Moonlighters recall accomplishments, changes after completing second successful tour in Iraq
Submitted by: 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing
Story Identification #: 20059284242
Story by Cpl. Cullen J. Tiernan



AL ASAD, Iraq (Sept. 28, 2005) -- When duty in Iraq called twice in two years, they were ready and continued their steadfast support of the Iraqi people and their desire to live in freedom.

The Moonlighters of Marine Medium Helicopter Squadron 764, Marine Aircraft Group 26, 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing, have recently finished their second deployment in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

HMM-764 is a reserve CH-46E Sea Knight squadron based out of Edwards Air Force Base, Calif. The Moonlighters will be returning to the United States after flying 3,800 mishap-free combat hours, transporting 14,918 passengers and hauling 26,972 pounds of cargo.

“Our primary mission was assault support,” said Lt. Col. Jacques Naviaux, the commanding officer of HMM-764. “Seven days a week, 24 hours a day, we were ready to move Marines, Soldiers and Iraqis throughout the area of operations.”

In a country where the roads are plagued with improvised explosive devices, the Moonlighters provided a much safer mode of transportation, flying Marines over the IED threat.

“We were able to save lives by being here,” said the San Diego native. “Seventy percent of our missions were flown under the cover of darkness. The Marines of HMM-764 thrived in a combat environment.”

Although Marines can sometimes get complacent at Al Asad, Naviaux said that the enemy threat is very real.

“We had a rocket land on the flightline, damaging three of our aircraft,” said Naviaux. “We were able to repair them over here, but it served as a reminder to all the Marines that we are in a combat zone.”

Marines throughout the squadron will go home with war stories, memories of turning wrenches in 120 degree heat, and many different experiences from two deployments into combat zones.

“I remember one time during (Marine Corps Marital Arts Program) training,” said Cpl. Deborah Myatt, an administrative clerk with HMM-764 from Lancaster, Calif. “It was 10 a.m. and we were finished for the day. We all put our hands in for the motivational cheer and boom, (indirect fire) goes off real loud and real close. I found out later it hit a gunnery sergeant in the face and she was later awarded the Purple Heart.”

While deployed, the Moonlighters didn’t let the high operational tempo stop them from training. They earned 60 different higher belts in the MCMAP, attended college courses, fired and carried the M-1014 Joint Service Combat shotgun, trained new crew chiefs and had eight combat meritorious promotions.

“Their maturity, confidence level and the way the Marines carry themselves has been extremely professional,” said Sgt. Maj. Daniel D. Townsend, the sergeant major of HMM-764. “It was a phenomenal task keeping the aircraft constantly flying and every Marine in the squadron attributed to that effort. We had great support from MAG-26 and Marine Aviation Logistics Squadron-26. The entire 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing welcomed us with open arms. It was a total team effort.”

The Columbus, Ohio, native, said the back-to-back deployments were especially hard on the families of reservists who do not live close to a Marine Corps installation. He said the Moonlighters’ Key Volunteer Network was fabulous and the communication from Al Asad to the United States was consistent.

“It was a good, quick seven-month deployment,” said Myatt, who is the current noncommissioned officer of the quarter for HMM-764, MAG-26 and 2nd MAW. “The time went by fast because we were constantly working, training and learning. We lived in a building with a cement roof, so I felt safer sleeping at night.

“While I’ve been here I’ve matured, and thought more about my life and career goals. If I don’t pick up sergeant and make it to the drill field, I know I want to be in the reserves for at least 20 years.”

Some of the Moonlighters said their second deployment wasn’t as exciting as their first, but they all are ready to get back to their families and loved ones.

“You make do with what you have,” said Cpl. Jarred Bolin, an avionics technician with HMM-764. “We have already been through this, under harder conditions. Now at Al Asad, we have running water. Even if the water isn’t clean enough to drink, it’s a luxury. Getting the birds up to fly missions was a fast-paced mission and we transported a lot of troops.”

According to Townsend, the Marines will leave Iraq with an experience level head and shoulders above what it was, as well as a couple pounds sweated out on the flightline in the desert heat.

“I’m a better Marine and I think a better person,” said Myatt. “One day at the (dinning facility) we met some people who spoke broken and had been tortured under the Saddam’s regime. One didn’t have an ear, and another’s brother had his tongue cut out of his mouth. Talking to them, I realized it’s not about (weapons of mass destruction) or fighting, it’s about people. People shouldn’t have to live in fear.

“These people didn’t have the freedom of speech we take for granted in the United States, like the right to protest. They are fighting to have their own country now. I think the Iraqi police are so brave. They put their lives and their family’s lives on the line every day so they might one day live in freedom.”

http://www.marines.mil/marinelink/mcn2000....A5?opendocument

“Black Three” rides again
Submitted by: II Marine Expeditionary Force (FWD)
Story Identification #: 200592944324
Story by Lance Cpl. Josh Cox



CAMP FALLUJAH, Iraq (Sept. 29, 2005) -- One team of Marines operating with 2nd Tank Battalion, 2nd Marine Division, bound together after facing the effects of a deadly improvised explosive device here.

While conducting routine operations with the tanks May 1, the gun truck, known as “Black Three,” was hit by an IED. Marines from Headquarters Platoon, Bravo Company, 2nd Tank Bn., 2nd Marine Division affected by the explosion, Lance Cpls. Jamby Perez and Brandon Wells, and Sgt. Brent Sheets, were riding in the vehicle when the blast occurred.

“It went off right beside our truck,” said Sheets, the truck’s vehicle commander. “We really didn’t have any good way to detect that it was there because the side of the roads were covered in trash.”

Perez, who is a motor transport operator with Bravo Company, said when the IED detonated, the boom was so deafening he temporarily lost his hearing, except for intense ringing in his ears.

“All I heard was sirens,” said Perez, describing his ear’s reaction to the blast. “It was like a police car. I didn’t hear the actual IED go off.”

When Perez realized what was going on, he and others rushed to help fellow Marines who were injured.

“I looked to my right and saw my vehicle commander, Sgt. Sheets,” said Perez, who was piloting the armored humvee at the time of the blast. “Sgt. Sheets was able to get out of the vehicle, but he just collapsed. He was bleeding from his nose and he couldn’t move his knee. I saw my gunner (Wells), and he was dripping blood, but I just didn’t know where it was coming from. He was walking around because he was so hyped up.”

Marines of “Black Two,” another humvee operating with Bravo Company, did what they could to calm and aid their injured teammates until they could be evacuated from the scene.

The “Black Three” driver came out of the explosion unscathed.

“I was the only one who didn’t get hurt,” said Perez. “The biggest two pieces of shrapnel that went through the truck missed me by inches. It would have taken half of my leg off. That’s pretty scary.”

After the attack, Perez was able to return to duty within a week, while the other Marines of “Black Three” recuperated from wounds received in the explosion.

“It took me about two weeks,” said Sheets. “I missed one mission.”

According to Sheets, Wells was back in the turret three weeks later.

“We were able to overcome it through each other, giving each other support,” said Perez. “We were kind of scared of going back out there. Somehow we were just able to overcome it.”

Sheets said the incident made him angry, and he was ready to get back into the fight as soon as he could.

“It makes you push a lot harder when you are out in the field to find the bad guys, because you don’t want that stuff to happen to any other Marine,” he said.

There is something special about the bond the “Black Three” Marines created supporting 2nd Tank Bn., in Iraq, and an IED didn’t stop the team from thriving through the rest of the deployment.

“The bond that we have, I never thought it was possible,” said Perez. “Our crew has never been separated.”

Sheets said the Marines who serve as a quick reaction force for the tanks, dubbed “The Rat Pack,” are a close-knit group in the battalion.

“I think honestly out of everyone in Bravo Company, we have a really good bond because we are always the ones going out with the tanks and clearing these buildings, and we depend on each other a lot more,” said Sheets. “When you go clear buildings and you have that man covering you while you are going in, there is a bond that gets a lot thicker.”

“Black Three” has been very instrumental during operations while attached with 2nd Tank Bn.

“If tanks have a certain mission, we will be the ones to clear houses in that area so the tankers don’t have to dismount,” said Sheets. “We get more involved with the ground than they do. If a tank breaks down, we will go out and set up security for the tanks while they are fixing the problem in the field.”

A deadly IED wasn’t enough to break the bond among the Marines of “Black Three,” or enough to stop the mission of Bravo Company in Operation Iraqi Freedom.

EDITOR’S NOTE
Please feel free to publish this story or any of the accompanying photos. If used, please give proper credit to the writer/photographer, and contact us at: cepaowo@cemnf-wiraq.usmc.mil so we can update our records.

http://www.marines.mil/marinelink/mcn2000....55?opendocument

Dallas, Ga., native serves to follow dad’s footsteps
Submitted by: 2nd Marine Division
Story by: Computed Name: Sgt. Jerad W. Alexander

Story Identification #: 20059245029




CAMP AL QA’IM, Iraq(Sept. 24, 2005) -- Dallas, Ga., native Cpl. Richard E. Scarlett III spent his entire life around the Marine Corps, traveling to the various Marine posts around the globe, long before he could even vote, drive, pay taxes, or even wear the uniform of a United States Marine.

Scarlett, now serving with the Motor Transportation Platoon, Headquarters & Service Company, 3rd Battalion, 6th Marine Regiment, traveled the world with his father, Richard E. Scarlett Jr., a now-retired Marine master sergeant.

While growing up, he moved with his family to various Marine Corps postings including Camp Pendleton, Okinawa, Quantico, and Camp Lejeune, according to Scarlett.

“Growing up around the Marine Corps helped me adjust to some of the things I’ve experienced in the Marines,” said Scarlett, who served in Afghanistan before coming to Iraq. “Moving around was pretty easy for me.”

Roughly two years after graduating Quantico High School in Quantico, Va., Scarlett followed his father and enlisted in the Marine Corps in 2003.

“He didn’t push me, but thought it was a good idea,” he said. “I thought the Marine Corps would help me grow up as a person,” Scarlett said. “Before, I was lazy and didn’t do much, now I have a better work ethic.”

He also joined because he wanted to be like his father, he said.

While in the Marine Corps, Scarlett’s father was an ammunition technician. Working with ammunition, however, wasn’t something Scarlett wanted.

“I like to work with my hands, so [motor transportation] was the best thing,” he said.

During his first year in the Marine Corps, if there was anything Scarlett didn’t understand about the Marine Corps, he could simply turn and ask his father, which, according to Scarlett, was a big help.

Currently, Scarlett isn’t sure about what exactly he wants to do in the future but is investigating the possibility of going to school to become a crime scene investigator.


http://www.marines.mil/marinelink/mcn2000....db?OpenDocument

Experiences never forgotten
Lance Cpl. Antonio Rosas


“Once captured, there is no comprehending what goes through your head,” said former Marine and Vietnam prisoner of war, Walter W. Eckes, 59, who spoke at the Camp Pendleton Naval Hospital’s 15th annual Prisoner of War/Missing in Action remembrance ceremony Sept 16.

The first national commemoration for POWs/MIAs was July 18, 1979. Since then, Congress has passed yearly resolutions for the tribute. But in 1996, a presidential proclamation designated the third Friday in September as National POW/MIA Recognition Day.

For the commemoration in 1991, the hospital planted a tree as a living memorial to the 10 Navy corpsmen still missing in action, some since 1963.

“It may only be a statistic for some, but it’s a terrible tragedy to someone who knows that individual (a prisoner of war),” said Navy Capt. James J. Ware, acting commanding officer, Naval Hospital Camp Pendleton.

Today, more than 25 feet tall, the tree serves as a reminder to the families and friends of those still unaccounted for that they are not forgotten. Families, retired servicemembers and current military leaders gathered for the event in order to acknowledge that those still unaccounted for will not be forgotten.

Eckes, one of a few servicemembers to successfully escape from a POW camp during the Vietnam War, described to the crowd of more than 100 teary-eyed people, his experiences at a POW camp.

“Every prisoner was treated differently. Fear is always in your mind. Basically they (the guards) could do anything they wanted to us, and that included torture,” said Eckes.

Although his hair has grown to a considerable length past his shoulders, Eckes continues to maintain the Marine spirit that helped keep him alive as a POW and speaks at colleges across the nation about his experiences.

“If there is something that I took from my experience it is that whatever you take on, don’t quit,” Eckes said.

In 1998, the Defense Auth-orization Act made it a law that the POW/MIA flag be flown on Memorial Day, Armed Forces Day, Flag Day, Veterans Day, Independence Day, and POW and MIA Recognition Day.

http://www.cpp.usmc.mil/scout/articles/sept%2029/xp.asp

General Predicts Victory Through Iraqi People's Determination
By Sgt. Sara Wood, USA
American Forces Press Service


WASHINGTON, Sept. 29, 2005 – The determination of the Iraqi people to resist terrorists and to advance the cause of democracy in their country is what will win the war there, a military official in Baghdad said today.
The Iraqi people have already shown a great will and determination to establish a free country, and progress is made continually, Army Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch, a Multinational Force Iraq spokesman, said at a news briefing.

"The people of Iraq are uniting to kick the terrorists and foreign fighters out of their country," he said. "We're seeing more of that every day."

Iraqi citizens routinely supply Iraqi security forces and coalition forces with information about terrorists and their activities, which often leads to successful operations, he said. Also, Iraqi security forces continue training and are increasing in size and effectiveness, he said.

"There is great progress with the Iraqi security forces, not just on numbers," he said. "We are seeing increased capabilities on the part of the Iraqi security forces throughout Iraq on a daily basis. It's amazing progress."

There are now more than 195,000 trained and equipped security forces, and they will be ready to provide security for the constitutional referendum in October, Lynch said. Coalition forces will still be in Iraq to provide support, he added.

"There will be a safe and secure referendum in October," he said.

A surge in violence undoubtedly will occur around the referendum, but Iraqi and coalition forces are prepared to fight the terrorists, Lynch said. Effectiveness of terrorist attacks has not increased, even though the number has, he said, and the violence is isolated to four provinces.

As the Muslim holy month of Ramadan approaches, the Iraqi government, in conjunction with coalition forces, is releasing about 1,000 detainees, Lynch said. Already, 500 have been released, and 500 more will be by the end of this week, he said. These detainees were chosen for release by a special release board consisting of Iraqi and coalition officials, he explained.

When the detainees are released, they are given new clothing, a copy of the Koran and $25 to help start their new life, Lynch said. Iraq's deputy prime minister speaks to them and urges them to go back to their families and be productive members of society, he added.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Sep2005/20050929_2880.html

'As Iraqis Stand Up, We Will Stand Down,' Bush Tells Nation
By John D. Banusiewicz
American Forces Press Service


WASHINGTON, June 28, 2005 – On the one-year anniversary of the transfer of sovereignty in Iraq to a transitional Iraqi government, President Bush tonight promised that U.S. forces would remain in Iraq until the job is complete, "but not one day longer."

President Bush told troops at Fort Bragg, N.C., June 28 that the terrorists in Iraq will fail. He said "terrorists do not understand America. The American people do not falter under threat. And we will not allow our future to be determined by car bombers and assassins." White House photo by Eric Draper

In a nationally televised speech at Fort Bragg, N.C., the president cited progress in Iraq and emphasized that the best way to complete the mission is to help the Iraqi people build a free nation they can govern and defend themselves.

"The principal task of our military is to find and defeat the terrorists," he said. "And that is why we are on the offense. And as we pursue the terrorists, our military is helping to train Iraqi security forces so that they can defend their people and fight the enemy on their own. Our strategy can be summed up this way: As the Iraqis stand up, we will stand down."

More than 160,000 Iraqi security forces are now trained and equipped, Bush said. Some, he said, are capable of operating independently, and others now are experienced enough to plan and execute anti-terrorist operations with coalition support. Some units still are forming, the president said, and the task of training them continues with three new approaches.

"First, we are partnering coalition units with Iraqi units," he explained. "These coalition-Iraqi teams are conducting operations together in the field. These combined operations are giving Iraqis a chance to experience how the most professional armed forces in the world operate in combat."

The second approach has coalition transition teams living, working and fighting together with their Iraqi comrades, Bush said. "Under U.S. command, they're providing battlefield advice and assistance to Iraqi forces during combat operations. Between battles, they are assisting the Iraqis with important skills, such as urban combat and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance techniques."

The third approach involves working with the Iraqi ministries of interior and defense to improve their capabilities to coordinate anti-terrorist operations. "We're helping them develop command-and-control structures," Bush said. "We're also providing them with civilian and military leadership training, so Iraq's new leaders can effectively manage their forces in the fight against terror."

Some 2,000 Iraqi security forces have died in the line of duty, the president pointed out. "Iraqi forces have fought bravely, helping to capture terrorists and insurgents in Najaf and Samarra, Fallujah and Mosul," he said. "And in the past month, Iraqi forces have led a major anti-terrorist campaign in Baghdad called Operation Lightning, which has led to the capture of hundreds of suspected insurgents. Like free people everywhere, Iraqis want to be defended by their own countrymen. And we are helping Iraqis assume those duties.

"The progress in the past year has been significant," he said, "and we have a clear path forward."

Acknowledging that the mission in Iraq is "difficult and dangerous," Bush said the mission also is clear. "We're hunting down the terrorists. We're helping Iraqis build a free nation that is an ally in the war on terror. We're advancing freedom in the broader Middle East. We are removing a source of violence and instability, and laying the foundation of peace for our children and our grandchildren."

Bush said that like all Americans, he sees "horrifying" images of the war. "And the suffering is real," he said.

"Some of the violence you see in Iraq is being carried out by ruthless killers who are converging on Iraq to fight the advance of peace and freedom," the president said. "Our military reports that we have killed or captured hundreds of foreign fighters in Iraq who have come from Saudi Arabia, and Syria, Iran, Egypt, Sudan, Yemen, Libya, and others. They are making common cause with criminal elements, Iraqi insurgents and remnants of Saddam Hussein's regime who want to restore the old order."

And the enemy, he said, is brutal.

"We see the nature of the enemy in terrorists who exploded car bombs along a busy shopping street in Baghdad, including one outside a mosque," he said. "We see the nature of the enemy in terrorists who sent a suicide bomber to a teaching hospital in Mosul. We see the nature of the enemy in terrorists who behead civilian hostages and broadcast their atrocities for the world to see."

But "savage acts of violence," Bush noted, have not brought the terrorists any closer to achieving their strategic objectives.

"The terrorists, both foreign and Iraqi, failed to stop the transfer of sovereignty," he said. "They failed to break our coalition and force a mass withdrawal by our allies. They failed to incite an Iraqi civil war. They failed to prevent free elections. They failed to stop the formation of a democratic Iraqi government that represents all of Iraq's diverse population, and they failed to stop Iraqis from signing up in large number with the police forces and the army to defend their new democracy."

Bush noted that Libya has abandoned its designs on nuclear and chemical weapons, and that steps toward freedom and democracy are taking place in the Middle East. "Our strategy to defend ourselves and spread freedom is working," he said. "The rise of freedom in this vital region will eliminate the conditions that feed radicalism and ideologies of murder, and make our nation safer."

Though much has been accomplished, much remains to be done, Bush said.

"We have more work to do, and there will be tough moments that test America's resolve," he said. "We're fighting against men with blind hatred and armed with lethal weapons, who are capable of any atrocity. They wear no uniform. They respect no laws of warfare or morality. They take innocent lives to create chaos for the cameras. They are trying to shake our will in Iraq, just as they tried to shake our will on Sept. 11, 2001.

"They will fail," he continued. "The terrorists do not understand America. The American people do not falter under threat. And we will not allow our future to be determined by car bombers and assassins."

http://www.dod.mil/news/Jun2005/20050628_1894.html

From left to right, Staff Sgt. Josie E. Harshe, flight engineer; Capt. Anita T. Mack, navigator; 1st Lt. Siobhan Couturier, pilot; Capt. Carol J. Mitchell, aircraft commander; and loadmasters Tech. Sgt. Sigrid M. Carrero-Perez and Senior Airman Ci Ci Alonzo, pause in the cargo bay of their C-130 for a group photo following their historic flight. U.S. Air Force photo


First All-female Crew Flies Combat Mission
A crew of six Airmen at a forward deployed location climbed aboard a
C-130 Hercules together recently for the first time

By U.S. Air Force Capt. Michael G. Johnson
386th Air Expeditionary Wing Public Affairs
SOUTHWEST ASIA, Sept. 27, 2005 — A crew of six Airmen at a forward deployed location climbed aboard a C-130 Hercules together recently for the first time in their careers. But something distinguished this mission from others they had flown --it was the first time an all-female C-130 crew flew a combat mission.
Capt. Carol Mitchell, aircraft commander; 1st Lt. Siobhan Couturier, pilot; Capt. Anita T. Mack, navigator; Staff Sgt. Josie E. Harshe, flight engineer; and loadmasters Tech. Sgt. Sigrid M. Carrero-Perez and Senior Airman Ci Ci Alonzo are all permanently assigned to the 43rd Airlift Wing at Pope Air Force Base, N.C., and currently are deployed to the 737th Expeditionary Airlift Squadron flying cargo and troops in and out of Iraq, Afghanistan and the Horn of Africa.

" “It was a great experience not many females can say they’ve had, however I don’t believe the Air Force should seek out all-female crews -- instead, we should focus on experience."

U.S. Air Force Senior Airman Ci Ci Alonzo

While some would call their mission “historic,” they feel this mission should be recognized like every other flight -- a successful combat mission.

“I enjoyed flying with this crew, but I don’t think we should go out of our way to have all-female crews,” said Captain Mitchell. “It took a long time for women to become accepted as aircrew members, and now that we are, we would be taking a step back by singling ourselves out rather than blending in with the rest of the Air Force.”

Airman Alonzo agrees. “It was a great experience not many females can say they’ve had,” she said. However I don’t believe the Air Force should seek out all-female crews -- instead, we should focus on experience.

“(The Air Force) should have the best crews they can put together. Nothing other than qualification and ability should be considered,” said Captain Mack.

Not only did this all female crew fly together for the first time, 6,800 miles from home-station, but they flew the mission on a Vietnam-era airplane -- a significance the crew did not miss.



“Our (aircraft) was a 1962 model. (It) came off the line when women weren’t accepted as C-130 aircrew, let alone in combat,” said Sergeant Harshe.

After the excitement of this all-female C-130 crew flying the first combat mission together wore off, they focused on what really mattered.

“(What matters is) knowing we’re making a difference and seeing it with every mission we fly,“ said Airman Alonzo. "(It's also) moving troops into the theater where they’re needed, seeing the excitement and relief on the faces of the guys and gals we take out of theater who have been there for six months to a year and are on their way home to their loved ones."

During the mission, the crew transported 151 Marines and their equipment.

Another thing they all agreed upon, the mission was a true experience.

“It was a fun thing to be able to say you did, if only once. Not that it is better, this was just different, and probably won’t happen for us again anytime soon just because of the sheer numbers,” said Sergeant Harshe.

Captain Mitchell said one additional benefit of this all female flight was gaining a different perspective.

“One way to avoid (complacency) is to mix the crews up a little, fly with some different people to get a different perspective,” she said. “And what better way to mix the crews up than by putting all the girls on the same crew?”

While the all-female crew did accomplish a unique milestone together, they point out that the significance of their mission success is that every crewmember achieved personal goals to get there.

“I encourage any girl or woman to do what she wants. Too often I hear people say they can’t do something (but it is) because they don’t realize they have the opportunity,” Captain Mack said. “I would tell any person flying is an attainable goal for anyone who wants to work for it. As they say, you are only limited in what you can do by what you can dream.”



http://www.defendamerica.mil/articles/sep2...a092705wm3.html

Two Afghan National Army engineer soldiers demonstrate their new skills as one operates an Italian-made bulldozer and the other gives hand signals. The demonstration was a part of the Afghan National Army engineer training course graduation ceremony. Office of Security Cooperation-Afghanistan photo by U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Victoria Meyer

Afghan Army Builds on Engineering Skills
The training covered heavy engineer machinery operation, force
protection, and natural disaster and relief operations.

By Army Capt. Cenethea Harraway
Office of Security Cooperation-Afghanistan
KABUL, Afghanistan, Sept. 29, 2005 — The Afghan National Army recently graduated 26 engineers from a six-week training course that built upon their engineering skills at Camp Invictia, on the outskirts of Kabul.
This was the second graduation of Afghan National Army engineers from the course and highlights the ongoing partnership between the International Security Assistance Force and the Office of Security Cooperation-Afghanistan to increase the capabilities of the Afghan Army.

The Multinational Engineer Group of International Security Assistance Force's Kabul Multinational Brigade conducted the training course which consisted of realistic, hands-on training and timely examinations to ensure course objectives were met.

"I have a very good feeling about my profession as an engineer. We can destroy the enemy's bunkers and clear paths for friendly forces. I will go back to my unit and train my soldiers and fellow noncommissioned officers."

Afghan National Army Sgt. Gulrahman

Afghan National Army Brig. Gen. Mohammad Amin Wardak, chief of Education for the Ministry of Defense, told the graduates the training was important to the Afghan Army's success. "This training is vital to sustaining the [Afghan National Army]," he said. "Take the skills learned here from our international friends and use them in your daily tasks.

"The [Ministry of Defense] is committed to providing the necessary machinery to equip all support units," Wardak said.

Italian and Greek instructors presented most of the course instruction, and the students enjoyed the opportunity to train on equipment from three nations -Italy, Greece and the United States.

Training was conducted in phases, starting with learning the basics of operating heavy engineer machinery like excavators and bulldozers.

The following phase covered force protection, with students applying their new skills and using engineer equipment to erect various force protection defenses at the new Afghan National Army compound at the Pol-e-Charkhi range. The intent was to teach the engineers how to operate in a working area and train to defend a forward operating base.

The final training phases focused on horizontal construction and natural disaster and relief operations, using their previous training in a field environment.


An Afghan National Army engineer from the 4th Kandak (Battalion) explains to his commander, Afghan National Army Lt. Col. Aminjan (second from right), the process of building a force protection barrier with concertina wire. Office of Security Cooperation-Afghanistan photo by U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Victoria Meyer



An Afghan National Army engineer renders a salute to Afghan National Army Brig. Gen. Mohammad Amin Wardak, the chief of Education for the Ministry of Defense, as he is presented his graduation certificate. Italian Army Capt. Umberto Cuvzio (right), the chief of Operations for the Multinational Engineer Group, assists as other senior officials from the Afghan National Army and coalition forces look on. Office of Security Cooperation-Afghanistan photo by U.S. Army Sgt. Mason Lowery


"I have a very good feeling about my profession as an engineer. We can destroy the enemy's bunkers and clear paths for friendly forces," said Afghan National Army Sgt. Gulrahman, a platoon sergeant from the 3rd Brigade, 201st Corps' 4th Kandak (Battalion). "I will go back to my unit and train my soldiers and fellow noncommissioned officers."

