Objective: IRAN

On Saturday, Israeli and American forces launched an aerial attack on Iran, hitting military targets as well as regime targets. President Trump told the Iranian people to take the opportunity to overthrow the mullahs and free themselves. This seems like a campaign to weaken Iran by tearing up their leadership, conventional capabilities, and nuclear infrastructure; while giving Iranian resistance to the mullahs the opportunity to exploit our ability to kill mullah people and things. We don’t know what the campaign will achieve yet, as I commented early.

Iran has been at war with America ever since the Islamic Revolution, starting with the seizure of the American embassy and continuing to today with terror and hostage-taking for profit. What part of "Death to America"--a.k.a. the "Great Satan"--has been unclear? While America has intermittently fought back, only now is the objective seemingly to crush the mullah regime. Or it is the Iran Punitive Mission?

Mission and Capabilities 

While America (and presumably Israel) would like the Iranian people to defeat the mullahs by exploiting our attacks on the regime, America is seemingly not tying our operations to their success, per the president: 

“When we are finished, take over your government. It will be yours to take. This will be probably your only chance for generations,” he said. 

We will strike to weaken Iran's government. The Iranian people will win or lose their parallel struggle. And we will end our strikes, hoping the Iranian people will defeat the mullah regime (now or eventually); but accepting a more narrow short-term victory that weakens Iran's military and governing capabilities. We will then wait for future opportunities to remove or neuter the Iranian mullah regime. 

We shall see if an intended short but glorious--or at least a short and useful--air war against the mullah regime pans out. The enemy gets a vote, of course, as I wrote about in this Land Warfare Paper about Iraq's ground invasion of Iran in 1980:

We must not underestimate our potential foes as the Iraqis did in 1980. They will be clever just as we are. They will believe in the cause for which they are fighting. And they, too, will fight to win. We cannot assume that the sight of an American soldier will panic our enemy and induce retreat and surrender in the same manner that Iraq thought the Iranians would collapse when confronted with Iraq's overwhelming invasion force.

There are limits to what an air campaign can achieve on the ground. Air power is great for flying over a land to kill people and break things. It is the modern version of cavalry sweeping through enemy territory burning and slashing their stuff. But while aircraft and missiles may fly over the ground freely in a very successful campaign, they cannot control the ground. 

And as an aside, even sea power (that in this case is supplementing the land-based air power) is limited. The bulk of a sustained air campaign must be done from and sustained from the ground. As our fight against the Barbary pirates revealed, a threat on the ground to the regime inflicts more fear than bombardment and blockade. I wrote about that in Army magazine ... last century.

How I'm so old yet so good looking is a miracle.

But I digress. 

And even a conventional ground campaign is no guarantee of success. Ask the Iraqis about how well there's went in 1980, as I discussed in this even older Land Warfare Paper. There are only limited ground missions that America (or our allies) can do to affect ground control in this campaign. 

Twenty years ago I described all the target sets we need to hit in something that is more than a one-off strike for a narrow target set (like the strikes last summer on Iran's nuclear facilities), and I concluded about that hypothetical strike:

This looks an awful lot like a war and not just a clean airstrike. Which is why my preference is to support internal forces for regime change. Lots, if not most, Iranians hate their government. But my first preference may not be possible. Either from our inability or from the lack of a determined internal opposition ready to fight for their future.

But when the alternative to what I've described is letting Iran go nuclear, a war by any other name is downright ideal.

America and Israel Strike 

Much depends on the ground in Iran. Are the Iranian people willing to fight to remove the mullah boot from their neck? And on the other side, what is the ability of Iranian security assets to remain united and their willingness to kill Iranians? Do we have knowledge of weakness and splits that we can push into the open?

I assume efforts--mostly by Israel--have been made to organize internal opposition, with smuggled Starlink terminals only the most open support; and to disrupt the Revolutionary Guards and explore the willingness of regular Iranian military forces to side with the people against the Revolutionary Guards.

The American attacks in the first 24 hours included command and control, Revolutionary Guard headquarters, air defense systems, ballistic missile sites, Iranian navy ships and submarines, anti-ship missile sites, and communications. These targets made the initial focus on the ability of the Iranians to resist the American and Israeli attacks. The top Iranian, the Ayatollah Khamenei, and numerous others leaders died in air attacks. 

Adding insult to injury, America used its reverse-engineered version of Iran's cheap Shahed suicide drone in the attack. Last December I noted that America sent that LUCAS weapon to CENTCOM. Army surface-to-surface missiles were part of the strikes.

It's early so I don't know what the Israeli targets are. Given past experience, I'd assume they are more focused on Iranian ballistic missile and offensive drone sites; as well as air defenses and command and control. But ISW reports this generally after one day:

The combined US-Israeli force has struck over 2,000 targets in Iran and achieved air superiority over Tehran. The combined force has continued to target Iranian internal security institutions responsible for maintaining stability and suppressing protests, including security forces along Iran’s northwestern borders with Turkey and Iraqi Kurdistan.

