Defense Issues

Military and general security

    Advertisements
  • Follow Defense Issues on WordPress.com
  • Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 252 other followers

  • March 2019
    M T W T F S S
    « Jan   Apr »
     123
    45678910
    11121314151617
    18192021222324
    25262728293031
  • Categories

  • Advertisements

Archive for March, 2019

Military recruitment and service model

Posted by picard578 on March 31, 2019

Military training is mandatory for all able-bodied individuals – or individuals who can be made able-bodied. Preparatory training starts in the elementary school. Recruitment age is 18 years old as standard, with minimum of 16 years and maximum of 40 years of age, but longer service is not unknown. Draft is carried out at 18 years of age, though it may be done earlier or later based on circumstances. Draft may be deferred for a maximum of two years due to high school education, or else carried out early in case of early end of education. After being drafted, soldier undergoes one to two years of training (1 year basic + 1 year specialist/officer). Under normal conditions only a portion of recruits proceed to active service while the remainder are sent straight into Reserves. Normal service time in standing military is 4 years with additional 28 years in reserves, or else 32 years in reserves (numbers include training). After two-year active service, contract can be renewed for four years, and every four years afterwards. If contract is not renewed, person is transferred to reserves. This makes immediate expansion of an active force a simple matter of contract renewal; or non-renewal, if it is to be reduced. Alternative possibility for expansion, used when there is greater lead-up to crisis (e.g. a war that had been incoming for a time), is to simply increase the number of conscripts retained.

Reserve consists of three primary categories. These are Regular Ready Reserve (units maintained at full strength), Partial Ready Reserve (units maintained at 15% strength but full staff, allowing for quick mobilization) and Individual Ready Reserve (reservists not assigned to any units). Members of RRR and PRR perform reserve duty on a monthly basis with their units. IRR members are subject to call-ups at various times, and are used to fill out understrength units in case of mobilization. All soldiers have to register their place of stay with the military commissariat.

Partial Ready Reserve, or the “Cadre Army”, is staffed with commanders, their staffs, and minimum necessary conscripts to perform various maintenance and other jobs. As noted, such units are maintained at 15% strength, but can expand to full strength in matter of weeks. These units deploy to training areas in full strength every year, and also conduct multiple-area training every five years.

Individual Ready Reserve consists of all able-bodied men of 18 and over that are not assigned to other military formations. IRRs primary purposes are to act as a pool of trained personnel for the active and reserve military units, and also to enable guerilla-style resistance in occupied territory. Territorial defense would focus on defending local defense production, enabling regular units to focus on other areas.

Military Commissariat forms councils of local officers of a military district. This council meets at regular intervals to resolve problems, arbitrate in draft deferment requests, discuss the implementation of policy, calculate and register human and other resources of interest, oversee preparation of youth for carrying out military service, conduct call-ups for military service and training assemblies, carrying out general defensive measures, selecting and nominating candidates for military schools. It also maintains a list of all service-age adults, including current place of living.

During peacetime, Regular Ready Reserve divisions are maintained in three categories. Category I divisions are combat ready, with 75 – 100% of their full wartime strength. Category II divisions are at 50 – 75% of their wartime strength, and Category III at less than 50%. Reserve officers are a mix of former active duty officers, men specifically educated for the job while at training, and warrant officers with at least five years’ experience.

Reservists themselves are divided into categories. Category I reservists are those fresh from training or active service, and they stock Category I divisions, as well as elements of Category II divisions. They serve 1 night a week, 1 weekend a month, 2 weeks a year (90 days/nights total). After four years, they are downgraded to Category II unless they volunteer and meet requirements for remaining in Category I. These drill once a year for four weeks, and staff Category II and III divisions. After additional four years, they are downgraded to Category III, and staff only Category III divisions. They drill when division requires personnel. If a reservist wishes to remain in higher category (for benefits or else), he may do so if he passes physical and mental testing.

Refresher training is carried out for reservists every year for two weeks, as well as two days each month. In increased peacetime readiness level, refresher training may be increased to two weeks every six or three months, and two days each fifteen or seven days.

Newly trained officers are placed under mentorship of more experienced officers, and in unit are assisted, advised and educated by experienced NCOs. Officers from lieutenant level up have to have finished education courses in history, geography, culture, diplomacy and technology. During peacetime, performance assessment and thus promotion is carried out through force-on-force exercises (colloquially known as “playing tag” due to low-power training weapons being used). Leave is granted on a rotational basis for a period of 30 to 90 days. All soldiers receive service pay and pension upon leaving the service. Retirement is accepted after finishing the term of service, but earlier discharge may be granted for medicinal reasons. Soldiers discharged for medical reasons may be accepted back in service only after a thorough medical examination, and are also regularly monitored for time after reentry. Soldiers discharged due to wounds taken on the battlefield are given tax reduction.

