Saturday, November 23, 2013

Meeting the Prince of Blackwater

An unapologetic Eric Prince, founder of the widely criticized mercenary firm Blackwater, speaks out
Erik Prince, the former CEO of Blackwater USA
Erik Prince, the former CEO of Blackwater USA, at a hearing held by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. on Oct. 2, 2007. Private security company Blackwater was used by the U.S. State Department, and came under investigation for its activities in Iraq.
Stefan Zaklin/EPA
PHILADELPHIA – Erik Prince – the founder of the private security firm once known as Blackwater – embarked on a publicity tour here on Friday, defending mercenaries as intrinsic to the birth of the United States and lashing out at the federal government that he believes unfairly persecuted him.
In a talk at the Free Library of Philadelphia to promote his new book, "Civilian Warriors: The Inside Story of Blackwater and the Unsung Heroes of the War on Terror," Prince seemed uninterested in image rehabilitating, preferring instead a dose of bravado and score-settling.
If Prince's Blackwater still existed and had been in charge of U.S. diplomatic security in Libya, he said, U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens would not have died in the September 2012 attack on the consulate in Benghazi.
Prince said mercenaries are invaluable and as old as America – a country "founded by private companies."
"The Jamestown colony was actually a publicly traded company on the London stock exchange, and they hired a guy like John Smith, who was a professional soldier, to come and protect the colony," he said.
Prince has never acknowledged that Blackwater was at fault for controversies that arose during its troubled but lucrative run during the 2000s providing protection to U.S. diplomats, training Afghan police for the Pentagon or, in Prince’s own words, acting as "a virtual extension" of the CIA. In recent interviews, he has evinced unapologetic pride in his company’s work, which boomed after the Sept. 11 attacks and the 2003 invasion of Iraq, earning Blackwater billions of dollars in government contracts. Blackwater became infamous after its contractors killed at least 14 Iraqi civilians at a Baghdad intersection in 2007.
On Friday, the only outward sign that one of the most controversial figures in modern U.S. warfare had arrived in town was the half-dozen protesters braving the early morning chill in scarves, skull masks and Vietnam War veteran shirts to greet Prince.
"This guy is a person of interest in homicide, money laundering and trafficking of women," said Jody Dodd, 56, a paralegal at a Philadelphia law firm who was among the protesters. "This city on a regular basis detains young African-American men on less of a basis than this guy."

Unfairly maligned

Since leaving Blackwater in 2010, Prince has launched the Frontier Resource Group, an Abu Dhabi-based private equity firm that he said would focus on logistics and mining. He has also recently surprised some observers by calling for cuts to the same "bloated" U.S. defense budget that helped make him rich.
Prince, whose father founded an auto parts company and died unexpectedly soon after Prince became a Navy SEAL in the 1990s, said on Friday that Blackwater was his attempt to spur innovation in the private security industry in the same way his father had responded to more efficient Japanese companies decades earlier.
"No one had ever done it on an industrial scale," Prince said, comparing Blackwater to an assembly line. "It was almost a Toyota-(style) linear flow."
By Prince's metric, Blackwater performed flawlessly at keeping U.S. government officials safe – even as its employees, in his view, received little acknowledgement for the dangers they faced. No government employee or VIP under Blackwater’s protection was ever killed, Prince said, though 41 of its own employees died in action and hundreds were wounded.
Shortly before Prince left, in 2009, Blackwater renamed itself Xe Services, then changed its identity once again, in 2010, to Academi. Only around 10 instructors from the Blackwater era remain with Academi.
In Prince's telling, Blackwater's fall came after it was unfairly maligned in the media and persecuted by the U.S. government. Indictments and subpoenas against its top officials came at the prodding of politicians with a grudge against Prince, he said, even though his contractors were doing the job they had been given.
In Iraq, he said, Blackwater troops guarding employees of nongovernmental organizations always used dashboard-mounted cameras on their vehicles to document any possible confrontations. But the State Department refused to allow those cameras on its missions, making it difficult, he said, for contractors to prove what happened during a confrontation. In a recent interview with the Wall Street Journal, Prince claimed that State Department requirements to protect its personnel at all costs forced his troops to behave aggressively.
During the deadly confrontation in Baghdad’s Nisour Square in 2007, a Blackwater team shot and killed an Iraqi woman and her sons as they drove toward the square. The contractors then ignited the woman's car with a flare or sound grenade, prompting return fire from Iraqi police and soldiers as the contractors continued to shoot into the crowd. Fourteen unarmed Iraqi civilians were killed and 18 wounded, precipitating the beginning of the end of Blackwater’s work in Iraq. One Blackwater contractor pleaded guilty to manslaughter in 2008 and after a long investigation, four others now face recently refiled charges in federal court in Washington, D.C.
According to Prince, FBI investigators and doctors treating victims of the firefight found AK-47 rounds in Blackwater vehicles and the bodies of wounded Iraqis, apparently indicating that men other than Blackwater troops had fired that day. On Friday, he compared the incident to the shooting death near the U.S. Capitol last month of an unarmed 34-year-old woman who had been driving erratically and rammed into security barricades. Police fired at the car as the woman’s child lay in the back seat.
The officers who chased and killed the woman were applauded, Prince said.
"I cannot even imagine the hue and cry if contractors were doing that job instead of uniformed employees of the government," he said.

