. political class. It also provides the two leading political candidates a platform to demonstrate their fealty to Israel and its own ambitions in the region.
Not many people care to articulate or to understand the Iranian position on the conflict, and few realise that Obama’s rhetoric is seen amongst the Iranian intelligentsia and the ruling clerics as a sequel to the Central Intelligence Agency’s 1953 Operation Ajax, which overthrew Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh. It suits the ruling clerics to maintain a level of ambiguity regarding Iran’s nuclear programme, particularly given the example before them of Libya. Muammar Qaddafi ended his country’s programme in 2004 and turned over his centrifuges and other materials to the U.S. (it was on these Iranian designed centrifuges that the U.S. scientists first tested the Stuxnet worm, used against Iran in 2011). His fate reinforces the policy of nuclear ambiguity. Many Iranians see the U.S. demands for a drawdown of its nuclear programme as precisely the first salvo in a new kind of Operation Ajax.
The Iranians do have cause for concern. Obama’s foreign policy advisers in the election campaign of 2008 (Anthony Lake, Susan Rice and Dennis Ross) made common cause with the neoconservatives on the issue of Iran. The Washington Institute for Near Eastern Policy’s (WINEP) 2008 Presidential Task Force included Lake and Susan Rice and it produced an acidic report called “Strengthening the Partnership: How to Deepen U.S.-Israel Cooperation on the Iranian Nuclear Challenge”. The report cautioned that the U.S. might “be reconciling itself to the idea of ‘living with an Iranian nuclear bomb’”, and so proposed “preventative military action” to circumvent such a situation. The lessons of Iraq had not deterred the neoconservatives or the interventionist liberals. Both wanted a repeat performance in Iran.
The WINEP report appears timid beside the September 2008 Bipartisan Policy Centre report (“Meeting the Challenge: U.S. Policy Toward Iranian Nuclear Development”), which included in its drafting Obama’s close Middle East (West Asia) adviser, Dennis Ross. This report debunked diplomacy and called for a muscular, military showdown with Iran. “It must be clear,” the report noted, “that any U.S.-Iranian talks will not be open-ended but will be limited to a pre-determined time period so that Teheran does not try to ‘run out the clock’.” In other words use the time of diplomacy to hasten its nuclear programme.
Since the talks are fated to fail, the report noted, the U.S. needs to “preposition military assets” and to use these for a “show of force” in the waters around Iran. Iran’s oil exports had to be blockaded and the U.S. needed to conduct the mysteriously worded “kinetic actions”.
All this has come to pass. The oil blockade is in place, the “kinetic actions” (computer worms, sabotage, assassinations) are ongoing, and the show of force is now in the Strait of Hormuz as USS Ponce drops anchor. “We believe a military strike is a feasible option,” says the 2008 report, “and must remain a last resort to retard Iran’s nuclear programme.” The time of the “last resort” seems to have presented itself.
Frontline
July 28-August 10, 2012
Ponce in place
Vijay Prashad
====
A friendly international media enabled the U.S. to paint Iran as the deterrent to the democratic ambitions of the Arab peoples, given Iran’s links to the Bashar al-Assad regime in Damascus. A military build-up, in this context, appears not as the authoritarian hand of U.S. power but as a mechanism to ensure “democracy” against “Iran’s regional hegemonic ambitions”. The monarchical Gulf Cooperation Council, the so-called Arab NATO, has expanded military ties with the U.S., and its six members, along with 11 other countries, will join the U.S. in a massive military exercise off the Iranian coast in September.
The oil blockade is in place, the “kinetic actions” (computer worms, sabotage, assassinations) are ongoing, and the show of force is now in the Strait of Hormuz as USS Ponce drops anchor. “We believe a military strike is a feasible option,” says the 2008 report, “and must remain a last resort to retard Iran’s nuclear programme.” The time of the “last resort” seems to have presented itself.
====
In early July, the United States Navy moved a converted transport ship, USS Ponce, into the Persian Gulf to its temporary home off Bahrain’s waters. The Ponce is a floating forward base for military operations in the region. This ship, originally built in 1966 but now retrofitted, is a platform for U.S. Special Forces in the region. It uses an array of helicopters as well as marine divers whose putative work is to assist minesweeping ships but whose other purpose is underwater sabotage.
The Ponce joins USS Enterprise and USS Lincoln, both first class warships that are supported by a considerable battle group. Alongside these vessels are the U.S. Air Force’s quotient of F-22 bombers and F-15C warplanes and the various marine and amphibious Task Forces of the U.S. Fifth Fleet based at the Naval Support Activity station in Manama, Bahrain.
There is a traffic jam of American power in the Persian Gulf. The arrival of the Ponce, the first of a number of “afloat forward staging bases”, raises the capacity of the U.S. forces in the region. It can hover in international waters, housing hundreds of Special Forces troops who can be taken anywhere in the region in helicopters or on fast boats. If the al-Khalifa regime in Bahrain or the Nouri al-Maliki government in Iraq decides that it will not sanction a U.S. attack from its territory, the Ponce will become crucial. It allows the U.S. government freedom to decide when and where it will launch its next assault.
The military build-up in the Gulf comes in the context of a stalemate in the diplomatic effort and an intensified U.S.-European sanctions regime on Iran. The P5+1 (the U.S., United Kingdom, France, China, Russia and Germany) meetings with Iran have largely collapsed through an impossible agenda: the U.S. wants maximum concessions (ending uranium enrichment to the 20 per cent level), which Iran finds unreasonable.