Combined with the CENTCOM target description, this may suggest the Israelis may have been initially more focused than we were on Iranian internal security capabilities. Perhaps because the Israelis have more communication with dissidents, separatists, and insurrectionists. But I'm speculating. This is interesting in that light:

Specifically, it seems that Israel’s mission was decapitation while Washington’s seemed more bent on destroying offensive missiles and drones.

Six Americans have been killed by Iranian attacks on land-based American troops near Iran; and in a friendly fire incident three American F-15E strike aircraft were shot down by Kuwaiti air defenses. Luckily all six crew ejected and survived (from CENTCOM).

Deconfliction procedures must be tightened up in Kuwait's role in shooting down Iranian ballistic missiles aimed at our bases in Kuwait. 

Iran's missile attacks on the territory of neighboring Arab countries has been weak, but enough to stiffen their apparent lukewarm attitude toward taking on Iran in this campaign. Unless their public reticence was either out of caution or for misleading the Iranians. 

President Trump said that any Iranian military or security forces who surrender will not be punished; and that Iranian officials moving into empty leadership slots are willing to talk to him. I assume this is part of an effort to sow confusion in the degraded communications environment and make security forces and leaders wonder if others will cut a deal with America and throw them under the bus.

And America announced that oil traffic out of the Persian Gulf should stop lest the Iranian attack the tankers. 

Since then, the war has continued. ISW is devoting resources to tracking the campaign, which for now is unclear on what it will achieve. Or how effectively Iran can fight. 

Why Now and Why No Broad Coalition of the Willing? 

And in standard operating procedure for many critics of American military action, on the first day of the attacks I began to see people arguing that while of course the Iranian regime is awful and deserves to die, is it really a priority for America when Russia is at war with Ukraine and China is a growing threat?

FFS. We and our allies are containing Russia's invasion of Ukraine; and we and our allies are still building up to stop China from starting or winning a war. I think we can count on allies to hold those lines with a bit less support from America for a while.

Iran is an active threat right now and preventing mullahs from getting nuclear weapons--we don't want a nuclear 9/11--is absolutely the priority right now regardless of the long term problem of China and the ongoing Russia problem. And we do recognize the power that their nuclear weapons give them to constrain our actions, right? We don't want mullah-run Iran to have that power, too, do we? 

Conversely, we did not insist that our allies in Europe and Asia participate in our attacks on Iran. Division of labor is not abandonment of allies. Although Britain, per their prime minister, has stood up with air defense efforts to block Iranian missile attacks in CENTCOM. And later, Britain, France, and Germany signaled support for American military operations to stop Iranian retaliatory strikes.

Too many people making the "Iran is the wrong priority right now" argument effectively support American paralysis by always looking for Mister Good War in the face of a current threat:

[The] war we are in is never as good as the last war we fought or the potential war against the "real" threat we aren't fighting.  

And from a different angle, advice to focus on the strongest threat to the exclusion of any other threat is really saying we should not go for weak points in an enemy alliance--or alignment, as I prefer. I recall that at one time military theorists claimed it was best to go after the strongest section of the enemy defenses on the theory that once you break that, all else will be easy. That was incorrect thinking for reasons I shouldn't have to explain.

But hey, at least that "wrong enemy right now" theory isn't the bizarre defense of the mullah regime all too common in the West from the usual suspects as if Iran is the land of frolicking puppies, kittens, and ducklings. 

The odious Iranian regime has been at war with America since their revolution nearly fifty years ago. What part of "Great Satan" (and "Death to America") has been unclear? As I note in that post, if the mullahs fall many American objectives will be at least a bit less difficult to pursue. 

Waiting For the Outcome to Define the Campaign 

Good hunting to American forces. And let's keep our guard up at home and at bases abroad. You never know when the Iranians will pack civilian shipping containers with missiles or masses of suicide drones to strike far from their shores. Or simple naval mines. Enemies do funny things at war. It's almost like they want to win rather than seek off ramps and finely crafted exit strategies.

It is not clear if this will be the Iranian Counter-Revolution of 2026 or the Iran Punitive Mission of 2026. 

Either could be called a win even if the latter isn't nearly as good as the former that actually ends the long war Iran's mullahs have waged on America, Israel, and Arab states. Think Desert Fox in 1998 under Clinton or the Libya War under Obama.

Problems will flow from instability should the stability of a cemetery that the mullahs provided collapses. Heck, this could be the break up of the rump Persian Empire. But the benefits would be tremendous for cutting this Gordian Knot.

NOTE: TDR Winter War of 2022 coverage continues here. 

NOTE: You may also like to read my posts on Substack, at The Dignified Rant: Evolved. Go ahead and subscribe to it. It's the right thing to do!

NOTE: Basic map image from (obviously) WorldAtlas.com

NOTE: I duplicated this post on Substack. But if I update this going forward, it will be this version. 

The Winter War of 2022 Looks Inward--and Worries

The Russians are seemingly extending more effort to gain control of internal information production and distribution even if it harms military operations against Ukraine. Huh.