No investigation

To critics, Blackwater got off easy. In 2005, the top security official at the U.S. embassy declined to investigate a separate incident involving Blackwater guards who fired 70 rounds into an Iraqi’s car. According to documents released to USA Today in 2009, the official suggested that an investigation would have "lowered the morale" of the contractors.
U.S. officials who faced grilling by Congress in 2007 defended the government’s reliance on contractors such as Blackwater, saying they could not possibly protect employees with full-time government security personnel alone. "There is no alternative except through contracts," Ryan Crocker, the former U.S. ambassador to Baghdad, said in 2007.
But the Nisour Square incident proved to be too much, and Blackwater lost its license to provide security in Iraq when it expired two years later. In 2008, Blackwater's pitch to sell the U.S. military an armored personnel carrier called “the Grizzly” was rejected by the Army. Prince viewed the move as a politically motivated slap, and he stepped down as CEO the following year.
"It's a good lesson, it's a painful lesson in selling anything to the (Defense Department) that they’re really incapable of making a truly merit-based decision. There is way too much politics involved in it," Prince said of the Grizzly episode.

New work in Africa

Speaking on Friday, Prince recalled an eight-week training course that Blackwater had administered for Afghanistan's border guards. The Afghan men were so uneducated, he said, that the contractors had to teach "intro to toilet use." But Blackwater, he said, provided the troops with fuel, electricity, batteries and the training they had lacked.
"I would speak at some of these (border guards) graduations and I would say, 'Look, we’re happy to be here, we’re happy to help train you, because you've been suffering under war for 30 years and enough is enough,’" Prince said. "’And we're happy to be part of that solution trying to help you live a peaceful life,’ and whether that's in Iraq or in Afghanistan, that's the goal we're after."
Today, with the fate of the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan unclear, violence there is rising and the Taliban remains strong. Blackwater’s eight-week training course and the supplies it provided may not have done much to advance an Afghan vision of a solution.
But Prince – who said he had grown unhappy with government "haranguing" and a "blizzard of subpoenas" – has moved on. He now plans to direct the Frontier Resource Group's investments in "energy, mining, agriculture and logistic opportunities," in Africa.
"We're very excited about Africa," he told the audience. "It can again be the breadbasket of the world."
As the talk finished, a long line of attendees formed to ask Prince to sign their books. Several protesters, after quietly entering the auditorium and being asked to leave by security guards, shouted from the rear: "Psychopath! War criminal!" Prince smiled and signed a book.