Meanwhile, on July 1, the U.S.-European intensified sanctions went into effect. Its immediate outcome has been a catastrophic decline of up to 40 per cent of Iran’s oil exports. Pressure on India to curtail its import of Iranian oil, if successful, would reduce Iran’s exports further. That India’s General Insurance Corporation has agreed to provide limited cover to tankers carrying Iranian oil to India is an indication that this pipeline may not be secure.
It was always going to be tough to have a genuine dialogue about Iran’s nuclear programme when the U.S. and Europe ramped up their belligerent rhetoric and consolidated their plans to isolate Iran economically. The use of various computer worms (Stuxnet and the Flame malware) combined with the assassination of Iranian scientists reduced the possibility of trust in diplomatic negotiations.
The arrival of the Ponce in the Persian Gulf is not simply about Iran’s nuclear programme. When asked to explain the endgame, a senior Defence Department official told The New York Times, “This is not about Iranian nuclear ambitions, but about Iran’s regional hegemonic ambitions.” The military cognate of this statement is in a 2008 report, which notes that a U.S. military strike “would have to target not only Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, but also its conventional military infrastructure in order to suppress an Iranian response”.
The Obama administration has erased U.S. complicity with the Hosni Mubarak and Zine El Abidine Ben Ali regimes, using the Arab Spring to its advantage and positioning itself as the champion of democracy, mainly through the Syrian theatre. A friendly international media enabled the U.S. to paint Iran as the deterrent to the democratic ambitions of the Arab peoples, given Iran’s links to the Bashar al-Assad regime in Damascus. A military build-up, in this context, appears not as the authoritarian hand of U.S. power but as a mechanism to ensure “democracy” against “Iran’s regional hegemonic ambitions”. The monarchical Gulf Cooperation Council, the so-called Arab NATO, has expanded military ties with the U.S., and its six members, along with 11 other countries, will join the U.S. in a massive military exercise off the Iranian coast in September.
Ajax, part 2
Diplomacy was fated to fail. In the U.S., there is a bipartisan consensus that Iran is beyond conversation. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad provides the caricature of the Oriental despot, and Israel’s siege mentality enables grotesque exaggerations of Iranian intentions to stifle reasonable debate on U.S. policy towards Iran. Like conjoined twins, the Republicans and the Democrats battle each other to appear tougher in the fight against Iran. With the domestic economy in the doldrums, President Barack Obama is running for re-election as the more sane political choice who is tough on foreign policy (illustrated by the drones and the extrajudicial assassinations)
The Gulf of Hormuz provides a theatre for U.S. power in the absence of any discomfort among the U.S. political class. It also provides the two leading political candidates a platform to demonstrate their fealty to Israel and its own ambitions in the region.
Not many people care to articulate or to understand the Iranian position on the conflict, and few realise that Obama’s rhetoric is seen amongst the Iranian intelligentsia and the ruling clerics as a sequel to the Central Intelligence Agency’s 1953 Operation Ajax, which overthrew Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh. It suits the ruling clerics to maintain a level of ambiguity regarding Iran’s nuclear programme, particularly given the example before them of Libya. Muammar Qaddafi ended his country’s programme in 2004 and turned over his centrifuges and other materials to the U.S. (it was on these Iranian designed centrifuges that the U.S. scientists first tested the Stuxnet worm, used against Iran in 2011). His fate reinforces the policy of nuclear ambiguity. Many Iranians see the U.S. demands for a drawdown of its nuclear programme as precisely the first salvo in a new kind of Operation Ajax.
The Iranians do have cause for concern. Obama’s foreign policy advisers in the election campaign of 2008 (Anthony Lake, Susan Rice and Dennis Ross) made common cause with the neoconservatives on the issue of Iran. The Washington Institute for Near Eastern Policy’s (WINEP) 2008 Presidential Task Force included Lake and Susan Rice and it produced an acidic report called “Strengthening the Partnership: How to Deepen U.S.-Israel Cooperation on the Iranian Nuclear Challenge”. The report cautioned that the U.S. might “be reconciling itself to the idea of ‘living with an Iranian nuclear bomb’”, and so proposed “preventative military action” to circumvent such a situation. The lessons of Iraq had not deterred the neoconservatives or the interventionist liberals. Both wanted a repeat performance in Iran.
The WINEP report appears timid beside the September 2008 Bipartisan Policy Centre report (“Meeting the Challenge: U.S. Policy Toward Iranian Nuclear Development”), which included in its drafting Obama’s close Middle East (West Asia) adviser, Dennis Ross. This report debunked diplomacy and called for a muscular, military showdown with Iran. “It must be clear,” the report noted, “that any U.S.-Iranian talks will not be open-ended but will be limited to a pre-determined time period so that Teheran does not try to ‘run out the clock’.” In other words use the time of diplomacy to hasten its nuclear programme.
Since the talks are fated to fail, the report noted, the U.S. needs to “preposition military assets” and to use these for a “show of force” in the waters around Iran. Iran’s oil exports had to be blockaded and the U.S. needed to conduct the mysteriously worded “kinetic actions”.
All this has come to pass. The oil blockade is in place, the “kinetic actions” (computer worms, sabotage, assassinations) are ongoing, and the show of force is now in the Strait of Hormuz as USS Ponce drops anchor. “We believe a military strike is a feasible option,” says the 2008 report, “and must remain a last resort to retard Iran’s nuclear programme.” The time of the “last resort” seems to have presented itself.