The war goes on. I hoped Ukraine might have a strategic reserve to mount a counteroffensive to exploit Russian casualties and communications problems. But on the bright side, they are at least doing what I've long hoped they could achieve as a Plan B--local, sharp counter-attacks against the spearheads of Russian attacks to punish the Russians for pushing forward away from their trenches and support.

Notwithstanding Ukraine's local initiative, Russia continues planning for a spring offensive:

Russian forces have likely begun artillery and drone preparation of the battlefield for the anticipated Russian Spring-Summer 2026 offensive against Ukraine’s Fortress Belt in Donetsk Oblast.

At some point the Ukrainians have to stop trying to advance and start digging in lest their counter-attacks simply make them more exposed to the Russian offensive. 

Well that's interesting:

The Kremlin has been intensifying its efforts in recent weeks to restrict access to Telegram, WhatsApp, and other Western social media platforms, news sites, and internet services as part of broader efforts to regain control over the Russian information space and dismantle the open internet in Russia. The Kremlin has been manufacturing justifications to ban Telegram in order to coerce Russian citizens to abandon other messaging apps for the state-controlled messenger app Max. The Kremlin may use its expanded powers to create an information blackout in the event of a possible mobilization or to further tighten state control over the Russian information space.

The military impact of Russia losing access to its Starlink terminals has been well covered. I don't hear as much now about the impact of restricting Telegram use which Russian troops had adopted for communications. Or is Max working as a substitute for Telegram? If so, it doesn't seem to have coped with the loss of Starlink, too.

The interesting part is why Putin has ordered this despite the impact on his invasion. Is it to block public online expressions of dissent for a future mobilization? Just the fact that Putin is worried about that reaction is significant apart from the need to supplement recruitment with mobilization of civilians for the military's attrition campaign. Putin is not acting like a confident tsar:

The recent intensification of this campaign suggests that Russian President Vladimir Putin may not be as confident in his regime’s stability entering the fifth year of his war in Ukraine as he was earlier on.

Why is Putin worried about public dissent now? His regime has coped with that well enough so far. Is Putin really more worried that people in power are unhappy with the war? Might people blame Putin and the war for their growing problems?

With the Ukraine War taking half the government budget, the [Russian] government had to reduce what was usually spent on many items essential for the population. 

Does he worry they could use Telegram and other social media platforms to exploit public online dissent in order to lead a coup under cover of public protest? And to rally support for the coup?

As Austin Bay writes:

I made this recommendation in a March 2022 column: "The best way out of this stupid, murderous war -- for Russians, for Ukrainians, the rest of the world, including greedy oligarchs -- isn't more sanctions or more war. The way out for the oligarchs is a Kremlin coup toppling Putin. The gallows humorists call it a nine-millimeter solution -- a bullet to the insane man's head."

Once we worried a coup could be by a pro-war faction eager to fully wage the war. At this point, is anybody unhappy about Putin really convinced that Putin hasn't warred hard enough? 

Sheer speculation on my part. But this crackdown is different. Why is it different? 

How interesting are these times?

NOTE: ISW updates continue here. 

NOTE: Also, I put war-related links and commentary in the Weekend Data Dump on Substack. You may read my posts on Substack, at The Dignified Rant: Evolved.

NOTE: Image from here.

Weekend Data Dump

I'm duplicating the Weekend Data Dump on Substack. You can read it there if you prefer. Or if you really want to comment online.

Help me out by subscribing on Substack and by liking and sharing posts. I occasionally post short data dump-type items on my Substack "Notes" section. 

In case you missed it on Substack: A Land Mission in the Persian Gulf

In case you missed it on Substack: Europe is a Crucial Staging Area

In case you missed it on Substack: Blood, Mud, and New Technology

In case you missed it on Substack: Strengthening Both Pillars of the Trans-Atlantic Alliance

The shockingly bloody 1859 Battle of Solferino led to the Red Cross and “the Geneva Convention of 1864, the first international treaty to establish legal protections for wounded soldiers and medical personnel.” Sadly, proliferating NGOs have become the logistics arm of war factions.

This last week Team USA defeated the Canadian men’s and women’s hockey teams to win gold medals; and Canada discovered its per capita GDP is less than Alabama’s, our poorest state. I think we can kiss that F-35 sale to Canada goodbye. You’re welcome, Sweden.

Securing the Western Hemisphere: “A major Mexican resort town was under siege on Sunday as drug cartels lashed out after the leader of the brutal Jalisco New Generation Cartel was killed in a military raid, authorities said.” Alert “Blackjack” Pershing.

The Axis of El Vil crumbles: “Cuban security advisers and doctors have been leaving Venezuela as Interim President Delcy Rodriguez's government faces intense pressure from Washington[.]”

Russia provided Venezuela a lot of weapons. It would be hilarious if one form of American aid was sending S-300 SAMs and “dozens of Su-30 jet fighters, hundreds of armored vehicles including T-90 tanks and scores of artillery systems, mainly multiple rocket launchers” to Ukraine.