Kerry Geneva-bound as Iran nuclear deal inches closer

Joining him are British, French and Russian foreign ministers in a sign of hope that interim deal could soon be reached

http://military-article-category.blogspot.com/

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is heading for Geneva to join talks on Iran's nuclear program, and several other foreign ministers are on their way as well, in an indication that ongoing negotiations between Tehran and six world powers may be closer to finalizing an interim agreement.
The State Department announced Kerry’s trip after diplomats in the Swiss city said a major sticking point in negotiations on an agreement — under which Tehran would curb its contested atomic activities — may have been overcome. Negotiators have been working since Wednesday to find language acceptable to Iran and its negotiating partners.
Kerry will head to Geneva "with the goal of continuing to help narrow the differences and move closer to an agreement," State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said.
As negotiations moved into the evening Friday, a diplomat in Geneva for the talks said some progress was being made on a key sticking point: Iran's claim to a right to produce nuclear fuel. Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif and Catherine Ashton, the European Union's top diplomat, have met repeatedly since Wednesday to try to resolve that and other differences.
Kerry is set to arrive in Geneva on Saturday and meet his Russian counterpart, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who is already there. The French, British and Chinese foreign ministers subsequently indicated Friday that they would head to Geneva as well, possibly signaling a belief that there is growing momentum toward progress.
While the participation of the foreign ministers in the current round of talks —which have hitherto included mostly midlevel diplomats — is a sign that a deal may be close, it is no guarantee of success. The last round ended Nov. 10 with no deal, even after Kerry and the foreign ministers of Britain, France, Germany and Russia, and a Chinese deputy foreign minister, flew in and attempted to bridge differences.

How Iran may scale back its nuclear program

Right to enrich?

Zarif indicated last weekend that Iran is ready to sign a deal that does not expressly state its right to enrich uranium, raising hopes that a deal could be sealed at the current Geneva round, given Western skepticism over Iranian enrichment.
On Wednesday, however, Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said his country would never compromise on "red lines." Since then Tehran has reverted to its original stance: that the six powers must recognize this activity as Iran's right under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), despite strong opposition by Israel and within the U.S. Congress.
A senior Iranian negotiator said his country's claim did not need to be explicitly recognized in any initial deal, despite Khamenei's comment. He did suggest, however, that language on that point remained contentious, along with other differences.
The diplomat said work was proceeding on a compromise along the lines of what the Iranian negotiator said — avoiding a direct reference to any country's right to enrich but still giving enough leeway for Iran to accept it. Both he and the Iranian envoy demanded anonymity because they were not allowed to discuss the closed negotiations.
Iran says it is enriching only for reactor fuel, medical uses and research, and its Supreme Leader has issued previous fatwas, or religious edicts, against nuclear weapons.
But as the technology can also produce nuclear warhead material, many countries have long worried that Iran’s clandestine program is a cover for possibly nefarious designs.
In addition to discussion about enrichment in the current round of talks, sanctions relief is at issue.
The U.S. and its allies have signaled that they are ready to ease some sanctions in place against Iran in return for a first-step deal that starts to put limits on Tehran's nuclear program. But they insist that the most severe penalties — on oil exports and the banking sector — will remain until the two sides reach a comprehensive agreement to minimize Iran's nuclear-arms-making capacity.

Roadblocks remain the same

Another issue that has divided the parties is differences of opinion within the six powers negotiating with Iran.
France has taken a harder line than other Western powers, and has repeatedly urged the six-nation group not to make too many compromises with Tehran. Many commentators believe that France’s more stringent position prevented an agreement during the last round of talks.
But French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius expressed hope that a deal could be made, telling reporters in Paris that he was in contact with the negotiators in Geneva.
"As long as there is no agreement, there is no agreement. You know our position ... it's a position based on firmness, but at the same time a position of hope that we can reach a deal," Fabius said.
Even if there were a unified front on negotiations, however, the talks have their critics.
Israel continued its public campaign of criticizing the offer of a sanctions rollback for Iran, voicing its conviction that all the move would achieve would be to give Iran more time to master nuclear technology and amass potential bomb fuel.
"We think it's not a useful agreement. Perhaps even damaging," Deputy Foreign Minister Zeev Elkin told Israel Radio.
Separately, the United States has only limited flexibility in any negotiations because of skepticism in Congress about the benefits of cutting any deal with Tehran under the current negotiating framework, which includes the potential easing of sanctions.
Al Jazeera and wire services

Memorials mark 50 years since JFK assassination

A half-century after the death of the 35th president, the nation pauses to remember one of its darkest hours
 