Afghan National Army Capt. Abdul Mobin demonstrates his new engineering skills as he operates an Italian-made tracked excavator. The demonstration was part of the Afghan National Army engineer training course graduation ceremony. Office of Security Cooperation-Afghanistan photo by U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Victoria Meyer


Afghan National Army Lt. Col. Aminjan, the kandak commander, echoed the sentiments of his noncommissioned officer. "I feel good about the progress of the [Afghan National Army] and we should be able to support the [Afghan National Army] units any time in combat and during deployments," he said.

"We have been trained by [International Security Assistance Force] and coalition forces to clear and destroy the landmines, to work with heavy machinery like bulldozers and excavators, and we know how to build ranges, dig trenches and prepare defensive positions for tanks and other artillery," said Aminjan. "Now, we have the skills to support our units!"

"The engineering course was difficult, but the involvement of coalition forces, trainers and trainees produced good results," said Italian Army Lt. Col. Walter Corvaglia, the MNEG commander. Corvaglia said that due to the successful coalition partnership, the training will be repeated in October for the next class of Afghan National Army engineers.

U.S. Marine Corps 1st Lt. Colin Flynn and Marine Gunnery Sgt. David Harris check the fit of a camouflage utility blouse on a Georgian soldier at Krtsanisi, Georgia, Sept. 9, 2005. The gear has been permanently issued as a donation to the 22nd Light Infantry Battalion as part of the Georgia Sustainment and Stability Operations Program mission, which is to assist and enhance Georgia's military capability to sustain its contribution to the allied effort in Iraq. Defense Dept. photo by U.S. Marine Corps Staff Sgt. Jonathan Moor


Marines Issue Equipment to Georgian Soldiers
The gear will assist and enhance Georgia's military capability to sustain its
contribution to the allied effort in Iraq.

By U.S. Marine Corps Staff Sgt. Jonathan Moor
U.S. Marine Forces, Europe
KRTSANISI, Georgia, Sept. 28, 2005 — U.S. Marines here have been issuing the Republic of Georgia's 22nd Light Infantry Battalion 275 types of equipment ranging from weapons, vehicles and uniforms to pencils, folding chairs and mess kits.
Part of U.S. European Command's Georgia Sustainment and Stability Operations Program, the ongoing gear issue at the Krtsanisi National Training Area here, which began Aug. 17, is almost complete, said U.S. Marine Corps 1st Lt. Marcelino Hsie, program logistics officer.

Hsie said the gear has been permanently issued as a donation to the 22nd Battalion under parameters the Georgia Sustainment and Stability Operations Program mission, which is to assist and enhance Georgia's military capability to sustain its contribution to the allied effort in Iraq.

Georgia's program-trained troops form part of the dedicated force called for in U.N. Security Council Resolution 1546 to protect U.N. forces in Iraq.

"[The Georgian soldiers] take nothing we give them for granted. They're very appreciative, and they take extremely good care of their things."

U.S. Marine Corps Gunnery Sgt. David Harris

Georgia needs the assistance, due to the Georgian military's limited resources.

"These guys came to us with pretty much nothing except a set of cammies and their [weapons]," Hsie said. "We're just trying to properly equip them."

The gear issue covers all aspects of equipment needed to professionalize a battalion. The individual soldiers have already received the majority of their individual issue.

"We gave them the full issue that a military soldier would need just to do his job and do it properly," said U.S. Marine Gunnery Sgt. David Harris, program logistics chief. "It's extremely important due to the fact that they will be properly equipped to fight the battle, and it gives them the morale of looking like soldiers and having the equipment to do the job."

The United States and several other nations donated the supplies to Georgia as part of European Command's Georgia Sustainment and Stability Operations Program. Hungary donated weapons. The Czech Republic and Romania contributed ammunition.

Hsie said each of the 558 members of the 22nd Battalion received about $4,000 in gear in addition to equipment issued to the unit such as trucks and general-purpose tents.


U.S. Marine Corps Gunnery Sgt. David Harris issues a camouflage utility blouse to a Republic of Georgia 22nd Light Infantry Battalion soldier at Krtsanisi, Georgia, Sept. 9, 2005. Defense Dept. photo by U.S. Marine Corps Staff Sgt. Jonathan Moor



U.S. Marine Corps 1st Lt. Marcelino Hsie fits a Kevlar helmet for one of Georgia's 22nd Light Infantry Battalion soldiers at Krtsanisi, Georgia, Aug. 24, 2005, during the initial issue of gear purchased by donor nations. Defense Dept. photo by U.S. Army Spc. David Brown


We gave them three [Russian] five-ton Ural 4320 cargo trucks, six British Land Rovers, three hard top and three soft top, and one Land Rover ambulance purchased from a vendor in Turkey," Hsie said, highlighting some of the more costly items.

Other categories of equipment issued to the 22nd Battalion were administrative supplies such as paper, dry-erase boards, markers and cleaning supplies such as brooms and disinfectant.

"We gave them all their training supplies too: all their targets, ear plugs, pasties and other equipment required to run a [firing] range," Hsie explained.

The battalion was also received office furniture and standard-of-living amenities like kerosene heaters for use in the winter.

One of the challenges that arose during the issue process was with the first-aid kits when they arrived: they were not adequate for the Iraq mission.

"The first aid kits were really small. Our medical personnel determined that they would be insufficient for their mission, so they're ordering ones like our IFAKs (Improved First Aid Kits)," Hsie explained. The kits that arrived in the initial order will be issued to non-deploying units.

Harris said something that stood out in his mind was the Georgian soldiers' appreciation for the gear they were given.

"The majority of it is just the attitude, saying 'thank you,'" Harris said. "You can see it in their eyes as their going through the line. They're happy to be getting the equipment we're giving them.

"Because they've never had anything, everything they get they take great care of," Harris explained. "They don't like getting their uniforms dirty or anything like that because they only have two or three sets."

The Georgian soldiers' appreciation for the new gear extends beyond their personal equipment to the unit items issued to the 22nd Battalion. While the Land Rovers are currently being used for daily battalion functions, the original shipping plastic can still be seen covering the seats in an effort to preserve the quality of the vehicles as long as possible.

Harris concluded, "They take nothing we give them for granted. They're very appreciative, and they take extremely good care of their things."






http://www.defendamerica.mil/articles/sep2...a092805pj1.html

America Supports You: Country Star Tritt Honors Special Ops
American Forces Press Service


TAMPA, Fla., March 22, 2005 – Country music star Travis Tritt will join the Special Operations Warrior Foundation at an April 24 dinner honoring the special operations servicemembers killed 25 years ago during an ill-fated secret mission planned to rescue American hostages being held in Iran.

Country music star Travis Tritt will perform at the Eagle Claw 25th Anniversary Dinner in Fort Walton Beach, Fla., April 24 to support the Special Operations Warrior Foundation. The foundation provides scholarships to the children of special operations personnel killed in training or on operational missions. The dinner marks the 25th anniversary of a failed attempt to rescue 53 Americans held hostage by Iranian militants. Courtesy photo (Click photo for screen-resolution image);high-resolution image available.

The mission, nicknamed Eagle Claw, attempted to rescue the 53 Americans being held hostage in a heavily guarded embassy compound by Iranian militants. But a collision between an MH-53 helicopter and an Air Force C-130 resulted in eight servicemembers being killed and several others injured in an Iranian desert. The eight dead servicemembers left behind 12 children. The accident led to the founding of the Special Operations Warrior Foundation.

The dinner will be held in Fort Walton Beach, Fla.

Tritt, who has been called “one of country music’s most soulful and versatile vocalists” by Billboard magazine, will perform at the commemorative dinner.

A nonprofit organization, the foundation provides college educations to the children of special operations personnel killed in a training accident or operational mission. Today, the Warrior Foundation has 540 children in its program and 92 students enrolled in colleges and universities across the country, officials said.

Joining Tritt will be up-and-coming country artist Keni Thomas. Thomas, a former Army Ranger who fought in the now-famous battle depicted in the book and movie, “Black Hawk Down,” has a new country CD, “Flags of Our Fathers,” which is climbing the country charts. Proceeds from the sales of “Flags of Our Fathers” are benefiting the Warrior Foundation and its scholarship program.

The Eagle Claw 25th Anniversary Commemorative Dinner is open to the public and will be attended by many participants in the hostage rescue attempt as well as family members of those who were killed in the aircraft accident, event planners said.

“The Special Operations Warrior Foundation is honored to have the support and generosity of both Travis Tritt and Keni Thomas,” said John T. Carney Jr., the foundation’s president and chief executive officer. “Not only does their participation in this event help raise funds to provide the opportunity for a college education for some very deserving children, but it also serves as a reminder to our deployed troops that they, and their families, are not forgotten.”

(From a Special Operations Warrior Foundation news release.)

Two Years in Iraq: Coalition Requires Work, Commitment
By Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service


BAGHDAD, March 23, 2005 – Keeping the coalition here strong and working together is a lot like maintaining a marriage, the chief of staff for Multinational Force Iraq told the American Forces Press Service.
“A good marriage isn’t easy. You have to work at it every day, and there has to be give and take on both sides,” said Marine Maj. Gen. Joseph F. Weber.

“And that is what dealing with the coalition over here is,” said Weber. “It’s been a selfless give and take on both sides, by all the countries involved.”

Working as a coalition introduces challenges to the mission, with coalition members bringing to the table different languages, cultures, skill levels, types of equipment and philosophies about the way they plan and strategize, Weber said. “It makes things very interesting and very challenging,” he said.

But despite the challenges, Weber said, Operation Iraqi Freedom is stronger for the many capabilities coalition members contribute.

Regardless of their troop strength in Iraq, Weber said all coalition members are important contributors to the operation. “I don’t care if it’s a country that has 12 soldiers over here or a country like Korea that has 3,700 soldiers over here. All the coalition partners’ contributions over here are significant,” he said.

The coalition in Iraq remains strong, Weber said, and most members have committed their forces here through the end of the year. However, he said, that does not mean that they may not phase in their troop reductions before that. “I think the coalition forces are approaching their drawdown exactly the way we probably want them to, and they have been very cooperative in working with us,” he said.

Multinational Force Iraq is developing goals and objectives for the end of 2005 and beyond, but Weber said deadlines won’t be the driving force in those plans, invoking the words of Army Gen. George W. Casey Jr., Multinational Force Iraq commander, on the subject of reducing troop strength in Iraq.

“General Casey says we are not going to tie ourselves to any specific timelines or numbers,” Weber said. “It is going to be condition-based.”

http://www.dod.mil/news/Mar2005/20050323_289.html

Veterans News

VDBC Holds Third Meeting
On Friday, July 22, the Veterans Disability Benefits Commission (VDBC) held it’s third public meeting in Washington. It was well attended by the public and members of many veterans and military associations. NAUS Military & Veterans Benefits Advisor Mike Plumer attended. His report follows:

The latest meeting of the VDBC was kicked off by the Chairman, General Scott, who first welcomed the newest Commissioner Ken Jordan. He also mentioned that the White House was working on the final nominee and expected that person to be appointed no later than September but hopefully by sometime in August.

General Scott then went on to state that the VDBC, in order to assure that all the commissioners were working from the same knowledge base, was conducting a lengthy information gathering process. He emphasized that this third meeting was probably only the mid-point in the process.

Of special interest, General Scott stated that in the future the Commission will be voting on specific issues that they will consider and report on, based upon the charter given to them by Congress. Some of the data and information being collected will not actually be part of their final report or recommendations.

General Scott also indicated that there would be “outside” hearings in parts of the country where there are large concentrations of veterans and military retirees. Although there are none scheduled yet, as soon as we know where and when, we will pass on the information so all concerned will be able to attend and make their opinions known.

The three sub-committees of the Commission reported out for the first time. Following are highlights of their report:

Compensation Sub-Committee: Subcommittee Chairman Grady reported that they are working on several definitions, bearing in mind the charter under which the commission was set up. The main questions they are working on are:

What are the appropriate levels of compensation and benefits under current law?
How well is the Congressional intent of replacing earning capacity being met?
To what extent do current levels lead to an improved quality of life?
If there were no restraints in law, what could be appropriate compensation?
What principle should be used as a guide to set levels of compensation?
What changes might make the levels more appropriate?
Would individual factors such as age, employability or rank be a consideration?
Line of duty/Service Connection Sub-Committee: Subcommittee Chairman McGinn reported that they were very much still in the knowledge gathering process and that they had received briefings from various members of Congressional staffs, VA and DoD.

Transition Coordination and Readjustment Sub-Committee: Subcommittee Chairman Livingston reported that they had received information from DoD and VA on the “Seamless Transition” process, Transition Assistance Programs and streamlining of all transitions. He was recommending that the full committee study these programs.

Of special interest was the testimony by Admiral Daniel Cooper, Under Secretary for Benefits, Department of Veterans Affairs. He stated that one of his many goals was to improve the claims process for all those separating from service to the extent that 75% of all initial claims would be originated by the Benefits Delivery at Discharge (BDD) process. He also said that 75,000 PTSD and IU claims for the past 6-7 years would be reviewed for appropriateness of awards.

Of several recommendations he made was one which he stated, because of current US law on age discrimination he could do nothing about. He said that maybe the practice of awarding Individual Unemployability (IU) to retirees and veterans who were already of advanced age and out of the workforce should be looked at closely. He cited a case where a retiree of age 84 had died and who had only made his initial application for IU one week before his death. Admiral Cooper offered his opinion that maybe cases like this should be studied more closely for cause and whether the IU was appropriate.

NAUS will continue to attend the meetings of the VDBC and report on any further developments.

President's Message

Major General William M. Matz, US Army (Ret)

09/21/2005

Support Our Troops

We all have weathered the dog days of summer (high temperatures and thunderstorms) and now look forward to the cooler beauty of autumn with less heat and humidity. Besides daily news of summer’s severe weather, we continue to watch on TV and read in the newspapers, the media’s version of the War on Terror, mostly reporting the bad news, not bothering to mention the many positive aspects of the US operations in Iraq and Afghanistan – the schools being rebuilt and opened, the reconstruction of the infrastructure, the good rapport that is being built between our military members and the citizens of these two war torn nations. Whether or not you approve of our involvement in these two operations, Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom, the fact remains – our troops are there. They are fighting and dying protecting our way of life, and they need our wholehearted support.

We at NAUS support the effort. And we are supporting legislation that benefits those now serving and their families, such as an increase in the death gratuity; increased amounts of SGLI (Serviceman’s Group Life Insurance); health care coverage for all Reserve Component/National Guard personnel and families; postal benefit to families and charitable organizations to lessen the burden of mailing letters and packages to those in the combat zones; tax breaks to employers of Guard/Reservists who continue to pay salaries to activated personnel; and a bill to continue the combat pay and other allowances to injured service members as they recuperate in a military treatment facility.

But never fear, NAUS is also continuing its strong support and lobbying efforts for our military retiree/veteran, spouse, and survivor members! When we state our Primary Purpose is to support a strong national defense, we take very seriously our promise to promote and protect the interests and earned benefits of those who have served in the past. This contributes to the overall effort by assisting the Active, Reserve and Guard in their retention and recruitment programs. A military retiree/veteran can be a great recruiter if they can report to prospective enlistees or a first-termer who is contemplating a military career, that our country keeps its promises to those willing to serve our great Nation in the Armed Forces.

Still, further programs of support by NAUS include local NAUS chapters adopting Reserve/Guard units to provide support to family members left behind, providing items to the troops in the combat area, and sponsoring a proper welcome home ceremony when the units return as was done by NAUS Chapter VA-5 in Fredericksburg, Virginia, for the 229th Engineer Battalion upon their return from Iraq.

Also, NAUS will mail its 2006 Calendar to many of our troops serving overseas to remind them that they have the support of our Association. So now is the time for all of us to “rally behind the troops.” We never have had to remind our members to be patriotic! That is a given. Just as those who stayed behind over 60 years ago to support our Nation’s fighting forces during World War II, our members will again do their part to support our troops in the War on Terror.

God Bless you all and God Bless our brave troops!

http://www.naus.org/Presmessage.htm

Welcome to the GI Bill Web Site.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dept. of Veterans Affairs Hurricane Information
(For Education Benefits- See Below)
School Officials - See our VA-ONCE link for important information concerning school officials.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Important Information on Replacing your Vital Documents
Available at FirstGov website.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Information for Recipients of VA Education Benefits -
NOTE: This information is subject to change.

(1) If your school is temporarily closed this term due to Hurricane Katrina or Rita, we will continue to pay any "Hurricane Katrina or Rita" students currently receiving VA Education Benefits through the end of Fall term. (See exception for permanent school closure in #2 below.)

If you receive active-duty or reserve GI Bill benefits (CH30 or 1606) you should verify your enrollment until further notice as if your school did not close. Your payment will not be affected. That can be accomplished by going to the WAVE website or by calling 1-877-823-2378.

If you currently receive benefit payments from the Department of Veterans Affairs via electronic funds transfer (electronic deposit), payment will be made to your financial institution as usual. For information on mail delivery in affected areas please visit the U.S. Postal Service website for important information.

(2) If the school you were attending is permanently closed due to Hurricane Katrina or Rita and the State Approving Agency has withdrawn approval, your benefits will end effective the "date last paid" once we are notified of the permanent closure. .

(3) If you were attending a school that has closed and you transfer or have transferred to another school approved for veterans, your benefits will continue. Our requirement for a letter from your parent school telling us they will accept your training at the current school is being waived. If you are making a permanent transfer to a new school, we are waiving the requirement that your new school provide us with the number of hours they are accepting as prior credit. The enrollment certification we receive from your new school must be clearly identified as "Hurricane Katrina Student".

(4) Under the law, OJT, Apprenticeship and flight students are not covered by the continuation of benefits provisions in items #1 and 2 above. If you could not work or fly due to Hurricane Katrina or Rita, we cannot continue to pay education benefits. Do not certify hours, if you did not work or receive flight training.

(5) If you receive benefits under the Dependents Educational Assistance (CH35) program, and were due a payment 9/1/05, it was issued as scheduled. If you are unable to access your funds, please call 1-888-GIBILL1 (1-888-442-4551) for important information and assistance.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ten-Year Extension of Delimiting Period for Chapter 35 Surviving Spouses of Members who Die on Active Duty

Section 105 of Public Law 108-454, The Veterans Benefits Improvement Act of 2004, which was enacted into law on December 10, 2004 states that a surviving spouse of a person who dies on active duty will have 20 years to use his/her chapter 35 educational assistance benefits. This provision applies to deaths that occurred before the date of enactment. However, payment of benefits may not be made before December 10, 2004 for anyone whose former 10-year period had expired before that date.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IMPORTANT- New education benefit for Activated Reservists -- H.R 4200 authorizing the creation of a new education benefit was signed into law on October 28, 2004. The new benefit, Chapter 1607, makes certain individuals who were activated after September 11, 2001 either eligible for education benefits or eligible for increased benefits. The Department of Defense (DOD), Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and VA are working on an implementation plan for this new benefit and at this time we are unable to provide more than general information about chapter 1607. Please be patient as we work with DOD and DHS to get this program implemented. Text of H.R. 4200

We added new questions and answers to our "Ask a Question and Find Answers" section and will continue to add more questions to this section as additional information becomes available. If you don't see your question listed we probably DO NOT have an answer at this time.

If you want to be notified when new questions on chapter 1607 are added to the site, you can either-

Click this link to view our general chapter 1607 question and use the "Notify Me by E-mail if this Answer is Updated" button to register for updates to this question. We will update this question whenever we ADD questions.
This link will open in a new window.
Click here to view all Questions and Answers on the new Chapter 1607 Benefit. Use the "Notify Me by E-mail if this Answer is Updated" button to register for updates to the questions you have a specific interest in.
This link will open in a new window.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Visit our "Ask a Question and Find Answers" section to see new questions and answers on the military "Call Up" or activation. Use the "Search" feature to see all questions and answers or click on the following links to view benefit specific questions.

Montgomery GI Bill - Active Duty (Ch 30)
Montgomery GI Bill - Selected Reserve (Ch 1606)
Veterans Educational Assistance Program (VEAP) (Chapter 32)
Survivors' and Dependents' Educational Assistance Program (DEA) (Ch 35)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom Web Site. This is the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) web site for returning Active Duty, National Guard and Reserve service members. Click the following link to visit that site:
http://www.vba.va.gov/EFIF/

Education Fact Sheet for Guard and Reserve Members - A short fact sheet for Guard and Reserve members called to active duty. Also available in Adobe Acrobat PDF format.

LEGAL ADVICE FOR RESERVISTS -- The American Bar Association offers information to those mobilized to active duty in the Reserves and National Guard on the Web at http://www.abanet.org/legalservices/helpreservists/home.html. The Web site informs legal professionals and lay persons, alike, about steps to take to prepare and protect Reserve and Guard members’ families, property and jobs during their active duty.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Useful Department of Veterans Affairs
Sites and Telephone numbers:

Education Benefits (Not Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment. See below.) 1-888-GIBILL-1 (1-888-442-4551)
Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment If you have a service connected disability, you may be eligible for this benefit.
1-800-827-1000
Home Loans Information for the home buying veteran.
1-800-827-1000
Compensation and Pension Information on Service Connected Disability Compensation, Survivors' Benefits, Non-Service Connected Disability Compensation.
1-800-827-1000
Life Insurance Information on VA Life Insurance.
1-800-669-8477
Burial Benefits Information on the VA's National Cemetery System. (National Cemetery Administration)
1-800-827-1000
Hospital and Medical Benefits Information on VA Medical Benefits.
1-877-222-8387
VA's Debt Management Center Information on resolving debts resulting from participation in the following VA programs: Montgomery GI Bill - Active Duty, Montgomery GI Bill - Selected Reserve, Survivors’ and Dependents’ Educational Assistance, Compensation and Pension and Loan Guaranty (home loans).
1-800-827-0648
Veterans Benefits Administration Home Page The home of the Department of Veterans Affairs Veterans Benefits Administration.


GI Bill toll-free number:
1-888-GIBILL-1 (1-888-442-4551)



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SECTION 508 OF THE REHABILITATION ACT WEB ACCESSIBILITY
The DVA Education Service is committed to making its Web site accessible to all customers, including those who are working with slower computers, browsers, and modems.. The entire Web site is undergoing redesign to provide maximum accessibility and to meet or exceed the requirements of Section 508 of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998. Thank you very much for your patience through this redesign process. If you have any comments or suggestions to improve accessibility, please contact the Webmaster.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments concerning the technical aspects of this page may be e-mailed to the Webmaster: wasco223c@vba.va.gov
Please do not leave benefits questions in this mail box.
This is an official web site of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, D.C.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

VA Home Page / Disclaimer / Privacy & Security Statement
Freedom of Information Act

DoD Kicks Off 2005 Combined Federal Campaign
Story Number: NNS050929-03
Release Date: 9/29/2005 11:27:00 AM



By Donna Miles, American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON (NNS) -- Acting Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England kicked off the 2005 Combined Federal Campaign (CFC) here Sept. 28 by thanking Defense Department employees for their generosity in supporting hurricane-relief efforts and encouraging them to continue that same level of support for other important causes.

England acknowledged that this year's CFC goal of $12.8 million might be challenging in light of the more than $1 billion department employees and other U.S. citizens have donated to hurricane-related charities.

This year's CFC campaign includes several hurricane-related causes, along with hundreds of others whose needs "did not go away because [Hurricane] Katrina happened," England said.

"Many people are in need of help from Hurricane Katrina and Rita," the deputy secretary told a group of service and DoD agency leaders and CFC key workers. "But we must not forget that there are also regional and national and international charities that need our support."

Speaking in a room decorated with red, white and blue balloons and a banner urging, "Please Give," England encouraged department members to continue their long history of generous support to the CFC campaign and to support this year's theme, "Be An Everyday Hero."

England praised the "uniquely American" spirit in which DoD workers open their hearts and their wallets to others in need, in most cases, to people they've never met and never will.

"You don't know the lives you've changed and the effect you've had," he said, noting that CFC donations cause a "ripple effect" throughout local communities and the nation as a whole.

England referred to a famous Winston Churchill quote in urging department members to give during this year's CFC campaign. "You make a living by what you get," he said. "You make a life by what you give."

The goals for the Navy and Marine Corps during this year's campaign total $3.45 million.

For more news from the Department of Defense, visit www.defenselink.mil.

For more news from around the fleet, visit www.navy.mil.

http://www.news.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=20362

Security force sets sights on range
Submitted by: Marine Forces Pacific
Story Identification #: 200592823831
Story by Lance Cpl. R. Drew Hendricks



U.S. MARINE CORPS FORCES PACIFIC, CAMP H. M. SMITH, Hawaii (Sept. 28, 2005) -- The U.S. Marine Corps Forces, Pacific, Security Augmentation Force conducted their first quarterly training exercise at the combat pistol course, Puuloa range, Sep. 23.

The SAF Marines are specially trained to assist security forces already attached to the base in any emergency situation, or if the base goes to a higher threat condition.

“We need the SAF just in case anything threatens the base or if something like 9/11 happens again,” said Sgt. Matthew E. Nale, the noncommissioned officer in charge of training the SAF.

This specific course is meant to go beyond the scope of annual training and re-qualification to give the Marines a more combat-oriented experience.

Training like this is used to help Marines hone their skills to prepare them for activation, according to Nale.

During the course, Marines shot 6,000 9mm rounds from several different positions, distances and courses of fire.

They also had to become especially proficient in failure and exposure drills.

“Failure drills are, simply, where the shooter puts two rounds to the chest and one to the head. It is the most effective way to bring down a target,” said Cpl. Daniel Rosales, a member of the SAF and a supply clerk here.

Exposure drills are used to simulate an assault on a building. The Marine walks the line with his weapon at the alert. The targets, which are lined up along side of the firing line, will randomly turn. The Marine will then face and engage the target with a failure drill.

This drill forces the Marine to keep a level head while at the same time maintaining speed and accuracy.

“The purpose of this is to get the Marines out of the qualifying mindset and allow them to get a glimpse of what it might be like in combat,” said Nale. “In combat, there are no rules and no one is going to be there to tell you how to put rounds on target; it has to be instinct.”

Each course deals with a different aspect of shooting. One requires the Marines to shoot on the move, another at close range, and the most challenging involves the Marines firing from their backs.

“Being on your back in combat is never a situation you want to find yourself in,” said Sgt. Shane D. Oltman, a member of the SAF and a supply clerk here. “Even so, it’s good to train for it so you know what to do if it does happen.”

The MARFORPAC training office wants to do as much combat-oriented training as possible. They’re calling on Marines who are willing to put in a little hard work and have some fun while doing it.

“This was definitely motivating training. We didn’t just step up to the line and shoot, we were able to do some things that actually resembled combat,” said Cpl. Jonathan E. Knight, an administrative clerk and a SAF member here.

According to Nale, this training is focused on preparing the Marines to react quickly and without hesitation when the time arises for them to use their pistols. This requires them to be completely comfortable with their weapon.