American relations with African states wouldn’t suffer from “history” so much if we didn’t fixate on our slavery—that we ended at high human cost—to the exclusion of African slaves sent to the Islamic world in larger numbers (with no surviving ancestors) and the Africans who sold the slaves.

This ignores a great difference: “Trump’s performance on the other current challenge by a major U.S. adversary–Russia’s invasion of Ukraine–does not provide comfort to the government and people of Taiwan.” Taiwan is our main defense line. Ukraine is well forward of our main line of resistance.

The Mexican-American War. My view is that is was impressive militarily; in line with contemporary norms that Mexico shared; and that Mexico’s inherited and largely sparsely populated imperial territory inherited from Spanish imperialism denies them sainthood.

An American-Israeli strike on Iran must include targeting defensive and offensive missiles. The other targets will tell us if we are trying to destroy or weaken the mullah-run government. Will we emphasize Iranian internal security assets or hit economic and power projection targets?

Will Trump choose a deal with Xi that sacrifices Taiwan? Trump’s ambivalence about defending Taiwan is part of a long line of ambiguity—America doesn’t want to give Taiwan the power to provoke China and drag America into a war.

More on the cartel-related violence in Mexico.

This is true: “The A-10 Thunderbolt II (‘Warthog’) Isn’t Just an Airplane — It’s a Promise Kept to Ground Troops”. It was always about trust and not the plane, which in fairness is very old. I’d settle for F-35 dedicated close air support squadrons.

Russian aircraft nose around former Russian territory: “Five Russian aircraft were intercepted by the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) while flying near the Alaskan coast Thursday.”

Amidst trans-Atlantic kerfuffles, that’s boring (other than to the sailor): “Denmark’s military said its arctic command forces evacuated a crew member of a U.S. submarine off the coast of Greenland for urgent medical treatment.”

Will Russia pay for North Korean military help by sharing nuclear weapons technology? Maybe. But it is something China should worry about, too.

Let’s end that talk about America siding with Russia, okay? “A new Army National Guard unit took over the training of Ukrainian forces in Bavaria this week[.]”

Drug boat goes boom.

It’s a dangerous region: “A major war is imminent in East Africa.” I’ve been worried.

Sure, side with the communist tyranny: “Canada announced Monday that it is working on an aid package for Cuba as it faces blackouts and severe fuel shortages worsened by a U.S oil embargo.”

American special forces are training for Arctic warfare. Good.

I thought this was old news: “Russia's SVR foreign intelligence agency has taken over mercenary group Wagner's influence operations in Africa[.]”

Coincidence? “Iran was rocked by fresh protests across its universities over the weekend as fears rise of US military intervention against the Tehran regime.”

If the CCP implements policies to encourage it, will the people trust the CCP enough to spend rainy day savings? “As China’s rate of economic growth slows, the country’s leaders have become increasingly concerned that the economy remains overly dependent on investment- and export-driven growth.”

Sh*t got real: “U.S. State Department on Monday ordered all non-emergency personnel and their families to evacuate from the American Embassy in Beirut, Lebanon.” Tip to Instapundit.

Expanding the fleet better not require increasing personnel: “The American navy, like most other navies, is suffering from a shortage of new personnel, causing a problem with providing ships with enough sailors.”

Russia is touchy about their Barents Sea SSBN bastion. Indeed. Tip to OPFOR Journal.

How can the Navy bolster sailor retention by shortening their second cruise when first-cruise sailors are part of the crew?

The Coast Guard is mostly coping with the Homeland Security funding cutoff from the political funding battle.

2027: “The Air Force and Northrop Grumman have struck a $4.5 billion deal to speed up production of B-21 bombers by 25 percent.”

C-130 variant: “The Pentagon has secured $194 million to build the first of a fleet of new ski planes that will support troops flying over the Arctic and Antarctic.”

America and Japan exercised to set up outposts on Japan’s Ryukyu Islands prior to any war. A2/AD isn’t a monopoly of China’s.

South Korea complained to America about the recent U.S.-China aerial standoff over the Yellow Sea?

Delivering blood with drones [video].

Canada and Denmark both use MQ-9B drones, which may provide a basis for cooperation in Arctic ISR.

The Army wants its 600-mile range Precision Strike Missile (PrSM) anti-ship variant faster. Also, moving ground targets.

Designed to thwart submarines, “the ADC MK6 generates acoustic signatures that confuse and divert incoming torpedoes, adding a critical layer of undersea protection.” Is there a weakness to exploit?

Is a Compact of Free Association between America and an independent Greenland really superior to just working with NATO ally Denmark and its Greenland possession to define increased American usage of the island?

As the crisis over Iran’s mullah regime grows, “nobody cares about the EU. Because it has simply become insignificant.” That’s good for America—and for Europeans who value freedom. European countries should want to be significant actors.

Is Peru on track to align with America and reject China?

Is optimism over Lebanon disarming the Hezbollah state-within-a-state justified?