The nation solemnly marked the 50th anniversary of President John F. Kennedy's assassination Friday with subdued remembrances at Kennedy's grave and the infamous site in Dallas where the young, glamorous president was gunned down in an open-top limousine.
Flags flew at half-staff, and moments of silence were planned for the hour when Kennedy, 46, was shot riding in a motorcade. The quiet reverence extended across the Atlantic Ocean to his ancestral home in Ireland.
Shortly after sunrise, Attorney General Eric Holder paid his respects at Kennedy's recently refurbished grave at Arlington National Cemetery, where a British cavalry officer stood guard, bagpipes played and a flame burned steadily as it has for the last half-century.
About an hour later, Jean Kennedy Smith, 85, the last surviving Kennedy sibling, laid a wreath at her brother's grave, joined by about 10 members of the Kennedy family. They clasped hands for a short, silent prayer and left roses as a few hundred tourists watched.
Speaking with Al Jazeera's Thomas Drayton on Friday, Dean Owen, journalist and author of "November 22, 1963: Reflections on the Life, Assassination, and Legacy of John F. Kennedy," said JFK "changed the face of the U.S. presidency."
"He was America's first television president, he was the youngest president ever elected to office — charismatic, witty, charming," Owen said. "He was a role model for many, many individuals and inspired many young people ... to go into public service."
Dallas was bitterly cold, damp and windy on Friday, far different from the bright sunshine that filled the day Kennedy died.
About 5,000 tickets were issued for the free ceremony in Dealey Plaza, which is flanked by the Texas School Book Depository building where sniper Lee Harvey Oswald perched on the sixth floor.
A stage for the memorial ceremony, just south of the depository building, was backed with a large banner showing Kennedy's profile. Video screens showed images of the president with his family.
People began assembling for the event hours ahead of time.
"President Kennedy has always been kind of revered in our family," said Colleen Bonner, 41, of suburban Hurst. "I just wanted to honor his memory, and I wanted to be a part of history."
The U.S. Naval Academy Men's Glee Club performed at the ceremony, in a nod to Kennedy's military service. An Air Force flyover had to be canceled due to overcast weather. A moment of silence was held at 12:30 p.m., marking the time when the president was shot.
Numerous events were held around Dallas this year to mark the anniversary, including panels of speakers who were there that day, special concerts and museum exhibits.

Dallas memorializes JFK assassination through 'Love' art

Doctor: I knew he was dead

Drs. Ronald Jones and Robert McClelland were young surgeons at Dallas' Parkland Memorial Hospital when Kennedy visited the city. Friday, Nov. 22, was a day that began like any other, but it quickly changed after lunchtime.
"The president has been shot, and they're bringing him to the emergency room, and they needed doctors right away," Jones told Al Jazeera's Heidi Zhou-Castro while recounting the moments after Kennedy was shot.
"I saw Mrs. Kennedy sitting on a folding chair outside trauma room one, and so then I was horrified to realize that it was just what they had said it was, that the president had been shot," McClelland said.
JFK was covered in blood on a gurney, with his arms spread, eyes open.
"I couldn't get any sterile gloves," Jones said. "I opened the tray and (bare-handed) did a cut down and got an IV going in his left upper arm."
McClelland was the first to see Kennedy's head wound.
"The back half of the right side of his brain was gone," he said. "And as I stood there, the cerebellum, the lower part of the brain, fell out through the hole onto the cart. So this was obviously a fatal wound, nothing could be done about that."
Jones recounted to Al Jazeera how he was asked to deliver the fateful news.
"The Secret Service man came up with a badge in his hand," said Jones, "and identified himself and said, 'I need to call (FBI Director) J. Edgar Hoover and tell him the condition of the president,' and right behind him was Secret Service, and they said, 'I need to call Joseph Kennedy and tell him the condition of his son.' And right then I realized that Joseph Kennedy is going to get bad news, the whole world was going to find out that Kennedy was dead."
But Jones faced a dilemma. Jacqueline Kennedy had asked doctors to delay the death pronouncement until after the president, a Roman Catholic, received his last rites.
"So I told them he was not doing well, but I knew he was dead," Jones said.
Moments later a priest arrived, and Mrs. Kennedy entered the room. McClelland witnessed her goodbye to her husband.
"She stood there, she was very self-contained, stood there for a moment and exchanged a ring from her finger to the president's finger, and a ring from his finger to her finger," he said. "She leaned over and kissed his right foot and walked out."
Less than 48 hours later, both doctors would be operating on a dying Oswald. The men say they just did their jobs, while history unfolded on their operating table.