“The reason I think this is so important is because I have been in combat with Marines from a variety of non-combat-arms jobs who are put into life or death situations and they have no clue how to react,” said Nale, referring to the many occasions where he provided security for non-infantry Marines.

No matter what the Marine’s job is, he has to be prepared for combat. The SAF can provide quality training to anyone willing to volunteer. Any Marine interested in joining their ranks must first send the request up their chain of command.

“Butcher, baker or candlestick maker, it doesn’t matter who you are, you need training like this,” said Nale. “Iraq is not going anywhere and neither is Afghanistan, you have to be ready and to do that you need to train hard like these Marines did today.”

http://www.marines.mil/marinelink/mcn2000....B2?opendocument

Exit Strategy Delusions
JEFFREY RECORD


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

During the past decade of US military interventions in Africa, the Caribbean, and the Balkans, there has been a rising clamor on Capitol Hill and within the Pentagon for "clear exit strategies" before resorting to force overseas. It is believed that road maps for post-intervention military extrication can and must be crafted in advance of military action, and that such maps can and must be followed throughout the course of intervention. The United States remains stuck in the Balkans, and came close to being sucked into a Vietnam-like quagmire in Somalia, some argue, because the Clinton Administration allowed the missions there to expand without inquiring into the likely consequences. The Clinton Administration failed to follow the Weinberger-Powell Doctrine--the military's professional take on the lessons of the Vietnam War, which demands both clear objectives and the use of overwhelming force to achieve those objectives swiftly and conclusively.

Obviously, it is foolish to undertake military action without having clear ideas on political purpose and the connection between that purpose and the military means selected to achieve it. Strategy is a plan of military action to accomplish a political object. A resort to force motivated by simple frustration and without contemplation of the enemy's probable response does not pass for strategy, as the Clinton Administration did indeed learn when it launched its initially feeble air "war" against Serbia in the spring of 1999. Strategy requires formulation of a desired political end-state and the appropriate application of sufficient force to achieve that end-state. Getting into a war without a reasonable idea of how to get out of it--i.e., without a concept of success--doomed US military intervention in Vietnam.

That said, the idea of a sure-fire, pre-hostilities road map to post-hostilities military extrication is a delusion. Having a concept of success is always good, but having a healthy appreciation of the difficulties of maintaining it in the face of war's vicissitudes is even better.

The Unfortunate Intrusion of Reality

Obstacles to arriving at the intended destination abound. First of all, states that are the objects rather than the subjects of military intervention, and especially of surprise attack, can hardly be expected to devise exit strategies in advance. Did Franklin Roosevelt, on the night before Pearl Harbor, have an exit strategy for waging war against Japan? Was he not much more worried about the consequences of Nazi aggression in Europe than Japanese depredations in East Asia, and had he not already decided that, in the event of war with both Germany and Japan, the United States would pursue a Germany-first strategy?

Second, exit strategies are hostage to military performance. Defeat or stalemate on the battlefield forces reduction of political objectives, whereas military success encourages their expansion. Initial war aims, especially in long wars, rarely survive intact, and new war aims, unanticipated at the start of hostilities, emerge during the course of hostilities. Thus, the road map may remain the same, but the destination changes. The United States entered the Vietnam War in 1965 with the objective of preserving an independent, noncommunist South Vietnam, an objective which subsequent military stalemate reduced to extrication without humiliation.

In the case of democratic governments, war aims are subject to the influence of public opinion as well as events on the battlefield. The United States could not be militarily defeated in Vietnam, but its political will to continue fighting declined after the Tet Offensive. President Nixon clearly would have preferred a conclusive victory in Indochina, but he understood that the political traffic back home would not bear its costs. There are also cases where leaders are driven by public opinion into expanded war aims and peace settlement terms they believe to be unwise. British Prime Minister David Lloyd George would have settled for a less punitive Treaty of Versailles had he not been imprisoned by British public and parliamentary opinion.

States fighting in alliance or coalition also may be compelled to restrict their war aims to whatever the common political traffic will bear, even at the expense of military effectiveness. This was certainly the case in NATO's war against Serbia. As with domestic political coalitions, international political coalitions involve compromise. A foreign policy of unilateralism appeals to many Americans today because it frees the United States from having to conciliate allies on matters of political objective and military strategy. Unfortunately for unilateralists, however, the United States rarely goes to war or into peace enforcement operations in the absence of allies. Robust allies have been a hallmark of American superpowerdom, and were perhaps the key strategic factor in the Soviet Union's defeat in the Cold War. Allies confer political legitimacy, provide bases and overflight rights, and can offer "boots on the ground" to an American political and military leadership that seems increasingly petrified by the risks of land warfare.

In short, mission change--by creep, contraction, substitution, or dilution--is almost impossible to avoid in any prolonged military intervention, and not just because of changes in military fortunes. Aside from the influence of military performance and perceived domestic and coalition political imperatives, fundamental considerations of ideology, fear, and reputation can intrude nastily upon wartime decisionmaking, forcing states to fighter harder and longer irrespective of the scope of their war aims. Sometimes fighting becomes an end in itself. From 1941 to 1945 Japanese war aims deflated from the conquest of East Asia to the retention of the Emperor in a post-surrender Japan. Yet the Japanese fought even more ferociously in 1945 than they did in 1941.

Exit strategists, like Jominians everywhere, tend to discount the degree to which non-scientific, especially irrational, factors continue to influence the conduct of war, including postulation of war aims. The very notion that the course of a military intervention can be crafted in advance--like drawing up blueprints for a construction project--betrays a conviction that war is, or can be, a science. Strategy is informed by more than reason; it is also informed by fear, honor, and ideology, and failure to grasp this fundamental fact impedes an understanding of war itself. Reason would have instructed Churchill, in the wake of Dunkirk, to cut a deal with Hitler (as Stalin had the year before); yet Churchill fought on out of hatred for Hitler and everything Nazi Germany stood for.

Third, there is no such thing as a politically immaculate use of force, especially for a superpower like the United States. A major military intervention imposes post-hostilities political responsibilities that often require continued military presence, or at least the credible threat of a military return. Precisely because war is a continuation of politics by other means, simply stopping the shooting does not permit immediate military evacuation. This is especially true of wars that do not resolve the underlying political conflict that occasioned hostilities in the first place. Thus US ground combat forces remain in Bosnia and Kosovo. Even in those rare cases of conclusive military victories that completely extirpate the enemy's government and capacity for armed resistance, a residual military presence is necessary to restore and maintain order and to provide a shield for political reconstruction. The demand for unconditional surrender implies an inescapable and open-ended military occupation and rule of the defeated side; this was as true of the Confederacy in 1865 as it was for Germany and Japan 80 years later. It is politically difficult--indeed, irresponsible--to walk away from a major use of force, and doing so suggests either insufficient grounds for using force in the first instance or an unwillingness to deal with sources as opposed to symptoms of enemy behavior (as was the case in the Gulf War and NATO's war against Serbia).

If military extrication becomes the paramount aim of a prospective military intervention, then the entire enterprise becomes suspect. As in the case of what has become a fetishism over force protection, once the safety of the military instrument becomes more important than the political objective on behalf of which it is being risked, then the military instrument should not be risked in the first place. And make no bones about it, the chatter about the need for clear exit strategies is loudest among those who believe that the military should not be exposed to the risks of peace enforcement operations and other small-scale contingencies.

The Example of Korea

The difficulties of crafting and sticking with exit strategies are exemplified by the Korean War. On 25 June 1950, the day the North Koreans invaded South Korea, the Truman Administration had no exit strategy for Korea because it had never imagined that it would fight for South Korea. Indeed, both General Douglas MacArthur and Secretary of State Dean Acheson had publicly excluded South Korea from America's defense perimeter in Asia. Truman's decision to fight was abrupt and unexpected, and at the time it was made there was no exit strategy other than resistance to North Korean aggression. There was certainly no timetable for a conclusion of hostilities of the kind that present-day exit strategists like to attach to their intervention blueprints.

The quick establishment of the restoration of South Korea's territorial integrity as the US war aim (and that of the United Nations, which authorized resistance) flowed directly from the Administration's decision to fight. Even that objective, however, appeared to be in grave jeopardy as rapidly advancing North Korean forces began corralling US and South Korean forces into the Pusan perimeter. The immediate objective became avoidance of being forcibly ejected from the Korean Peninsula altogether.

Then came MacArthur's Inchon landing and the swift and almost complete reversal of North Korea's military fortunes. The defeat of the communists and the victorious advance of UN forces into North Korea opened the door for a dramatically inflated war aim: the reunification of the entire peninsula under Western auspices. Then, of course, came China's massive counter-intervention, which produced almost three years of military stalemate and a consequent reduction of the US/UN war aim to the status quo ante. On this basis, and once Beijing realized that it could not defeat US forces in Korea, a settlement of the war should have been possible no later than the spring of 1952.

But by then, a new war aim had arisen that no one could have anticipated back in 1950: the voluntary repatriation of communist prisoners of war. Both China and the United States, if not their respective Korean clients, were prepared to enter an armistice that left Korea divided with minor adjustments to the pre-war line of the 38th Parallel. China insisted, however, that all of its soldiers in UN hands be repatriated, including those who had no wish to return to life in communist China. This the Truman Administration refused to do, and thus the war continued on until mid-1953, when China dropped its insistence on forcible repatriation.

Nor was there any chance of US military extrication from Korea once the shooting had stopped. What was signed at Panmunjom in 1953 was an armistice, not a peace treaty. As such, the Korean War failed to resolve the political struggle which occasioned it, and it was this failure that in turn mandated a residual US military presence in South Korea that continues to this day. Far from offering an exit from Korea, the Truman Administration's decision to fight imposed political obligations toward South Korea that the United States has not been able to satisfy without threatened force on the ground in Korea.

The Korean War exhibits the difficulties in anticipating when and how a war will start, how it will unfold, and how it will end. Having an exit strategy on the shelf at the beginning of hostilities and sticking to it until the end assumes away the potent influence of military performance on war aims as well as the law of unintended political consequences that attends any major military intervention. Even if possessed of overwhelming force, military action may still fail to achieve its intended political consequences because of self-imposed restraint, the demands of coalition politics, and unexpected enemy responses. The Clinton Administration thought that NATO could bully Serbia out of Kosovo with the mere threat of a token air campaign, only to discover, to the alliance's great embarrassment, that Milosevic was not only prepared to fight--for 78 days--but also to accelerate the very ethnic cleansing of Kosovo that NATO sought to halt.

World War II also shows that political responsibilities do not end when the shooting stops. US military forces remain in Germany and Japan almost 60 years after the war that brought them there ended. Though they accomplished their mission of defeating and occupying the two countries, they could not be withdrawn because the resulting vacuum of power would have been filled by that of another totalitarian state. Even after the Soviet Union's disappearance, those forces continue to provide stability and reassurance in Europe and Northeast Asia. Indeed, it was America's political and military exit from Europe after World War I that made it necessary to fight another world war and to stick around after it was over. Similarly, US (and other UN-authorized forces) remain in Bosnia six years after the Dayton Accords, and they remain in Kosovo two years after the conclusion of Operation Allied Force.

Mission Creep in Today's Environment

Mission escalation is well-nigh irresistible in military interventions aimed at countering the humanitarian consequences of foreign civil wars. Stopping the fighting in Bosnia and Kosovo mandated a post-hostilities military presence that would permit attempted political reconstruction that ultimately in turn would permit military withdrawal. It was impossible to impose arbitrary departure deadlines without undercutting the rationale for intervention in the first place and inviting a resumption of hostilities. Does anyone doubt that the absence of war in Bosnia and Kosovo would persist in the absence of external peace enforcement? The point is not that intervention in the former Yugoslavia was wise or unwise; rather, it is that, as in Korea, the employment of force inevitably saddled the United States with post-hostilities political obligations that required a continuing military presence.

Mission creep was no less inevitable in Somalia. Especially for an administration so skilled in foreign policy as that of the first President Bush, it was naïve to believe that the United States could simply dart into the Somali anarchy, pass out some food, and then leave without at least attempting to deal with the primary source of hunger--which was political, not meteorological or logistical. Withdrawal without some attempt at political reconstruction would simply have invited the return of mass starvation and exposed military intervention as a sham. In Somalia, the Clinton Administration inherited a military intervention that was intended to be politically immaculate but in the end could never be so.

The Gulf War is cited by exit-strategy proponents as proof that control of a war's purpose and duration is possible. US objectives, some argue, were clear, feasible, and sustained without alteration throughout the Gulf crisis of 1990-91. The US exit strategy was a model of simplicity: (1) mass sufficient force in Saudi Arabia; (2) kick the Iraqis out of Kuwait; (3) go home. Yet the declared objective of "restoring peace and stability to the Gulf" was sufficiently vague to raise the question of whether it was code for overthrowing Saddam Hussein. It obviously meant something more than simply liberating Kuwait, which was a separately declared objective. Certainly it encompassed the intended destruction of Iraq's nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons capacity and offensive conventional military power--especially the Republican Guard. But did "restoring peace and stability to the Gulf" also mean getting rid of Saddam? President Bush publicly compared the Iraqi dictator to Hitler on several occasions, authorized air attacks on his known residences and workplaces, and broadcast appeals for the Iraqi people to get rid of their leader. General Schwarzkopf was directed to pay special attention to wiping out the Republican Guard, a key prop of Saddam's regime. Thus, if Saddam's removal was not a declared objective, it was certainly an undeclared one whose lack of fulfillment clearly disappointed President Bush.

Saddam Hussein remains in power because the United States was not prepared to assume any responsibility for Iraq's postwar political reconstruction. The Bush Administration was so intent on wrapping up its easy, albeit dramatic, military win in Kuwait and vacating the premises that it even declared a unilateral cease-fire in the absence of any Iraqi request for terms. To be sure, America militarily exited the war in the Gulf, but it was a politically inconclusive departure.

Moreover, once US forces had been assembled in Saudi Arabia, Iraq was in no position to significantly influence the course of hostilities. This guaranteed a successful American military performance, which in turn guaranteed the stability of US war aims. Because Iraq and its military remained virtually inert in the face of Coalition attacks (the Scud missile strikes were of no military significance, although an Israeli response to them could have damaged the Coalition), the Gulf War was not a large-scale duel as Clausewitz likened war to be but rather more of a shooting gallery for the reformed and re-equipped post-Vietnam War US military. It was essentially the administration of massive firepower against a large but helpless foe whose defeat was certain from the beginning of hostilities. In no other major war before or since has the United States faced so inanimate an enemy. There was never any possibility of Iraqi military performance adversely affecting declared US war aims. Thus a pre-hostilities exit strategy was sustainable.

The Gulf War was exceptional. Against qualified adversaries--those capable of sustaining resistance and even inflicting considerable damage--the maintenance of war aims becomes problematical. Even in its war against Serbia, NATO was compelled by unexpectedly prolonged Serbian resistance and the need for Russian diplomatic support to weaken the original terms it offered the Serbs at Rambouillet before Operation Allied Force was launched. There, it insisted on an exclusively NATO occupation force for Kosovo, NATO military access on demand to the rest of Serbia, and an eventual plebiscite to determine Kosovo's political future. These demands were dropped in the end in order to facilitate termination of a war whose duration came as a surprise to NATO and for which levels of enthusiasm varied widely within the alliance. Though Serbia lost the war, NATO only tangentially engaged Serbian military forces because it was unwilling to engage in ground combat or low-altitude air combat and because Serbia's fielded forces were well concealed. Thus Serbia retained a latent military threat that permitted it to hold out for war settlement terms significantly less harsh than it might otherwise have been compelled to accept.

In sum, the United States is free to choose most of its overseas military interventions, but it is not free to select their duration and outcome. Once the shooting begins, war's innate dynamism takes center stage, and policy becomes hostage to military performance and changing domestic and international political circumstances. In the dangerous and unpredictable arena of using force, an exit strategy, like any other plan, may not be sustainable. This means that having an exit strategy in mind is not the same thing as being able to stick to it. A preconceived exit strategy is sustainable only if it can be militarily forced down the enemy's throat and remains politically acceptable at home.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jeffrey Record is Professor of International Security Studies at the Air War College in Montgomery, Alabama, and author of the forthcoming Making War, Thinking History: Munich, Vietnam, and Presidential Uses of Force from Korea to Kosovo. He is a frequent contributor to Parameters.

http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usawc/Paramet...nter/record.htm

A Clash of Systems:
An Analytical Framework to
Demystify the
Radical Islamist Threat


ANDREW HARVEY, IAN SULLIVAN,
and RALPH GROVES

In the Winter 2004-05 issue of Parameters, Philip Seib makes a laudable effort to establish the imperative for journalists, policymakers, and the American public to “undertake a more sophisticated analysis of how the world works.”1 This is critical because the analytical framework adopted by the media and policymakers has a direct effect on how they approach news coverage and frame discussions regarding the threat posed by radical Islamist extremists. This in turn directly affects public opinion in the United States and the world, which in the context of a war of ideas is directly related to the success or failure of both sides. Professor Seib also pointed out the fact that the “clash of civilizations” theory espoused by Samuel Huntington has been widely criticized, and this article rejects it as an appropriate analytical framework. Our purpose is to provide an alternative framework that portrays the current global conflict as a clash of systems, not civilizations.

The central danger of accepting Huntington’s model as a basis for analysis is that it is the chosen model of radical Islamists, who in turn use it to mobilize support. If a clash of civilizations is accepted in the West—or worse, accepted by the populations in Muslim states—then the forces attempting to overturn the global system could eventually succeed. Success, however, is not battalions of extremist Islamists marching down Pennsylvania Avenue; rather, it is the replacement of “apostate” regimes with an Islamic Caliphate, which can occur only once the current US-led global system is destroyed. Therefore, it is imperative that the wider global war on terror focus on the systemic impli-

72/73

cations of the struggle, which provides a credible methodology to address and mitigate the root causes that fuel the ideology of extremist Islamism.

Many authors have identified the imminent threat posed to the United States by radical Islamists in the ongoing Global War on Terrorism, and a number of them have described it as a war of ideas. What is lacking in the ongoing discourse, however, is a conceptual framework necessary for an in-depth analysis of the basic conflict. The current threat environment is based on a clash of systems between the US-led global system, in which the phenomenon of globalization has created unprecedented connectivity and prosperity in the developed world, and those who oppose this system and wish to replace it with another paradigm. The ideology seeking to overthrow the global system is extremist Islamism.2 It is put into action by transnational Islamist terrorists as well as regional and indigenous extremists, who wish to replace the secular, US-led global system with an Islamist world order. States along the periphery of the US-led system, where Western liberal democratic ideology and values underlying globalization directly clash with radical Islamism, constitute the main battleground. This is where the primary objective of US national power should be aimed: at convincing the undecided multitudes that becoming part of the global system is a better option than fighting against it. In order to prevent states and populations in this periphery from accepting integration into the global system, radical Islamists attempt to frame the ongoing conflict as a clash of civilizations.

Clash of Systems Framework

The first part of this framework is to establish that there is an international system made up of states and non-state actors. Though there is no world government, rules that guide interactions among these actors on the world

73/74

stage do exist.3 These are formed either by consensus (norms of international law and commerce) or are imposed by a major power such as the United Kingdom in the 19th century and the United States in the 20th.4 This system includes not only norms of interaction, international law, and treaties, but also institutions. The most important aspects of the post-World War II world system are the West’s multinational organizations. They owe their origins to the 1941 Atlantic Charter of liberal principles established to guide the postwar world, and the 1944 Bretton Woods Conference on monetary order (both American initiatives). These gave birth to various organizations, including the United Nations, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, and the World Trade Organization (WTO). These organizations and the world order of open economies and dispute management were intended to prevent problems among Western industrial capitalist states—not to fight Soviet communism, which was a separate system—and they continue to endure despite the end of the Cold War.5 Therefore, the underlying Western-inspired world order remains intact and is even expanding as China, Russia, and other states of the former Soviet Union join Western organizations. This demonstrates the ongoing vigor of Western values and principles in an international and multinational context. This system is still in place and forms the framework that enables “globalization” to occur, which is in many ways an acceleration of the speed of interactions within the system, and an indicator of their scope. The Islamists understand this relationship, which explains why these institutions are targets for al Qaeda.

Thomas Friedman has described “globalization” as a system, and as operating within the “liberal rules of economics . . . the software being the rule of law, courts, regulatory institutions, oversight bodies, free press, and democracy.”6 He also observes that globalization is happening in a power structure that isn’t driven just by electrons and stock options. It’s a power structure maintained and preserved by the US military. The US military is the hidden fist that keeps the hidden hand operating—“Ain’t no McDonald’s without McDonnell Douglas, and without America on Duty there’s no America Online.”7 This article agrees with Friedman’s view of globalization as a system that promotes this increased mobility and the speed of exchange of these elements.

This global system established and maintained by the United States provides the background on which an analytical framework can be built. As the world’s sole superpower, the United States will continue to dominate and influence all aspects of the global system for the foreseeable future. Although hegemonies are uncertain, there currently are no powers that accept the global system (this includes most of the world’s major states) which are capable of overturning this hegemony without damaging the system itself. In this regard,

74/75

the greatest threat to US hegemony is not competition within the system, but is instead composed of elements that seek a complete overthrow of the global system. The United States owes this tremendous position of power to its ability to leverage its influence and leadership in the global system, which provides considerable benefit (economically, politically, and militarily) in return. Furthermore, in order to maintain this position as global hegemon, the United States is a status quo power within the global system that must protect and conserve it. In its relations with states that have not accepted the global system, the United States must be an agent for change in order to expand, if possible, the global system from which it derives such benefit.

Thomas Barnett describes the world in terms of a “Functioning Core” of states that have embraced the Western world system of “globalization.” These states have stable governments, rising standards of living, liberal media, and are included in one or more systems of collective security. There are also states that have only begun to integrate or have not yet fully integrated into the world system, and are described as “Seam States” on the boundary of the “Functioning Core.” Barnett calls other areas (which do not accept “globalization” or the global system) the “Non-Integrating Gap.” It is no accident that these areas are trouble spots, and are where the United States is most likely to intervene militarily.8 This three-level construct of globalization indicates the global Western system has limits that affect how it functions. These constraints are, interestingly enough, connected to liberal Western concepts such as the rule of law and individual rights, reflecting an important point regarding this global framework. It is built on ideas and values that stand in direct opposition to those of the extremist Islamists.

In return for setting the rules for international interactions (which benefit the rule-maker), the United States provides security to maintain the system. Other actors or powers will support the United States if they receive more benefit from the system’s continuation than from its demise. At the same time they may also jockey for position within the system. On the other hand, if they do not feel that the system provides appropriate benefits, then they will challenge the system and attempt to overthrow or change it through conflict.9 While many observers of the international system believe that states which clearly are part of the global system may seek to form partnerships and coalitions as a means of mitigating the dominating influence of US power structures, there will be times when members of the system jockey for its leadership. No state is currently seeking to replicate our capabilities across all instruments of power. There is no “near peer competitor” with a desire to replace the current system. In fact, the major world powers—the United States, the European Union, China, Japan, and Russia—are in fact part of the system, or are attempting to integrate further into it (e.g., China and the WTO).

75/76

Though no state is attempting to overthrow the Western global system, there are states that are not fully integrated into it, and despite the intactness and growing inclusiveness of the system, there are still outsiders who believe the system is unjust and are unable to share its benefits. It is these latter areas, which are part of the seam, or the non-integrating gap, where the most critical battles in the wider clash of systems will occur.

The Islamist Challenge

Political Islam (Islamism), in various forms, is the most rapidly growing and persuasive ideology among Muslims today. Islamism is a socio-political ideology which strives to institute governments under Allah’s authority, not man-made constitutions, and administration of society according to sharia (Islamic law), not Western law.10 The ideology of Islamism is the cutting edge of Islamic militants’ exertions against the West and its global system. As an ideology, Islamism is distinct from the religion of Islam, although it draws strength from zealous members of the Islamic resurgence. The Islamic resurgence does not protest against Islamic institutions, but, rather, protests against secular governments and social innovations modeled on the West. Understanding the Islamists’ critique of modern life provides some clarity to these distinctions. Most Islamists (except for retrograde Salafists) are not against modern instrumentalities produced by industries (telephones, cars, airplanes, computers, etc.). Rather, Islamists are opposed to modernism, a sequel to industrialization and modernization, which is the ideology of social innovation in a secular environment completely unhinged from traditional and religious norms.

Islamism is ideological because it employs Islam for the socio-political goal of establishing governments under Allah’s sovereignty with societies based on sharia. Islamism “fuses religion and politics, din wa dawla, in a way incompatible with Western analytical categories.”11 Establishing such governments and societies is meant to preserve Islamic religion and culture and to reverse Western domination. Culturally, many Islamic traditionalists feel eclipsed by the Western way of life in the globalized economy. Islamism is ascendant in its competition against secular Western political models within large segments of the Muslim world. In predominantly Islamic countries, Islamism has absorbed much of nationalist parties’ ideologies, leaving nationalists weak. Generally in such countries, the left is marginal and in disarray and liberal democrats are few. Islamists heed the Koran’s specific direction: “Fight in the cause of God against those who fight you.”12

The Islamists’ slogan, “Islam is the solution” (popularized by the Egyptian Sayyid Qutb), will continue to inspire political exertions against Western-type governments in Islamic countries, until or unless the West con-

76/77

vinces the Islamic world that it can have an equitable stake in globalization. Islamists will resist cultural and political influences of the West’s global system, even if they acquiesce to economic interaction and trade. Their resistance to the West is not to imply mainly overt clashes. Most clashes for the proximate future will occur within the Islamic world itself, just as industrial countries of the West’s global system will have their own internal (especially social) problems.

There are significant elements of Western culture that make the West less than entirely appealing to many in the Islamic world, both Muslims and Islamists. Though many appreciate the material benefits and technological advances that the West has to offer, Islamists tend to believe the West diluted the basis of its classical Christian civilization due to the Renaissance and Scientific Revolution, followed by the Philosophical Revolution (based on natural law) and its empiricism, rationalism, and positivism. Even though this enabled technological innovation and industrialization, the removal of religion from its previous position as the basis for all knowledge meant that Christianity lost its centrality over the course of several centuries as the arbiter of how society should function. Today, religion in the West is compartmentalized due to increased secularization since the 1970s. Because of this, the overt manifestation of the West is characterized by its industrial order, which gives it overwhelming material superiority over agricultural or other resource-exporting countries,13 but not moral superiority because secularization has eroded traditional morality.14 Social relativism has become the norm, which Muslims and Islamists regard as unacceptable for emulation. In contrast, traditional societies still harboring tenets of their classical civilizations value spirituality (rather than consumerism), a God-centered view of the world (rather than a human-centered one), prescribed patterns of behavior (rather than innovative ones), extended families (rather than individualism and nuclear families), and a belief in absolutes (rather than relativism).