Can Mexico treat the disease rather than the symptoms? “The Mexican state will continue to offer up big-name cartel figures ad infinitum, but their elimination alone changes little. What would be transformative is bringing to account the politicians who enable, protect and promote cartels.”

Congress recommends policies to end the persecution of Christians in Nigeria. The broader problem is—as a kindergarten teacher might say—that Islam doesn’t play well with other children.

Does “Europe” want to be Western? Well, "Western civilization” predates the spread of democracy and freedom. But if you mean a free West, “Europe” as defined as the EU absolutely does not. But many Europeans who the EU fanboys fear and despise do.

Smuggling Starlink terminals into Iran had something to do with this: “Students at Iran's Sharif University of Technology launched a new wave of anti-regime protests over the weekend, calling for Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei's death and clashing with government security forces[.]”

Via Instapundit, some random guy inadvertently took control of 7,000 Chinese-made robot vacuum cleaners. Suddenly my F-35 pucker factor skyrockets. I know ALIS was replaced. But the plane is very networked.

If we don’t deal with Iran now, the next time will be harder: “Iran is close to a deal with China ‌to purchase anti-ship cruise missiles[.]”

The Ukrainians and Russians are exploiting UGVs for logistics and rescue missions. That does seem promising. But I am not impressed with UGVs as a replacement for armored combat vehicles.

Ukraine has become a “steel porcupine.” Sorry, that’s not nearly good enough.

Docking? Why? “The USS Gerald R. Ford, the world’s largest aircraft carrier, is set to dock in Haifa as part of US reinforcements in the Middle East, amid rising tensions with Iran.” I wondered if Ford was bringing something vital. Is it delivering something?

Soviet UFO fans inadvertently alerted America to Soviet attempts to bypass American missile radars by sending nukes over the South Pole.

Sure: “Russia is betting on its submarines and experimental nuclear weapons to make up for the smaller military force that it fields compared to NATO, a top Norwegian military official told Business Insider.” Sea nukes defended by subs. It’s Russia’s only hope.

Survival of the fittest Ukrainian brigades in combat. Help from family and friends is interesting, as I addressed in this post about digital camp followers.

“Battleships” and ship class evolution.

What’s going on in France? Tip to Instapundit.

Fascinating that Russia’s KIA seems to be about four to eight times greater than Ukraine’s. Ukraine eventually explicitly organized its defenses to kill Russian troops as the priority over holding (or liberating) territory.

Also—and you don’t see me slapping my forehead—Trump’s Board of Peace for Gaza that sidelines the United Nations has the feature of escaping a Chinese or Russian (of French?) Security Council veto. Well played, sir.

Did the Pentagon warn Trump that military action against Iran will make the U.S. military’s magazines too empty to fight China? If I may be so bold, if that warning was given, it is also true that America doesn’t have enough to fight China even if we don’t attack Iran.

In space, nobody can hear you experiment: “China's reusable space plane is circling Earth once again.”

Simply surviving in the Arctic is a skill to learn even before you test your skills and equipment in EOD in that environment.

A pilot in an experimental aircraft turned over control to an AI to evade a simulated missile attack. And AI for the F-35. Is the future going to be C/Fe rather than C or Fe?

I can see low-threat fronts being held by 12 troops on a 5-10 km. front, but I suspect the infantry shortage is real but exaggerated by the examples given. I’ve also read that on Ukraine’s 1200 km. front they have built 2200 platoon strongpoints to hold the line.

Rising sun: “Japan plans to deploy upgraded air defense missiles on its westernmost island — within sight of Taiwan — by 2031[.]”

Israel decided not to let their officers’ cars spy on them for China.

South Korea’s bunker-busting precision ballistic missile will have to do for coping with North Korea. Until South Korea puts nuclear warheads on them.

The Marines are buying a mobile light mortar system. I had to find an article about the Army looking at it to see it is an 81mm weapon. Before (and after) small drones, mortars allowed infantry to reach out and touch someone.

There’s some validity to this: “From China’s perspective, sustained Iran-U.S. tension – short of full-scale war – can be strategically advantageous.” But don’t let it stray into Looking for Mister Good War paralysis in the face of a massive threat.

The importance of Taiwan’s integrated air defense system.

Excellent overview of trade policy and tariffs for national security purposes since 1945. No less true even if Congress must put that presidential weapon on a broader legislative foundation.

Threat: “Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps Ground Forces units held an exercise on February 24 at the Madinah ol Munawarah Operational Base near the Strait of Hormuz[.]” Shield?

Toss in the fact that the mullahs have been waging war on us for nearly fifty years and this sums it up: “In his speech, Trump pointed to Tehran's support for militant groups, its killing of protesters and the country's missile and nuclear programs as threats to the region and the United States.”

The threats of Russia, China, and jihadis couldn’t get Canadians to enlist or spend more on defense. But the threat of Trump did the trick? Whatever. LOL.