Advertisements

Posted in proposals | Tagged: , , , , , | 2 Comments »

On New Zealand shooting

Posted by picard578 on March 19, 2019

Prelude: while this blog is predominantly-military oriented, especially early on, I had always intended to cover general security issues. And that goes far more into width than just military issues. The following is a commentary and speculation on the mosque shooting in New Zealand.

I decided to wait for a bit before commenting, as mainstream media – well, most people, but mainstream media especially – are prone to seeing what they want. And in mainstream media, Left dominates the narrative. Now, it is true that extreme Right is guilty of many hate crimes – but so is extreme Left, with caveat that Left in general is much more dangerous because a) it is global instead of national, and b) it is prone to hiding itself behind the humanist rhetoric, whereas even extreme right-wingers tend to be up-front and honest about their motivations. Left also tends to use any case and accusation to attack their opponents. The mainstream media that are falling over each other in its hurry to cover the attack on Muslims, are completely ignoring near-concurrent attacks on Christians:

https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2019/03/17/media-silence-surrounds-muslim-massacre-of-christians/

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-47611811

Now, onto the case.

Mainstream media had reported that the shooter is suspected right-winger. The shooter – Brenton Tarant – has published a manifesto. Titled “The Great Replacement”, manifesto would seem to confirm the media’s reports. However, the text is psychologically suspect. It paints the picture of an average white supremacist, the way that the Left sees them. It reads almost like a carricature, a comedy piece on white supremacism. Manifesto paints a picture of an uneducated, uninterested, lazy person, sprouting half-cooked phrases and maintaining contact with various right-wing groups.

But having had discussions with people ranging from far-Left globalists to far-Right groups, I can relatively safely say that that is not how even a neo-Nazi would write it. It is, however, the way how a leftist trying to act like a right-wing extremist might write it. It shows limited understanding of politics, psychology and society. Shooter is shown in rather stereotypical terms, as described before. It has a significant number of grammatic mistakes. Manifesto ponts to military and law enforcement as being places where far-right people are disproportionately employed. This serves no purpose for the goals of far-Right, but it may enable the Left to try and take over the control of these services, and use them for furthering their own agenda – similar to how they had taken over universities and politics.

His explanation on why he chose firearms for the attack also makes no sense – but it does make sense if one was to assume that the attack was to be used by the Left to abolish right to bear arms. He also talks about “invaders” and “traitors”, terms that a right-winger may use in anger, but hardly in a written text of such length. Likewise, his answers on whether he hates Muslims in general are not extremist; this is the point, as they may – and likely will – be used by the Left to paint any sort of nationalist, anyone who opposes globalism, as a potential mass murderer.

Soon in the text, he contradicts himself, first claiming that the attack is an “end in itself”, and immediately after that it is “meant to promote ideals”. So which one is it? Further it makes reference to 1300 years of war and invasion Islam had caused – a historical fact, but one that is extremely uncomfortable to the Left, and if tied to this attack in such a manner may become (even more) “politically incorrect” to discuss, allowing the Left to further its control of the discourse. Manifesto also discusses diversity, again helping the Left push the narrative that any form of diversity but their own – “diversity” that destroys actual diversity – is racist, hateful and genocidal.

Further pushing the leftist narrative/agenda, he claims that he is racist because he believes that “racial differences exist between peoples and they have a great impact on the way we shape our societies”. But that is not racism, that is racialism. Racism is a belief that one race is superior to others, and all others have to be exterminated or at least subjugated. It was used as a post-facto justification of colonialism (e.g. 19th century scientific racism) and of Nazi genocides (yet greatest genocides in history were either class-based or religion-based, not race-based). Racialism, on the contrary, believes that all races are distinct, unique, and of equal value. Racialism, similar to ethnic nationalism, would serve to prevent genocide, slavery and other evils of racism, as it would keep races separate and safe – from each other, at least, though obviously not from themselves. However, by pushing the idea that racism and racialism are the same, and that they both lead to mass murder, he is further promoting the leftist narrative which makes no distinction between the two.

His statement that he is “ethno-nationalist” immediately places ethnonationalism into guilt by association – a logical fallacy most of the time, but a very powerful one indeed. Again, this serves the Left, and in no way helps the Right. Other one-liner answers are also stereotypical of what a modern-day right winger, especially an ethnonationalist, might say, providing the Left with the so-useful “smoking gun”. However, he also outright states that he is an “eco-fascist”, and that closest country to his view is People’s Republic of China – two statements that not only contradict each other, but rest of the text as well. He is also a “supporter of Donald Trump” as a symbol – Left on Capitol Hill will sure love that – as well as Brexit, two things that are currently very painful for the Left, and to be discredited by any means necessary.