While the industrial West has emphasized secular rationalism, it also has engendered a certain degree of dissatisfaction with materialism as the primary focus of life. Westerners are likely to seek spirituality in their “flight from the meaninglessness of the secular world,”15 reviving various sects of Christianity or importing other religions (such as Bahai’ism) or creating new synergetic ones (such as Scientology). The fear of “importing” a similar spiritual void is one of the reasons why Islamists reject Western modernism. The West’s insistence on democratic government and the rule of law is a function of industrial and commercial efficacy, not high-minded principles from Western classical civilization.16 In any case, these features are integrated into industrial societies of the global system, and may make it awkward for countries outside the system to join. For Islamic countries, democracy is more about access than

77/78

process, and Islamic law is based on sharia, which is very different from Western law. Also, the West’s secularity presents serious cultural problems for Islam, creating tension alongside the potential economic benefits of joining the West’s global system.

Despite US or Euro-centric views (such as Francis Fukuyama’s End of History), the West’s industrial order and global system do not have universal appeal. However, the West’s industrial order claims a universal applicability of its global system. This puts it in direct conflict with Islamists, who also proclaim the universality of their system. Radical Islamists will accept only our unconditional surrender.

Our current conflict of ideologies is centered on the answer to the question of what constitutes “a good life.” In the West, the answer is found in the individual rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. For the radical Islamists, the answer is in one’s submission to the will of God through the imposition of their interpretation of sharia throughout the Muslim world.

A Clash of Systems in the Middle East

To Huntington’s disciples, al Qaeda’s strike on the economic and military power base of the United States clearly represents an attack by the Islamic civilization against that of the United States and the West. Such an argument is persuasive, particularly when one looks at the undercurrents of recent events in the Middle East: the ubiquitous Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the vicious campaign being conducted by foreign jihadists against US forces in Iraq, a resurgence of the Islamist ideology across Barnett’s non-integrating gap,17 enhanced violent activity perpetrated by radical Islamist groups across the region, the spread of weapons of mass destruction in the region, and cooperation between regional states and militant groups. Yet Huntington’s thesis fails to capture the true nature of the conflict that currently grips the Middle East. It is not simply a result of irreconcilable differences between Western and Islamic civilizations; it is instead a deeper clash of international systems of order—globalization vs. Islamism.

78/79

Under the current system of US-led globalization, a given state has two options—beating the system or joining it. In the Middle East, this debate is raging in an emotional and often violent manner, and it is fast becoming a battle for the soul of the Islamic world. This conflict pits two sides against each other: those who embrace the system—i.e., moderates who seek to reconcile the Islamic culture, religion, and worldview with the benefits of modernization and globalization—against those who would seek to destroy it, personified by Osama bin Laden and other extremists of his ilk, and who wish to replace it with an alternative system, in this case a world guided by the ideology of Islamism.

For Islamists, there are two main targets in their effort to bring about an Islamist system. The United States and its Western allies constitute one target. The other, perhaps more important, is the governments and elites of the states across the Middle East, who walk a narrow tightrope between accepting the dramatic benefits of the global system and heeding the wishes of the majority of the populace who receive little in the way of benefits from their own governments, let alone from the wider global system.

As a result, Islamists are fighting a two-pronged conflict. On the one hand, they have initiated a wide-reaching war against US interests and allies which includes not only direct combat against US military forces, but also attacks like those of 9/11 that target Americans and other Western civilians. Second, in the Middle East the Islamists view the acceptance of a corrupt, godless, immoral system by the civilian populace as being responsible for the Western system’s spread. Consequently Islamists are engaged in a comprehensive battle for hearts and minds.

Their strategic objective to replace the Western system with one inspired by the divine hinges entirely upon successfully converting the populace to Islamist ideology. Islamists point to the hopelessness endemic throughout much of the region, where a handful of leaders and business elites reap economic rewards from collaborating with the US-led system while the vast majority live in a pitiful squalor, where daily life is a challenge. Instead of cooperating with a system where a few get rich, Islamists insist upon a strict interpretation of the Koran and look to the glory days of a bygone era when the Muslim world dominated the international system. Instead of buying into a system that is “corrupt” and accepting a culture that is “immoral,” Islamists seek to create an alternative system similar to the one that once held a position of dominance. Islamists ask Muslims to accept the concept that “Islam is the solution,” popularized by Qutb as early as 1952. Qutb argued that a philosophical break was required with modernism if a Muslim was to be true to his faith. This break is not a starting point for the intellectual study of the impact of modernism on the Islamic world, but instead becomes a manifesto demanding a

79/80

radical change, inspired by the divine truths espoused in the Koran.18 In essence, Qutb’s philosophy, which has been adopted by a long string of Islamist radicals culminating in bin Laden, espouses a clash of civilizations between the wider Islamic umma (community of believers) and the West.

For the West, and particularly the United States, it becomes imperative to prevent the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) from becoming such a clash of civilizations, thereby devolving into exactly the kind of conflict that will be to the Islamists’ advantage. Instead, the United States also should follow a two-pronged strategy, whereby it selectively confronts Islamists, not simply to crush them, but to demonstrate to the Muslim world the long-term futility of such a conflict. The current focus of this active conflict is on Iraq and Afghanistan. In the words of Friedman, “America’s opponents know just what’s at stake in the postwar struggle for Iraq, which is why they flock there: beat America in Iraq and you beat them out of the whole region; lose to America there, lose everywhere.”19 Friedman notes the Islamists understand the fight is not about oil, but is instead about “ideas and values and governance.”20 So for the United States, the active stratagem guiding the Global War on Terrorism is unlike anything it has attempted before; instead of concrete, military success, the GWOT is about reinforcing ideas and values (i.e. those that underpin the US-led system), while at the same time demonstrating the inability of Islamists to advance their ideas and values to the wider Islamic community.

This in part explains the frustrating experience the US military is encountering in its nation-building operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. For the enemies of the global system, each successful tactical operation against the US-led Coalition becomes a strategic victory. Each successful attack against US military targets, Coalition partners, or international relief workers is a ringing endorsement for those who oppose the system and seek its replacement. Successful attacks offer “proof” to the undecided masses that the United States will not be able to establish the system in the contested areas of Iraq and Afghanistan, and they help to sway opinion toward alternative systemic constructs. From a US perspective, tactical victories are relevant only insofar as they help to buy time for the global system to take root. As a result, there is no classic definition of military “victory.” Military operations in these circumstances should be aimed at implementing security and stability in order for the other elements of national power (e.g., economic and social) to bring concrete improvements to the wider society, which in turn will eventually lead the masses to decide that the US-led global system is worth joining. Providing security and stability are the absolutely necessary preconditions that will allow this systemic acceptance to occur, and that should be the primary focus of US military operations in areas of the non-integrating gap where societies are split between joining the global system or choosing the Islamist alternative.

80/81

According to Daniel Pipes, the central task of the United States is to reinforce moderate Islam as a counterbalance to Islamism. Pipes postulates the central conflict in the GWOT is the one waged between militant and moderate Islam. While Washington can help in this struggle by providing assistance to the moderates and working to establish reforms in areas locked in a self-defeating bargain with the militants (such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan), the actual battle will be won or lost within the Islamic world itself.21 As a result, the second task implicit in a successful resolution to the GWOT is in supporting those elements in the Middle East that already accept the US-led system, and, most critically, facilitating pro-Western change in those states that straddle the fence.

The issue that makes the Global War on Terrorism so fundamentally different from other ideological conflicts in history is that it pits the US-led global system against non-state actors who transcend political boundaries. These non-state actors are striving to appeal to religion, culture, and even pan-Arab nationalism to forge a decentralized core of ideologically motivated insurgents fighting to overthrow the US-led global system and replace it with one based on their radical interpretations of sharia. This conflict is completely asymmetrical, where the enemy realizes it lacks the military capability to directly challenge the US-led system on a global scale. Instead, it relies on the strategy and tactics of the insurgent to selectively engage US and Coalition forces (Khobar Towers, the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, the USS Cole attack, 9/11) while striking in other venues to make political gains (the Madrid bombing, Bali bombing, kidnappings and murder of foreign nationals in Iraq, the 7/7 bombings in London) to erode Coalition cohesion. Unlike other insurgencies, the GWOT is unique because of its scale. It is, in effect, a pansurgency.22

Strategic Conflict of Perceptions

Islamist militants understand their desired strategic objectives. Although they are incapable of militarily defeating the US and Coalition forces on the battlefield, their success is determined by the achievement of their desired strategic political end state—the withdrawal of US forces and the creation of sharia-based governments. This type of conflict is ideally suited to the cultural underpinning of Arab and Islamic concepts of warfare. In virtually every historical example involving Arab or Islamic conflict, tactical and even operational-level military operations are considered ancillary to the final political objective. As a result, even overwhelming defeats have been turned into victories or considered simply part of a longer-term conflict. A couple of historical examples highlight this perspective:

• Israel won the most dramatic and complete tactical victories in modern military history during the 1967 Six-Day War. In May 1967, just be-

81/82

fore launching the devastating air attack which crippled Egypt’s air force, Israeli Prime Minister Levi Eshkol commented to his generals, “Nothing will be settled by a military victory. The Arabs will still be here.”23 Thirty-plus years later, Arabs continue to resist the battlefield outcome of that conflict.

• In the French/Algerian conflict of the 1950s and early 1960s, conventional French military forces won the tactical fight against the insurgent forces, but failed to achieve their strategic objectives due to the collapse of French national will.

The United States currently is facing a tremendous asymmetric challenge. US military operations are focused on winning a tactical fight that does not answer the strategic challenge or target our adversaries’ center of gravity, the attraction of their ideology. If US forces fail to orient on the enemy center of gravity, the United States may continue to win the tactical fight while abandoning the strategic advantage to our adversaries, whose tactical operations are designed with a strategic objective in mind. In essence, US forces are playing football while the militants are playing chess.

Meanwhile, the radical Islamists have fixed, and are directly targeting, the United States’ center of gravity, its national will to carry on missions in both Iraq and Afghanistan. From the outset, anti-Coalition elements in both locations have relied on the media to target this center of gravity. Although part of this effort has been focused on shaping regional opinion (e.g., condemning US foreign policy and military action, calling for armed resistance, etc.) to sustain their operations, the more damaging aspect of this approach is the targeting of public opinion in the West.

The militants are aided in this fight by some parts of the international media that are eager to report on situations unfavorable to US policy. As a result of this coverage, the militants’ tactical fight is elevated to the strategic level, whereby each tactical success (a bombing, a mortar attack, a kidnapping, even a single US or Coalition casualty) becomes a strategic success. This is seen in their targeting selection, which aims to cause as much instability as possible, fracture the Coalition and thereby compel elements of the international community to abandon active participation in these missions. This effort has succeeded in driving out several Coalition partners, NGOs, and regional-based companies participating in the reconstruction efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan. The militants intend to take further advantage of a wider information operations campaign as a strategic weapon. Militants can rely on the coverage of Arab-language broadcast and print media, which often has an unmistakable bias against the United States and the West, to bolster their cause.

The growth of satellite broadcast networks, such as al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya, is one of the most significant developments in the Middle East in recent years. Although these independent outlets represent a fundamental shift

82/83

away from state control of the media, they do play upon the emotions of the Arab masses. Suicide bombers in Israel, Iraq, and Afghanistan are not referred to as terrorists, but instead as martyrs. During a discussion of the outbreak of violence in Saudi Arabia following the murder of American contractor Paul Johnson, al-Jazeera anchor Abdul Samad Nasser referred to Saudi Arabia as “Jazeerat al-Arab” (or the Arabian Peninsula). This term was used in Arabic to describe the area prior to the formation of the Saudi state, and also has been adopted by Osama bin Laden in his references to Saudi Arabia in an attempt to delegitimize the Saudi state in the eyes of his followers. In another case, the former chief editor of the pan-Arab daily Asharq al-Aswat noted he once caught one his editors changing the caption of an Associated Press photo from “an American soldier chatting with an Iraqi girl” to “an American soldier asking an Iraqi girl for sex.” In effect, Arab-language media sources are tacitly supporting the radical Islamists’ agenda of creating a clash of civilizations.24

Advocating a New System: The Islamist Agenda

The primary objective of Islamists is to overthrow the West’s global system and replace it with a traditional Islamic system. From its political expressions during the early 20th century, Islamism challenged Western modernism as the basis for a just world order. Hasan al Banna, the Egyptian schoolteacher who established the Muslim Brotherhood in 1928, railed against the modern world’s encroachments on the Islamic world. Banna blamed Mustafa Kemal Attaturk’s rise to power in a wave of secular liberalism in Turkey, which spread throughout the Middle East. In 1939, the Muslim Brotherhood transitioned from a social reform movement to a political organization adopting a radical, revolutionary agenda, and in essence became the ideological genesis of today’s Islamism. The agenda espoused by the Muslim Brotherhood was threefold:

Islam is a comprehensive, self-evolving system; it is the ultimate path of life in all spheres.

Islam emanates from, and is based on, two fundamental sources, the Koran and the Prophetic Tradition.

Islam is applicable to all times and places.

According to Dilip Hiro, the platform of the Muslim Brotherhood presented an “all-encompassing entity,” which offered “an all-powerful system to regulate every detail of the political, economic, social, and cultural life of the believers.”25 Seizing upon Banna’s ideas, Qutb argued that true Muslims are in a perpetual state of war against secular political leaders, in which jihad becomes a “defensive response” to the “war of annihilation” the “apostates” wage against Islam. “True Muslims” are and must be set apart from the secular incarnation of government in a “counter-society” of the umma (com-

83/84

munity of believers). In this counter-society, true Muslims have no allegiance to state or government, but only to the umma, striving to create a system based on the Koran.26 As early as the mid-1950s, Qutb was arguing for jihad against secular influences in Egypt and the Arab world, and also against Western society. He asked, “What should be done about America and the West given their overwhelming danger to humanity. . .? Should we not issue a sentence of death? Is it not the verdict most appropriate to the nature of the crime?”27 During his trial, Qutb made his final statement in support of his concept of Islamism as a system when he argued, “The bonds of ideology and belief are sturdier than those of patriotism based upon region.”28 He was executed by Nasser in 1966.

There is a direct connection between the ideologies of Banna and Qutb and today’s radical Islamists. Judith Miller argues that Qutb’s primary legacy to radical Islam’s ideology is that of “literalism.” Qutb was able to use the words of the Koran and turn them against the Western-dominated system that permeated Middle East governments.29 His calls for jihad against the West as a religious duty for all Muslims would not only permeate the mainstream of Islamic society but would be seized upon by a new generation of radicals, culminating in bin Laden. Like his ideological mentor Qutb, bin Laden considers Arab governments that have bought into the West’s system to be “morally depraved” and “hypocrites” worthy not only of enmity, but of overthrow.30 According to Emmanuel Sivan, Islamist opposition movements concentrate on the “nearest enemy,” which in this case means Arab governments that cooperate with the US-led system. In his view, Islamist opposition movements will engage the “further away enemies” (meaning the United States and Israel) at a later time.31

Despite bin Laden’s ideological diatribes against the United States, and even his direct attacks against US power and influence, the nearest enemy continues to be the dominant battleground in the war between systems. At the end of the day, radical Islam will seize upon challenges in the Middle East: the youth bulge, declining economies where wealth and opportunities are concentrated among small elites, lack of political expression in most states, foreign policy crises (e.g. the Intifada and the US occupation of Iraq) where the Islamic world believes it is being challenged by the global system, and a future devoid of optimism. In the words of Moroccan Islamist Abdul Sallam Yassin, both “West and East have failed. The future is Islam.”32 The pervasiveness of Islamism, which even in its moderate form advocates a unity between religious and political life, means that until the global system shows its ability to benefit states of the non-functioning gap, the Arab street will be a willing audience for Islamism. As leading Egyptian journalist Muhammad Hasanein Heikal notes, “Only Islam makes sense, is authentic” to the Arab street.33

84/85

Bridging the Gap: The Struggle Across the Middle East

From a geostrategic perspective, these areas include a variety of states across the region where Islamists are actively engaged in attempting to instill their vision of a sharia-based Islamic umma. Currently, radical Islamists do not wield complete control in any state. The only state that comes close is Iran, but even Iran is caught in the struggle between religious fundamentalists and moderates who seek to modernize their country and bring to it some of the benefits of globalization. A second category of states is those in which the leaders have attempted to strike bargains with their nation’s indigenous Islamist elements in order to remain in power, such as Egypt, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia. Finally, there are also states whose governments have chosen to restrict or even eliminate all Islamist elements from gaining enough power, influence, and authority to establish themselves as a true force for change, such as Algeria, Tunisia, and Turkey.

A further complicating factor is the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian and wider Arab-Israeli conflict, which is truly about land and not religion or ideology, counter to what the Islamists would have us believe. This aspect represents a true conundrum for US Middle East policy, as it presents an opportunity for Islamists to encroach in an area that allows them to sway the opinion of the Arab street toward their ideology. Bin Laden’s attempt to hijack the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for his own purposes, adding the removal of the “Zionists” from Arab territory as one of al Qaeda’s stated goals, illustrates clearly his attempt to develop a clash of civilizations.

If the United States is to be victorious in the Global War on Terrorism, it must not allow the situation to devolve into Huntington’s simplistic, apocalyptic vision of a clash of civilizations. Instead, the United States must understand the implications of its leadership in the global system, and how to use this position to demonstrate to moderates in the Islamic world why they should join us rather than attempt to beat us.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NOTES

1. Philip Seib, “News Media and the Clash of Civilizations,” Parameters, 34 (Winter 2004-05), 71-85.

2. Niall Ferguson makes a key point by suggesting “it is a mistake to characterize Islamists as “Islamo-Fascists,” and it is better to think of them as “Islamo-Bolshevists committed to a revolution and reordering of the world along anti-capitalist lines” in “Sinking Globalization,” Foreign Affairs, 84 (March/April 2005), 75.

3. This is a common construct regarding international relations. See: Hedley Bull, The Anarchical Society (New York: Columbia, 1977); Kenneth N. Waltz, Man, the State, and War: A Theoretical Analysis (New York: Columbia Univ. Press, 1959); Alexander Wendt, “Anarchy is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics,” International Organization, 46 (Spring 1992); Robert Keohane, After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton Univ. Press, 1984); and Kenneth A. Oye, ed., Cooperation under Anarchy (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton Univ. Press, 1986).

4. This is part of the basis for Hegemonic Stability Theory. See: Robert Gilpin, War and Change in World Politics (New York: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1982); and Duncan Snidal, “The Limits of Hegemonic Stability Theory,” International Organization, 39 (Autumn 1985).

5. G. John Ikenberry, “The Myth of Post-Cold War Chaos,” Foreign Affairs, 75 (May/June 1996).

85/86

6. Thomas Friedman. “National Strategies and Capabilities for a Changing World: Globalization and National Security,” luncheon address, 31st Annual IFPA–Fletcher Conference on National Security and Policy, Washington, D.C., 15 November 2000.

7. Ibid.

8. Thomas Barnett, “The Pentagon’s New Map,” Esquire, March 2003.

9. This is the main argument of the hegemonic stability theory. Changes to the international system occur when the hegemon is unable or unwilling to provide the public goods necessary to maintain the system. A weak hegemon may be assisted in maintaining the system by other states who derive benefit from that system, or be challenged by others who do not benefit, or who wish to assume the role of the hegemon. See Gilpin, War and Change in World Politics, and Snidal, “The Limits of Hegemonic Stability Theory.”

10. Sharia (Islamic law) was codified in the eighth and ninth centuries, after the Abbasids seized the Islamic caliphate from the Umayyads. Sharia variants exist according to jurists’ compilations and interpretations in different geographic areas: the Hanafi School (least strict) in Turkey, Central Asia, and India; Shafi in Iran and the coastal Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean areas; Maliki in North and Sub-Saharan Africa; Hanbali (most strict) in Saudi Arabia.

11. Charles Hirschkind, “What is Political Islam?” Middle East Report, No. 205 (October-December 1997), p. 14.

12. Koran, Sura 2: verse 190. Most sharia schools of law consider jihad an obligation if unbelievers begin hostilities. See also Desmond Stewart, Early Islam (New York: Time-Life Books, 1967): “Christ had taught Christians to forgive their persecutors and turn the other cheek; Muhammad, in contrast, had urged his followers to fight for Islam” (pp. 39-40).

13. See Theodore H. von Laue, The World Revolution of Westernization: The Twentieth Century in Global Perspective (New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1987), for his views of cultures and their abilities to assimilate modern ideas and technology.

14. See Alisdair McIntyre, After Virtue (South Bend, Ind.: Notre Dame Univ. Press, 1984), for a comprehensive review of the philosophical path taken by the West, with a critique mirroring many of the Islamists’ complaints.

15. Wolfhart Pannenberg, Christianity in a Secularized World (New York: Crossroad, 1989), p. 57.

16. See Seizaburo Sato, “The Clash of Civilizations: A View from Japan,” The Asteion Magazine (Okamoto International Affairs Research Institute, Japan), 1996, for a detailed explanation of the West’s transition from its classical roots to an industrial order. Rodney Stark’s For the Glory of God (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton Univ. Press, 2003), examines why science progressed further in Christendom rather than in the Islamic world, providing an explanation for the early impetus toward eventual Western industrialization.

17. Barnett.

18. Nazih Ayubi, Political Islam: Religion and Politics in the Arab World (2d ed.; New York: Routledge, 1993), pp. 139-40.

19. Thomas Friedman, “Fighting ‘The Big One,’” The New York Times, 24 August 2003.

20. Ibid.

21. Daniel Pipes and Graham Fuller, “Combating the Ideology of Radical Islam,” Special Policy Forum Report, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, 10 April 2003.

22. The concept of pansurgency was conceived by Dr. Ilana Kass of the National Defense University for a briefing to the White House and Congress. Dr. Kass defines pansurgency as the organized movement of transnational actors seeking to overthrow values, cultures, or societies on a global level through subversion and armed conflict with an ultimate goal of establishing a new world order.

23. Michael B. Oren, Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of the Modern Middle East (Oxford, Eng.: Oxford Univ. Press, 2002), p. 152.

24. Mamoun Fandy, “Where’s the Arab Media’s Sense of Outrage?” The Washington Post, 4 July 2004, p. B04.

25. Dilip Hiro, War Without End: The Rise of Islamist Terrorism and Global Response (rev., 2d.ed.; London: Routledge, 2002), pp. 59-60.

26. Emmanuel Sivan, Radical Islam: Medieval Theology and Modern Politics (New Haven, Conn.: Yale Univ. Press, 1990).

27. Sayyid Qutb, Islam and the Problems of Civilization, quoted in Judith Miller, God Has Ninety-Nine Names: Reporting from a Militant Middle East (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1996), pp. 62-63.

28. Hiro, p. 67.

29. Miller, p. 63.

30. Ibid., p. 49.

31. Emmanuel Sivan, “The Holy War Tradition in Islam,” Orbis, 42 (Spring 1998), 171-94.

32. Mahmud A. Faksh, The Future of Islam in the Middle East: Fundamentalism in Egypt, Algeria, and Saudi Arabia (Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 1997), p. 25.

33. Ibid.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Major Andrew Harvey is a West European Foreign Area Officer currently assigned to the Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence, Headquarters US Army Europe and Seventh Army, in Heidelberg, Germany. He previously taught in the Department of Joint and Multinational Operations of the US Army Command and General Staff College. He holds an M.A. in political science from Appalachian State University.

Mr. Ian Sullivan is the Senior Intelligence Analyst for the Middle East and North Africa for the Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence, Headquarters US Army Europe and Seventh Army. He previously worked for the Office of Naval Intelligence and as the intelligence liaison officer at the Center for Naval Analyses. A graduate of Canisius College and a Fulbright Fellow in modern history at the University of Potsdam (Germany), he earned an M.A. in German and European studies at Georgetown University.

Dr. Ralph Groves (Major, USAR) is an analyst of West Africa and Islamism at the Joint Analysis Center, Molesworth, England. His Reserve assignment is with the Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence, Headquarters US Army Europe and Seventh Army. He is a graduate of Columbia University’s Middle East Institute, holds an M.A. from Columbia’s Department of Middle East Languages and Cultures, and holds a Doctorate from St. John’s University in modern world history.

http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usawc/Paramet...tumn/harvey.htm

Veterans preference is provided to separated military members under the following conditions:


Five point veterans preference is granted to veterans who separated with an honorable discharge (or under honorable conditions) from the Armed Forces after more than 180 days of active duty, any part of which occurred after 31 January 1955, and before 15 October 1976, or after service during a war or in a campaign for which a campaign badge has been authorized (including those who served on active duty during the Gulf War).


Ten point veterans preference is granted to disabled veterans and veterans awarded the Purple Heart.


Non-disabled veterans who retire at or above the rank of major are not eligible for veterans preference.

When referral is made from external recruitment sources (such as certificates issued by a Bureau Delegated Examining Unit , Office of Personnel Management certificates, Veterans Readjustment Appointments or outside the register authority for temporary appointments) candidates are ranked and referred in veterans preference order. Veterans preference eligibles appear ahead of nonpreference eligibles on a referral list within the same score and must be selected prior to nonpreference eligibles.

Veterans preference provides for hiring preference on initial appointment only. Employees with veterans preference compete equally with all other candidates for subsequent inservice placements. In addition to preference in hiring, employees with veterans preference have higher retention standing than others for reduction-in-force purposes.

Banshees of VMAQ-1 ensure smooth transition for Navy partners
Submitted by: 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing
Story Identification #: 200593064529
Story by Cpl. James D. Hamel



AL ASAD, Iraq (Sept. 30, 2005) -- The Marine Tactical Electronic Warfare Squadron 1 Banshees, based at Al Asad, Iraq, are playing host to two Navy squadrons supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom from late September to early October.

As Navy Tactical Electronic Warfare Squadron 135 transferred operations to VAQ-141, the two squadrons needed a land base because of a carrier gap, a situation caused by aircraft carriers rotating in and out of the area of responsibility.

When the USS Chester W. Nimitz, the home of VAQ-135, left the Persian Gulf, the squadron left behind two jets to help VMAQ-1 successfully execute the electronic warfare mission. The USS Theodore Roosevelt, the home of VAQ-141, is on its way to the Persian Gulf, but won’t arrive until next month. The Shadowhawks of VAQ-141 came to Al Asad to relieve their Navy counterparts and allow them to return to their ship.

The rotation allowed operations to continue without forcing any squadron or service member to stay in country longer than necessary. The Shadowhawks hit the ground running, beginning combat missions the day after their arrival. Such quick assumption of missions was no doubt aided by having two squadrons aiding their transition.

“Having VAQ-135 here when we arrived to get a face-to-face turnover was excellent,” said Navy Lt. Bryan Gunkel, a pilot with VAQ-141. “Between them and VMAQ-1, the transition will appear seamless to the troops on the ground, who we’re supporting.”