Egad. If NASA can’t restore its culture of innovation that works that led to landing on the Moon, perhaps it should just be the minor league team for the private space companies. Tip to Instapundit.

Self-criticism is good. Self-hate is not: “Sracic said that the West has been engaged in years of self-criticism. ‘Instead of focusing on our achievements, we have been obsessed with our sins,’ he noted. ‘This has undermined our confidence and our unity.’” Tip to Instapundit.

Not sure what happened, but if American civilians in a boat decided to shoot it out with a Cuban patrol boat a mile from Cuba’s coast, that was fatally stupid. But we’ll see.

I reject the military punishing Senator Kelly as a retired officer still subject to the UCMJ for his “unlawful orders” video. But the video was hyper-partisan. To avoid conflict of duties, retired officers serving in Congress or other partisan national office should resign their commission and forfeit their pension.

Troops of the Army’s 2nd Brigade Combat Team of the 3rd Infantry Division (armored) practice to integrate small FPV drones into armored combat.

Friends in need recognized our help: “Six pilots and crew from a New York National Guard helicopter unit made a pair of flights into an active firefight in 2023 to rescue a team of French special forces soldiers who had been ambushed by Islamic State fighters.”

The HAVOC conventional hypersonic missile can be launched from ground, air, sea, and space launchers. The story implies the military will get this. Also, thus far China and Russia work on nuclear hypersonics while Congress bars such work here—for now.

A CRS report to Congress on Yemen and Red Sea security.

Sh*t got real: “Several countries have begun withdrawing dependents of diplomatic personnel and non-essential staff from some locations in the Middle East, or advising citizens to avoid travel to Iran[.]”

A reminder that defeating an enemy in the Arctic first requires our troops to defeat the Arctic itself long enough to fight the enemy.

I resent the claim that America redefined its alliances by requiring allies to do enough for their defense to earn our help. One, it is practical. A weak ally may not survive long enough for us to help it. And two, haven’t weak allies already redefined the alliance into one where we fight and they don’t?

The U.S. deployed F-16s and a Burke-class destroyer to Diego Garcia. Just in case the Iranians have long-range suicide drones. I assume the F-16s have counter-drone rocket pods. I think an A-Whacks plane would be better.

Is using a UAV to spoof other aircraft a Chinese test to disguise drones during an attack on Taiwan? Maybe. But if Taiwan sees hundreds (or thousands) of innocent airliners heading to Taiwan, they’ll suspect something is off.

Is war going to return to Ethiopia’s Tigray province?

Is China’s future a nightmare and not a dream? “Behind the Chinese illusion of strength lies a Soviet-style system sustained by subsidy, suppression, and the ongoing exhaustion of its own foundations[.]” The essay says China is following the USSR’s economic development path. Could be right.

We assume Xi’s military purges are about corruption: “In China, corruption in military procurement is an ancient and destructive tradition.” I start from the assumption that the PLA’s primary mission is to preserve CCP control of China.

Keeping the ships moving.

The Pentagon-Anthropic dispute.

The 45th U.S-Thailand Cobra Gold exercise once again kicks off—with 30 countries participating.

Space Force: “Officials insist there are no plans to deploy troops in orbit, but commercial infrastructure and cislunar ambitions are reshaping the debate[.]” I patiently await SMOD.

Star Orbital Wars.

On the bright side, we can shoot down small drones along our border.

The Army ordered a lot of Switchblade suicide anti-tank drones.

Sounds good to me: “The Royal Navy’s First Sea Lord Gen. Sir Gwyn Jenkins plans to hold a Navy summit in April as he calls on his service to take the lead in uniting Northern European navies against Russia’s growing threat in the Arctic and Atlantic.”

Remember when Pakistan backed the Taliban against America in Afghanistan? “Pakistan declared “open war” Friday on Afghanistan, after the two South Asian neighbors traded overnight attacks in a sharp escalation of their long-running dispute.”

AI is not a military planning breakthrough. Maybe stop calling it Artificial Intelligence. Call it Artificial FUBAR.

Is Cuba’s communist government shaky enough to fall?

We’ve had liberty so long that too many have forgotten to value it: “The real problem is the decline of the idea of liberty itself, as a governing principle, and of its advocates and defenders.” This is what Vance was talking about.

Apparently, China’s new carrier cannot launch and recover aircraft at the same time, meaning its sortie generation is just 60% of a Nimitz class.

Sh*t got real as America orders non-emergency staff and families in theIsrael embassy to evacuate.

Will Europeans replace the enablers that America’s military brings to the table to knit European NATO capabilities together?

Suspicious Russian real estate purchases in Finland. I assume this is a problem throughout the West. We really should all closely scrutinize such deals.

Here we go: “The US and Israel have launched an attack on Iran.” It appears one purpose is to give Iranians the chance to overthrow the mullah regime. But without tying our objective to their success. Targets hit may tell us if we think the mullah regime will fall.

Despite Ukraine’s modifications to the Abrams tanks it has received to counter drone attacks, Ukraine has failed to operate them in a combined arms team—the ultimate means of protection and lethality.