JFK remembered in Ireland

Kennedy
Click here for more on JFK: 50 years later.
On Thursday in Dublin, a half-dozen Irish soldiers toting guns with brilliantly polished bayonets formed a guard of honor outside the U.S. Embassy as the American flag was lowered to half-staff. An Irish army commander at the embassy drew a sword and held it aloft as a lone trumpeter played "The Last Post," the traditional British salute to war dead. A bagpiper played laments including "Amazing Grace." A U.S. Marine raised the flag again as the bugler sounded an upbeat reveille.
More than a dozen retired Irish army officers who, as teenage cadets, had formed an honor guard at Kennedy's graveside gathered in the front garden of the embassy to remember the first Irish-American to become president of the United States.
Together with Irish Foreign Minister Eamon Gilmore and embassy staff, they observed a minute's silence and laid two wreaths from the Irish and American governments in memory of JFK.
The former cadets invited by Jacqueline Kennedy to serve as the graveside honor guard described the awe — and fear — they experienced as they traveled to the United States 50 years earlier.
"We were young guys, all pretty much 18. We had no passports, no visas. None of us had flown before," said retired Col. Brian O'Reilly, 68. "We were told on the Saturday night we were wanted for the funeral. The next day, we were on the plane with our own president (Eamon de Valera) heading for Washington."
The day was crisp and windless, with trees full of autumn leaves and a cloudless blue sky, the sun blindingly low on the horizon.
Al Jazeera and The Associated Press 

Monday, July 9, 2012

Uranium Tipped Ordinances, Multiple Tours, and Brain Damage Hypothesized

There has been quite a bit written about our use of uranium tipped ordinance in the Middle East against the Iraqis, and our various enemies causing terrorist nuisances around the world. Personally, I don't have a problem with that, to hell with the enemy, and our job is to unite them with their so-called maker before they can make any problems for this great nation. War is no good, but if you're going to be in a war, you had better win it, and that means pulling out all the stops.
Okay so, that's where I stand on the use of these materials because they cut through armor and Earth like butter. We should be using the best of the best, and materials that work to ensure our strategic objectives in every single battle to fall in our favor, no matter what. Still, if we are using these types of weaponry in the battle space, and then putting our soldiers in harm's way, we also need to understand the potential eventualities and health hazards that come with that.
Slight radiation poisoning can cause all sorts of challenges with the human bio-system, including brain loss, cancers, and failures of vital organs. If US military personnel are in these battle spaces, and in and around depleted uranium expended ordinance, then we will have problems. Now then, let me go out on a limb here and ask a question; should we be surprised if some soldier or even our enemy loses rational thinking in future events because of the loss of mental faculties due to the use of such weapons?
My answer would be of course not, and I'm not pointing any fingers, but I'd like to bring up another point. CBS News had a segment on March 11, 2012 titled; "Obama shocked by Afghan shooting rampage," by Leigh Ann Caldwell. Okay so, President Obama is shocked? Really, because I'm not, not in the least, nor am I shocked with these other headlines;
CBS News had a segment on March 11, 2012 titled "Taliban vows revenge for Afghan shootings," by Mandy Clark
CBS News had a segment on March 12, 2012 titled "Shooting suspect from "most troubled" U.S. base."
Worse, it is interesting that the Taliban vows to revenge these Afghan shootings, when the shootings came from a soldier seeking revenge of attacks by the Taliban in the first place, supposedly over the destruction of religious works, Korans, which were burned because prisoners and members of the Taliban had written in the margins anti-American slander, and were passing information back and forth promoting hate and rationale as well as tactics and plans for killing Americans.
If this is just a war and a conflict about religious doctrine and revengeful hate going back and forth, then it will never end. Might I suggest that perhaps the only way to solve the problem and guarantee the protection of Americans is to eliminate the problem entirely and completely? In that case, I wonder if the soldier in question didn't come to that conclusion, and use his own firearm to serve that justice. These are unpleasant things to think about, but maybe it's time we did start thinking about such things, if we ever hope to solve our differences and problems.
Is it wrong to think the unthinkable, as far as I'm concerned war itself is unthinkable, and a needless waste of human lives, and certainly not be fitting for a species of such high intelligence, at the top of the food chain, and basically running the planet right now. Nevertheless, as I said before if we are going to have a war, we need to win it, and if we are willing to use the best weaponry to do that, then shouldn't we be willing to pull out all the stops and do what it takes to end the bloodshed by completing what we started. Please don't ever forget that on 9/11/2001 it was us in the United States who were attacked. I ask now; what have we accomplished?
Do we win the hearts and minds of those who hate us, or do we prevent them from ever trying to attack us again? If we can't convince them to be nice and get along in this world, and if this world isn't big enough for the two of us, then perhaps we need to start thinking the unthinkable, because that's exactly how they view us. Yes, that's not too politically correct, and you might have a problem with it, and I understand why, as I have a problem with it myself, and yet at some point we must realize the reality of the situation, and successfully protect our nation, and the American people. That comes first and foremost before anything else.

Crowd Sourcing Via Personal Tech Sensors for Potentially Harmful Substances


It seems that crowd sourcing is all the rage, and that makes sense because when you break very large and challenging problems into micro components, you get a little bit of work out of a whole bunch of people. But what if we got a whole bunch of work out of a whole bunch of personal tech smart phones?
Do you remember the SETI project where they allowed each individual on their giant network to donate their excess computer usage to help the processing of information? This distributive computing strategy allowed all of the participants to work as one giant supercomputer processing data. If you aren't familiar with the "SETI@Home Project" then you can look it up on the Internet.
Now then, what if we used a version of distributive computing, and crowd sourcing to provide a layer of protection against terror attacks on the United States of America - let me explain my plan, as I have in previous articles for the last 10 years, because I think this technology has now come to fruition, and we can make this happen. But first let me give you some background.
There was an interesting article recently on Homeland Security News titled; "Researcher develops highly sensitive, nanomaterial gas detector," published on March 12, 2012. It turns out a post graduate student at Rensselaer is using a graphene material sensor device to sense minute traces of hazardous gases. It might also be used to detect bomb materials for security. The article stated;
"He has created a device that is durable, inexpensive, and highly sensitive, and has created a range of new gas detectors for bomb squads, law enforcement officials, the military, and industry."
Okay so, what would I do with something like this? Well, I am glad you asked, because as I said above such a technology could save our nation from a terrible terrorist attack; we should put one of these little sensor devices embedded in every single smart phone. When it detects something, it would turn on the camera, and send a call out to the Department of Homeland Security Fusion Center alerting them of the GPS position, and the type of substance which was discovered.
They could then decide what the threat level was, and if it was something that needed to be taken care of right away. If it was just someone who was perhaps loading their own bullets at home, someone with a gun permit, it would be no big deal and skipped over, but if it looked like someone was putting together a bomb, or was at an airport, government building, or in a very populated place, then they could do something about it.
This means they can catch the terrorists while they were doing their bomb making, or while they were preparing to do a terrorist act. The uses in the battle space goes without comment, obviously it makes sense for that. For instance small lightweight UAVs, model aircraft size flying above the roadways in front of convoys, military personnel, or dignitaries. We need this technology, and we should use it to our advantage. And, perhaps we can do it in such a way where it doesn't disturb any innocent person's privacy. Please consider all this and think on it.