But while it may seem seamless to the troops on the ground, preparing a Prowler for combat missions in Iraq is anything but easy. To accomplish the distinct mission Operation Iraqi Freedom requires, Prowlers are outfitted with a new tactical jamming pod, the weapon in their electronic countermeasure arsenal.

Marines from VMAQ-1 have been teaching those from VAQ-141 how to operate and maintain the pods. Colonel Mark E. Wakeman, commanding officer of VMAQ-1, said one of the requirements to operate the newly outfitted Prowlers is for an aircrew that has spent time in Iraq to teach a new aircrew that hasn’t. His Marines have been filling that double role to VAQ-141.

“They’re catching on pretty quickly,” said Cpl. Jaa E. Tucker, an electronic countermeasures technician from VMAQ-1. Besides his daily task of keeping the Prowlers flying, he’s been passing his knowledge to his Navy counterparts. “We show them how to service the pod and troubleshooting steps.”

And while Tucker and his fellow Marines have taught the Sailors their jobs, others within the squadron have dealt with the logistics of adding seventy people, albeit temporarily, to their squadron.

“We’ve had to establish billeting, vehicles and working spaces, so there’s a lot of prior coordination so they can get in here and start operating from the start,” said 1st Lt. Mike Monette, an administration officer and electronic countermeasures officer with VMAQ-1.

Yet, the Marines of VMAQ-1 can rest easy knowing their extra work has aided the mission and ensured a more efficient transition for their fellow Prowler squadron.

“The Marines of VMAQ-1 have made our transition from the Theodore Roosevelt to Al Asad easy,” said Navy Lt. Warren Van Allen, an electronic countermeasures officer with VAQ-141. “Not only have they taken us under their wing, they’ve shared everything from working spaces, to critical mission data, to treats from supporters back home. I can’t say enough about them.”

http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf...C0?opendocument

Humanitarian heroes homebound after creating ripples of hope in Iraq
Submitted by: 2nd Marine Division
Story Identification #: 2005928201016
Story by Cpl. Mike Escobar



CAMP BAHARIA, Iraq (Sept. 7, 2005) -- On the verge of coming home, they still remember their first impressions of Fallujah in early March. It was desolate, ruined, and filthy. The staccato sound of gunshots and tank cannons still seemed to echo through the abandoned city streets and crumbled buildings months after major conflict had ended.

"It looked like something out of post-World War II Germany," stated Sgt. Matthew Dreher, a 25-year-old reservist from Arlington, Va. "Everything was destroyed and there was really nobody walking about the city streets."

It was this portrait of misery that Dreher's six-man civil affairs unit, Team 3, Detachment 2, 5th Civil Affairs Group, set out to repaint immediately after their arrival here.

The provisional reserve unit, created in January, came armed only with their rifles and a rudimentary knowledge of how to accomplish the massive task before them; helping rebuild a city in shambles and restoring the area's broken infrastructure.

Dreher said Team 3 members had received hasty pre-deployment classes while in the states on Iraqi culture and how to conduct Civil Military Operations (CMO). But much of their knowledge of performing humanitarian missions was drawn from their civilian occupations. Policemen, firefighters, engineers and civil workers all came together as Team 3 to embark on their humanitarian mission.

Seven months after first arriving here, the Marines reflected on the progress and community growth they helped bring about, a success not created by the team's efforts alone.

"Every project we did in these areas, we accomplished with the help of the Iraqi government and local contractors," explained Maj. Chris E. Phelps, Team 3's leader. "We merely worked as project managers and facilitators behind the scenes, sort of like the wizard behind the curtain in 'The Wizard of Oz.' Our goal was never to come here to do things for the people, but to help set up their government and infrastructure enough so they could do it themselves. Ultimately, we worked to 'fire' ourselves and make ourselves obsolete."

Altogether, Phelps' team spent $4.85 million dollars on 38 completed, ongoing or projects pending approval by the local government. These community projects affected the Northern Fallujah area and nearby Saqlawiyah, a rural township miles outside the city.

In Fallujah alone, Team 3 coordinated with local officials and contractors to remove 200 tons of rubble from the city streets.

This beautified the area and made the flow of foot and vehicle traffic more efficient, while also eliminating places for terrorists to stash improvised explosive devices.

Additionally, Team 3 helped contract a local mine-clearing company to de-mine the fields surrounding Fallujah's train station. Insurgents previously occupying the city placed these explosives here in hopes of deterring the Coalition Forces' advance, Phelps said.

He added that Iraq's Ministry of Transportation wanted to improve roads near the previously mined field, but needed it cleared before labor commenced.

Notable also is the progress and democratic social reform Team 3 Marines helped bring about in Saqlawiyah. This farming community had remained nearly untouched by the military's helping hand until April, when Coalition and Iraqi forces began operating in the area.

"When we first got to Saqlawiyah, the people didn't know the fighting in Fallujah was over," said Staff Sgt. Darian Patterson, Team 3's staff noncommissioned officer-in-charge. "You had (displaced) people living inside schools, because they had nowhere else to go."

Many of these citizens' temporary residences were in disrepair, Patterson continued. In Saqlawiyah's al-Dahr school's restroom, there was one working toilet and no sinks for their 160 students.

"In the U.S., we never see raw sewage, especially not at places with kids, such as schools," Patterson stated. "My wife is a social worker, and all I could think about was how she would go ballistic in a place like this."

Working alongside Saqlawiyah's city council, the team began addressing the school’s sanitation and structural flaws. Thirty-three schools in the community received first aid kits, and local contractors refurbished the al-Dahr facilities. Now, the school has running water, four new toilets and two new sinks.

The Saqlawiyah medical clinic was another site Team 3 helped improve. The Marines and stateside nongovernmental organizations would routinely donate and distribute thousands of dollars worth of medical supplies there, including syringes, laboratory gloves and sanitizer solution.

In May, the team facilitated the clean-up of a biohazard material dump site behind the clinic, along with bringing biohazard waste incinerators to prevent future buildup.

Navy Seabees working with Team 3 had also erected an information read board outside the clinic, where the two- to- three hundred residents who visit the clinic daily can read about upcoming community events.

"We always appreciate the help we receive from the CAG and our good cooperation with the Marines here," stated Dr. Ayad al-Hadithy, one staff member at the clinic. "They have helped us restore many vital services to this clinic and its patients."

Approximately $1.5 million dollars will also be invested to renovate the local water plant and the piping that transports it to the surrounding areas, a system Phelps said has seen no maintenance in more than 30 years and has been sickening some of the populace with cholera.

Nearly one million dollars was also spent on revamping the city's power system by installing new power lines and transformers to ensure that as many residents as possible have electricity in their homes. This system had been untouched in 25 years, and the restoration will affect tens of thousands of residents here, said Majeed Na'amah Khalifa, a member of the Saqlawiyah city council.

It is Khalifa's own body of legislation that is to thank for many of these projects coming to fruition, Phelps said. Since late April, when Marine and Iraqi military leaders first met with the council, Phelps said he has noticed vast improvements in the local officials' relationships with their community.

"The CAG had started to back off from our more active role in city affairs lately, because the Saqlawiyah city council is speaking to the council in Ramadi and making a case for their people's needs," he continued, explaining how Saqlawiyah's representatives bring up community projects their people would like to see accomplished to the governing body in the provincial capital city. "Council members would tell me that local people now stop them on the streets to thank them and say, 'Hey, you're really representing me.'"

Working in conjunction with the local government and Team 3 were the Marines of Company A, 1st Battalion, 6th Marine Regiment and Iraqi Security Forces. Together, they provided a secure environment for police forces to reenter Saqlawiyah. Since 2004, the community had been lacking civil law enforcement personnel. Currently, approximately 70 policemen patrol the streets while operating out of a headquarters safeguarded from insurgents by Company A Marines and ISF personnel.

"I feel that everything came together in Saqlawiyah in the end," Phelps stated. "All the good things that happened in that area were a direct result of what the Marines on this team did with the community. Saqlawiyah was our little slice of the war."

After months of tirelessly conducting civil military operations, Patterson said Team 3 will leave Iraq richer for the experience of having aided an emerging democratic nation. Almost as valuable as the infrastructure they started helping restore is the personal growth each Marine underwent here.

"I know I came here with a closed mindset, not wanting to care about the people and only wanting to do my job to get home," he continued. "Meeting people like Dr. Ayad and our 'terps' (interpreters) changed all that. This job made us all remember that we're warriors as well as human beings. I'm excited about getting home to my wife and son, but I know we'll be leaving some great friends behind."

"We came here thinking we would help hundreds, but we ended up helping thousands," Dreher added. "We put our hearts and souls into this job for the past seven months. Now we see people walking down the streets and markets open for business. I feel like I'll leave a big piece of my life back here."

The team will depart Iraq in late September upon being replaced by members from the 6th CAG, who will continue their legacy. Phelps said his Marines will return to their respective parent reserve commands, and the provisional 5th CAG will be disbanded "to go down in Marine Corps history."

Now, Team 3 leaves Iraq with one of Phelps' favorite quotes in mind, that of 18th century philosopher Edmund Burke stating, "The only thing necessary for evil to exist is for good men to remain silent and do nothing."

These six men took these words to heart during their time in Iraq, and learned that even a small team operating in a country ravaged by war and insurgency can create a ripple of hope for a brighter tomorrow.

http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf...AF?opendocument

Marines give Bronze Star to Hobart man

ASSOCIATED PRESS


HOBART, Wis. - The Marines have awarded the Bronze Star to an 18-year-old soldier who was killed in Iraq trying to protect his fellow Marines.

Pfc. Ryan Jerabek of Hobart died in an ambush at Ramadi, Iraq, on April 6, 2004.

His parents, Ken and Rita Jerabek, accepted the Marine Corps' fourth-highest medal for bravery -- the Bronze Star -- during a ceremony at their Hobart home Saturday.

"Combat will test everything a person is made of," said Marine Capt. Sean Schickel, the former commanding officer of Jerabek's unit -- Echo Company, Second Battalion.

"Character is finding yourself in an enemy ambush against impossible odds and immediately employing your weapon into enemy positions as Ryan did, so that your fellow Marines can get out from under a massive amount of enemy fire and have a chance to fight," Schickel told the 125 people at the home.

"Character is being shot to the ground as enemy bullets strike you in the shoulder and getting back up to fight as Ryan did, while most others would have stayed down," Schickel said.

"Character is continuing to give everything you have until that final moment. That's what Ryan did. That's why he has earned this award."

Rita Jerabek said she feels the loss of her son everyday, but takes solace in the award from the Marine Corps that her son loved.

"It signifies the respect he has gotten from his peers and those he served with," she said.

http://www.duluthsuperior.com/mld/duluthsu...al/12743957.htm

Returning Marines performed heroically
September 17,2005
BY CHRIS MAZZOLINI
DAILY NEWS STAFF
There's few things that can bring a Marine Corps staff sergeant to tears. Seeing his infant son for the first time is one of them.

Six-month old Cole Hanson was born while his dad, Staff Sgt. Timothy Hanson, was deployed to Iraq with 3rd Battalion, 2nd Marines. So although Hanson has seen pictures of his son, he's had to fight through seven months of fierce combat to hold him.

"We got a present for him," said Hanson's wife, Michaelynn, as she hoisted Cole, who was decked out in a hat, shirt and shoes dappled in stars and stripes.

Cole wasn't the only one wearing his patriotic finest. A crowd of families and friends of the roughly 900 Marines from 3/2 waited in a parking lot Friday at Camp Lejeune, waving flags and hanging welcome-home signs from the upper-story railings of the unit's barracks.

Nervousness was a common feeling.

"I have butterflies in my stomach," said Kristin Ceppaluni, girlfriend of Lance Cpl. Kyle Mergner. She joined Mergner's family for the trip down to Jacksonville from Jackson, N.J. "I'm really excited. I'm really nervous."

Ceppaluni smiled.

"I'm really happy."

While loved ones experience frazzled nerves throughout he duration of a deployment, it's much the same for returning Marines, who, in this case, had to endure a slow bus ride back to Lejeune from Cherry Point - then a trip to the armory - before reuniting with parents, wives, girlfriends and kids.

"You come home with a lot of good anxiety â?¦," said Maj. John Reed, 3/2's executive officer, who returned home with an advance party on Sept. 1. "During the deployment, you rely on your buddies, the Marines to your left and right, and it's important to keep in touch with them through the reunion process.

"But there's nothing better than to come home and get hugs from loved ones."

The battalion spent its deployment in Iraq's Al Anbar province near the border of Syria, a war-torn area rife with foreign fighters. They fought in many nationally recognized operations - such as operations Matador, Spear and Quick Strike - to route out insurgents.

Three from the battalion were killed in action, said 2nd Lt. Barry Edwards, a spokesman for the 2nd Marine Division.

"The combat operations fought by 3/2 were violent, more so than stability and support operations," said Reed. "3/2 was in all-out combat, and that occurred the entire time. These Marines performed heroically, and they are coming home to a hero's welcome."

That welcome came when the buses finally arrived and a cheer erupted from the crowd. The Marines filed off and marched through a throng of clapping people. They lined up at attention one last time, and then were dismissed into the waiting arms of their families.

And Hanson finally got to hold his son. Shaking and fighting back tears, he could barely put into words how happy he was to see his wife and son.

"It's unbelievable," Hanson said. "It's all you live for. No matter what you do over there, this is what matters."


Contact staff writer Chris Mazzolini at cmazzolini@freedomenc.com or at 353-1171, Ext. 229.


http://www.jdnews.com/SiteProcessor.cfm?Te...61&Section=News

My name is Randy Gary, owner and operator of Waterfowl Mercenary Guide Service. The following pictures may be what some consider to be "waterfowl pornography." If you think pictures of dead waterfowl might offend you, you may want to check out the Ron Atwood Wildlife Gallery instead. Otherwise, come on in and take a look at what my guided hunts produce. If you like what you see contact me and we'll go and slaughter 'em. I could say more but as they say, "A picture is worth a thousand words."

The Mercenary Argument Some armchair warriors assert that the military isn't for everyone; those who lead cheers on the sidelines serve just as important a role as those who face bullets. This is perhaps the strongest evidence of how anti-veteran the Right has become in this country, besides their support for a President who wants to stick soldiers with a bill for their own medical care. At one point in our history, serving in a state militia or in the military was an almost universal experience for young men; the question wasn't whether the military was for everyone, since the country didn't want a military consisting only of people who "felt comfortable" being warriors. Uncle Sam wanted civilians, people from all walks of life; it was through the forced integration of the WWII battlefield that real integration occured in our society. When there was too great a discrepancy between those who "belonged" in the military, and those who didn't (ie., the draft riots during the Civil War), the country suffered. The all-volunteer military, by and large, has been a good thing, but not in the way it created separate classes of citizens, those who fight and die for their country, and those who rally support for them on the sidelines.

Battle of Heligoland Bight

British submarine patrols in the Heligoland Bight region in August 1914 had noticed that German torpedo boats patrolled this area supported by light cruisers in two shifts of a day and night group. Roger Keyes Commodore (S), commander of British submarines, formulated a plan to raid these patrols using the Harwich Force of light cruisers and destroyers under Reginald Tyrwhitt Commodore (T).

The plan was for the Harwich force to drive the German patrol away from the German coast at dawn with British submarine split into two groups, one to intercept any German reinforcements and the other to act as a decoy to keep the German torpedo boats offshore. Further offshore would be some heavier units to support the Harwich Force against any German reinforcements and ideally the Grand Fleet would be in distant support.

Keyes approached the Admiralty for approval of the plan on August 23 1914 but the War Staff were too busy to consider the plan. Keyes, rather than giving up, went direct to the First Lord of the Admiralty, Winston Churchill.

Churchill was impressed by the idea and called a meeting the following day with Tyrwhitt (who had to be recalled form sea), Price Louis of Battenburg (the 1st Sea Lord), Vice Admiral Sturdee (Chief off the Admiralty War Staff) and Vice Admiral Sir Fredrick Hamilton (2nd Sea Lord).

Sturdee decided that is was not necessary to send the Grand Fleet in support and so the plan was changed to reduce the support to Cruisers Force C of five old armoured cruisers and Cruiser Force K with the Battlecruisers Invincible and New Zealand. He also changed the direction of the attack.

Eight British submarines were involved with an inner line of E4, E5 and E9 north and south of Heligoland to attack any reinforcing or retreating German ships. An outer line of E6, E7 and E8 was formed 40 miles further out and were intended to try and lure the German destroyers further out to sea. Finally D2 and D8 were stationed off Ems to attack any reinforcements coming from that direction.

The sweep was to take place on the 28 August with Keyes and Tyrwhitt putting to sea on the 26 and 27 August respectively. Unfortunately it was not until the 26 August that the Admiralty informed Admiral John Jellicoe (C-in-C Grand Fleet) that a major operation was planned in the North Sea, and even when they did inform him the information they sent was limited and vague.

Jellicoe was concerned by the lack of support for an operation so close to German bases and so requested that he bring the Grand Fleet out in support. Sturdee told Jellicoe that this was not necessary but if he wanted he could send additional battlecruisers. Jellicoe took this opportunity and he informed the Admiralty that he would be sending Beatty with the First Battlecruiser Squadron and Commodore Goodenough with the First Light Cruiser Squadron to reinforce the covering force. Keyes and Tyrwhitt had already sailed and the Admiralty failed to inform them of the additional British units involved in the operation.

This lack of communication from the Admiralty nearly led to disaster when before dawn the Harwich force encountered the First Light Cruiser Squadron. Fortunately it was established the cruisers were friendly. Tyrwhitt was then informed of the reinforcements but it was too late to inform the British submarine of the new units.

Facing the British raid the German Navy had two patrol lines. The outer line, 25 miles west of Heligoland, consisted of nine modern destroyers of the I torpedo Boat Flotilla. Twelve miles nearer Heligoland were vessels of the III Minesweeping Division. Supporting these lines were the light cruisers SMS Hela, Ariadne, Frauenlob and Stettin. SMS Mainz was waiting off the Ems to the south but the other seven light cruisers allocated to the patrols were all in either Brunsbuttel or Wilhelmshaven. Unfortunately for the German light forces any heavier ships that might be used to reinforce the patrols were limited in the times they could leave the Jade by tides.

The first contact between the opposing forces was between the German torpedo boat G-194 and the British submarine E-9 at 0526. E-9 fired and missed with a torpedo as G-194 attempted to ram her. G-194 reported the presence of the submarine and the V Torpedo Boat Flotilla was sent from Heligoland to hunt for submarines.

Destroyers from the First Destroyer Flotilla sighted G-194 shortly before 0650. HMS Laurel and the other three destroyers of her division and a running fight to the SE started. It took some time for signals of this incident to reach Real Admiral Franz Hipper (via Read Admiral Maass in SMS Cöln) in Wilhelmshaven who had overall responsibility for defence of the Bight. He thought that only British destroyers were involved so ordered the light cruisers SMS Stettin and Frauenlob to assist but no further reinforcements were sent.

Tyrwhitt on the light cruiser HMS Arethusa had become concerned that HMS Laurel and her division were becoming detached from his force so after a failed attempt to recall them he set off after them as the German V Torpedo Boat Flotilla was arriving for their expected submarine hunt. Unfortunately this meant that the German warships had only steam for enough steam to hunt submarines and not for a fast surface battle. On finding themselves facing enemy destroyers they retreated.

The British Third Destroyer Flotilla led HMS Arethusa were getting the better of the action with the German S-13 and V-1 worst damaged and although heading towards the batteries on Heligoland the mists prevented the German shore based artillery from assisting. The Third Destroyer Flotilla led by the light cruiser HMS Fearless was keeping a parallel course to the north but was not in range to take part in the action.

By now the pursuit had reached the second line of German ships consisting of minesweepers and was D-8 soon under fire from British forces. Fortunately for the battered German warships at 0757 the light cruisers SMS Frauenlob and Stettin arrived and the British changed course to engage these new more dangerous opponents.

Fearless quickly hit Stettin knocking out one of her guns and forcing the German cruiser to turn away towards Heligoland having successfully taken the pressure off the German destroyers. Fearless did not follow, as her orders were to continue the sweep of Heligoland Bight.

Meanwhile Arethusa and Frauenlob were engaging each other with the German cruiser gaining the upper hand over the new British warship. Arethusa suffered two 4inch guns out of action through jamming and another from damage as well as suffering wireless damage and engine room flooding that would affect her speed. Frauenlob was also hit about ten times but the British cruiser had been forced to turn away by 0830 at which point Frauenlob gave up the chase.

Meanwhile to the north west Keyes on HMS Lurcher sighted cruisers in the mist and as the message of late reinforcements of Goodenough and Beatty had not reached him he reported them as enemy cruisers and started to shadow them. Later the British cruisers sighted Keyes and in return pursued him to the west where Keyes hoped to lure them into the waiting British battlecruisers. It was not until 0950 that the confusion was cleared up.

Even further to the north west Goodenough detached the light cruisers HMS Nottingham and Lowestoft from his squadron to reinforce the Harwich Force. The pair of cruisers ran into the German V-187 that was being pursued by British destroyers led by HMS Goshawk. The British light cruisers opened fire at 4000 yards and soon the German torpedo boat was brought to a halt by the fire of the British warships. The V-187 sank at about 0910 and the British started to rescue survivors.

As this was happening Stettin appeared again and unintentionally interrupted the rescue operation forcing the British destroyers to leave a couple of their boats in the water as they escaped the cruiser. Later the British sailors and the German crew they were rescuing in the boats were surprised when the British submarine E-4 surfaced. The British crew were taken on board the submarine and three German prisoners were taken but there was no more room on the submarine so the remaining Germans were provided was a compass, directions to Heligoland and supplies.

By 0855 HMS Fearless had joined up with the damaged Arethusa which was attempted to make temporary repairs.

Further German cruisers were on their way. The old SMS Hela had been heading for the action but intercepted a radio message from Stettin that said that the British were withdrawing and so Hela returned to her patrol position. SMS Ariadne also missed the first phase of the action and returned to her patrol position. SMS Cöln and Strassburg were on their way from Wilhelmshaven and SMS Mainz was on the way from Ems.

At 0930 the British submarine E-6 attacked unsuccessfully HMS Southampton, not being aware of the presence of the British cruiser. Southampton returned the favour and tried and failed to ram the submarine.

Tyrwhitt in the crippled Arethusa was busy trying to reform his scattered destroyers and so changed course to the east to help collect them. Soon afterwards the visibility improved and Keyes and Goodenough were at last able to identify each other as friendly and clear up some of the British confusion. Tyrwhitt then decided to withdraw and headed west.

At this point SMS Strassburg attacked from the southeast but was driven off by Fearless and destroyers. As the destroyers were returning to screen Arethusa SMS Cöln appeared and was again the massed destroyers of the Harwich Force drove the cruiser off. Again Strassburg returned to attack Arethusa.

The under pressure Harwich Force now requested assistance from Beatty and his battlecruisers and at 1135 he decided to assist despite the risk of mines and torpedoes for the big ships. Meanwhile the British destroyers launched torpedo attacks on Strassburg and managed to drive her off but the Mainz was now coming into contact with some of the British destroyers.

At 1150 Goodenough with the First Light Cruiser squadron made contact with Mainz and the outnumbered German cruiser fled. Unfortunately for Mainz she was heading into the path of the Harwich Force and she her steering was damaged by Fearless. Destroyers then pummelled the damaged German cruiser although she did manage to damage HMS Laurel, Liberty and Laertes to varying degrees. Mainz was hit many times before the British ceased fire at 1225 in order to rescue survivors from the ship that sank about forty minutes later.

As this was happening Cöln and Strassburg reappeared to attack Arethusa. Faced with two German cruisers and with many of her destroyers dispersed the situation looked bad for Arethusa. Fortunately Beatty arrived just at this point and faced with the huge battlecruisers the German light cruisers attempted to escape.

Cöln was rapidly hit but she was given a respite by the appearance of SMS Ariadne at 1300. The range to HMS Lion was only 6000 yards and the German cruiser was rapidly hit and within fifteen minutes the British battlecruisers had disappeared into the mist leaving the burning Ariadne to be abandoned by her crew some of whom were rescued by SMS Danzig which had been left the Jade a couple of hours earlier.

Strassburg managed to escape despite being seen by several British units but because the German ship had not acted aggressively she had been assumed to be British in the mist.

At 1325 HMS Lion sighted Cöln again and this time there was no respite for the German warship. Despite putting up a fight Cöln stood no chance and was sunk.

This was the last of the action. Arethusa made it home being towed by HMS Hogue.

The Battle of Heligoland Bight was a clear victory for the British, the Germans had lost three light cruisers (Mainz, Ariadne and Cöln) and a torpedo boat (V-187) and over 1200 men whilst the British had suffered no ships sunk and only 35 killed. The attack showed the inadequacy of German planning for the defence of the Bight - it took many hours before any German heavy ships could reinforce the patrols and by the time they did the British had gone. During the action the German tactics were poor and their cruisers attacked individually rather than co-ordinating their attacks allowing the British to beat them off.

It was not all good news for the British despite the public relations bonus of steaming into the enemy's 'back yard' and defeating them. There were serious errors in planning and it was only by luck that no 'friendly fire' incidents had resulted in casualties. This also resulted in the various forces not supporting each other as well as they could have.

The Lions of July: Prelude to War, 1914 by William Jannen Jr. Presidio Press, 505B San Marin Drive, Suite 300, Novato, California 94945-1340, 1996, 456 pages, $18.95.

The 80th anniversary of the armistice ending the Great War has recently passed. Historians and political scientists, professional and amateur, continue to ponder the cause of that bloody conflict. In The Lions of July, his first book, William Jannen Jr. presents yet another look into the furious diplomatic and military maneuvering during July of 1914 that inexorably marched Europe and much of the world into war. A practicing attorney, Jannen earned his law degree and a PhD in modern European history from Columbia University. In addition to his legal practice, Jannen has taught history at Brooklyn College.

The Lions of July is a tough read--not because it is poorly written but because the author follows the machinations of over 80 different personalities in at least eight European capitals. Jannen peels back another layer from Barbara Tuchman's famous The Guns of August and examines not only the behavior of kings, prime ministers, and generals but also the actions of the many ambassadors to the European powers. Consequently, it becomes difficult to follow the large cast of characters through the turbulent month of July 1914. The work is exhaustively researched and well documented with numerous foreign-language primary-source materials. Jannen balances his treatment with perspectives from all the major powers. His research is excellent, his sources are compelling, and he valiantly attempts to breathe life into the scores of actors. The average reader, however, will find it difficult to track more than a handful of the more compelling personalities.

The Lions of July is a diplomatic history. Anyone looking for a thorough analysis of the military causes of World War I will be sorely disappointed. Because armies are the instruments of politics, Jannen rightly places responsibility for the war on the politicians and not on the Germans' single-minded adherence to the Schlieffen Plan. Count von Schlieffen and his infamous plan for the conquest of France do not even make their appearance until halfway through the book. Jannen believes that war did not inevitably result from mobilization. The cause rested squarely on the numerous leaders who refused to present or accept plausible solutions that might have averted war at many stages.

The last hope for reversing the waning Austro-Hungarian Empire lay in crushing Serbia. Russians were committed to defending their brother Slavs. Germany could not tolerate a Russia postured for war marshaling along its borders, but the German war plans demanded the defeat of France before Russia. Britain, allied with France, was motivated to fight only to protect the honor of the heroic Belgians. Serbia had been the touchstone of the crisis and was also the keystone to its resolution. As Jannen concludes, "Everyone was prepared to have Serbia pay for the peace of Europe by being invaded." For their part, Serbian leaders agreed to almost complete subjugation to redress the Austrian grievances and avoid a war they would certainly lose, but subjugation was not enough to reinvigorate the ailing Austrian Empire. The road could lead only to world war.

Contrary to the comments on the dust jacket, The Lions of July is not a perfect companion to The Guns of August. The former is a much more serious work of historical scholarship and, as such, does not match Tuchman's riveting, page-turning style. Although midcareer service members may be familiar with World War I, this is not the book for them. The Lions of July is a book for a serious student interested in a deeper understanding of the human failings that led to the war that did not end all wars.

Maj Mark P. Jelonek, USAF
Washington, D.C.

Real good book ghost, you ought to widen you knowledge. Unfortunitly, it's not on the socialist or anarchist approved reading list.

http://www.stevenzeeland.com/zeeland/marboy/tijuana.htm


T I J U A N A B R A S S
M A R I N E B O Y

From It's A Queer World:
Deviant Adventures in Pop Culture

I'M LOOKING AT America's youth with its pants down. It ain't pretty but I want a piece of the action. I'm on the prowl, you see, looking to 'recruit' - and this is probably the best place to do it because there isn't a boy here who hasn't drunk the equivalent of a bottle of industrial-strength muscle relaxant.

Tijuana may mean little more than cheery Herb Alpert to you, but to kids in the Californian border city and naval base of San Diego, Tijuana spells 'Party on, dude'. The reason for this is very simple: the minimum age for imbibing intoxicating liquor in California is twenty-one; in Mexico it is eighteen. This, and the fact that Tijuana is only a half-hour drive south, explains why hordes of teenagers regularly leave leafy suburbs, green campuses and neatly ordered barracks to party and puke on the pavements of their Third World neighbour.

Tijuana must be difficult for the American mind to comprehend. Perhaps this is another reason why they drink so much here. Apart from the sheer disorganisation of everything, from street signs to sanitation (particularly shocking after the fastidiousness of well-heeled California), there is the poverty which litters the streets. Four-year-olds sit on the pavement, among the refuse and the dead cats, their dirty palms outstretched. Many of the beggars have travelled from the rural interior of Mexico to try to cadge some dollars. 'TJ', as the kids call it, may be richer for its proximity to the United States than other parts of Mexico. But the image of a town unhooking its bra straps to cater for the apparently limitless hedonism of Yankee youth while its own children sell chewing gum and sleep in its doorways, is not an altogether attractive one.

The main drag for the brattish Yankee invaders is called, with sad Latin American irony, Plaza de la Revolucion. Tonight the square is full of rampaging youths eager to combine the incompatible activities of getting legless and getting their legs over (though not, I hope, incompatible with someone like me getting their leg over them). Tonight is also a military payday. Their back pockets bulging, hundreds of 'squids' and 'jarheads' (sailors and marines) zigzag their way up and down the streets, deliberately walking into their sworn enemies, college boys.

I came here with the intention of preying upon America's clean-limbed youth while they prey on Mexico. In the sexual food chain I intend to be at the top. But who to choose? Jarheads, squids or college boys? It only takes a minute to eliminate the college boys (too smug) and the squids (too geeky) and thus plump for the jarheads.

There's a certain irresistible poetic justice in the idea of seducing a US marine, historically the means of projecting US power in Latin America. But, even more persuasively, marines have a number of classical features which attract them to the homosexual predator. They are fit, they have short hair, they always suffer from a shortage of women and, best of all, they drink far too much. As a popular American gay joke has it- Q: What's the difference between a straight marine and a 'bisexual' marine? A: A six-pack of beer.

All in all, it's really very thoughtful of the US government to go to the trouble of giving teenage Midwestern boys a decent haircut, making them exercise, depriving them of female company and then sending them to southern California - Fagville USA - where they can bring a little joy into the lives of lonely homosexuals.

The big drawback is that marines, like nuns, always travel in threes. But that didn't stop me chatting up Troy, a recruiting poster picture come to life, in some bar where he was whooping it up with his two buddies. 'Hey dude, that accent's really cool!' he exclaimed, grinning his blond grin and slapping my back with his wide farmboy hands. 'I bet the chicks really go for that!' And so our romance began.

As the beers and tequila flow, so does Troy's life story. It turns out that, like many military boys, he turned to the US Armed Forces to save him from America. Back in his twohorse town in west Texas, he used to while away the hours mainlining crystal-meth. 'Man, I woulda been dead by now if it wasn't for the Corps,' he tells me. 'They gave me something to live for, y'know?'

His chaperones, Dusty and Jim, smaller and plainer than Troy, are boyhood buddies who joined up with him. There's something very touching about their friendship. 'He was my protector at school,' confides Jim later. A stutterer, life must have been hard at school and I get the impression that Troy is still his protector in the Corps. Nevertheless, their lifelong attachment to one another must end tonight, at least long enough for me to jump on Troy.

We move increasingly unsteadily from bar to bar, hassling the college boys along the way. Asked to explain this tribal animosity, Troy just shrugs. 'They're pussies,' he says, adding, 'It's traditional. I guess.' But I suspect that the hatred stems from the vague intimation that college boys are going to live the American Dream, while boys like Troy are destined only ever to defend it or be its victims.

The dark-eyed, long-lashed senioritas who would like a share in the Dream are everywhere, eyeing up their future green cards. But tonight I can afford a sense of solidarity with them; they know that the boys with the short hair who drink their fortnight's pay in two days are not the boys to dream with. Instead they do their best to attract one of the boys spending Pop's money like there was no such thing as an angry long-distance telephone call. Another reason jarheads hate college boys.

The evening wears on. Trays of sweet-tasting cerveza come and go, as do the neon names of bars and discos. And visits to the john - the only place I seem to have a chance of getting Troy away from his buddies. At last, I find myself answering the call of nature at the same time as him. Standing next to me, Troy has his hands on his hips (I should have known he'd be one of those 'Look, no hands!' pissers). I'm resisting the urge to cop a look at his joint when I catch him checking me out. 'Hey, Mark,' he says, half in jest, half in wonder, 'so it's true you English guys ain't cut!'

Now, you might be forgiven for thinking that here is a green light for me, that this studly young marine's expression of interest in the status of my penis might somehow be turned to my advantage. Shamefully, I lose my nerve for tackiness (for example, saying something like 'oh yeah, and look how easy it makes jacking off...') All I can manage is to mumble 'Er, yes', pull in my pecker and run out of the men's room.

Foreskins have never been a major fetish for me, but if you're English and you want to cruise jarheads then you'd better have your rap ready. Despite being programmed at an early age to revile these rather comical flaps of skin as unhygienic and therefore un-American, American men cannot help but experience a dim sense of mutilation and loss when gazing on the untampered-with variety. They think: so it's dirty, but that's what they said about sex, and look how much fun that turned out to be.

It's also an accessory which they can never have. Now that's what you call a Unique Selling Point. Most of all, the foreskin is a symbol of the Old World and its chaotic messiness. In America roads run straight, air is conditioned, teeth are bleached and foreskins are sliced - God is in his heaven and cinnamon is in apple pie. Americans have everything except smegma, and what Americans don't have, they want very badly.

Meanwhile, back at the bar, Troy attempts to recoup some of his virility by suggesting we 'go and cruise some pussy'. I wonder if the moment has come to tell him that 'I don't go for pussy' but decide that this confession would put the dampers on any chance of persuading him to take a closer look at my foreskin. With boys like Troy, any genital friction with members of the same sex always has to be prefaced with the timeless line, 'I'm no fag, understand? I really dig chicks but...' Which is fine by me. So I 'cruise some chicks' with him for a couple of hours, to buy some time and to make him feel better.

Much later, Troy and I have passed the point at which drunkenness excuses a couple of regular guys who want to get into each other's pants from the duty of pretending to look for women. It also happens to be the same point at which physical expressions of affection cease to be suspect - on the contrary, they become almost compulsory. Troy acknowledges this in the traditional way: 'Hey, man - I'm totally "expletive deleted"ed up.'

Now he puts his arm around me and begins to recite sketches from Monty Python. I'm happy because I know this is his way of showing me he loves me. To American youth, Britain means Depeche Mode, Boy George, James Bond and Monty Python. Monthy Python, with its anarchic Old World surrealism, is the kind of comedy that American kids were denied until Beavis and Butthead and Ren and Stimpy brought them the smegma they craved.

Nevertheless, despite scenting victory, I decide to wimp out. I'm too pussy for this. It's 3 a.m. in Tijuana and I'm arm in arm with a drunken nineteen-year-old US marine with the face of an angel and the butt of Beelzebub, who's reciting Monty Python in a Texan accent you could marinate a T-bone with. We met just a few hours ago. Now we're the bestest buddies that there ever was. I can't bring myself to spoil it.

The heat, the beer, the game-playing, and now a Texan marine nudging me and asking 'Is your wife a goer? Know wot I mean?' proves a little too much. I abdicate my self-appointed position as avenger of Latin America and abandon my fiendish plans to ravish the virtue of the United States Marine Corps. Instead I offer the boys a lift back Stateside.

At the border, as we queue to re-enter the neatly ordered New World, a skinny, ragtag band of Mexican kids - none looking older than ten - wash our windscreen in a determined last-ditch effort to prevent Yankee dollars escaping back over the border. Troy, the simple Texan, is moved enough by this scene of regional deprivation to offer a few dollars (all that is left of his pay packet), only to have them snatched out of his hand. By way of thanks, he receives loud demands for more.

Truly this evening has blurred the lines between who is the prey and the preyed upon, the "expletive deleted"er and the "expletive deleted"ed, more than I care for.

Marine officer receives Silver Star
Submitted by: Marine Forces Atlantic
Story by: Computed Name: - Spc. Marc Loi

Story Identification #: 200593013177




NORFOLK, Va(Sep. 30, 2005) -- Marine Lt. Col. Matthew Lopez, an infantry officer currently attending the Joint Forces Staff College in Norfolk, Va., will never forget the five-day ordeal he and his unit, based out of Marine Corps Base 29 Palms, Calif., went through in April, 2005.
The Department of Defense won’t let him forget, either. Lopez was awarded the prestigious Silver Star today for his actions during Operation Iraqi Freedom, when his unit came under fire near the Syrian border in Iraq.
Riding in the 3rd vehicle of an 8-vehicle convoy, heading to assist other Marines in another firefight, Lopez’s own unit was suddenly hit with enemy fire. The Marines fired back as they had numerous times before.
When the smoke cleared, Lopez and his Marines had killed 25 insurgents. Twenty-two Marines in the convoy lay wounded, including Lopez himself.
“The shot hit (my) back,” said Lopez. In addition, the impact of the round also broke a few of his ribs.
“My first thought was I didn’t want to pass out,” said Lopez, a Chicago native. “We’d already fought through one ambush and I wanted to get the injured Marines to the (corpsman***) as quickly as possible.”
The Marines were involved in another fight at a forward base checkpoint, and needed fire support. It wasn’t until that night that Lopez was treated for the wounds he sustained.
“I didn’t do anything that any other Marine wouldn’t have done,” he said.
“It’s my privilege to stand here today and recognize this great Marine,” said Army Maj. Gen. Ken Quinlan, JFSC Commandant.
“His actions helped define who we are,” Quinlan said. “Who we are is our greatest weapon – our values, ethos and warrior spirit.”
For his heroic effort, Lopez was awarded the Silver Star.
Lopez became one of only 24 Marines who earned the award during OIF. The Silver Star, in some ways, represents a pass to an exclusive club.
“This is not something that the Marine Corps just gives out,” said Marine Lt.Col. Shane Landeche, JFSC faculty member.
However, Lopez credits fellow Marines for the award. According to Lopez, every servicemember with whom he worked contributed to his success in earning the award.
“I think the credit belongs to the individuals who put themselves at risk everyday out there,” he said. “The young Marines, Soldiers and Sailors’ work guarantee US success in Iraq.”
Lopez has gotten the chance to deploy to many foreign lands and participate in many missions, in his 20-year career with the Marine Corps.
“The heroism of the individual Marines in Iraq is something that will stick with me for the rest of my life,” he said.


http://www.marines.mil/marinelink/mcn2000....a4?OpenDocument

Kindlers keep it in the family
Submitted by: MCAS Yuma
Story by: Computed Name: Pfc. Brian J. Holloran
Story Identification #: 200593017952





MARINE CORPS AIR STATION YUMA, Ariz.(Sept. 23, 2005) --
“It’s a family business that’s been passed on for four generations now,” said Master Gunnery Sgt. Jeffery W. Kindler, staff noncommissioned officer-in-charge at Aircraft Rescue Fire Fighting on station.

Most would assume the “Master Guns” was talking about a local restaurant, construction company, or a law firm.

“Joining the Marine Corps was definitely like going into a family business,” said Lance Cpl. Michael J. Kindler, disbursing clerk, Headquarters and Headquarters Squadron, son of Master Gunnery Sgt. Kindler and fourth-generation Marine.

Both father and son are stationed at Marine Corps Air Station Yuma.

“Having my dad here is good and bad,” said Lance Cpl. Kindler, native of Havelock, N. C. “If I screw up, I know he’ll be right there with my chain-of-command. Also, if I ever need anything, I know that I’ll be able to go to him anytime, knowing that he’s right down the street.”

Being assigned to the same duty station as a family member is seen as a rare occurrence in the military. However, not for the Kindlers. This is not the first time the Kindler family has seen two of its own stationed on the same Marine base.

Retired Master Sgt. Meryl Kindler, and his son, retired Capt. Gary Kindler, Master Gunnery Sgt. Kindler’s father, were both stationed together on Marine Corps Logistics Base, Barstow, Calif., in June 1957.

“Not only were my dad and grandfather together at Barstow, but they also served in the Korean War together as well,” said Master Gunnery Sgt. Kindler.

The Kindler family has enjoyed its share of accomplishments in the Marine Corps. The family boasts two senior enlisted Marines and one officer. Master Sgt. Kindler also served in World War II, and Capt. Kindler fought in the Vietnam War. Master Gunnery Sgt. Kindler received an honorable mention for the Marine Corps Times Marine of the Year award in 2004.

The Kindler family is proud of its constant contribution to the Marine Corps.

“I think coming from such a long line of Marines is great,” said Lance Cpl. Kindler. “I know I can’t be a bad Marine. I don’t want to ruin the family name. It also gives me a strong bond with the rest of the family.

In light of his family’s history in the Marine Corps, Lance Cpl. Kindler didn’t feel any pressure to join.

“My dad didn’t pressure me at all to join the Corps,” said Lance Cpl. Kindler. “I know, no matter what, he would have been proud of me.”

Lance Cpl. Kindler arrived on station in October 2004. His father arrived in Yuma 10 months afterward in August of this year. However, this isn’t the “Master Gun’s” first time here.

“This is my third tour at MCAS Yuma,” he said. “I’ve also been to MCAS Futenma, Okinawa, Japan, and MCAS Iwakuni, Japan. That’s just overseas. Stateside, I’ve been to the now closed MCAS El Toro, Calif., and MCAS Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii.”

Even with four generations serving in the Marine Corps, the Kindler family doesn’t seem content to let it rest there.

“If I have kids, I hope they join the Corps,” said Lance Cpl. Kindler. “Military life is a great experience for any kid. Joining the military teaches you a lot about yourself and your abilities.”



http://www.marines.mil/marinelink/mcn2000....9d?OpenDocument

1 table of contents
Foreword
Today’s Marine forces continue to demonstrate the readiness, agility,
and lethality the Nation demands from its armed forces in uncertain
times. As we battle insurgents, strike at fanatical terrorists, and deter
aggression around the globe, we continue to validate the necessity of
“expeditionary” capabilities in meeting the Nation’s wide range of security
challenges. Our success in these endeavors requires that we draw upon
past strengths, while innovatively anticipating and overcoming 21st
Century dangers.
The 21st Century Marine Corps must be able to project U.S. power
anywhere, protect our interests and allies, and enable joint warfighting
capabilities on a global scale. With our naval partners, Marines will
exploit the Navy’s command of the seas with sustained naval force
projection ashore. Taking full advantage of this asymmetric advantage
through the Sea Basing operational concept, the Navy-Marine Corps
team provides a strategic capability for assuring access, increasing
responsiveness, maximizing the effects of forward presence, and reducing
our dependence on vulnerable land bases-which greatly expands the
options available to the combatant commanders.
While we retain the ability to fight effectively across the conflict
spectrum, fighting and winning the Global War on Terror remains our
top priority. Because of the Nation’s overwhelming strength in traditional
conflicts, we believe that future conflicts will be dominated by irregular
wars of an increasingly unrestricted nature, involving terrorism,
a messag e f rom the
commandant of the
marine cor ps
891 - C&P 05 ToC + Ch1 4/7/05 3:40 PM Page 1
iii foreword
insurgency, and civil war. As a function of our heritage, training, and
education, Marines intuitively think independently and act aggressively,
yet with a measure of cultural understanding such chaotic and
unpredictable environments demand. Typically projecting our forces from
the sea, we further possess the capability to operate at long distances
and for extended periods of time as an integral combined arms element
of a joint force. Our forward deployed posture throughout the world, both
on land and at sea, supports these goals for our increased readiness and
contribution to the global war.
Our main effort in building tomorrow’s Marine Corps will be honing
the warfighting excellence of the individual Marine, our combined arms
Marine Air-Ground Task Forces, and our expeditionary culture based on an
ethos of rapid responsiveness, and our ingrained preparedness to be “First
to Fight.” At the center of these capabilities is the 21st century Marine,
who exudes the Corps’ tradition of warrior excellence and is today more
capable then ever. Well trained, well led, and well equipped Marines have
always been our greatest strength, and they are the focus of ensuring the
Corps remains one of the world’s finest fighting forces.
This 2005 version of Concepts and Programs describes our strategic
direction, operational concepts, and those major programs we require to
continue the Marine Corps’ warfighting excellence and relevancy in the
21st century. This book also contains facts and figures on our people,
organizations, and resources to foster a better understanding of the
Corps and the tremendous Americans who fill its ranks.
GPO-00i-016 3/15/05 4:46 PM Page iii

Sport of spear fishing gains in popularity among Marines and Sailors
Submitted by: MCB Hawaii
Story by: Computed Name: Lance Cpl. Roger L. Nelson
Story Identification #: 200593016411




MARINE CORPS BASE HAWAII, KANEOHE BAY, Hawaii(Sept. 30, 2005) -- Spear fishing, a very popular sport in Hawaii, is growing in popularity among Marines and Sailors aboard Marine Corps Base Hawaii.

“It’s great to do on the weekend and just gets my mind off of the work I have to do all week long,” said Pfc. Timothy J. Regan, traffic management specialist, Traffic Management Office, MCB Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay. “I started off just snorkeling but always saw people in the water with these spears. I wondered how they worked, so I went out and bought one and fell in love with the sport.”

Regan, a Boston, Mass. native, explained the experience was one of the most exciting things he has done in his life.

“There is actually a lot more to the sport than you would think,” said Regan. “You have to learn all the rules and regulations or else you could end up being arrested. Also, you have to know the techniques and different things you need and the fish you can and can’t spear.”

Randy Fallau, marine technician, Aaron’s Dive Shop, said a lot of fish are good to eat but may carry a toxin that will get a person sick if eaten.

“Honestly, one of the best ways to figure out what kind of fish you can eat is to go to a fish market and figure out what they sell,” said Fallau, a Kailua, Hawaii native. “This will give you the best idea of what is okay to eat. Parrotfish are good eating; however, please keep in mind that some fish carry toxins. For example, Papio, a tasty fish, may carry toxins, the bigger they get.”

The rules and regulations for spear fishing range from what kind of fish can and cannot be speared to what kinds of spears and equipment you can use to spear the fish. Also, a “bag” limit is set, which limits how many of a certain kind of fish a person is allowed to take home after one day of spear fishing.

For example, anyone spear fishing can harvest a maximum of 20 Papio and Ulua per person in one day or one trip.

In some areas of the United States, a saltwater fishing license must be obtained before a person can go spear fishing, but in Hawaii, this license is not required.

Regan said the most common tools needed to spear fish are fins, snorkel, mask, and a catch bag.

“That’s the cheap way to go, too,” said Regan. “It can be a pretty expensive sport, if you get into buying scuba-diving gear and a lot of other things that will make your chances of spearing ‘the big one’ higher.”

Regan explained the difference and variety in the types of spears and spear guns that can be purchased for the sport.

“I like to use what’s called a Hawaiian sling spear,” said Regan. “It has a big rubber band on the end of it that you hold in your hand, then you pull back on the spear and let go when you see a fish you want to shoot. There are other types of spears, but this one is easy to use and does the job just fine for what I use it for.”

Other spears that are commonly used are pneumatic spear guns, pole spears and sling spears, all of which can be made out of different materials. Common materials are aluminum, wood and stainless steel.

Hawaii has a diverse population of fish, which makes every place a good spot for the sport, according to Regan. Areas where you will usually find people spear fishing are Shark’s Cove at North Shore and North Beach at Kaneohe Bay.

“I personally like spear fishing at North Beach on base,” said Regan. “It’s a close drive and has some really nice fish. The only bad thing is that if you go out too far, you have to bring a marker for protection — that’s in case a boat drives by. The driver will know that there is a person in the water. Just another safety precaution.”

Fallau explained that a spear fisher and other divers must have dive flags. If the diver is surfacing around the flag, he must not surface more than 50 feet away from the flag or marker. Boats must allow at least 200 feet between the boat and a dive flag.

“Even though there are a lot of rules and things you have to know before going, it’s still fun,” said Regan. “It helps with my tan and gives me something to do.”

http://www.marines.mil/marinelink/mcn2000....55?OpenDocument

Retired Marine stays on ‘til job’s done
Submitted by: 2nd Marine Division
Story Identification #: 200572183432
Story by Sgt. Stephen D'Alessio



CAMP BLUE DIAMOND, AR RAMADI, Iraq (July 21, 2005) -- One gunnery sergeant with the 2nd Marine Division received his folded flag in a retirement ceremony this week after more than 20 years of active duty service in the Corps – but it was a retirement ceremony unlike any other.

Unlike most, or as far as anyone here knows – any other Marines in the Corps, Gunnery Sgt. Theodore Pufall decided to forego his trip back home for a peaceful and quiet retirement. He decided to stay here with his Marines and serve in combat for the remainder of their stay with the division – the Marines’ ground combat element for Operation Iraqi Freedom.

After he gave a speech for all of the attendees and reminisced about some of his days in the Corps, he went right back to work. For the next several months while the division is working in Iraq, he is part of the Individual Ready Reserve force

“When I made this decision, it was for a lot of personal and professional reasons,” said Pufall. “I think the deciding factor was because it was the last tour with my troops. My wife, Patricia, said I just wanted to play Cowboys and Indians one last time.”

Pufall spent many years assigned to what Marines consider hardship duties. He spent two tours in Okinawa, Japan with his family working both for the 1st Marine Aircraft Wing and 3rd Marine Division.

He was also a recruiter in Cheyenne, Wyo., from 1996 to 1999. Considered one of the toughest duties a Marine can have, especially in that sparsely populated part of the country, Pufall made the best of it. He became the Small Station Recruiter of the Year in 1998.

“I spent most of my time in my government vehicle doing ‘road time’ as we call it,” said Pufall. “I put an average of 3000 to 5000 miles per month on that car canvassing for recruits.”

Here at the division, Pufall doesn’t have to look too hard for help. He has several Marines working for him who manage the division’s data section – a computer network linking the Marines to the information highway. He and his team are relied upon to keep communications up.

“Gunny is the number one guy on call out of anybody in his section,” said Master Gunnery Sgt. Michael Tyndale, division communications maintenance chief. “When the general’s computer is down, if there’s anybody in here who can fix it in a hurry, it’s him.”

Pufall ensures the division’s computer links are up and running, keeping the vital information flow open between the division’s major subordinate commands. He breaks it down to one thing – customer service.

“No matter what we do, it comes to the basics – service to the customer,” said Pufall.

One of his biggest achievements was when he and his Marines established the new Windows 2003 program on the division’s server during the transition from 1st Marine Division to the 2nd.

“Before we came out we trained for six months to a year for this at the division, regimental and battalion levels,” said Pufall. “If we didn’t, we’d be hurtin’ for certain.”

Pufall said he joined many years ago for many different reasons, but the main one was the camaraderie of being a Marine.

“My advice to younger Marines is to take it one day at a time,” said Pufall. “Take each challenge to the fullest and do the best you can.”

http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf...light=2,retired

'War Dawgs' sergeant major retires after 23 years
Submitted by: MCAGCC
Story Identification #: 20056612466
Story by Cpl. Heidi E. Loredo



MARINE CORPS BASE TWENTYNINE PALMS, Calif. (May 27, 2005) -- Second Battalion, 7th Marines received a new sergeant major May 27 in a retirement and post and relief ceremony on the commanding general’s parade deck.

Sergeant Major David L. Plaster, a 23-year Corps veteran turned over his post to Sgt. Maj. Michael L. Barrett, a Niagara Falls, N.Y., native.

Plaster had been the battalion sergeant major since August 2003. Previously, he served with Marine Tactical Electronic Warfare Squadron 2, Marine Aircraft Group 14, 2nd Marine Air Wing at Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point, N.C.

During his time there he served with the “Death Jesters” and deployed as part of the Unit Deployment Program to MCAS Iwakuni, Japan and later to Prince Sultan Air Base, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in support of Operations “Southern Watch” and “Iraqi Freedom.”

“Beautiful Marines,” said Plaster as he addressed the battalion, “I grew up in the Marine Corps believing in one major thing–duty. A person does their duty because it’s the right thing not because he may personally feel right about what is happening at the time. It may not be what he wants to do. It might be very uncomfortable at the time, but it’s the right thing to do in order to preserve the lives of these fine young men out here and to preserve Americans. That’s why we do our duty.”

Barrett joins the battalion after a tour as the sergeant major of Recruiting Station Cleveland, Ohio.

“Sergeant Maj. Barrett and I go back a little bit,” said Lt. Col. Joseph A. Letoile, battalion commander, 2/7. “I think I’ve known the sergeant major for about 18 years. We started out with 3/9 and served in Desert Storm. We kind of bumped into each other here and there throughout our journey in the Marine Corps.”

“To the Marines of 2/7 let me tell you something. Sgt. Maj. Barrett is one of our Corp’s best Marines. He’s going make each and every one of us better, including your battalion commander. I’m excited about our time together. We’re ready to march, Col. Tucker,” added Letoile, as he addressed the 7th Marine Regiment commander.

Barrett, a 23-year veteran anxiously joins the battalion.

“If I was asked today what I needed I’d tell you we have everything we need,” said Barrett. “I would ask you to look to the front to the warrior defenders of 2/7. I’d say we have everything we need. Lt. Col. Letoile: I look forward to our success, and I look forward to our hardship.”

Plaster found it difficult to say goodbye to his Marines but left knowing he’d take their friendship with him.

“We’ve spent a lot of time together over the past 22 months in this battalion, and I’ve come to know every one of these Marines in a personal way,” said Plaster.

“As I told them this morning I made a lot of personal friends in this battalion many of which are welcome at my doorstep at any given time to have a place to sleep, food to eat, cold beer to drink or a cup of coffee if that’s what they need. The rest of those Marines out there I consider my sons. If at any given time you come to the hills of Carolina, don’t mind the long hair and the Harley Davidson you’ll see me on at the time. Knock on the door. You’re welcome to come in 2/7. God bless you. Go forward to do good things and protect this country.”

http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf...light=2,retired

Military retirement plan secures future
Submitted by: MCAS Iwakuni
Story Identification #: 20041013213855
Story by Cpl. David Revere



MARINE CORPS AIR STATION IWAKUNI, Japan (Oct. 12, 2004) -- Service members preparing for future financial security are in good hands.


The Thrift Savings Plan is a retirement savings and investment plan for Federal employees. The purpose of the TSP is to provide retirement income. It offers Federal employees, including members of the uniformed services, the same types of savings and tax benefits that many private-sector corporations offer their employees under 401(k) plans.


“The Thrift Savings Plan is great for military members of all ages because it is flexible and can be customized to fit a variety of goals and needs,” said Stephanie Sutton, Personal Readiness and Community Support branch manager.


Sutton said there is not a minimum amount of money required to open a retirement account. Service members can choose to contribute any amount from one to nine percent of their basic pay. There is also an option to contribute bonus, special and incentive pay.


Thrift Savings Plan contributions are taken out of pay before taxes are computed, so less tax is paid. Federal taxes are deferred until withdrawal of money.


Sutton said TSP benefits can significantly increase retirement income, but starting early is important. Contributing to the account early will increase the compound interest over time.


According to Sutton, service members can choose from five different funds to invest their money. Funds range from no risk of loosing money to higher risk funds. The option is left up to service members to transfer money and change funds at any time without penalty.


If a service member separates from the military, there are options on how the money will be handled. It can be left in the TSP, transferred to an employer’s 401(K), or transferred into a traditional IRA. All of these options are penalty free.


“This plan is a great way to save for retirement without having to do a lot of research or have a background in financial planning,” Sutton said. “Service members can get started online through their ‘My Pay’ account. There is a link that will allow personnel to select the amount they want to contribute and to monitor the account.”


Sutton said service members can enroll upon entering the Marine Corps or during open season. Open seasons are held annually from April 15 through June 30 and October 15 through December 31.


With specific questions about the TSP, service members can contact their command financial specialist or the personal Financial Management Program located at the Marine and Family Services office in Building 411. Additional information can be found at the Thrift Savings Plan website www.tsp.gov.

http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf...light=2,retired

Military Retirees to See Pay IncreaseFrom: GARCIA, CAROL [CAROL.GARCIA@DFAS.MIL]
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2004 5:04 PM
Subject: Military Retirees to See Pay Increase





NEWS RELEASE

______________________________________________________________________

DEFENSE FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING SERVICE 1931 Jefferson Davis Highway, Crystal Mall 3

Arlington, Virginia 22240-5291

Press Release 0104004

January 27, 2004
For External Release




MILITARY RETIREES TO SEE PAY INCREASE

ARLINGTON, Va. (Jan. 27) -- On Feb. 2, an estimated 150,000 military retirees will see an increase in their pay. The National Defense Authorization Act, enacted in November 2003, significantly modified a long-standing law preventing retirees from receiving full-retired pay if they also received disability pay from the Department of Veterans Affairs.

The new law allows concurrent receipt of military retired pay and VA disability pay for retirees with more than 20 years of service and a disability rating of 50 percent or greater. This restored pay will be phased in over a 10-year period that began on Jan. 1, 2004.

Retirees are not required to take any action to receive the additional pay. The Defense Finance and Accounting Service has already identified eligible retirees and begun making adjustments to their military retired pay.


The first payments are due the first business day of February for the law change that was effective Jan. 1. The additional funds will be paid on Feb. 2, 2004 based on entitlement for Jan. 1-31, 2004. The restored pay is paid on the same schedule as current military retired pay. Recurring payments will be made on the first business day of each month based on entitlement for the prior month.

For the majority of military retirees, the additional money is taxable income and subject to federal tax withholding.

One category of military retirees that is eligible for additional funds but will not be paid on Feb. 2, 2004, are those who receive retired pay based on a disability percentage instead of years of service. Further guidance is needed from the Department of Defense to determine how the law will be applied in these cases. Once guidance is received, payments will be made retroactive to Jan. 1, 2004. An estimated 2,800 military retirees fall into this category.

For more details regarding who is eligible for the restored pay and how payments will be made, visit www.dfas.mil and see the topics under “Retired and Annuitant Pay,” or visit the myPay Web site at https://mypay.dfas.mil.

###


http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf...%20Increase.txt

This is a must for that jarine's wake up collection.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0...4176577-7241227
Jarhead: A Marine's Chronicle of the Gulf War


5 out of 5 stars Very good, December 8, 2003

Reviewer: williamjansen from Hillerød, Denmark

In order to enjoy this book, you have to understand that Anthony Swoffords book will put a partially negative light on the U.S. Marines. The U.S. Marines are portrayed as unorganized and largely populated with very young people still acting like a bunch of teenagers, but now with guns. It also paints the picture, that the U.S. Marines are corrupted by being exposed to daily scenes of mayhem and death. If this is too much for you to swallow, then do not read this book. If you are open towards listening to Anthony Swoffords experiences, then this is a strong portrayal of a young man in war. Anthony contains a human side, but is not immune to being corrupted from daily exposure to human misery. His heart does grow cold on occassion, just as he has some very human moments in contact with local bedouins. Good and evil does exists side by side inside most of us, and Anthony Swofford is not afraid to let both shine through in this selfportrayal. This book is occassionally so disturbing, that I put it down halfway through just to rush through a light paperback, before I went to the worthwhile task of finishing the book. oh yeah; one last thing: This is not an action-book. if you just want to read "cool" stories about heroics in war (i.e. a literary Rambo-movie), then seek out Chris Ryan, because in that case, this is definitively not your book.

Lejeune considers plan to improve retirees' lives
Submitted by: MCB Camp Lejeune
Story Identification #: 2003720132920
Story by Cpl. Kristin S. Gambrell



CAMP LEJEUNE, N.C. (July 20, 2003) -- "My pledge is that to the best of our abilities, we will advocate our veterans' causes as we do those of our active forces, for 'once a Marine, always a Marine,'" said Gen. James L. Jones in his guidance to Marines as the 32nd commandant of the Marine Corps. "We are determined -- without compromise -- to preserve the status and advance the interests of those who made us who we are."

Officials here are looking to do just that by building a retirement community near the waterfront between the Paradise Point Golf Course and the Camp Lejeune Naval Hospital.

"We feel like this is something we should be providing to our retirees," said H. Wayne West, assistant chief of staff, business development, Marine Corps Community Services. "We need to give them the opportunity to have this type of facility."

If the new project is approved, West said the base would be the first Department of Defense installation to have a financially self-sustained retirement community on it.

The concept, still in its early stages, needs approval from the Navy, Marine Corps, Department of Defense and Congress. It will take about three years to build and prepare the facility for residents if approved.

Once authorized, a private company will build and operate the retirement community -- no taxpayer money will be involved. Any retired uniformed service member or spouse will be able to benefit from the services offered.

West said the facility would include independent- and assisted-living areas, as well as nursing facilities.

The intent is to develop a community in which any retired service member or their spouse can receive progressive care without having to leave the area, said West. Ideally, people will be able to move from building to building as their age and health demands increase.

"The pricing will be very comparable to the area," said West. "Our goal is to keep our prices on the low end of the scale."

The Jacksonville, N.C., native, said the retirees in the community love the idea of the safety and security of being on base.

"The willingness with which our young are likely to serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall be directly proportional to how they perceive the veterans of earlier wars were treated and appreciated by their nation." -- George Washington.


http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf...light=2,retired

'Lifecycle funds' aim to maximize retirement savings
Submitted by: American Forces Press Service
Story Identification #: 200542591426
Story by Mr. Gerry J. Gilmore



WASHINGTON (April 20, 2005) -- Recent surveys show most people contributing to DoD-sponsored thrift savings accounts shun riskier investment options and aren't getting maximum returns to build bigger retirement nest eggs, a DoD thrift savings plan specialist said here April 20.

"The vast majority of participants do not fully take advantage of the Thrift Savings Plan," Army Lt. Col. Janet Fenton, executive director of the Armed Forces Tax Council, told Pentagon Channel and American Forces Press Service reporters during a Pentagon interview.

The Thrift Savings Plan, Fenton explained, is a 401k-type program designed to provide tax-deferred retirement nest eggs for servicemembers and civilian employees. TSP managers have noticed that "very few" participants transfer money out of more stable TSP investment programs into riskier options, she said.

Fenton surmised some participants might be leery of riskier TSP investment options because they have little or no stock market savvy.

However, the new Lifecycle Funds program option slated for implementation sometime in July will enable TSP participants to have experienced money managers make investment decisions for them according to 10-year plans.

The Lifecycle Funds program "is going to help address the issue of people who want to take advantage of the Thrift Savings Plan but maybe are a little bit intimidated by making investment choices and allocating their participation contributions between all of the various funds," Fenton explained.

The Lifecycle Fund program "is based on asset allocation within the fund, based on how long you are going to have that money in the fund until you retire," Fenton said.

Almost half of the total $140 billion invested in TSP accounts -- about $60 billion -- is currently concentrated in the less-risky Government Security Investment, or G fund. The G fund, consisting of treasury bonds and other federal-backed investments, is considered among the most stable of the five TSP investment choices.

An almost equal number of TSP contributions -- about $61 billion -- are now placed in the Common Stock Index Investment, or C fund. Yet, she pointed out, riskier options offered by the Fixed Income Index Investment, or F fund; the Small Capitalization Stock Index Investment, or S fund; and the International Stock Index Investment, or I fund, contain far fewer dollars.

Through use of the Lifestyle Fund program "the money is allocated for you amongst the five funds without you having to do anything," Fenton explained. The system "is automatic" and "changes as your time in the military (or government) continues," she said.

For example, Fenton said, typical investments early in a 10-year period would tend to be targeted toward riskier, but higher potential yield, TSP investment options. Investment choices would become more conservative as the end of the 10-year period nears, she added.

And after the current TSP open-season investment choice system ends July 1, participants will be able to change their investment options at any time, Fenton noted.

Although the TSP program doesn't guarantee participants will make money on every investment, Fenton cautioned, she noted riskier investment options usually produce higher returns over the long term.

Some people may feel safer to continue steering their TSP funds to safer investments, Fenton acknowledged.

But "to really leverage your contributions and make the most of the thrift savings plan," Fenton said, "we need to encourage people" to move their money out of more conservative investment options and allocate it among the various funds that indicate potentially higher yields over time.


http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf...light=2,retired

Combat veterans attend transition workshop
Submitted by: MCB Camp Butler
Story Identification #: 2005717201052
Story by Pfc. C. Warren Peace



CAMP COURTNEY, OKINAWA Japan (July 8, 2005) -- The III Marine Expeditionary Force Chaplain’s Office hosted a Warrior Transition Program here July 8 for Marines and sailors who recently returned from combat operations.

Marines and sailors participate in the program within 60 days of returning from a combat environment to ensure a smooth transition to a non-hostile environment.

According to Lt. Cmdr. Glen Wood, the deputy group chaplain with 3rd Force Service Support Group, it was only offered at Marine Corps bases in the continental United States, until Lt. Gen. Robert R. Blackman, the commanding general, III MEF, institutionalize the program throughout the III MEF Nov. 5, 2004.

Camp Courtney Chapel hosts the transition workshop the first Friday of each month. Camp Kinser Chapel hosts the transition workshop the third Friday of each month.

“If we can catch problems now we stand a better chance of preventing post traumatic stress syndrome,” said Navy Lt. Philip D. King, a chaplain with 3rd Material Readiness Battalion, 3rd Force Service Support Group, III MEF.

The program begins with a brief. Following the brief, attendees break into small groups where chaplains and qualified personnel such as counselors lead an open discussion with peers.

“We discuss where they were, where they are, and where they are going (mentally and spiritually),” said Wood.

The program addresses four main topics during the workshop. The chaplains and counselors discuss each service members’ individual readiness, family reunion, combat stress and effective communication.

Family members are not allowed to accompany their sponsors; however, attendees receive resources and referral information to take home for family members.

Some chaplains attend professional development workshops to learn critical intervention and stress management techniques and the latest techniques for trauma prevention, explained Wood.
According to Wood, the counselors use many cutting edge techniques in the workshops. The techniques have been used with victims of the Sep. 11 terrorist attacks and the Oklahoma City Bombing.

The program has supported more than 2,100 service members since its inception.
To schedule a class or make an inquiry about counseling, service members should call their local Chaplain’s Office.

http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf...ht=2,transition

Department of Labor taps into TAP
Submitted by: MCB Camp Butler
Story Identification #: 200413182810
Story by Sgt. Jason D. Gallentine



CAMP FOSTER, Okinawa, Japan (Jan 30, 2004) -- Before separating from the Marine Corps, servicemembers must attend the Transition Assistance Program (TAP) class, which teaches people the steps to finding employment in the civilian world.

These classes have been provided by the Department of Defense through the Personal Services Center, Marine Corps Community Services, since 1991; however, this instruction has recently change hands from the DoD to the Department of Labor.

According to Rich Welch, program manager, Transition and Employment Assistance, Personal Services Branch, MCCS, the DoL provided the TAP classes in the United States, but were unable to provide them overseas due to laws restricting them from working outside of the U.S. Early last year Congress changed these laws and the DoL has since began classes in three locations: Korea, Japan and Okinawa.

The DoL began easing into the program in Aug. and soon sent a representative to begin hiring and training new instructors for the class. During the month of Nov., the DoL gave its first class and began teaching all classes by Dec. Since then, seven classes averaging 40 people in size have completed the program.

Offering his co-workers more time to concentrate on other areas of assistance, Welch is pleased with the transition.

"It's a plus for the program. It gives us more resources to work with," the St. Louis native said. "I think it's great they can come over here and provide this."

Although the program is changing hands, according to Welch, there will be no changes in the class. Utilizing the same instructor book worldwide, every individual receives the same training.

"It's a smooth transition I think," he said. "The information in the class itself should be transparent, and you shouldn't notice any difference in it.

"The only effect it will have on the military is my transition office will have more time to work with individuals," he added.

During a recent visit by DoL and DoD TAP representatives, servicemembers attending a TAP class had an opportunity to speak with the individuals managing the program, according to George Ramero, TAP facilitator, Native American Management Services, DoL.
Ramero, who began teaching TAP classes in Nov., said he got little time as an instructor to speak to the representatives, but the class got a lot of time to ask questions.

They thanked Marine and Navy servicemembers for their service, motivated them and let them know employment is out there, he said.

"A lot of motivation is just letting them know they do have skills to get jobs," the Roswell, N.M. native added.

Feeling that teaching the TAP classes is his way to give back to the military, Ramero thinks the transition is a big benefit for military men and women getting out because it gives them more time for one-on-one counseling.

"I just think MCCS and ourselves are a good working team. We get along well, and I think this is going to be a good working process for both organizations," he said.

http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf...ht=2,transition

Transition program brings Marines sense of home
Submitted by: 2nd Force Service Support Group
Story Identification #: 20059984920
Story by Lance Cpl. Joel Abshier



MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE, N.C. (Sept. 8, 2005) -- When Marines and sailors deploy they leave family and friends behind. Returning to a home life after being in a combat environment for a prolonged period of time can be difficult and can complicate communication with loved ones.

However, service members can now begin resolving issues before stepping back onto American soil.

Marines and sailors returning from Operation Iraqi Freedom III or other war zones are required to attend a transitioning brief within 60 days prior to returning to garrison.

The Warrior Transition Program, a program mandated by Gen. Michael W. Hagee, commandant of the Marine Corps; provides Marines an opportunity to share their narratives, stories and experiences while stationed in hostile environments.

The program has this far supported more than 2,100 service members since its start and is designed to help service members’ transition from a hostile to a home environment, according to Navy Capt. Vince Arnold, 2nd Force Service Support Group chaplain.

“Having Marines return to a sense of normalcy is the primary focus of this brief,” Arnold said. “Spending many months in a hostile environment can be stressing for many individuals.”

The program has four aspects that the service members must participate in, which include: a confidential questionnaire, a return and reunion brief, a discussion among troops on the positive and negative aspects of combat and a presentation on effective communication.

“We are not implying that anything is wrong with the Marines or sailors,” Arnold said. “We are simply trying to cease any problems that could escalate from experiences that happen [in Iraq or Afghanistan].”

Some normal responses from being in a stressful environment that Marines and sailors may have when they return are, but are not limited to depression, anxiety, drug or alcohol abuse, flashbacks or nightmares, Arnold explained.

“The one thing I try to teach Marines and sailors is resilience,” Arnold said. “Resilience basically means the ability to bounce back.”

Within the brief, resilient people are described to have a sense of coherence, which includes the expectation that life events will make sense, the belief that the individual has the necessary personal and social resources to meet the demands of theses events, and the conviction that these demands are worthy of investment and commitment.

“Resiliency is the greatest personality trait to have when returning from a place, such as Iraq,” Arnold said.

To schedule a class or ask questions regarding the program, service members should call their respective chaplain's office.


http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf...ht=2,transition

Band member looks forward to birthdays with Marines
Submitted by: MCAS Miramar
Story Identification #: 200478185825
Story by Lance Cpl. Skye Jones



MARINE CORPS AIR STATION MIRAMAR, Calif. (July 8, 2004) -- Ever since Sgt. Jon M. Koshuta joined the Marine Corps, his birthdays have taken on whole new meanings, complete with a whole new slew of family members.

Koshuta, a French horn player in the 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing Band has celebrated three of his birthdays in ways that he would have never imagined before he joined the Marine Corps.

"I thought I would be opening presents and eating cake every year, but I was wrong," explained Koshuta. "I lived in the same house and was surrounded by the same people my whole life and anything outside of that was foreign to me, until the Marine Corps."

The Willowstreet, Pa., native enlisted in the Marine Corps when he was 19 years old, "I joined for the challenge and the sense of duty. I just wanted to give back to my country."

His first birthday in America's 911 force landed him in the sunny depths of Key West, Fla., where the band performed for a retiring admiral.

"It was my first birthday away from my family, so the experience was a little different then what I was used to," said Koshuta. "I had a great time being at an exotic location and I felt privileged to play for the admiral there."

On his second birthday, Koshuta found himself at a less scenic location and endured the most taxing day in his Marine Corps career and life.

"I was in Jordan in Operation Enduring Freedom and it was my 21st birthday. I spent that day on a 12-hour post. I can still remember the times, 7 p.m. until 7 a.m. It was difficult because it was the longest time I have ever been away from home. I look back with pride and I am very proud of that day."

According to his fellow Marines and band mates, Koshuta has a very positive outlook on life.

"He doesn't let little things get him down, like being away for his birthday," mentioned Cpl. Christopher M. Walmer, trumpet player, 3rd MAW Band. "He's a good guy and he definitely leads by example."

Recently, Koshuta celebrated his birthday in one of the most honorable ways a Marine could celebrate his special day.

Koshuta joined the 3rd MAW Band in providing military honors to the late President Ronald Regan during ceremonies at Pt. Magu Naval Air Station, Ventura County, Calif.

"The ceremony meant a lot to me, he was a great President. I felt very grateful be part of all of that on my birthday," expressed Koshuta.

Koshuta plans on spending most of his birthdays in the Marine Corps, "I want to reenlist and make a career in the Marines.

My biggest aspiration is to become a Sergeant Major and lead other Marines."

Perhaps Koshuta will find himself getting promoted on a future birthday.

"This is the line of life that I have chosen and I love what I do, so spending my birthdays this way is an honorable way to celebrate," concluded Koshuta.

http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf...ight=2,birthday

"Gunny Hartman" visits troops in Babylon
Submitted by: I Marine Expeditionary Force
Story Identification #: 20037128036
Story by Pfc. Samuel A. Soza



CAMP BABYLON, Iraq (July 8, 2003) -- Applause resounded through the chow hall as Marines, soldiers, and sailors got their first glimpse of a legendary screen Marine who had come to express his gratitude and support for all the troops involved with Operation Iraqi Freedom.

"I am Gunnery Sergeant Ermey," shouted R. Lee Ermey, echoing his lines from the movie "Full Metal Jacket." "I am your senior drill instructor. From now on, you will speak only when spoken to. The first and last words out of your filthy sewers will be sir. Do you maggots understand that?"

"Sir, yes, sir!" the crowd responded.

Ermey, famous for his immortal role as the Marine Corps drill instructor Gunnery Sgt. Hartman in the Stanley Kubrick classic, visited Camp Babylon June 8 during an impromptu tour of Iraq.

Today, Ermey is the host of the high-rated show "Mail Call" on the History Channel.

After his introduction, Ermey talked about his views on the celebrities that protested the war.

Later, Ermey addressed the recent concern from the people in America about the morale of troops deployed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

"Do you guys have a morale problem?" Ermey asked the troops. "I don't see it."

Ermey went on to add his perspective on the overall war.

"I think that George W. Bush is an outstanding commander-in-chief and I think the troops feel the same," he said. "(Bush) assigned General Tommy Franks, and he knows how to run the war."

The 59-year-old actor and his crew had recently finished a two-week tour in Kuwait, where they shot a live episode of his show "Mail Call" June 6 at Ali Al Salem Air Base. While there, he also spent time meeting the troops.

After returning to the United States for two days, he immediately departed to visit the troops throughout Iraq.

Earlier in 2003, Ermey visited thousands of service members in the U.S. before they were deployed as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

"I must have talked to 40 units before they came over," he said.

However, he explained this second tour was neither for the show nor to see the sights. It was strictly to visit those troops serving far from home.

"When I go to see units I like to spend some damn time with them," Ermey said.

Ermey says he greatly enjoys being with the troops and appreciates their hard work and sacrifices. As proof, after his talk, he continued late into the night signing autographs and posing for pictures with those who stood in line.

Besides his busy work schedule Ermey, a native of Emporia, Kan., said he receives two to three requests daily for him to appear and speak to servicemembers.

Just last year, he had 30 speaking engagements with Marines. He was the guest of honor at seven Marine Corps birthday balls as well as two Navy birthday ceremonies.

"I like to tease the Navy," Ermey says. "I like to start out saying, 'I didn't even know the Navy had a birthday.'"

Despite all the travel that is demanded of him, Ermey's fondness for American troops keeps him content with his duties. He says that if he has a free day, his assistant isn't doing a good job.

Ermey's relationship with the military goes back to 1961 when he first enlisted in the Marine Corps. He served 11 years, including a period in Vietnam, but was medically discharged due to wounds he sustained.

After his discharge, he studied drama and criminology at the University of Manila in the Philippines. In 1987, he got his biggest break when he was hired as a technical consultant for the movie "Full Metal Jacket", where his job would be to coach the actor that played the drill instructor.

Ermey did a 15-minute video where he threw out harsh insults without repeating himself once and, instead of being a consultant, was cast for the part of the hardened drill instructor.

In recent years, he has picked up a new fan base with the popular "Mail Call."

"Our show is the highest rated show on the History Channel," Ermey said.

On the show, people email questions they have about the military, any branch, to the History Channel. As the host, Ermey addresses the questions and educates the viewers on various military topics.

Previously, Ermey had done another show for the History Channel called "Sarge's Forum."

Then as military history week was being promoted on the History Channel, Ermey was approached to do a commercial. The History Channel devised the concept for the show and went straight to Ermey with their proposition that he be the host.

He consented, with the agreement that he could have some control over how the show was presented.

"I wanted it to be light, funny, easy to watch," he said.

After only 23 episodes, "Mail Call" had doubled the ratings of the next highest rated show on the History Channel. The flexible schedule does allow him time to pursue other interests, according to Ermey.

"The best part about the show is that I can just do lumps of episodes for 'Mail Call' that can be shown to free my time to do feature films or spending that time to visit the troops," he said.

Ermey ended his speech in Babylon to the troops by voicing his appreciation for President Bush and the troops working for him.

"And God bless America. Ooh rah!"

http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf...ight=2,birthday

Los Fresnos, Texas Marine receives Bronze Star
Submitted by: 2nd Marine Division
Story Identification #: 20058512309
Story by Pfc. Terrell A. Turner



MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE, N.C. (Aug. 5, 2005) -- The average day of a Marine deployed to a combat zone is anything but average. As the Global War on Terrorism rages on, Marines find themselves facing tough situations and decisions on a daily basis. With the lives of fellow Marines on the line, the ultimate goal is to return Marines home alive.

Gunnery Sgt. Gordon R. Hill Jr. of Los Fresnos, Texas was awarded the Bronze Star medal with combat distinguishing device for Valor here, Aug. 5, for his actions taken while deployed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom with 1st Battalion, 8th Marine Regiment.

While assigned as platoon sergeant of 3rd mobile assault platoon, weapons company, 1st Battalion, 8th Marine Regiment, Hill was in charge of evacuating casualties out of Fallujah Nov. 9 of 2004.

While mounted in gun trucks en route to a casualty, one of Hill’s Marines were critically wounded by enemy fire. The Marine was pinned down in an open field by small enemy fire, machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades from multiple positions. Another Marine who ran to the aid of his wounded comrade was also injured and pinned down by enemy fire.

Hill left his covered position and ran to the area where the Marines were trapped. He silenced one enemy position with a hand grenade and suppressed another with his M-4 rifle while directing fire from a heavy machine gun into a third enemy position. Once the enemy positions were suppressed, he ran to the injured Marines, firing at the enemy as he went. He dragged the most seriously injured Marine to safety, again firing as he went. After more Marines arrived to help and the casualty was loaded into a vehicle, he ran back into the open and retrieved the wounded Marines rifle.

“Hearing that makes me proud to be a Marine and wear the same uniform,” said Maj. Lew Vogler, battalion executive officer. “When the chips were down he dealt with it.”

Hill modestly praises the other Marines who were out there with him.

“This award could not have happened without the team effort,” Hill said frankly. “I’m just glad I was able to be there for other Marines.”

Other Marines with the assault platoon were recommended for awards for their courageous actions and dedication to duty.

Hills family was also in attendance including his father, Gordon R. Hill Sr., his fiancé Wendy Anderson, her daughter Jenna, and Hills son, Avery who shyly said he was happy to be there and proud of his father.

Hill served 16 years knowing he would make the Marine Corps his career. Now he plans on finishing out his career content that he accomplished his goals.

“I joined in 1989 and all I ever wanted to do was be a sniper,” Hill explained. “In 1993 I became a sniper and I was an instructor after that. I helped save lives. I’ve done everything I have wanted to do in the Marine Corps.”

http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf...ghlight=2,enemy

Afghan officers tour Parris Island
Submitted by: MCRD Parris Island
Story Identification #: 200542191127
Story by Lance Cpl. Justin J. Shemanski



MCRD/ERR PARRIS ISLAND, SC (April 8, 2005) -- After traveling halfway around the world, a group of Afghanistan National Army officers arrived aboard MCRD Parris Island April 8 to see what it takes to become one of the "elite."

The group of six Afghan officers, each wearing woodland-pattern camouflage utility uniforms and bright green berets, spent two days viewing various training activities aboard the Depot after spending time at Marine Corps Bases Quantico, Va., and Camp Lejeune, N.C. The group is touring the different bases in an effort to gain valuable information that they will be able to use when training their own armies.

"We came here to visit the Marine Corps to learn new things for our soldiers," said Afghanistan National Army Capt. Momand Zabibullah, who was the most fluent in English of the group. "Everything we learn here, we will take back to Afghanistan."

The soldiers experienced their first taste of recruit training bright and early in the morning at Leatherneck Square. They learned the importance of hand-to-hand fighting through a Marine Corps Martial Arts Program demonstration, which was followed with a tour of the Confidence Course. Leatherneck Square instructors negotiated obstacles such as the "A-Frame" and "Slide for Life," which are both designed to build courage self-confidence and teamwork within recruits.

Throughout their stay, the Afghan officers also spent time at the Combat Pool, the Depot Museum, the gas chamber and were able to view recruits at Page Field during the Crucible's Day Observation Course.

The men, with years of combat experience ingrained in their facial features, listened to each brief intently, absorbing everything that was being said. But, of all the information the Afghan officers were able to obtain during their two-week stay in the United States, surprised them little about the way the Marine Corps operates.

According to Zabibullah, they were already familiar with a lot of the Marine Corps' training methods because of the training programs Marines are currently providing in Afghanistan.

"Everything is pretty interesting ... but nothing too surprising," he said.

During their visit, the officers also noticed quite a significant difference between Marine Corps training and their own: technology. Though a lot of the basic skills are similar between the two forces, Zabibullah pointed out that the technology the American military has at its disposal and the ability to properly equip every troop is what sets the two forces apart.

"Well, there's a lot of similarities, but as you know, we are still building our army ... we aren't as advanced," added Afghanistan National Army Capt. Sadad Abdul Khaliq, through his translator.

Khaliq also seemed impressed with the historical references scattered throughout the Depot and the other Marine Corps bases they had visited. He said he recognized the Iwo Jima Monument from a photograph he had back home.

It seemed everywhere the officers went aboard the Depot, all eyes were on them; each Marine was curious about who they were.

One of the Marines who had an opportunity to speak with the men was Sgt. Dennis Turner, a 3rd RTBn. drill instructor. Turner said there is a good reason for these types of visits.

"They need to see some of our training and need to understand that we aren't all mercenaries ... we aren't just trying to breed killers," said Turner, amidst the sounds of Pugil Stick training at Leatherneck Square, which the officers also viewed. "We are training young men and women with core values."

http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf...ght=2,mercenary

More Gold Star and Military Families Join Cindy Sheehan in Crawford

Vow to Stand Vigil Until End of August; Call for Troops to be Brought Home Now

CRAWFORD, TX - More Members of Gold Star Families for Peace and Military Families Speak Out from Georgia, New Jersey, Illinois, Massachusetts, Oregon and Ohio are arriving in Crawford, Texas to add their voices to Cindy Sheehan's, calling for a meeting with President Bush and for troops to be brought home now. Over 30 military family members have joined the vigil in Crawford, with more arriving daily. The following Gold Star and Military Families Speak Out members are available for interview and are arrving this week in Crawford: Beatriz Salidvar of Fort Worth, TX arrived in Crawford last week. Her nephew Daniel Torres was killed February 4th, 2005 in Baygii 155 miles north of Baghdad on his 2nd tour of Iraq. IED device exploded and hit his unarmored Humvee. Mary Ann Macombie of Atlanta, Georgia arrived in Crawford on Saturday, August 13. Mary Ann's son Sgt. Ryan Campbell served in the Army and was killed in action south of Baghdad on April 29, 2004. Paula Rogovin of Teaneck, New Jersey arrived in Crawford on Saturday, August 13th. Paula's son is a Lieutenant in the U.S.Marine Corps, and has not yet been deployed to Iraq. Pat Vogel of Barrington, Illinois arrived in Crawford on Sunday, August 14th. Pat's son, a member of the Army Reserves, served in Bacuba, Iraq from March 2003 - March 2004. He joined Iraq Veterans Against the War (www.ivaw.net) when he returned from serving in Iraq. Mimi Evans of W. Barnstable, Massachusetts will be arriving in Crawford on Tuesday, August 16th. Mimi's son serves in the U.S. Marine Corps; he will be deployed to Fallujah, Iraq in the next week. Linda Englund of Chicago, Illinois will be arriving in Crawford on Tuesday, August 16th. Linda's son served in the Army in Iraq from February to December, 2004. He was wounded in Iraq and received two Purple Hearts and a Bronze Star. He is currently stationed in Germany and may be re-deployed to Iraq. Michelle DeFord of Salem, Oregon will be arriving in Crawford on Wednesday, August 17th. Michelle's son Sgt. David W. Johnson served in the Oregon National Guard and was killed in action near Baghdad on Sept 25, 2004 when his convoy hit by an IED (improvised explosive device). Adele Kubein of Corvalis, Oregon will be arriving in Crawford on Saturday, August 20. Her daughter is in the Oregon National Guard; she was wounded in Iraq during her tour of duty from April, 2003 to January, 2004, and was injured in Iraq. Steve Fryburg of Bellbrook, Ohio will be arriving in Crawford on Sunday, August 21st. Steve's son, currently a member of the Army's Individual Ready Reserves, served for six months in Iraq and may be activated to serve another tour. Steve is himself a member of Veterans for Peace and served in the U.S. Army from 1974-1977. Deb Hagerman of Beaver Creek, Ohio will be arriving in Crawford on Sunday, August 21st. Her husband is in the Navy Reserve and was deployed overseas at the start of the Iraq War. His contract with the military extends for several more years, and he may be deployed to Iraq during that time. Beth Lerman of Dayton, Ohio will be arriving in Crawford on Sunday, August 21. Her oldest son is a Veteran of the first Gulf War; her daughter-in-law currently serves with the Air Force; and her youngest son entered the Coast Guard two and a half years ago. Her daughter-in-law and youngest son have not yet been deployed to Iraq. Teresa Dawson of Gahanna, Ohio will be arriving in Crawford on Tuesday, August 23. Her daughter serves in the Army Reserves; her son in the Ohio National Guard is currently serving in Iraq. Karen Williams of Reynoldsburg, Ohio will be arriving in Crawford on Tuesday, August 23. Her son serves in the U.S. Marine Corps and has not yet been deployed to Iraq. Other military families are expected to come in to Crawford from Vermont, Ohio, California and other states between now and August 31. For further information, Military Families Speak Out: www.mfso.org or Gold Star Families for Peace: www.gsfp.org

http://www.mfso.org/article.php?id=35

Survivor -- Urgent Fury veteran still active after near-death experience in Grenada

Submitted by: MCB Camp Lejeune
Story Identification #: 2000911155054
Story by Sgt. Sharon G. Angell



CAMP LEJEUNE, N.C. (Sept. 11, 2000) -- "They were shooting at me for sport. That made me mad, because sooner or later they would have to hit me," said Col. Timothy B. Howard in a November 1986 article from The Observation Post. "So I waved my middle at them in my last hope of defiance."

Howard, who is the 2d Marine Division's assistant chief of staff for intelligence, at the time, was part of a squadron providing air support for ground troops during Operation Urgent Fury. The operation called for U.S. troops being sent in to St George's, Grenada, to rescue American citizens who were being held hostage by the Marxist People's Revolutionary Army.

Howard recalls his above reaction to what he thought would be his capture or eventual death when he was forced to land in a grassy field during Urgent Fury after his AH-1T Cobra attack helicopter was shot down over St. George's.

Howard was on his second tour with what was then the 22nd Marine Amphibious Unit when they were headed to relieve the Marines of the 24th MAU.

Howard's tour with the 22d MAU proved to be a lot different from anything the Marines from Marine Medium Helicopter Squadron-261, or any of the other units comprising the 22d MAU, had experienced on their previous tour.

When they set sail, the mission of the 22nd MAU was to relieve the 24th MAU in Beirut, Lebanon.

Before the turnover happened, the 22d MAU was diverted to Grenada.
Ironically, the mission was changed Oct. 22, 1983, one day before the Beirut bombing that took the lives of 241 U.S. service members.

"We were supposed to relieve the 24th MAU, but we got diverted," said Howard.
"We got the call about the bombing after we had already turned for Grenada, and it was too late to turn around to help them. We still had to complete our mission."

The beginning of U.S. support in Grenada began Oct. 25, 1983, when Army Rangers and Marines landed to help in the rescue efforts of the American students and to help return the island to a peaceful environment, said Howard.

That morning, Rangers were dropped over Point Salines to secure the area.
Other Rangers were given orders to secure True Blue campus. However, they were ambushed and requested assistance.

Along with these Rangers, another Ranger detachment was trying to secure the area at Fort Frederick overlooking St. George's. These soldiers came under heavy fire and Marine gun-ships were called in to assist them.

Two AH-1T Cobra attack helicopters were also sent in to provide cover fire for the soldiers.

One Cobra was manned by then Capt. Howard and his co-pilot Capt. Jeb Seagle.
The other was piloted by Maj. John "Pat" Guigerre, and co-pilot 1stLt. Jeff Sharver.
After Howard's Cobra made four passes, the bird needed more ammunition.

Following a re-supply, the Cobra made a fifth pass over St. George's. This pass would change Howard's life forever.

Before he knew it, his bird was hit by anti-aircraft fire originating from a nearby mental hospital, according to an article from All Hands magazine from May 1984.

Howard's Cobra has been hit several times, including three shots that injured him. The first shot hit him in the right arm tearing it off from the just below the elbow and down.
The second shot hit him in the right leg, seriously impairing his knee. After a final shot hit the aircraft, a golf-ball size piece of the aircraft became imbedded in his neck.

Howard said they were forced to land in a field near St. George's beach. During the forced landing, Howard called for his co-pilot to lower the bird, but realized Seagle had been knocked unconscious from rounds impacting the helicopter.

"He must have hit his head when we got hit, because I tried yelling his name, but he wouldn't come to. I knew I had to do something, so I tried everything I could to land safely," said Howard.

Despite his injuries, Howard managed to wrap his left arm around the "stick" and control the helicopter enough to land it.

During the landing however, the aircraft was seriously damaged. It caused the tail rotor to furrow and separate from the tail boom, according to a brief in a May 1984 of All Hands magazine.

Upon landing, all the warning lights on the circuit board were lit up, and although the helicopter managed to stay upright, it caught fire. Seagle regained consciousness after landing and attempted to assist Howard.

"He kept yelling at me to get out, but I don't think he knew how bad I had been hurt," said Howard.

Although Howard managed to unbuckle himself, he fell to the ground. Howard recalled that Seagle grabbed him by the back of his shirt and dragged him toward safety.

"I used my good leg to push with, while he was pulling me. He left me in a tall grassy field, next to a soccer stadium," said Howard.

Howard says he was worried more for his co-pilots safety more than his own, and he kept yelling, "You've got to get out of here. I am going to die, but you've got a chance," according to an article from The Washington Post entitled, 'Pilot recalls launch of Grenada invasion.'

Seagle went for help, but Howard still anticipated his own death, and said he knew he was never going to see Seagle again.

Seagle managed to send a call for help before leaving on foot to find ground support.
The other Cobra received the call and provided fire support while a CH-46 crew tried to rescue Howard.

During the rescue attempt, the Cobra received fire from anti-aircraft from somewhere on the island and was shot down.

Both Guigerre and Sharver were killed when their helicopter crashed into the ocean.
Meanwhile, Gunnery Sgt. Kelly Neideigh, a CH-46 door gunner, and Vietnam veteran, risked his life by running into live fire to drag Howard to the CH-46 for safety.

By the time Neideigh reached Howard, more than an hour had passed since Howard's Cobra went down.

Unfortunately, Howard's co-pilot, Seagle, never made it to safety; he was found dead on the beach. He had been captured and murdered while trying to find help for Howard.

After the rescue, Howard spent many long months in the hospital learning to deal with the loss of his arm and the grim diagnosis made by his doctors that he would never walk again.

That was 17 years ago and he's proven the doctors wrong. He recently ran three miles in 23-minutes during a physical fitness test.

"I still run, and I do the sit-ups for the PFT even though I am not required. I just don't do the pull-ups because it would take me a long time to work up to being able to do one-armed pull-ups," explained Howard.

Howard attributes his wife of 22-years, the former Bethany Tyrrell, for keeping him motivated.

"I think she has been the biggest part of my success and recovery. She has stood by through everything," he said. "When most people marry, they say 'I do,' but they mean I do until the times get hard or don't go their way. My wife is not like that."

Howard joined the Marine Corps in 1977 to fly helicopters.

Upon completion of a successful tour with MAG-29, he was promoted to captain and augmented the Cobra detachment that was assigned to HMM-261 to complete his second tour.

Following Urgent Fury, Howard took many months to recover from his injuries and fought to stay in the Marine Corps and won.

He was assigned to various duties following his recovery, including activating the 1st Remotely Piloted Vehicle Company in Twentynine Palms, Calif.

Howard received the Silver Star, the Distinguished Flying Cross with a Combat "V," and the Purple Heart for his actions in Grenada. He also received several awards from civilian organizations honoring his courage and dedication to duty.

http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf...24?OpenDocument

Urgent Fury revisited
Submitted by: MCB Camp Lejeune
Story Identification #: 2000102016013
Story by Sgt. Sharon G. Angell



CAMP LEJEUNE, N.C. (Oct. 20, 2000) -- Grenada, a small independent nation in the Western Hemisphere, is just 133 square miles, roughly a tenth of the size of Rhode Island. Yet, its strategic geographical placement was valuable to Cuba's military strategy, and its importance set off a chain of events that reverberated worldwide and added the idyllic tropical island to the annals of Marine Corps history..

Grenada's government was led by Prime Minister Maurice Bishop, who had overthrown the previous regime in 1974. Grenada's government soon embraced communism and copied Cuba's model of "revolutionary government.".

The Cuban government took notice of Grenada's geographical placement and wanted to use the small nation as an arsenal and stopover for Soviet forces. Their objective was to transport troops, weapons, military equipment and ammunition via a major airport they were building there.

Political tensions were high in 1983. Bishop's deputy, Bernard Coard was pushing for more widespread socialism, while Bishop was considering holding elections. On Oct. 13, Coard took control of the government and placed Bishop under house arrest.

Further political unrest erupted Oct. 19 when thousands of Bishop's supporters freed him. His freedom was cut short, however, when Coard's troops executed him and other political leaders who sided with Bishop.




The new government enacted a 24-hour, shoot-on-sight curfew from Oct. 20 to Oct. 24. The airport and businesses were closed, and looting and riots broke out putting the country on the brink of chaos. Neighboring countries and the U.S. felt something had to be done to restore order.

On Oct. 25, Eastern Caribbean nations and the United States joined forces, but were criticized by other countries that felt the U.S. was invading merely because they didn't like the government.

Despite this criticism, Urgent Fury was planned as a rescue mission to help restore law and order on Grenada and to rescue U.S. citizens trapped in the turmoil.

American military forces were mobilized. Marines of the 22nd Marine Amphibious Unit were diverted from their original mission - relieving the Marines of the 24th MAU in Beirut, Lebanon, - to assist in the evacuation of students and to help restore peace.

"There was political unrest. The government that had been friendly had been taken out of control and people were getting killed," said 1st Lt. Dave Wassink, corrosion control officer and CH-53 pilot at the time. Wassink left the Marine Corps as a major in 1994 and is now a military analyst.

The 22nd MAU arrived in Grenada Oct. 24 and began a predawn launch the following morning, according to Lt. Col. Edward Walsh, commanding officer for Marine Medium Helicopter Squadron-266, Marine Corps Air Station, New River. Walsh was a first lieutenant during Urgent Fury and flew a CH-46.

Missions were varied during Urgent Fury for both the Marines and the soldiers. The Marine pilots' missions included supporting Army Rangers and the 82nd Airborne Division paratroopers, as well as saving American lives.

"I flew in the rescue of the American students," said Wassink.

The fighting covered much of the coast of the island, including St. George's, Grand Anse Beach, Point Salines and Fort Frederick. Rangers were dropped over Point Salines to secure the area. Other Rangers were given orders to secure True Blue campus, but they were ambushed and requested assistance. The Marine pilots traveled over much of the island carrying out various missions

One group of Marines captured Pearls Airport . The capture aided supply missions, and the airport became a support facility. They renamed the airport Marine Corps Air Station Douglass after Sgt. Maj. F.B. Douglass, who was killed just days before on Oct. 23 in Beirut when the barracks were blown-up by a terrorist bomber, according to Walsh.

Other missions weren't as successful. On one, three Marine pilots wre killed.

A group of Marine pilots were conducting fire runs over Fort Frederick and on a nearby cluster of buildings they thought were Cuban headquarters. Unknown to them, the Cubans had moved their flag from the real headquarters building to a nearby mental hospital to trick them, according to an article from All Hands magazine from 1984.

The Cubans armed patients with automatic weapons and forced them to fire on the aircraft passing over them. They also installed a BTR-60 armored personnel carrier in the trees near the hospital to fire on the Americans.

For the pilots, determining where the ground fire was coming from proved difficult.

One of the pilots flying over the hospital was Col. Timothy B. Howard, who at the time was a captain and a member of the AH-1T Cobra attack helicopter squadron providing air support for the troops. He recalled the tops of all the buildings were painted green which made it difficult to decipher where the heaviest fire was coming from.

Howard and his co-pilot, Capt. Jeb Seagle, were assisted by another Cobra manned by Major John "Pat" Guigerre, the pilot and 1st Lt. Jeff Sharver, the co-pilot.

On their fifth run over the area, Howard and Seagle received fire from anti-aircraft from somewhere on the ground.

Howard was severely injured, losing most of his right arm, and Seagle was knocked unconcious. Despite his horrific injury, Howard managed to land the Cobra safely.

Seagle came to after they landed and helped Howard out of the aircraft. Seagle then called for assistance on their radio, and set off on foot for help. Howard was later rescued by a CH-46 crew that received the call for help.

Guigerre and Sharver, in the second Cobra, assisted the CH-46 during Howard's rescue. However, they were shot down in what was believed to be a "fake run" to draw fire away from the CH-46 as its crewmembers rescued Howard, according to Walsh. Guigerre and Sharver died.

Seagle was later found dead on the beach a few hundred yards from where he and Howard landed. He was killed while trying to reach help for Howard.

"It was hard anytime you lost anybody, but it is especially hard when you lose three guys at the same time. It touches you in a little different way," said Wassink.

In the next several days, the Marine pilots and soldiers continued their missions, rescuing U.S. students in the process. By the third day, the majority of the missions were accomplished, and the 22nd MAU left for Beirut to relieve the 24th MAU as originally planned.

American soldiers stayed behind, and by Nov. 3, all military objectives were secured, and the Grenadians began rebuilding their country.

http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf...33?OpenDocument

Ghost, this may well put into perpestive how long ago Vietnam was.

Corps bids farewell to last enlisted ‘Nam vet
Submitted by: MCB Quantico
Story Identification #: 2005630135311
Story by Cpl. Jonathan Agg



MARINE CORPS BASE QUANTICO, Va. (June 30, 2005) -- Another chapter of Marine Corps history will draw to a close as the Corps bids farewell to the last remaining enlisted Vietnam veteran on active duty.

Master Sgt. Randall Arnold, Quantico Security Battalion operations chief, will retire in a ceremony to be held at Harry Lee Hall here Friday at 9 a.m.

Arnold, a Charlottesville, Va., native raised in Washington, enlisted in the Marine Corps Jan. 21, 1969, at the age of 18. After boot camp and radio telegraph operator training, Arnold was assigned to the 2nd Amphibious Tractor Battalion, Camp Lejeune, N.C. Upon arrival, he immediately requested, and was granted, duty in Vietnam.

Arnold arrived in Da Nang Jan. 25, 1970, and was assigned to Communications Support Company, 7th Communications Battalion., III Marine Amphibious Force.

“I did what most Marines did,” said Arnold of his early days in Vietnam. “I pulled guard duty, I stood watch in the tower along the perimeter, and I stood radio watch, because that was my job – I was a communicator.”

Later, Arnold would participate in support of ground operations with the 2nd Republic of Korea Marine Brigade and the 2nd Marine Corps Combined Action Group. While at Hoi-An with the ROK Marines, Arnold was introduced to martial arts, which would become a significant part of his life and family.

“That’s when I first started getting into martial arts,” said Arnold. “I used to watch (the ROK Marines) work out. Those guys train really, really hard, and they’re tenacious fighters. Their intensity impressed me so much that later on, when the battalion moved to Red Beach on Da Nang Bay, I continued to study under a Korean Army colonel. It opened up a lifelong passion.”

After serving in Vietnam, Arnold was assigned to 1st Marine Brigade at Marine Corps Base Kaneohe Bay on June 27, 1971. He received his first posting to Marine Corps Base Quantico on Sept. 17, 1971. Arnold served as an enlisted instructor at the Student Demonstration Troops Battalion, later designated Headquarters and Service Battalion, at The Basic School. Arnold also instructed at the Communications Officers School before leaving active duty as a sergeant on Jan. 19, 1973.

Following two years in the Marine Corps Reserve, from January 1973 to January 1975, Arnold served in the U.S. Army Reserve and the Washington, D.C., National Guard from September 1976 to July 1978.

“I didn’t know how to be anything other that a Marine, in terms of attention to duty and attention to detail,” said Arnold, whose dissatisfaction with the Army eventually led him back to the Corps.

“I liked the way the Marine Corps did things as opposed to the other branches. I liked the straight-forwardness. Mostly, it was the pride in the title, Marine. I really liked taking pride in telling someone, ‘I am a United States Marine,’” said Arnold. “I don’t think there is another branch of military in this world that evokes so much respect, admiration, fear or outright hatred then the United States Marine Corps does. The guys we go against, they respect us as warriors, they fear us as adversaries, and they hate us because invariably we win.”

After reenlisting in the Marine Corps Reserve as a sergeant in February, 1982, Arnold transitioned back to active duty on May 14, 1983.

Arnold reported to Infantry Training School in June 1983 for instruction in the Anti-Tank Assaultman Course, and upon graduation was assigned to 2nd Tank Battalion, 2nd Marine Division.

Arnold deployed aboard the USS Guam in October 1983 and participated in Operation Urgent Fury in Grenada as a TOW squad leader with Echo Company, 2nd Battalion, 8th Marine Regiment.

Arnold then served as a recruiter at Recruiting Station Richmond from June 1985 to September 1988 before returning to the fleet to serve in the 4th Marines Regiment Anti-Tank (TOW) Platoon. He deployed to Korea in support of Operations Valiant Blitz and Team Spirit.

After promotion to staff sergeant Jan. 1, 1989, Arnold again returned to Quantico in September where he served as Counter-Mech Section leader, Mortar Section leader and Rifle Platoon leader. In March 1992, he was transferred to H&S Bn., where he served as both battalion operations chief and substance abuse counseling officer.

In September 1992, Arnold served in Somalia in support of Operation Continue Hope with Fox Company, 2nd Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment.

In July 1996, Arnold once again returned to Quantico to serve as a rifle platoon leader in the Infantry Unit at TBS. After promotion to gunnery sergeant, Arnold served as senior enlisted advisor, company gunnery sergeant and as company operations chief.

Arnold was then assigned to Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point in September 2000 to serve as a squadron master sergeant.

Arnold was promoted to his final rank, master sergeant, Jan. 1, 2001and served as staff noncommissioned officer-in-charge of Camp Hansen Range Control Detachment in Okinawa, Japan, from August 2003 to September 2004, when he received his final assignment as the Security Battalion operations chief here.

Arnold said he finds parting with the Marine Corps a difficult task and would prefer to continue serving with Marines as a civilian contractor.

“I would really love to have the opportunity to work around Marines. When you’ve been a Marine for so many years, you find that you identify with them. You feel a closeness with them that’s not going to go away,” said Arnold.

Arnold illustrated the Marines’ undying esprit de corps with an anecdote from his time in the Army National Guard.

“I remember when I was with the Army National Guard at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida, and I had my old bush cover on with the Marine Corps emblem on the front,” said Arnold. “One of the soldiers asked me, ‘Why are you wearing that?’ I answered, ‘Because I’m a Marine.’ He said, ‘No, you’re a soldier.’ Well I said, ‘I was a Marine before I was a soldier, and once a Marine always a Marine. I just may be wearing a different uniform, but deep down inside, I’m still a Marine.’ He just shook his head and moved on.”

As he exits the active duty ranks, Arnold offered some insightful wisdom for the Marines who continue the Corps’ proud legacy.

“First, keep faith with the Corps. She may not be perfect, but she’s the best Marine Corps we’ve got. Second, hold to your I’s and J’s,” said Arnold, referring to initiative, judgment, integrity and justice, four of the 14 Marine Corps leadership traits.

“You can be the most evil son of a gun in the world, as long as you’re fair. If you see something that needs to be fixed, take the initiative, use good judgment, and get it done,” said Arnold. “When a Marine comes to his leader with a problem, he’s looking for an honest answer. When a leader asks a Marine, ‘What happened?’ he’s looking for an honest answer. As leaders and Marines, there are so few of us that we need to be sure that we’re honest with each other, because someday, someone’s life may depend on it. So if I have to leave anything to anyone, I would say, keep faith in the Corps and never compromise your integrity. The bottom line is the Marine Corps is what we do and integrity is who we are.

http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf...db?OpenDocument