Following answers are mostly one-liners, used to reinforce the view that the attacker is an ethno-nationalist conservative. His answer about video-games however serves to further support the leftist crying point about video games being “dangerous”, even though there is no proof that playing video games – even first-person shooters – increases agression in everyday life. But then, every moral guardian knows that Bluebeard was a Battlefield 2142 addict, that Hitler constantly played Doom 3 and that Blackbeard had Sid Meier’s Pirates! installed onboard his flagship. It does show how Left is trying to milk the attack for everything it is worth.

He also calles himself an eco-fascist, which is a relatively new ideology, in exposure if not in existence. He reaffirms Australia’s connections to Europe, by implication compromising the entire West. Next few points are stereotypical Nazi talking points about the “future of white people” etc. His statement “I will let my actions speak for themselves” is clearly meant to compromise any form of conservativism, or at least ethnonationalism.

Further writing serves to further reinforce the idea of him as a cretin, particularly rant about his combat capabilities which seems to paint him as a junior Call of Duty player. He continues by supporting every single thing that the Left opposes – providing the Left with a “point-by-point” support of their views. This includes Left’s attempts to control violence, as well as to counter claims that democracy is controlled by the globalist forces at the time that European union is attempting to increase its authoritarian control and integration. He also states that racial differences are a fact – another view Left is opposing. He claims that he attacked Muslims because they are the most hated, thus supporting the attempts to censor any and all criticism of Islam.

He continues by supporting some conservative talking points that are very painful for the Left – such as Muslim rape gangs in Europe, dangers of diversity to society, consequences of leftist policies on radicalization, the failure of assimilation. Again, these are used to paint them as necessarily murderous, and thus support the Leftist narrative. Manifesto is even used to provide shield to Merkel, Erdogan, by claiming that they are enemies of Europe, and thus connect their right-wing critics to the shooter. It also claims that diversity means inequality, thus supporting Left in attempts to create a unified global Borg Collective.

He draws a connection to Battle of Vienna in 1683., which in itself is one of showcases for dangers of Islam. By connecting rational discussion of potential dangers of Islam to this attack, it helps censor yet another thing that is painful to the Left. The same is repeated with a fact of leftist takeover of educational and media institutions and dying of the West, the thoughts on populist movements – which are a big problem for the Left which had abandoned and betrayed the very people it is supposed to defend, the fact that people are driven by the emotion. He especially supports memes, which had proven so damaging to the Left, and which Left had been trying to ban for the some time. Likewise, he points out the truth of capitalists using open borders policy to import cheap work force and reduce everybody else’s standards of living; calls for “Europe for Europeans”; and supports “with strong traditions, gender norms, societal norms;the poor and the religious, usually a combination of all” – that is, everyone that the Left hates. He also attacks globalized capitalists – correctly, but this allows them to defend themselves simply by screaming “racism” at any opposition to globalism.

It should be noted that the latter part of the text seems to have no grammatic mistakes, contradicting the introductionary part. Text itself covers literally every single social issue of contention between the Left and the Right.

Overall, the attack has served to put Right on the defensive – which was likely the whole idea. For at least the next few weeks, being a right-winger will become a crime – even more than it usually is.

Posted in news, politics, security | Tagged: , , , , , | 7 Comments »

AMRAAM jammed by Su-30MKI – further questions on radar BVR combat

Posted by picard578 on March 7, 2019

In a recent clash between Indian Su-30MKIs and Pakistani F-16s, latter had fired “four to five American AMRAAMs (AIM-120 advanced medium-range air-to-air missile) from a distance of 40-50 km at the Indian aircraft including the Su-30 and the MiG-21 Bison.” IAF had negated Pakistani claims of having shot down a Su-30MKI in the engagement. Even if true, that claim would give Pk of 20-25%, nowhere close to 50-90% often claimed. Historically the attacker’s claims were typically significantly overstated, so there is no reason to believe Pakistani claims.

In February, Pakistani F-16 had been shot down by Indian MiG-21, confirmed by both sides.

EDIT: Missile used was AIM-120-C5. Multiple launches were “conclusively observed“. Su-30 had spoofed a number of AMRAAM missiles.

EDIT2: Further analysis of the F-16 shootdown.

Posted in news | Tagged: , , , , , , | 6 Comments »

 
%d bloggers like this: