Another Meaningless Wargaming Poll

poll by twiigs.com

By: Brant

Sound Off Bonus! Two-Sided Wargaming Maps

poll by twiigs.com

By: Brant

Are Israelis Making Iranian Nukies Go "Boom"?

According to The Daily Beast, the Israelis have "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" (not) admitted to killing Iranian nuclear scientists.

Six weeks ago in Washington, on the sidelines of a major U.S.-Israeli meeting known as the “strategic dialogue,” Israeli Mossad officers were quietly and obliquely bragging about the string of explosions in Iran. “They would say things like, ‘It’s not the best time to be working on Iranian missile design,’” one U.S. intelligence official at the December parley told The Daily Beast.

Those comments were a reference to a string of explosions at a missile-testing site outside Tehran on November 12. The explosions killed Maj. Gen. Hassan Moqqadam, the head of the country’s missile program. But the manner in which the message was delivered—informally and on the sidelines of an official discussion—also speaks to how Israel appears to seek to create the impression of responsibility for acts of violence and sabotage inside Iran without quite taking formal responsibility.

What do you think?

poll by twiigs.com

By: Brant

Huge US Deal to Sell F15s to Saudis

What the heck, theSaudis probably have $30 billion laying around their couch cushions.

The Obama administration on Thursday hailed a new $30 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia as both a hedge against Iranian aggression in the Persian Gulf and an economic windfall that could create thousands of U.S. jobs over the next decade.

The agreement to sell 84 top-of-the line F-15SA fighter jets to the Saudi air force also provided a needed boost to U.S. relations with the oil-rich kingdom after months of strain over the White House’s response to the Arab Spring uprisings, U.S. officials and Middle East analysts said.

The deal, which was finalized after more than a year of negotiations, was announced during a week of increased tensions with Iran, which has renewed its threat to block ship traffic through the Strait of Hormuz in response to international economic sanctions. The administration has pursued a policy of supplying advanced weapons systems to friendly Arab states to keep Iran’s regional ambitions in check.

“This sale will send a strong message to countries in the region that the United States is committed to stability in the gulf and broader Middle East,” Andrew Shapiro, assistant secretary of state for political-military affairs, told reporters.

What do you think - good idea? Bad idea? Is this sale mainly a diplomatic move, a security move, or an economic move?

poll by twiigs.com

By: Brant

If You're Going To Repeal DADT

go whole hog...

The honor of the first kiss off the USS Oak Hill, upon returning to port, was raffled off. The winning ticket was drawn by Petty Officer 2nd Class Marissa Gaeta, who was met on the gangplank by her girlfriend Petty Officer 3rd Class Citlalic Snell.

David Bauer, the commanding officer of the USS Oak Hill, didn’t appear terribly surprised about the moment, which ‘officially’ signaled to any leftover doubters that the Navy has caught up to the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell.”
"It's going to happen and the crew's going to enjoy it. We're going to move on and it won't overshadow the great things that this crew has accomplished over the past three months," Bauer said.
According to the AP, both Gaeta and her partner Citlalic have been dating for over two years, working as fire controlmen on various Navy ships, and hiding their relationship under the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.

(photo from the AP)

As The Washington Post blogs:

When the couple began dating, they had to hide their status under the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. The 17-year-old policy was repealed in September. On Wednesday, in front of Gaeta’s entire ship and a cheering crowd, the two women made history as the first same-sex couple to share the coveted kiss.

“It’s nice to be able to be myself. It’s been a long time coming,” said Gaeta about life after the repeal. “It’s been pretty awesome to say the least.”

poll by twiigs.com

By: Brant

The Red Cross Weighs In on Virtual War Crimes

I'm going to admit that at first blush, the article about the ICRC investigating possible war crimes in video games gave me a facepalm. I was going to post a poll with the options being "dumb idea", "stupid idea", and "f'n' waste of time". But on further reflection, I will give the ICRC credit here, even though I don't think they're doing this with the foresight I'm about to ascribe to them.

One of the world's largest and most respected humanitarian groups in the world is investigating whether the Geneva and Hague conventions should be applied to the fictional recreation of war in video games.
If they agree those standards should be applied, the International Committee of the Red Cross says they may ask developers to adhere to the rules themselves or "encourage" governments to adopt laws to regulate the video game industry.
The International Committee of the Red Cross is mandated under the Geneva Conventions to protect the victims of international and internal armed conflicts. That includes war wounded, prisoners, refugees, civilians, and other non-combatants. The question they debated this week is whether their mandate should be extended to the virtual victims of video game wars.