Innovative Dragon Skin Body Armor


New body armor designs are continuously being implemented, redefining the industry, and giving soldiers and law enforcement officers access to improved gear. Developed by Pinnacle Armor, Dragon Skin® is a certain type of body armor that provides the wearer with significant protection and upgrades against a host of ballistic weapons.
Dragon Skin® is incorporated in multiple products, including special knee armor and bullet proof vests. The knee pad version offers protection from armor-piercing ammo from handguns as well as high-velocity IED fragmentation. The chest armor looks a lot like an average bullet proof vest, with just the inside design unique. Small discs are connected and overlapped in an imbricated layout fashion, giving the appearance of what looks like dragon "scales." The ceramic and titanium blend material is highly flexible, bending and moving more than the human body is able to, while still offering the maximum protection.
Traditional ballistic armor that protects against armor piercing rifle rounds is usually really heavy and attaches to soft Kevlar® armor. After so many rounds the rigid ceramic plates tends to fracture and crack, leaving the soldier vulnerable to repetitive shot situations. Dragon Skin® has the capability of stopping multiple high-powered rifle rounds, while maintaining weightlessness and extreme flexibility. The layered design reduces trauma to the body by as much as 40 percent over standard hard armor, effectively dispersing the bullet's impact energy over a wider area than most other armors available.
In 2007 a test by Gunnery Sergeant R. Lee Ermey for the History Channel's program Mail Call trialed the vest with 150 9mm sub-machine gun rounds, and 20 AK-47 rounds. The latter test was undertaken with a mannequin from a distance of 20 feet, with none of the bullets actually piercing the vest. This test proved the manufacturer's claim that the vests will defeat substantial repetitive shots. Dragon Skin® was also showed in a 2007 episode of the Discovery Channel's Future Weapons: The Protectors. Another test of the armor featured multiple steel core, armor-piercing 556 mm and 762 mm rounds fired from an M-16 rifle at almost point blank range. As in the other television program, no bullets actually penetrated the vest.
Dragon Skin® has had its fair share of scrutiny as unreliable "body armor". These Bullet proof vests notably failed classified tests conducted by the U.S. Army in 2006. One test in particular showed that under extreme temperatures some of the disc had a tendency to dislodge. This made this brilliant vest ineffective against bullets. Also some rounds were also reported by Army officials as having penetrated the vest. Pinnacle Armor argued these claims and the Army took the most unusual step of releasing test results to the public in 2007. Despite the complete ban on Dragon Skin® purchases by the Army from March 2006 onward, it was reported by NBC News that elite forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, on VIP and General protection details, continued to wear these vests well after the ban was applied. This revelation, later confirmed by Army officials, added to the growing controversy and made arguments on both sides inconclusive. At the present, American-made Dragon Skin® armor is utilized primarily by soldiers in the U.S. Special Forces, approved foreign militaries, and police tactical teams. With costs significantly higher than that of Kevlar® and standard hard plate body armor, price may still be a significant factor in the overall limiting widespread military application of the Dragon Skin® product.

Are We Fighting With Our Hands Behind Our Backs in Afghanistan


Are our strategies of winning the hearts and minds of the Afghan people failing? Are the people afraid to stand up against the likes of the Taliban or ways of corruption so common to that area? If we leave, will the warlord practices of 3000 years simply return, and will their big income cash crop go back to being poppies? Yes. Okay so let's talk.
A year ago, I was having this conversation with an acquaintance and they asked me if I thought the way we were using our military there was smart, and if I thought our leaders were undermining our efforts. The reason I bring this up now is due to the recent problems; Koran burning, revenge attacks, and massacre on civilian Afghans.
Indeed, I would submit to you that we are not using our military effectively, that they are NOT the department of peace. It is okay to use the US Military for "Disaster Relief" but that is our decision, not the UNs, and even with that said, at the end of the day the US Military is the greatest military ever assembled, we need to use it wisely!
It's not a joke, war is serious, don't do it unless you really need too. Right now unfortunately, we do need to. And if we don't we are indeed, setting the world up for WWIII by our appeasement. History repeats, the UN falls aside like the League of Nations, and then no one is talking, venting, carrying on, and the paranoia starts and some lunatic comes along and all hell breaks loose.
What am I trying to say here? Simple, sometimes winning the hearts and minds isn't enough, sometimes, and unfortunately you have to make a decision. Either you don't get yourself involved in the conflict at all, or you confront the problem head-on, take action, and get it over with. During 9/11 the United States of America was attacked, that is unacceptable to Americans, and therefore we took action. But as soon as we did, we were infiltrated by a neo-liberal socialist mindset of political correctness.
You see, they don't understand political correctness in their part of the world, nor do they care. They must be laughing at us for the way we beat around the bush to achieve our objectives, all the while they're taking advantage of the situation. We can't fight a war with our hands behind our back, and we are fools to try. What should we do from here on out?
Well, I'm not privy to all the information at the upper echelon levels of leadership, but I would submit to you that whatever they think they're doing, and what they are actually doing, well, it's quite obvious it isn't working. Please consider all this and think on it.