Shield: “Israel is to call up around 70,000 reservists, most of them air defence specialists and home guard troops, a military spokesman said on Saturday.”

Exactly! “The development of sophisticated anti-missile and counter-drone platforms could reintroduce maneuver warfare to Ukraine—and modern war planning more generally.”

Kharg Island has been a big target question for me. Destroying the oil export hub would hurt the mullahs. But it would also hurt a new government if the mullahs fall. Apparently we narrowly hit a power plant, meaning the hub is down but more easily restored.

Reading views of people I respect on the Iran strikes (or any other issue) doesn’t offend me. I view their differing views as challenges to my analysis and not a personal attack. Or they’re just wrong, of course—but not evil. I annoy people across the spectrum, so it is really a survival strategy.

I hope the Pentagon is alert to the potential threat worldwide from Iran using missiles or masses of small drones fired from standard shipping containers hidden on civilian ships.

Going to note that hurting Iran will reduce Iran’s ability to supply Russia with weapons and ammunition to hurt Ukraine.

The West’s real rare earths problem is not sources of the plentiful resources—it is processing that China dominates.

A kindergarten teacher would say Islam doesn’t play well with other religions: “Nigerian Christians are being slaughtered. Call it genocide.”

Chinese biolabs in America seem like a big effing deal to me.

The Speed Bump For Victory

The Chinese have two missions if they want to capture Taiwan. Defeat Taiwan and delay America. China worked on the latter mission.

China is using its increased reach at sea to isolate Taiwan from outside support:

[Three] months ago, China conducted its most elaborate live wargames around Taiwan. This included live firing exercises in international waters near Taiwan. This was a Chinese demonstration of its ability to cut Taiwan off from American, South Korean, and Japanese support. China declared that the recent exercises were meant to discourage outside support. 

This has long been part of what I've considered the key factor in a Chinese conquest of Taiwan:

As I've droned on repeatedly here, China does not need to defeat America to conquer Taiwan. China needs to defeat Taiwan to conquer Taiwan. And to defeat Taiwan, China only needs to delay our intervention long enough to defeat and conquer Taiwan. This is a far less difficult mission than deterring America or defeating us. 

And one means to delay the U.S. Navy by sacrificing an old PLA aircraft carrier might be seen as a victory--until we realize too late it wasn't. 

And I don't think we really appreciate a Chinese victory doesn't require conquering all of Taiwan, as I addressed in Military Review.

NOTE: TDR Winter War of 2022 coverage continues here. 

NOTE: You may also like to read my posts on Substack, at The Dignified Rant: Evolved. Go ahead and subscribe to it. It's the right thing to do!

NOTE: I made the image with Bing. I gave up after repeatedly trying to get the video screen to show a sinking Chinese carrier. Refine it too much and Bing won't create your "violent" image.

Strengthening Both Pillars of the Trans-Atlantic Alliance

Because Substack apparently doesn't allow search engines to identify articles there, I'm going to try publishing the introduction here and see what happens. 

The defense of Europe must reflect a very simple observation that America cannot care more about defending Europe than Europeans care. Defense spending and capability are the relevant measure of caring. Is Europe willing to adjust to an era when threats to Europe are small enough to reduce the need for American military power in Europe in contrast to the need from 1917 to 1991? The threat to Europe is real. But after two world hot wars and a world cold war, the military threat to Europe is small enough that America can watch from afar with only a framework of power in Europe as an insurance policy. This is not abandoning Europe. This is partnering with Europe.

Read the rest here. 

The Charge of the Light Brigades (and Regiments)

The Marines lightened up the entire corps; and the Army followed more narrowly with the new "agile" mobile brigades. Enemies will chew them up in combat.

I wrote about my concerns about the Marine Force Design 2030 changes, including getting rid of its tanks. And I'm sick that the Army has watched that and thought, "Let's do that, too!"

Ukraine slaughters with suicide drones the Russian troops attacking in civilian vehicles little different from the Infantry Squad Vehicle. But if you use enough adjectives, the vehicles will save American infantry from that threat! Face it, the units will be slaughtered in heavy combat. It’s like the Army adopted Force Design delusions. 

Although to be fair, the Army has not abandoned armored brigades.

Still, let's review my thoughts the last time the Army thought its number one mission was getting overseas rather than winning once on the ground there. 

NOTE: TDR Winter War of 2022 coverage continues here. 

NOTE: You may also like to read my posts on Substack, at The Dignified Rant: Evolved. Go ahead and subscribe to it. It's the right thing to do!

Blood, Mud, and New Technology

Because Substack apparently doesn't allow search engines to identify articles there, I'm going to try publishing the introduction here and see what happens. 

A British Army battalion is going all-in on using drones. Listen to the commander. You won’t hear panty-flinging enthusiasm for making the job of infantry obsolete.

Read the rest here. 

America Needs to Remain in Europe

America is not planning on walking away from Europe and NATO despite the cacophony of voices claiming NATO is--or should be--dead. 

It is in America's national security interest to remain in NATO. But that’s not what the Best and Brightest are telling me: 

American policymakers are telling European leaders not to expect major U.S. troop drawdowns anytime soon, according to seven U.S. and NATO officials, calming widespread fears across the continent’s capitals.

European officials have worried President Donald Trump would call home tens of thousands of American soldiers to encourage countries to spend more on their own defense as the Pentagon focuses on the Western Hemisphere.

Any near-term reductions would likely be from the rotational reinforcements that were sent in response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Since then, Russia has done far more harm to the Russian ground forces than one or two American combat brigades could inflict.

I think a number of European officials stoke worries to sabotage the trans-Atlantic relationship for their own purposes. And there are Americans who would do the same while pretending not to. 

I've long supported a robust if limited American presence in Europe for a couple main reasons (starting on p. 15). Face it, America still needs NATO to defend the Atlantic. And to project power into and through Europe, as America has been doing to cope with Iran.

America's continuing European role fits in with the modern three reasons for NATO, in general.

NOTE: TDR Winter War of 2022 coverage continues here. 

NOTE: You may also like to read my posts on Substack, at The Dignified Rant: Evolved. Go ahead and subscribe to it. It's the right thing to do!

NOTE: Photo from the article.

NOTE: My Redundancy Editor of Redundancies edited a sentence from the original post.

Europe is a Crucial Staging Area

Because Substack apparently doesn't allow search engines to identify articles there, I'm going to try publishing the introduction here and see what happens. 

American power abroad is a multiple of American power in the United States and the ability to project it great distance. If either part of that equation is weak, America does not have effective power abroad to support friends and defeat enemies. Europe is an under-appreciated power projection platform for getting relevant power closer to enemies. Presidents in a crisis may very well ask “Where are the carriers?” But what they really need to know is where are the land airbases?

Read the rest here. 

The Air Force Joins the Ship-Killing Club

Billy Mitchell claimed land-based air power made ships obsolete. Perhaps the Air Force can at least thin the PLA Navy herd once it leaves port.

This is a good addition to Air Force long-range bomber payloads:

Derived from the company’s widespread guided-bomb kit, the JDAM LR will be able to strike targets or deliver minefields out to 300 nautical miles, effectively converting the Mark 82 warhead into a long-range cruise missile. The variant was previously known as the Powered JDAM in 2023, with Boeing updating its information pamphlet to the new designation this year and at WEST 2026.

Maritime strike, Quickstrike aerial-launched mines and baseline strike variants are planned. A decoy variant without the warhead extends the range to 700 nautical miles. The inclusion of the fuel tank, engine and spaces for optional attachments has greatly increased the length of JDAM LR.

Having Air Force assets outside of bases easily attacked by China's aircraft and missiles on the mainland is a potent addition to America's arsenal. This Thin Blue Line is crucial.

NOTE: TDR Winter War of 2022 coverage continues here. 

NOTE: You may also like to read my posts on Substack, at The Dignified Rant: Evolved. Go ahead and subscribe to it. It's the right thing to do!

NOTE: Image from the article.

A Land Mission in the Persian Gulf

Because Substack apparently doesn't allow search engines to identify articles there, I'm going to try publishing the introduction here and see what happens. 

The focus in the United States over the Iran crisis has been on air attacks on Iran. A ground invasion against such a large and populous country is not an option. But could ground forces be decisive in the Strait of Hormuz to hold open oil export routes? 

Read the rest here. 

The Million-Man Swim Takes Shape

Will China invade Taiwan without relying on heavy tanks? That fits with my view on how China will throw an invasion force across the Taiwan Strait.

This is interesting:

Chinese strategists believe infantry is better suited for fighting in Taiwan’s mountainous and urban terrain, according to an analysis by Lyle Goldstein, director of the Asia Program at the Defense Priorities think tank in Washington, D.C. Perhaps more important, infantry and light vehicles could be transported by China’s vast fleet of civilian ships, rather than needing special landing craft to carry armored vehicles.

One aspect I have doubts about is using China's fishing boat militia to move light infantry to Taiwan. How would the congestion off the beaches and chaos on the beaches for the numbers he is talking about be avoided? Invading is way different than evacuating like at Dunkirk in 1940. 

Although his airborne spearhead of air drops and helicopters makes sense to me in an invasion that  lands troops by many means. Offensive and defensive fires for the bridgeheads could be provided from offshore.

And yes, I too worry about the quality of Taiwan's ground forces. Just seeing a major PLA force ashore could demoralize the defenders. 

Even if Taiwansese troop moral holds, if the PLA gets ashore and digs in, that might be victory enough even without the heavy armor to drive on Taipei, as I wrote in Military Review.

NOTE: TDR Winter War of 2022 coverage continues here. 

NOTE: You may also like to read my posts on Substack, at The Dignified Rant: Evolved. Go ahead and subscribe to it. It's the right thing to do!  

NOTE: Photo of Dunkirk from Rare Historical Photos.