While the "virtual victims" are virtual today, we've seen no shortage of remote-control warfare, from Predator-equipped drones to CROWS turrets. Given the slow, but inexorable, shift in the visualization provided by remote-control weaponry, and the more graphically realistic portrayal of game-based content, are we rapidly closing on the day when the video games and video targeting are visually indistinguishable? And if so, then how far are we, really, from Ender's Game?

If that's really where the Red Cross is going with this, then bravo. They're establishing standards now, before the industry ever catches up to the standard from a technical aspect. Maybe we've learned the lessons of internet 'regulation' after all. But somehow, I'm pretty sure that's not what the ICRC is actually trying to do. So it seems as though they might actually be doing the right thing, even if it's for the wrong reasons.

What do you guys think?

poll by twiigs.com

UPDATE: Here's a thoughtful piece from Rex over at PaxSims about the same topic.


By: Brant

Pak ROE Changing After NATO Attack

Our overpaid frenemy is "adjusting" their rules of engagement to allow them to shoot back in "self defense". Or maybe it's the first step down the path of just telling them to shoot us for whatever reason they feel like.

Pakistan's commanders in the wild Afghan border region can return fire if attacked without waiting for permission, the army chief said, a change in rules of engagement that could stoke tension after Saturday's NATO strike killed 24 Pakistani troops.
The attack sparked fury in Pakistan and further complicated U.S.-led efforts to ease a crisis in relations with Islamabad, still seething at a secret U.S. raid in May which killed al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, and stabilize the region before foreign combat troops leave Afghanistan in 2014.
"I do not want there to be any doubt in the minds of any commander at any level about the rules of engagement," Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Kayani said in a communique on Friday.
"In case of any attack, you have complete liberty to respond forcefully using all available resources. You do not need any permission for this."

poll by twiigs.com

By: Brant

Cheating!

poll by twiigs.com

By: Brant

More Evidence of the Growing Military-Civilian Divide

We've talked about it before, but there's still more information about the continuing divide between America's military and the general population.

After 10 years of war, the vast majority of post-Sept. 11 veterans say the public does not understand the problems faced by those in the military and by their families. The public largely agrees but believes there’s nothing unfair about the outsized burden being shouldered by veterans.

The findings are part of a broad new study by the Pew Research Center that documents a growing gap between civilians and a military force that has been put under intense strain over the past decade. According to the study, 84 percent of veterans believe the rest of the country has little or no understanding of the problems faced by the military. Seventy-one percent of the public shares that assessment.

“When it comes to their armed forces, most Americans in the post-9/11 era have feelings of pride, gratitude and confidence,” the study concludes. “At the same time, most Americans acknowledge they know little about the realities of military service. And, in increasing numbers, they disapprove of or do not pay attention to the wars the military is currently fighting.”

Less than 1 percent of the U.S. population has been on active military duty at any given time during the past decade. For many Americans, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been seen only in glimpses, in a newspaper or on television.

For many veterans, however, the wars have meant incredible strains that have lasted long beyond their deployments. Roughly 44 percent of post-9/11 veterans say their readjustment to civilian life was difficult, according to the Pew study. By contrast, 25 percent of veterans who served in earlier eras said the same.

The newly-released Pew Research poll mentioned above is getting headlines for some results that seem to show a significant proportion veterans think the Iraq/Afghanistan wars were not fruitful. However, the other details about the experiences of the military adjusting to home life are far more important and wide-reaching than statements likely to be mis-represented in upcoming election campaigns.

The poll results presented by the Pew Research Center portray post-9/11 veterans as proud of their work, scarred by warfare and convinced that the American public has little understanding of the problems that wartime service has created for military members and their families.
The survey also showed that post-9/11 veterans are more likely than Americans as a whole to call themselves Republicans and to disapprove of President Barack Obama's performance as commander in chief. They also are more likely than earlier generations of veterans to have no religious affiliation.
The Pew Research Center, a nonpartisan organization that studies attitudes and trends, called the study the first of its kind. The results were based on two surveys conducted between late July and mid-September. One polled 1,853 veterans, including 712 who had served in the military after 9/11 but are no longer on active duty. Of the 712 post-9/11 veterans, 336 served in Iraq or Afghanistan. The other polled 2,003 adults who had not served in the military.
Nearly half of post-9/11 veterans said deployments strained their relationship with their spouses, and a similar share reported problems with their children. On the other hand, 60 percent said they and their families benefited financially from having served abroad in a combat zone. Asked for a single word to describe their experiences, the war veterans offered a mixed picture: "rewarding," ''nightmare," ''eye opening," ''lousy."

By: Brant

Anniversary: National Security Act of 1947

Today marks the anniversary of the most significant reorganization of the US defense infrastructure, the National Security Act of 1947

The National Security Act of 1947 (Pub. L. No. 235, 80 Cong., 61 Stat. 496, 50 U.S.C. ch.15) was signed by United States President Harry S. Truman on July 26, 1947, and realigned and reorganized the U.S. Armed Forces, foreign policy, and Intelligence Community apparatus in the aftermath of World War II. The majority of the provisions of the Act took effect on September 18, 1947, the day after the Senate confirmed James Forrestal as the first Secretary of Defense. His power was extremely limited and it was difficult for him to exercise the authority to make his office effective. This was later changed in the amendment to the act in 1949, creating what was to be the Department of Defense.

poll by twiigs.com

By: Brant

Anniversaries: Big Events in WWII

Big doin's on this date in WWII

1940 - France's Formal Surrender

The Second Armistice at Compiègne was signed at 18:50 on 22 June 1940 near Compiègne, in the department of Oise, between Nazi Germany and France. Following the decisive German victory in the Battle of France (10 May–21 June 1940), it established a German occupation zone in Northern France that encompassed all English Channel and Atlantic Ocean ports and left the remainder "free" to be governed by the French. Adolf Hitler deliberately chose Compiègne Forest as the site to sign the armistice due to its symbolic role as the site of the 1918 Armistice with Germany that signaled the end of World War I with Germany's surrender.

1941 - Operation Barbarossa

Operation Barbarossa (German: Unternehmen Barbarossa, for Frederick I) was the code name for Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union during World War II that began on 22 June 1941. Over 4.5 million troops of the Axis powers invaded the USSR along a 2,900 km (1,800 mi) front. In addition to the large number of troops, it also involved 600,000 motor vehicles and 750,000 horses. Planning for Operation Barbarossa started on 18 December 1940; the secret preparations and the military operation itself lasted almost a year, from spring to winter 1941. The Red Army repelled the Wehrmacht's strongest blow, and Adolf Hitler did not achieve the expected victory, but the Soviet Union's situation remained dire. Tactically, the Germans had won some resounding victories and occupied some of the most important economic areas of the country, mainly in Ukraine. Despite these successes, the Germans were pushed back from Moscow and could never mount an offensive simultaneously along the entire strategic Soviet-German front again.

1944 - Operation Bagration

Operation Bagration (Russian: Oперация Багратион, Operatsiya Bagration) was the codename for the Soviet 1944 Belorussian Strategic Offensive Operation during World War II, which cleared German forces from the Belorussian SSR and eastern Poland between 22 June and 19 August 1944.

The operation was named after 18th–19th century Georgian Prince Pyotr Bagration, general of the Imperial Russian Army who received a mortal wound at the Battle of Borodino. The Soviet armies directly involved in Operation Bagration were the 1st Baltic Front under Army General Hovhannes Bagramyan, the 1st Belorussian Front commanded by Army General Konstantin Rokossovsky, who was promoted to Marshal on 29 June 1944, the 2nd Belorussian Front commanded by Colonel-General G. F. Zakharov, and the 3rd Belorussian Front commanded by Colonel-General Ivan Chernyakhovsky. This action resulted in the almost complete destruction of the German Army Group Centre and three of its component armies: Fourth Army, Third Panzer Army and Ninth Army. The operation "was the most calamitous defeat of all the German armed forces in World War II". By the end of the operation most of the western Soviet Union had been reconquered and the Red Army had achieved footholds in Romania and Poland.

excerpts from Wikipedia

poll by twiigs.com

By: Brant

GrogNews Origins Coverage

Where do we focus? What do you want to see? What should we cover? Give us your details and special requests in the comments.

poll by twiigs.com

By: Brant

Cyber Attack = Act of War?

A new Pentagon policy has elevated cyber attacks to "acts of war".

The Pentagon has concluded that computer sabotage coming from another country can constitute an act of war, a finding that for the first time opens the door for the U.S. to respond using traditional military force.

The Pentagon's first formal cyber strategy, unclassified portions of which are expected to become public next month, represents an early attempt to grapple with a changing world in which a hacker could pose as significant a threat to U.S. nuclear reactors, subways or pipelines as a hostile country's military.

In part, the Pentagon intends its plan as a warning to potential adversaries of the consequences of attacking the U.S. in this way. "If you shut down our power grid, maybe we will put a missile down one of your smokestacks," said a military official.

poll by twiigs.com

By: Brant

The Endgame in Libya Led By... France?

There's a compelling argument over at Small Wars Journal about why France will finish off Gaddafi.

Let’s make something clear, the civil war in Libya will not end in a stalemate. The French will likely intervene with ground forces and topple the Gaddafi regime, and they will probably do it within a month. It is quite possible that they will do so with Italian help. President Obama has fervently wished for America to be just one of the boys; in the end, this may be a case of wishing for something so much that you get it. America has abrogated the role of global marshal that it assumed after World War II. Every posse needs a Marshal to lead it. The French will likely pick up the tin star they found lying in the street of the global village.

When General Petraeus asked the famous question, “tell me how this ends?” early in the Iraq war, he was signaling unease about launching conflicts with no clear idea of how the world should look after the fighting stopped; the military calls this an “end state”. When he had a chance to do something about it, Petraeus as a caveat for assuming command in Iraq, insisted that the civilian side of the government craft a clear end state and give him adequate forces to pursue it. By the 2008 election, both candidates were promising never again to get us involved in an open ended conflict. Fast forward to 2011, where we have embarked on a military campaign with no clear strategic objective other than to “do something”; having done something that is clearly not enough, the administration seems at a loss. At this point, we have a strategic leadership vacuum, and the French will probably fill it.

poll by twiigs.com

By: Brant

NEWS: Petraeus to CIA

MSNBC is just now breaking this on TV, so I don't have a link yet, but the scroll on their website says it all:

BREAKING NEWS: CIA director Panetta to take over Pentagon; Petraeus to be nominated for CIA - AP

poll by twiigs.com

poll by twiigs.com

Update: here's one article for you.

Update 2: Here's an interesting article about Ambassador Ryan Crocker taking over Afghanistan. Clearly this was written before the Petraeus announcement.

Seasoned diplomat Ryan Crocker has emerged as the top candidate to become the next U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan, part of a far-reaching revamping of the nation's top leadership in the conflict there, now in its 10th year.
Crocker is the only person being considered currently to replace Ambassador Karl Eikenberry, a former Army general whose two-year tenure has been marred by cool relationships with major players in the Afghanistan war, including the White House, U.S. military leaders and Afghan President Hamid Karzai, administration and other sources said. The sources emphasized that the White House has not made a final decision.
Sending Crocker to Afghanistan would reunite him with Gen. David Petraeus, re-creating the diplomatic and military "dream team" credited with rescuing the flagging American mission in Iraq.

By: Brant

Who's *Really* Going to Origins?

Now that we're looking at the details of the Origins War College, we're going to ask again... There's still a ton of nifty things happening in Columbus this summer at the intersection of wargaming, training, and current military affairs so if you're not already planning to be there, you're wrong!

poll by twiigs.com

By: Brant

The Arab League and Libya

Lessee, so far the lessons of Kosovo are being ignored, as airstrikes alone have failed to push back Libyan ground forces.

Western warplanes hit Libya for a fifth night on Thursday, but so far have failed to stop Muammar Gaddafi's tanks shelling rebel-held towns or dislodge his armor from a strategic junction in the east.
Gaddafi's tanks rolled back into Misrata under the cover of darkness and began shelling the area near the main hospital, residents and rebels said, resuming their attack after their guns were silenced in daylight hours by Western airstrikes.
Government snipers in the city, Libya's third largest, were undeterred by the bombing raids though and had carried on firing indiscriminately throughout, residents said. A rebel spokesman said the snipers had killed 16 people.
"Government tanks are closing in on Misrata hospital and shelling the area," said a doctor in Misrata who was briefly reached by phone before the line was cut off.
It was impossible to independently verify the reports.
A loud explosion was heard in the Libyan capital Tripoli early on Thursday and smoke could be seen rising from an area where a military base is situated.

As the Arab League sits on the bench during the fighting. At least warm up some pom-poms and try cheerleading a little from the sidelines guys.

Except for the small Persian Gulf nation of Qatar, which is expected to start flying air patrols over Libya by this weekend, no other members of the 22-member Arab League have so far publicly committed to taking an active role. The U.S. has sold many of these countries, including Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, billions of dollars in sophisticated military gear over the past decade to help counter Iran's power in the region.

poll by twiigs.com

You might agree with more than one option on the poll, but you can only pick one. Expand on your vote in the comments if you want.

By: Brant

Word Association: A Fun BGG Poll

FoGN Andrew Heath (AKA "Shad" to the WGer crowd) has a fun little word association poll over at BoardGameGeek. You'll at least get a chuckle.

KHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNNNNN!

By: Brant

Who's Going to Origins?

With the Origins War College, there's a ton of nifty things happening in Columbus this summer at the intersection of wargaming, training, and current military affairs.

If you're not already planning to be there, you're wrong!

Seriously, though... the War College speakers' grid is coming soon, but in the meantime, let's look at a headcount of who's going?

poll by twiigs.com

By: Brant

Italy vs The Dutch!

No, it's not a World Cup qualifier... we're wondering which nation is going to hit 1000 visitors to our little corner of the interwebs first. Based on current traffic rates, one of them ought to get there either this weekend, or early next week. Any guesses who makes it first?

poll by twiigs.com

By: Brant